Idiocy in the Boston Herald blogs - they ask if JK would win in 2010

The Republican blogger suggests he would have problems because:
1) Scott Brown
2) Delahunt is quitting - which might be as he said he wanted to or the Amy Bishop case - something JK has nothing to do with
3) Edwards - even though all Edwards' problems started after 2004.

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/news/lone_republican/index.php/2010/03/05/would-john-kerry-lose-in-2010/

(I love the DU search function and the record compiled here.)

Personally, I think it works to Senator Kerry's credit that he did not endorse his former 2004 running mate in 2008.

Not to mention, it was common knowledge before Edwards was picked that they were not friends. No one faults Gore for Clinton's sexual exploits. I do really feel sorry for Senator Kerry that his name is at all associated with Edwards - especially after having had to deal with Edwards' ego during the general election. Once chosen, there was no way to "unchose" him without killing his campaign. The Kerrys did a good job keeping the anger they had to feel invisible. Then they had to live with his lies 2004 - 2008.

I keep remembering a time that he was on Imus, and Imus asked if he "still hated John Edwards' guts". Kerry just laughed and said something about where did that come from - still. I think he then spoke of not hating anyone. Not confirming anything, but not going out of his way to deny a bad relationship. (I'm less sure of exactly what Kerry responded than the question.)

That blogger is clearly a GOP operative -- it all but says so in her bio. I think I remember her trying to make trouble re JK in other "columns". Trying to connect JK with JRE at this point is truly desperate.

The only real thing they can say is that it goes to his judgment - as Palin does to McCain's. But in Edwards' case, he had run in the primary and no scandals of any type were known in June 2004. (Later, there was found to be a problem with the trial lawyer money - in that law practices reimbursed soem donors - but it was not alleged in 2004 and it was never tied to Edwards himself.) The fact is that media and the party was cheerleading for him - and selecting anyone else - like Gephardt or Durbin - would have led to a lot of negative press as many had already signalled that if this young superstar (who failed to come close in the primaries) were not chosen, it would be because Kerry was afraid of being overshadowed.

The sad thing is Kerry did have a negative gut reaction. But, given that there was nothing concrete, it could have been nothing more than them being nearly opposites.

even RUN if he had to face Kennedy...or Kerry.

From the meeting the day after Brown's victory:

http://www.necn.com/Boston/Politics/2010/01/21/Brown-meets-with-Kerry-on/1264090686.html

Can you imagine the debates? (Not to mention, Brown wore a jacket that could be said to imitate the barn jacket that JK wore often in 2004. So, Brown was a copycat.)

Watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-05Z-GsGfI

The Ma Repubs are trying their best by bluffing. They may or may not get some interest. We shall see.