Boston Herald story on Kerry 4/21/05

Kerry: Don't tell me what God wants
By Noelle Straub
Thursday, April 21, 2005 - Updated: 03:55 AM EST

WASHINGTON - Sen. John F. Kerry yesterday attacked Republicans for having an ``orthodoxy of view'' and overly inserting religion into politics, accusing them of using God as a justification for appointing conservative judges.

``I am sick and tired of a bunch of people trying to tell me that God wants a bunch of conservative judges on the court and that's why we have to change the rules of the United States Senate,'' Kerry told a group of Bay State residents who traveled to Capitol Hill for U.S. Rep. Martin Meehan's annual legislative seminar.

The Bay State senator was referring to a possible GOP move to alter Senate rules that would prevent Democrats from filibustering President Bush's judicial nominees.

``I am sick and tired of (them saying) they somehow have a better understanding of Christianity, of the Judeo-Christian ethic, of values,'' Kerry added. ``We're talking about values? You show me where in the New Testament Jesus ever talked about the value of having taxes and taking money from poor people to give to the rich people in this country.''

http://news.bostonherald.com/politics/view.bg?articleid=79532

Yup, the gloves are definitely off.

Geez, that seems odd. The speaker list for this function included Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Tedy Kennedy. Yet the only one drawing press in Boston was Kerry?

Odd, and the actual quotes are great in this story. It will play well in Massachusetts. What's up with the Herald?

they've gotten religion? ;-)

Okay, bad joke. Maybe they see an opening and they're running for it. They're barely hanging on by their fingernails. Maybe they hope for resurrection as the city's liberal newspaper.

:rofl:

Okay, I'm done amusing myself now. Nice article, though. Amazing.

That has already been trashed on DKos. Sigh! Oh well.

Kerry was the best speaker by far. And he stayed a long time and spoke his mind openly. I kind of wish I had gone now. My hubby asked a Vets question and he got Kerry's full attention and gze for ten minutes. Hmmmm, I should have gone and asked a question. That alone would have been worth the 4:15 wakeup, early flight, long layover and all the rest.

Ten minutes of full attention??? Wow.

So what's up among the Kos undead?

Per the new video: He should have done this last year
He is sounding like Dean circa 2003
Kerry lost, so don't listen to him now

The usual bag of sh*t. So tired of it.

I never go over there anymore unless someone sends me there. There's a real unhealthy level of cynicism towards Kerry that's really analogous to freeperworld. I've come to the conclusion at this point that nothing anyone can say or do will change their minds. Least of all Kerry.

But on the other hand, all the Kerrylove threads that have been popping up are showing something else. People are getting over their election depression. And waiting for them is an energized and inspiring Kerry who is exhibiting true leadership.

To me his words are like a cool drink of water in the desert. Just watching him and listening to him speak are a balm to my spirit, they really are. And I think more and more people are feeling that way. And just maybe not all of them are dems...

I was trying to articulate what you are saying in a post yesterday, but I couldn't get it to come out right, so just deleted it. You've got it right: some people are ready to come around again, now, and he's here, as big and bright as he always was. There are only a handful of Dem leaders with as much national recognition who are able to speak out with his amount of authority, and being a long-time member of the Senate gives him the power to put actions behind his words. So he does offer hope to those who are over the disappointment of the election.

This fight he's waging is the same one that he'd be waging as president, assuming the Congress stayed with a Repub majority. Of course he'd have the bully pulpit then, and the continuing damage of Chimp & Co. would be halted. He'd be undertaking a major repair efforts in the areas of foreign diplomacy, relations with the U.N., and domestically on many fronts. But it wouldn't happen overnight, and wouldn't be as easy as waving a magic White House wand.

I hope the "whining left" will face realities on the ground and get behind Kerry's and the other Dem warriors' backs for a change. United we stand, divided we fall.

I hope that too. I fail to understand the propensity of some of our fellow dems to recover from a bruising election by diving headfirst into the divisiveness of a 4-years-too-early primary. It's ridiculous. None of us knows what the lay of the land will be in 2007. All we can do is try to set the stage for a successful campaign for whoever is chosen.

That I dearly hope that person will be Kerry is no secret. But first and foremost we have a common goal to achieve.

I like the things NoisyDemocrat writes. And one interesting thing about Kos: you usually find that posts that heatedly defend Kerry get a lot of 4's. Says to me that there are a ton of Kerry lovers out there lurking. The whiners are a LOUD but tiny minority.

it's bad for your health

I think all of the fanatic Dean people that got kicked out of here joined up over there.

Kerry in both cases had a grasp of history that Dean didn't address. Even in the Bolton hearings, Kerry seemed as concerned about how our democracy was functioning, with the Republicans not really even wanting to get to the truth on Bolton, as he was with defeating Bolton. The anger in Kerry's video is more focused and seems to come from a deeper place than Dean's in 2003.

It's weird how they have mythologized Dean from a year and a half ago, all because he said then that he was anti-war. (Some people on the forum are mad at Dean this morning because he said we can't leave Iraq yet - which has been his position but they forgot it.)

Being a one-issue voter is a precarious position to be in--especially if you don't even fully understand your candidate's position on that issue! My guess is that Dean's antiwar statements are the main reason a lot of Nadarites glommed onto him during the primaries. But he IS more centrist than Kerry when you look into it further.
Second, he speaks very plainly--he's easy to understand, which is a plus for these types. Not that they are stupid, but that they don't want to spend the time dealing with a lot of complicated issues. They are more emotional voters, I guess.

But right now there's a recommended diary about Kerry that, so far, seems to have lots of positive(and highly rated) comments. There *are* some reasonable people over there, after all. Someone even said "Kerry has always been one of our best and most liberal leaders - not that that stopped the loony left front hating him." Great!

Now, KOS himself is mysteriously mum about Kerry's new speech and video, choosing instead to highlight Salazar and Pryor's remarks about the fundies. Kos also dissed Kerry a couple months ago for getting into a squabble with Reid about wanting the Dems to do more to counter the Repun agenda. So, Kos is apparently against the Dems fighting back?

The man wouldn't give Kerry any credit if he cured cancer tomorrow. Fortunately, not ALL kossacks are that blind.

Hell, when I was purusing the very inner chambers of hell itself the other day (FreeperVille) there was a singular post there that said, "Kerry is looking good." Since this was hell, it was followed by a disparaging remark, but still. A freeper said this. A frickin freeper. OMG.

DKos has, till the time of my post, not said anything bad about Kerry. That is something, I guess. Kos needs to get over whatever bad feelings he still has about John Kerry. Cuz The Man is rocking lately.

He fears the WMD and it's strange and hypnotic power over women.

Honestly, this has been the bet week. Is it just me or are scadsof new LLL's being Kerrya-formed in DU? I swear, there have been lots of new people salivating over him.

I about died today when I saw that speech. It was magnificent. I am so proud of him for doing that. I convinced my hubbie to send in a check to FoJK. It that doesn't say love, I don't know what does.

I thought you could only donate via credit card! ( I hate, hate, hate using my credit card.) Where is the address?

I have noticed the new LLLs as well! It's as if DU is waking up to what we've known all along - that John Kerry is an honorable, compassionate, virtuous, intelligent, sexy beast.

Look at the bottom of the e-mails. They all have the address of the FoJK. I think you have to remember to put in a disclaimer that you are a US citizen and stuff, but checks are never returned uncashed.

Sexy beast is right. I about died during that Senate speech. I loved that. Oh baby, I caould do with more of that. Please, pleae, please. (And, in fairness to all Kerrycrats, I hope that Kerry comes to your state soon and you can see him in all his glory for yourself.)

This seems a real escalation of this fight. From arguing on what his values are to arguing they are consistent with Christianity. It seems that he feels that the hypocrisy of the Republicans needs to be attacked directly - unless he thought the meeting was off the record. Your husband really got to see an interesting event.

It does seem weird that they didn't even mention Kennedy. Maybe they feel the comments will be controversial.

I actually saw this on the Latest Breaking News forum. Lots of kudos but then you get the tired "where was this during the election?"

A. It WAS there, it just didn't get much coverage
B. You don't think he's changed since then? He even said that he learned a lot on the campaign.

Geez!

No one ever changes. Didn't you get the memo???

:banghead:

To not be allowed to learn and grow from painful experiences. Lord, even during the Bolton hearing on Tuesday, Kerry had a learning remark.

Mr. Chairman, I just don't understand -- I get the politics; that I get very well. And I've been pretty schooled in it the last couple of years. But this shouldn't be governing what we're doing here.

What was he schooled in and what did he learn? I think that would benefit the Dems and I want to know.

that he was out there on the front lines of a huge political battle, and saw what lengths people were willing to go to, to win, nd how many people will act out of partisan interests instead of following their own sense of what's right. How people are willing to sell their own grandmothers, etc. He saw first-hand how ugly partisan politics can get.

Wasn't it right after he had the "Karl Rove" slip-up? I think the key to understanding Kerry (obviously, this is just an educated guess...) is that he is completely devoid of cynicism. I believe this is what keeps those attacks coming on him from the left and the right - people just can't believe anyone could be the way he is and be in politics.

What I'm guessing he was schooled in was the utter cynicism and empty moral center of the right. Massachusetts politics are hardball but nothing like the Rove School of Slime methods. Part of that is the lack of concern his fellow legislators apparently have for the interests of the people they claim to serve.

I don't think Kerry is - or was - naive. But I do think things like the sliming of Max Cleland and John McCain's willingness to sell out were something of a shock.

Kerry almost won doing what he did. If he would have shown the anger he clearly feels now, I think it would have lost votes then. Before the election, the RW hid their more controversial agenda. Since the election, the Republicans are really trying to privatize SS - even though they called Kerry a liar when he said that, have literally threatened the lives of judges, and used the Congress in an appalling way on Schiavo, and have nominated people that most managers would NEVER recommend their company hire, If these things were done before the election, Kerry would have won.

Kerry had a lot to lose if he would have acted like Dean or even talked as he did here. He needed to win the people still deciding between him and Bush. By definition, that rules all of us who already were convinced that Bush was horrible. Kerry stood to lose some of the people he had won over if they thought he was attacking the President too hard.

I did see righteous indignation. But his feelings are always well-controlled and filtered through a very rational mind. I did see this same thing during the campaign--being deeply concerned over the state of the country and calling Bush on his policies. Forceful language, but always under control.

I do think losing his temper during the campaign would have lost him a lot of votes. He never did. He never made it personal; it was always about the person's ideas and actions, just like now. He's naming names because he wants to criticize their actions, and it's totally within reason to do it.

Righteous indignation is much better, because it's more accurate. I meant that he was angry at what they were doing - but as you stated well, he has amazing control over how he expresses it. I defintely meant no critisism - he's great.

you weren't criticizing JK--you meant "anger" in a good way--the same way I meant it. I guess I was a bit picky about word usage (an English major's hang-up--sorry!). :pals:

it against him and claimed that Kerry said God is not on our side.

what Kerry actually said was that it's not up to him to say whether God is on America's side and that we need to stop using God or Religion in politics this way.

almost everything he is saying is what he has been saying not just throughout the election but before that.

people don't pay attention or don't want to pay attention.

After all, they wouldn't have anything to bitch about.