« Health Care Attitudes | Main | Beauty Standards »
October 16, 2006
What Could Have Been
As this wide-ranging interview with Bob Woodward illustrates, John Kerry would have made a very, very good president. Much better than he seemed during the campaign, possibly even finer than his performance suggested at the debates. It's a trite truth and a crying shame that our system encourages the qualities that make a very good campaigner rather than a fine leader. It's into that chasm that Kerry falls. But it's worth reading his talk with Woodward to get a flavor of how a grown-up would be dealing with the world.
October 16, 2006 | Permalink
Comments
Sad. Woodward has become nothing more then a weather vane. Back when Bush was popular, he wrote nothing but good stuff about him. Now with Bush unpopular, he comes out with a harsh book and praise for Bush's previous opponent.
Way to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable!
Posted by: dansomone | Oct 16, 2006 12:09:14 PM
Kerry was a better campaigner than he gets credit for. Even with all of the things dragging him down--Swift Boat BS, terrible advisors, gay marriage wedge amendments, etc.--he came within three points of upsetting an incumbent wartime president. That's literally unprecedented.
Posted by: Nick | Oct 16, 2006 12:15:55 PM
Of course, Kerry's way would had made no real money for anyone.
Except the taxpayer.
Reading these thought out answers, the insight into his methodology, the intelligence and experience, and then you look at waht is going on now....like William Shatner in " The Wrath of Kahn"......BUSHHHHHHHH!
Posted by: marcus | Oct 16, 2006 2:03:33 PM
I voted for Kerry even though I thought he would be a horrible President, just less horrible than Bush. Nothing that has occurred in the last two years has changed my position. Senator, I beg you...please don't run again.
Posted by: Steven Donegal | Oct 16, 2006 2:31:17 PM
Senator Kerry has always been very good at talking,
especially about what he would have done.
But that is all he has to offer, talk.
He's been a senator for what, 20 years or more.
Have you looked at his accomplishments during that time?
Won't take long.
I voted for him 2 or 3 times.
He debates well, seems to know his stuff, projects well.
But eventually more is required.
There is nothing more to Kerry.
And I regret having voted for him at all.
Regards, HM
Posted by: HM | Oct 16, 2006 2:35:16 PM
Kerry would have been a disaster as a president. I say this because of his actions (lack of) during the campaign.
It took his loss in 2004 to wake him up about what the current GOP is really like. Kerry before that loss was just like so many other Democrats, believing in the essential goodness of everyone, thinking that ignoring attacks equals "taking the high road" and that they can expect everyone to just magically know what is really the truth.
This as a governing style would be terrible. That it would be less terrible than George Bush means nothing; a brain-damaged cockatoo would be a better president than Bush.
Posted by: Stephen | Oct 16, 2006 2:38:45 PM
Kerry seems to think that the larger a group you have discussing a problem, the better answers you get. Having attended different size meetings in the corporate world, I am skeptical of that viewpoint.
Posted by: Dave Justus | Oct 16, 2006 3:17:57 PM
i think, in spite of the swiftboat controversy, i think his wife as a presence in the campaign, worked against him greatly.
and also, when i heard him make that appallingly hurtful and glancingly inappropriate comment about cheney's daughter, i couldnt believe my ears. i thought to myself, "you just lost us all the election."
Posted by: jacqueline | Oct 16, 2006 6:33:49 PM
Sen. Kerry led the commission to investigate POW claims in Vietnam and was extremely influential thereafter in restoring relations with that country.
He spent years investigating - against the wishes of his own party - the BCCI - resulting in an international case that shut the bank - a corrupt haven for drug money, criminals, and terrorists.
He was also lead early investigations that helped uncover the Iran-Contra scandal.
The legislation he has gotten passed largely concerns environmental legislation - wetlands protection, etc.
His record in the Senate should not have been hidden. He had plenty he could have spoken of. The BCCI in particular.
As for the campaign itself. I tend to think our memories of it are skewed because he lost. It simply isn't accurate to say that he pulled his punches with Bush - he was incessently critical of Bush, especially in the months leading up to the election. He was far more critical, in fact, than Gore had been in '00.
I also tend to think the Swift-Boat attacks have been over-emphasized. The campaign didn't respond as well as it could have, but it did respond. They cut several ads, including one with John McCain (which they pulled at McCain's request) and Kerry also denounced them in several speeches. Polls showed that the overwhelming majority dismissed the criticisms outside of those who were already inclined to vote against him.
Ultimately, I do think John Kerry would have made a good president. I think he ran a better campaign than he gets credit for, and I still wish he had won.
That said, I doubt he could win in '08 - though it's unfair, having lost once, he's been branded as a loser and it's unlikely he'll be able to shake that.
Posted by: Andrew | Oct 16, 2006 8:33:51 PM
Remember in the debates when Kerry criticized Bush's hardlined stance on North Korea? I believe his logic was "We(the US) are still manufacturing tactical nukes. Who are we to tell North Korea that they can't have nukes". Now he criticizes Bush cuz NK has nukes.
Remember when he was speaking in front of a Palestinian group and he told the group that a fence/wall that was being built between Israel and the West Bank was a bad idea? Later, in front of a group of Jews he said the very same fence/wall was a good idea.
Remember when he bragged to the UAW that he owned 5 or 6 cars including an SUV? A few weeks later when speaking to an environmental group, he was confronted about his claim of owning an SUV. He said, "the SUV belongs to the family, it isn't mine".
Kerry just kept on giving.
Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 17, 2006 12:07:17 AM
Kerry just kept on giving.
--Captain Toke
Yes Kerry was lame, condescending, etc.-on the other hand Stephen said it well:
"a brain-damaged cockatoo would be a better president than Bush.
I don't know that the cockatoo would be better than dumbya, but it would certainly have done less damage to our country..and wouldn't operate on a Bush presidency that on some days seems to operate on picking the evil option EVERY time.
A bonus is Kerry would have been a helluva better President if for no other reason than he's not in the Bush crime.
Posted by: rondea, ghost | Oct 17, 2006 8:34:09 AM
A bonus is Kerry would have been a helluva better President if for no other reason than he's not in the Bush crime.
Er, that should be "Bush Crime Family."
Posted by: rondea, ghost | Oct 17, 2006 8:36:44 AM
Please list and cite the "Bush Crimes". Just cuz you say it, doesn't make it true. Even here.
Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 17, 2006 9:10:46 AM
Well, let's start with the grandfather who was involved with the bank which continued to trade with the Nazi's even after war was declared on us by Hitler. It took legislation to stop it and even then it continued by way of proxies.
Then let's get to HW, who was involved in Iran-Contra scandel which was, like it or not, a criminal enterprise violating United States law, he then goes onto pardon those involved who now are again working in government as a result. Understand that the above is just a loose memory and can be substantiated in numerous articles, books, etc.
But still, go right ahead, take another toke and wipe the memory clean.
Posted by: marcus | Oct 17, 2006 10:38:14 AM
oh yeah, lest we forget ole GW.....he just killed Habeus Corpus and most of the Bill of Rights. What? didnt you feel the cold shudder flowing through our nation?
Or maybe that dont count as a crime in your book....it does in mind and the difference between me and him is that I will allow him to have his day in court and to have his defence because I DO believe in the Rule Of Law and not in the FIAT of kings.....or Presidents.
Posted by: marcus | Oct 17, 2006 10:42:42 AM
"he then goes onto pardon those involved who now are again working in government as a result."
I am not one normally to defend bad behavior by pointing out worse behavior, but I have to take issue with the party of Clinton lecturing anyone about pardons of criminals. Or lecturing anyone on corruption in general.
Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 17, 2006 10:43:43 AM
"oh yeah, lest we forget ole GW.....he just killed Habeus Corpus and most of the Bill of Rights. What? didnt you feel the cold shudder flowing through our nation?"
I bet you think torture happens at Gitmo too. I bet you think Lynn Stewart's sentence was fair or even too harsh.
Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 17, 2006 11:06:05 AM
"oh yeah, lest we forget ole GW.....he just killed Habeus Corpus and most of the Bill of Rights."
Foreign terrorists never had those rights to begin with.
Why does the left want to grant foreign terrorists the rights of US citizens?
Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 17, 2006 10:07:50 PM
"Foreign terrorists never had those rights to begin with.
Why does the left want to grant foreign terrorists the rights of US citizens?"
All persons under the American flag are afforded rights, those inalienable rights, and it does not specify that only citizens are covered, just persons. With the definition of "persons" being augmented through the various amendments.
We are Americans. I do not hold to that specious argument that one must do as his enemy does, so as to defeat it. Nonsense. To be Americans, we subscribe to a higher authority, the Rule of Law. We do not use the Creator's name for any other purpose than to declare that Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, are INalienable rights. It is these three concepts that are the very bedrock of our jurisprudence. It is not perfect, as nothing man does is, but it is revolutionary and hard to live by. We do stand taller than most because we have that Declaration, that Constitution, which tells us, and the world, how it is done.
Habeus Corpus is also a bedrock principle of our legal system. It is rooted in English Common Law and does not discriminate as to the status of any human being in that he/she need only be....a human being.
As to torture, is does not work. It never has and it never will. I would direct you to the war time experience of one Hanns Scharff, http://www.merkki.com/new_page_2.htm
The Republic died on Tuesday and no one gave a crap. Un less the Supreme Court over rules, or a new Congress changes this law, we are headed down the road to dictatorship. An Uber Presidency.....the Enhanced Executive....whatever permeation you would choose, it will be those "Devils" that Madison thought he had gotten under control with the "checks and balances" scheme, will be running things.
"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there's a twilight that seemingly remains unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become victims of the darkness"
Wm Douglas.
Posted by: marcus | Oct 18, 2006 1:20:00 PM
More on Habeus Corpus:
Justice Jackson, Brown v. Allen,
"Executive imprisonment has been considered oppressive and lawless since John, at Runnymede, pledged that no free man should be imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, or exiled save by the judgment of his peers or by the law of the land. The judges of England developed the writ of habeas corpus largely to preserve these immunities from executive restraint."
Notice it says " Free man " and not citizen.
Jefferson to Paine, 1789,
"I consider [trial by jury] as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution."
Patrick Henry,commenting on future governments trying to undermine habeus,
"Is the relinquishment of the trial by jury and the liberty of the press necessary for your liberty? Will the abandonment of your most sacred rights tend to the security of your liberty? Liberty, the greatest of all earthly blessings--give us that precious jewel, and you may take everything else! ...Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel."
Posted by: marcus | Oct 18, 2006 1:34:39 PM
