I read the news today, 3/4

Teacher granted stay of deportation:

http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2005/03/04/teacher_granted_delay_in_deportation/

Kerry/Kennedy/Romney: Can this marriage be saved?

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/03/04/threes_a_crowd/

(Okay, I'm loving this story just alittle bit too much. It is wonderful. A Teddy K. - Kerry split? Teddy tolerates Mittens? Kerry hates Mitt. At least one of those things warms me to the bone.)

Atta Boy, John, Now Work Harder:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2005/03/04/justice_for_an_immigrant/

http://news.bostonherald.com/election2004/view.bg?articleid=71511&format=text

I just want that man's frequent flyer miles. I mean really. Boy is this ever full of tea leaves. Tell me what you see?

Agree. Tea leaves all over the place.

The Bay State senator today will attend a birthday event for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in Boston.

Too bad (according to Lehigh, anyway) the Kennedy/Kerry relationship is so strained...

Edited to add, wtf is Biden on about these days? Can't figure him out.

How can they look at these 3 people and decide Kerry is the odd man out.From the articles this week alone, Kerry was honored at the Kennedy Library with Kennedy talking about their long relationship, Kerry is going to a Kennedy birthday event and even in the trio article they say they are genuinely friendly and Kennedy says Kerry is in a extraordinary position to be a very powerful Senator.

The proof of their split seems to be recitation of old stories of when they didn't get along and the MTP interviews. Russet in both cases emphasized that they were at odds, but both Kerry and Kennedy said it was more a difference in process. Also, aren't Senators allowed to be friends and vote differently.

The proof of Romney and Kennedy being on the same side is that they lobbied together on some non-partisan MA issues. (Ignoring today's article that Kerry and Romney could be accused of the same thing to help the teacher.) The 2006 arguments make no sense because won't Kennedy back any Democrat against Romney. Didn't Kennedy just blast Romney on his stem cell research comments?

So it all boils down to the fact that Romney has taken millions of pot shots at Kerry, while he has been nicer to Kennedy. Maybe they should ask Kennedy, who he likes better, agrees with more often, and respects more - or even who he rather have a beer with.

Helping Hillary fund raise for her Senate campaign implicitly calls attention to his own fund raising success and having him as the key note speaker is an honor for him. It is also significant because Hillary probably doesn't need Kerry to raise money for her.

Seen in conjunction with them campaigning against SS together, Kerry and Hillary may be trying to send a strong message that now (in 2005), the important thing is for Democrats to support each other and to try to get Democrats elected in 2006 and to fight the Bush agenda. Kerry and Hillary could each have drawn a huge crowd and either could competently make the case - so the only reason I can see for them to be together is to show party unity.

Party unity, keeping the grassroots started in 2004, and growing the party also would explain reaching out to Dean. For whoever wins the nomination in 2008, the party's success in 2006 and the development of a stronger, more competent grassroots will make success more likely. (Also, regardless of who wins the nomination in 2008, both Hillary and Kerry will be powerful Senators.)

I also loved Kerry comment in the first article, about how democracy works best when people reach across the aisle. I liked, but was saddened by the contrast of Kerry's idealist appeal for bipartisanship with the background of the Republican's voting as a block against each of the amendments. With both the Republicans and Democrats, Kerry is pushing working together for the good of the country.

It's very true: party unity has got to be at the top of the agenda now. The Dems need a clear identity and need to work as a team to oppose the repub majority. This shows JK's commitment to putting the party and the welfare of America first, before his own personal ambitions. And true, he's got so much political power right now, that he isn't feeling threatened by H. Clinton or anybody. :)

A Kerry/Clinton ticket? Hmm. Too soon to know.

That's really interesting. But I also think the unity theme is being played quite loudly. We must defeat the Thugs attempt to destroy Social SEcurity, then get ready for other Thuggy mischief. (Not to mention get more Dems elected in '06.)

Still, this is great stuff. Unity dinners all around are great, we need them.

Well, you know I'd take any ticket as long as JK is at the top! Let's see, who else for veep? Feingold? (too progressive?) A southern Dem governor, maybe. Edwards again? (hmmm) Oh stop it now-- (slaps own wrist)!

as people. considering the crap both get from people and especially the media who repeat it they really have to be tough and have a thick skin to want to stay in politics.

because of her name Hillary could spend all her time making easy money. Kerry is married to Teresa and he could leave politics and have almost anything he wants without having to work again. but both of them are willing to put up with the shit to help the people.

the point you make about the fundraising and Kerry being keynote speaker is a very good one also. it's well known Kerry wants to run again and if Hillary was only thinking of her own presidential ambitions she sure wouldn't have him as keynote speaker as she can raise money on her own. so it's more of a sign of the positive relationship they have.

i'm not talking about issues here as there are some differences but more about just personalities.

unless one or the other did something that justified it (hah, like one of the two WOULD!). I'm not a huge fan of Hillary, but it's never a good thing to have Dems tearing each other apart. I'm glad that they did this and I'm glad that they're apparently working together on election reform too now. That's another issue that MUST be resolved if we want to have a chance in 2008... whether it was done last year or not, the system is so broken that one certainly could be stolen. (Hope it's not too late for 2006.)

There are several Dems whom I'm not a big fan of, but there's just too much at stake for the party to rip itself to pieces.

I was really glad to see the news item, because there were comments on the one of other forums saying that they "never saw them talking in the Senate" (after reading, there was a vote and I did see them talk briefly). Because they are the 2 most mentioned names, there choosing to no be forming two camps is great.

that column is so full of sh*t, I don't know where to begin. Get a grip, Scot. Sounds like maybe he's got the post-campaign blahs and is trying to stir things up...

But I believe some of it. There were big strains in the past between the two staffs. (Sigh!) But everyone can unite to gut Mitt like a flapping fish on a dock. (Ah, I can dream.)

The B-Day party is nice. The Hillary fundraiser and the next Hillary fundraiser in May is a real eye-opener. Hmmmmmm.

they act as if Senators working with Governors of opposite parties is unusual.

It is not going to happen all that much with Kerry and Romney.

http://news.bostonherald.com/politics/view.bg?articleid=71516

This is great.

the way the Globe and Herald police each other. What do 1-paper towns do for entertainment?

The Sentinel and Journal merged years back to form the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. And man, is it dull! Phooey! We get the Sunday paper, but mainly for the ads and funnies. Seriously. Got to see what movies are playing, and stuff like that. But otherwise, YAWN.

But I'll give them credit for endorsing Kerry/Edwards, finally, last fall. Everybody thought they were going to fail to endorse any candidate, but they came through. While JK was here in October, he gave them a very nice long interview, which they printed. They had to rely on old stuff from B/C 04 to put together a counter-balancing article with His Fraudulency's platform. Maybe that tipped the scales for them, I don't know. Milwaukee county is a Democratic county, the bluest in the state, but the paper seems to try to stay in the center.

The Chicago Tribune (very conservative), the Sun Times (which was better then than it is now), and the Daily News. My family usually got all three and the local Hammond Times. The Daily News, my favorite had a great columnist (Mike Royko - sp?). I loved comparing the news in the 3 of the Chicago papers.

The Tennessean has started to come around again. We have a new manager/editor. It was pro-Smirky four years ago, dissing Gore (and sometimes can be in LTE), but it endorsed Kerry last year.

the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel used to carry his column. Did he retire or did the Journal-Sentinel just get stupid? He did have interesting columns. I don't even know if he is still around?

edit: yeah, he died in 1997.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Royko

Royko: "No self-respecting fish would be wrapped in a Murdoch paper"
heehee