« AIDSing and abetting an epidemic | Main | A Reason to Vote for Hillary »

Breaking: John Kerry Will Announce that He Will Not Seek the Presidency

This news comes from the Boston Globe:

Senator John F. Kerry plans to announce today that he will not run in the 2008 presidential race, and will instead remain in Congress and seek reelection to his Senate seat next year, according to senior Democratic officials.


Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, plans to say he will remain in the Senate to recommit himself to efforts to extricate the United States from the war in Iraq. His decision to stay out of the presidential race reflects a realization that he would have had an uphill climb in capturing the Democratic nomination, given the other party heavyweights who are already in the race, according to the officials, who spoke to the Globe on condition of anonymity.

Kerry plans to make his plans known with a speech on the Senate floor this afternoon, and is taping a message to e-mail his supporters to explain his decision.

Kerry, the party's 2004 presidential nominee, has been acting like a 2008 candidate virtually since he lost to President Bush -- traveling the country, spreading money to other Democratic candidates, and keeping in place a campaign infrastructure that was ready for another presidential bid.

But according to Kerry associates, the senator's plans changed dramatically in the fallout of his election-eve ``botched joke" about the education levels of US troops. The harsh reaction to that incident -- from many Democrats as well as Republicans -- displayed to Kerry the extreme skepticism within his own party about whether he should mount another run.

I'm not sure if I buy that. I think it's more likely that he's not running because the Democratic field is becoming filled with much more capable candidates and he'd be trounced in the primaries. To be destroyed in the Democratic primary when he was his party's nominee just a little over two years ago would be simply too much of an embarrassment.

Lorie adds: There are gonna be some Democrats celebrating today.

Update: Greg Tinti has the video of Kerry making his announcement.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Breaking: John Kerry Will Announce that He Will Not Seek the Presidency:

» The Political Pit Bull linked with Kerry Out of '08 Race?

» Wizbang Politics linked with Kerry Won't Run in 2008

» Sensible Mom linked with Kerry Can Stop Botox Treatments

» The Virtuous Republic linked with Hillary Clinton's Conversation with America

» Absolute Moral Authority linked with John Kerry is not running for president

Comments (41)

I'm heartbroken.... (Below threshold)

I'm heartbroken.

My congratulations to him f... (Below threshold)
blackcat77:

My congratulations to him for his grasp of the obvious.

The trolls are weeping. </p... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

The trolls are weeping.

Perhaps he realized there w... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Perhaps he realized there would be a military coup if he took office.

No matter. He would never h... (Below threshold)
Lee:

No matter. He would never have been able to take office. He had no chance of winning whatsoever.

Now if only he was announci... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Now if only he was announcing that he was seeking a lobotmy, then I might be interested...

Good, I am glad he isn't ru... (Below threshold)
Jaku:

Good, I am glad he isn't running. He was a terrible candidate in 2004. Now you wizzies can concentrate all your Pavlovian hate on Hilary, if you can get over your Pelosi obsessions first.

I still want to see F... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

I still want to see Fraud Kerry's Military Records. The ones he's been denying to show the public. That's unless Sandy Pants hasn't swallowed them up as well.

Awww, and I was so looking ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Awww, and I was so looking forward to not voting for him again.

You guys are absolutely des... (Below threshold)
BC:

You guys are absolutely despicable. Kerry may not have been the best candidate available in 2004, but he was still head, shoulders and feet above the lying-ass bumbler still embarrassing this country. Kerry was maliciously smeaered relentlessly, especially through the right wing blockheadsphere, and the mythical liberal MSM did little to help or even to clarify matters. To the people out there still feeling obligated to make nasty snipes about a man whose long record of military and public service shows a guy who simply mostly tried to do the right thing when he could, screw you, screw the sorry ass President you did vote for, and screw your own no doubt sorry ass lives.

-BC

JFKerry: the guy who carrie... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

JFKerry: the guy who carried in his briefcase the cap of a friend from a place he'd never been? Oh, THAT JFKerry!... I Predict Algore will be (preferably for his ego) drafted as the Dem nominee and probably (thanks to BoyGeorge) win the presidency in 2008. THINK BIG, Wizzers!

Kim writes:... (Below threshold)
Langtry:

Kim writes:

"But according to Kerry associates, the senator's plans changed dramatically in the fallout of his election-eve ``botched joke" about the education levels of US troops. The harsh reaction to that incident -- from many Democrats as well as Republicans -- displayed to Kerry the extreme skepticism within his own party about whether he should mount another run."

Such an admission on Kerry's part would require instrospection and its resulting regret. I have to agree with BC that Kerry demonstrated himself "able" in many ways. Kerry ably demonstrated during the campaign that he found taking a personal inventory to be overrated, and that prefers self-promotion to self-examination. How else to explain the "I'm John Kerry and I'm reporting for duty" opening in his nomination acceptance speech? Anyone anti-war activist (as Kerry was during & after Viet Nam) with an ounce of shame would have shied away from such a patent charade. Not John Kerry!

Christmas in Cambodia, 1968... (Below threshold)
Gianni:

Christmas in Cambodia, 1968 when Nixon was in office,,,,


ROFL

How this guy isnt in Leavenworth for treason is beyond me. Maybe now he'll release his complete military records to the lublic.

Christmas in Cambodia, 1968... (Below threshold)
Gianni:

Christmas in Cambodia, 1968 when Nixon was in office,,,,


ROFL

How this guy isnt in Leavenworth for treason is beyond me. Maybe now he'll release his complete military records to the public.

Maybe he finally realized t... (Below threshold)
hermie:

Maybe he finally realized that he'd lose both the Presidency and his Senate seat if he ran for both at the same time. Unlike Connecticut in 2000, where Lieberman was still popular, Kerry would have to face the fact that there are lots of Kennedys still in Massachusetts who haven't been given a seat in Congress yet.

Did someone take over "puck... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Did someone take over "pucker puss" (lee lee )'s name? That can't be him posting lately.

BC can't be a real person c... (Below threshold)
Michael:

BC can't be a real person can he?...I mean no can be that stupid?...
oh wait...he's a DimRat so I guess can he can be.

Now the Swift Boat veterans... (Below threshold)
John:

Now the Swift Boat veterans can go on about their lives - God Bless them.

BC, I'm John Ker... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

BC,

I'm John Kerry and I am "THE PERFECT FRAUD". Thank God and even those democratic Retired Military Veterans that stood up and exposed that Traitor.

" and the mythical liberal MSM did little to help or even to clarify matters."

You wish it was a myth. The MSM did everything it could for that punk ass fraud and you know it. Except for of course delivering him the office of the Presidency.

Nov 7 2006 was proof of your lies about a Mythical Liberal MSM. It's a fact that you must deny. How else could the Party of Criminal Frauds regain the Majority? Certainly not by merit.

So screw you, screw the sorry ass President "WANABE" you did vote for, and screw your own no doubt sorry ass life. Have a nice day.

hermie's got it. T... (Below threshold)
wavemaker:

hermie's got it.

This chickenshit windbag doesn't have the balls to give up his Senate seat for the run.

So it ain't so, John! We c... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

So it ain't so, John! We could really use another gas bag in the primary, who can thoroughly discredit his party!

wavemaker,That's Mis... (Below threshold)
Eneils Bailey:

wavemaker,
That's Mister chickenshit windbag to you.
I did not know he had been promoted within the democrat party.

Hooray!We don't ne... (Below threshold)
Larkin:

Hooray!

We don't need Kerry. We've got lots of good candidates who haven't already been rejected by the country. The Democratic debates will definitely be good entertainment.

The Republicans on the other hand will look a tired collection of balding and decrepit old white men (with the exception of Romney--aka "the Ken Doll").

Lately, Kerry has been taki... (Below threshold)
Eneils Bailey:

Lately, Kerry has been taking long strolls around the White House, reflecting on his political career, thinking about what could have been, planning for the future, and asking the guards to throw his medals back over the fence.

Lee"He never had a... (Below threshold)
914:

Lee

"He never had a chance of winning anyways"

Really? He got way more votes then Your wet dream Billary ever got~!

914 - I'm not a fan of Hill... (Below threshold)
Lee:

914 - I'm not a fan of Hillary so your comment is, as usual, stupid and misplaced -- and how many votes Kerry received in the past has no relation to how many he would have received in '08. He was un-electable after his behavior following the gaffe just before the election.

Kerry getting out of the way now is a good thing for Democrats, and it'll be interesting to see how he wields his power as a fundraiser. That boy can raise money.

Hillary has similar money-raising power - so Kerry throwing his support behind someone else in the race would give Hillary a fit.

However, if Kerry has presidential aspirations beyond on '08, and he's stupid enough to believe he might have a chance down the road (he doesn't imho) he might not throw his weight behind any particular candidate right now - and just help the DNC raise money until we have a nominee, then support that candidate.

Kerry dropping out the race strengthens the Democrats' chances in '08. -- so you silly, cymbal-clapping conservomonkeys make even less sense than usual with your glee over this move.

To "Rob LA"I think... (Below threshold)
BC:

To "Rob LA"

I think the term "Swiftboated" should have two meanings:

1) To discredit and malign a rival or opponent with a campaign of disinformation, smears, and false rumors using a network of malicious spokespeople and faux-news reporters with disguised agendas and/or false knowledge and expertise.

2) To be utterly suckered in by a Swiftboating campaign.

And you, my non-friend, have obviously been suckered in more than a Tootsie Roll Pop.

-BC

Now that he's realized that... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Now that he's realized that all of Teresa's money couldn't buy him respect OR the presidency, will he be tossing her overboard?

Well, he does like the lifestyle she affords him, so I doubt it.

It is VERY telling that he was the best the democrats could do in 2004. Pathetic.

Our President was a member ... (Below threshold)
nogo postal:

Our President was a member of the Guard..He could have volunteered to go to Viet Nam. Folks can say what they want about Kerry...they can dis Purple heart vets like myself by wearing band-aids..
The single basic fact is that Kerry was there and Bush was not...of course Cheney used a marriage/child deferment not to go to Viet Nam...ya know how many husbands and fathers names are on "the Wall"

I did not nor would not support Kerry for President. However as a purple heart vet...it is not even close the difference between him and Bush/Cheney Dan Rather did not have anything to do with our President not volunteering to use his trained expertise to fight in Viet Nam...No one said "Thank you for volunteering but we don;t need you".....but of course so many here who have been in combat can repeat cliches like we loved another "shotgun" of Cambodian Red

Breaking: Theresa Heinz Ker... (Below threshold)
914:

Breaking: Theresa Heinz Kerry to announce She will be seeking a divorce!

Our President was a memb... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Our President was a member of the Guard..He could have volunteered to go to Viet Nam.

He did. He lacked the flight hours to be allowed to go.

Read up on Palace Alert.

The standard rap against Bush is that he was ducking combat by joining the Guard. Actually, the Texas Air Guard had a program called Palace Alert that allowed pilots to volunteer for flight time in Vietnam. Three of Bush's fellow pilots--Udell, Woodfin and Fred Bradley--recalled to NEWSWEEK that Bush inquired with the base commander about signing up for Palace Alert. He was told no; he had too few flying hours at the time and his plane, the F-102, was by then deemed obsolete for air combat.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4271922/

Man, when the wingnuts get a lie in their head, no amount of proof will dislodge it.
-=Mike

and the mythical liberal... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

and the mythical liberal MSM did little to help or even to clarify matters.

He got more favorable press coverage than any candidate since 1980.
http://www.cmpa.com/documents/04.10.29.Kerry.Final.pdf

How much more do you want? A 58 - 34% positive story spread between Kerry and Bush isn't enough?
-=Mike

"How much more do you want?... (Below threshold)
Chris:

"How much more do you want?"

How about using a study tht doesn't come from a hack conservative front group funded by Richard Mellon Scaife?

<a href="http://www.mediach... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:
That good enough for ya the... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

That good enough for ya there, Chris?
-=Mike

Yep that's old "pucker puss... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Yep that's old "pucker puss" (lee lee) (resident turd polisher) for sure. Had me worried there for a second.

How facts and logic are the... (Below threshold)
BC:

How facts and logic are the enemy of the right:

1) In trying to refute a point, they will bring up something utterly irrelevant.

Example: In response to the assertion that the "mythical liberal MSM" did little to help in regards to regards to the 2004 smear campaign against John Kerry, especially that by the Swiftboaters, the follow link was offered up as "evidence":
http://www.mediachannel.org/views/dissector/affalert153.shtml

Please note the following key excerpt from this site:

"According to data compiled for MediaChannel.org by international media monitoring firm Media Tenor, network news broadcasts in January and February contained on average nearly three times more negative news statements about President Bush than about Senator John Kerry."

Basically the sampling was done during the first 2 months of 2004 while the primaries were still being on, and before even the GOP-funded Swiftboaters formed in May:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Swift_Boat_Veterans_for_Truth

Also note that by the beginning of 2004, the mainstream corporate media was finally noticing that the Iraq situation wasn't really going all that well, and that maybe, perchance Bush and his people hadn't been exactly, how shall we say, entirely truthful all along:
http://www.ajr.org/article_printable.asp?id=3725

Hence neutral press coverage should naturally have been much more critical of Bush at that time based on evidence.


2) Make a claim based on very sketchy evidence while ignoring much firmer evidence to the contrary.

Example: Claiming that Bush actually wanted go to Vietnam:

"The standard rap against Bush is that he was ducking combat by joining the Guard. Actually, the Texas Air Guard had a program called Palace Alert that allowed pilots to volunteer for flight time in Vietnam. Three of Bush's fellow pilots--Udell, Woodfin and Fred Bradley--recalled to NEWSWEEK that Bush inquired with the base commander about signing up for Palace Alert. He was told no; he had too few flying hours at the time and his plane, the F-102, was by then deemed obsolete for air combat."

This statement, based on supposed recollections, is in conflict with much firmer evidence that Bush had no intention of going to Vietnam and had indeed got into the Air National Guard for the sole purpose of avoiding Vietnam duty, and was put into a "Champagne Unit" with the sons of other wealthy families and pro-athletes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champagne_unit

And this quote from Bush himself confirms why he got into the Guard: "I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada. So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes" (1990 - Dallas Morning News)

And lastly, in one of his Guard application forms, Bush checked a box that was labeled "Do Not volunteer to serve overseas."
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/images/donotbush.gif
And that whole Palace Guard thing was no more than a ruse -- he knew he had no chance of being sent overseas:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm

Hope this clarifies. Sorry for the trolling, but these moronic, malicious attacks on Kerry, whom I actually never cared for in particular, caused by his emotional announcement that he wasn't goning to run, was really infuriating, both morally and intellectually.

-BC

Hey BC You ... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Hey BC

You emotional fool , you are both morally and intellectually bankrupt. You are a dumb democrat just like your criminal party's leaders claim you are.

"whom I actually never cared for in particular"

Liar, Did you vote for him?

Never cared? Then shut the fuck up.

"His emotional announcement?" " was really infuriating"

What? This punk ass fraud starts crying because he was exposed by another Democrat SwiftBoat Veteran after all the time and effort he put into deceiving his way through life and you get all emotional?

You are not sorry for jack shit, you are just a sorry shit.

"Hope this clarifies."

Sure, it clarifies exactly why your own Party calls you Stupid especially when they say things like : Hillary Clinton: "We're Going to Take Things Away From You on Behalf of the Common Good".

"but these moronic, malicious attacks on...."

Non-friends such as political opposition is the best strategy that is nothing more than election fraud . Standard opperating procedures of the democrat criminal frauds.


To "Rob LA"

"I think the term "Swiftboated" should have two meanings:"

I believe you believe that. Just like "Slick Willie", you know what it "IS" that I am talking about , the story you wish you could forget. LOL , or do you need to have me explain what the meaning of "IS" is?

Now run along and join the rest of your empty headed tools like this one and keep passing the ignorance.

"At 10:17 AM, Synergy-synthesis said...

More good work, Dayvoe. I'm not sure where you uncovered this, but I am passing it along at The Augusta (GA) Chronicle Forum."


How facts and logic are ... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

How facts and logic are the enemy of the right:

1) In trying to refute a point, they will bring up something utterly irrelevant.

Example: In response to the assertion that the "mythical liberal MSM" did little to help in regards to regards to the 2004 smear campaign against John Kerry, especially that by the Swiftboaters, the follow link was offered up as "evidence":
http://www.mediachannel.org/views/dissector/affalert153.shtml

Please note the following key excerpt from this site:

"According to data compiled for MediaChannel.org by international media monitoring firm Media Tenor, network news broadcasts in January and February contained on average nearly three times more negative news statements about President Bush than about Senator John Kerry."

Basically the sampling was done during the first 2 months of 2004 while the primaries were still being on, and before even the GOP-funded Swiftboaters formed in May:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Swift_Boat_Veterans_for_Truth

Also note that by the beginning of 2004, the mainstream corporate media was finally noticing that the Iraq situation wasn't really going all that well, and that maybe, perchance Bush and his people hadn't been exactly, how shall we say, entirely truthful all along:
http://www.ajr.org/article_printable.asp?id=3725

Hence neutral press coverage should naturally have been much more critical of Bush at that time based on evidence.

Are you REALLY going to argue that Bush, at ANY point, got positive stories? Are you going to argue that the last 3 months of the campaign were the "golden days" of Bush coverage? Even Evan Thomas said the MSM's coverage would boost Kerry's numbers.

I didn't mention Halperin's memo, which I could have and am now. Nor did I mention the forged memos. Or the percentage of reporters who vote Democrat every time. Nor did I mention the story of missing ammo that was wrong.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2004/jobs_study/sr20041014.asp

To claim Kerry had anything but fawning coverage is a lie.
2) Make a claim based on very sketchy evidence while ignoring much firmer evidence to the contrary.

Example: Claiming that Bush actually wanted go to Vietnam:

"The standard rap against Bush is that he was ducking combat by joining the Guard. Actually, the Texas Air Guard had a program called Palace Alert that allowed pilots to volunteer for flight time in Vietnam. Three of Bush's fellow pilots--Udell, Woodfin and Fred Bradley--recalled to NEWSWEEK that Bush inquired with the base commander about signing up for Palace Alert. He was told no; he had too few flying hours at the time and his plane, the F-102, was by then deemed obsolete for air combat."

This statement, based on supposed recollections, is in conflict with much firmer evidence that Bush had no intention of going to Vietnam and had indeed got into the Air National Guard for the sole purpose of avoiding Vietnam duty, and was put into a "Champagne Unit" with the sons of other wealthy families and pro-athletes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champagne_unit

You're citing wikipedia.

Sweet feathery Jesus, you're quoting wikipedia.

Why even waste your time with that link?

And this quote from Bush himself confirms why he got into the Guard: "I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada. So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes" (1990 - Dallas Morning News)

And he volunteered to fly airplanes in Vietnam but he lacked the flight hours in his aircraft to be sent.

And lastly, in one of his Guard application forms, Bush checked a box that was labeled "Do Not volunteer to serve overseas."
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/images/donotbush.gif
And that whole Palace Guard thing was no more than a ruse -- he knew he had no chance of being sent overseas:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm

He volunteered. Whether you like how he did it or not, you have lied here about it.

Hope this clarifies. Sorry for the trolling, but these moronic, malicious attacks on Kerry, whom I actually never cared for in particular, caused by his emotional announcement that he wasn't goning to run, was really infuriating, both morally and intellectually.

Yes, I was mocking the automaton because of his clumsy attempt to show "emotion".

Kerry isn't running because he's a crap candidate. He had the press in his back pocket and STILL couldn't win.

If Bush had Kerry's coverage, he would've won by 20 points.
-=Mike

"Rob LA" drooled:"... (Below threshold)
BC:

"Rob LA" drooled:

"Hey BC

You emotional fool , you are both morally and intellectually bankrupt. You are a dumb democrat just like your criminal party's leaders claim you are."

So says a poster boy for what's ailing this country -- ignorance and maliciousness.

"'whom I actually never cared for in particular'"

"Liar, Did you vote for him?"

"Never cared? Then shut the fuck up."

Ignorant, deliberately deceptive fool, how about posting what I said slightly more in context (typos fixed): "Sorry for the trolling, but these moronic, malicious attacks on Kerry, whom I actually never cared for in particular, caused by his emotional announcement that he wasn't going to run, were really infuriating, both morally and intellectually."

Oh, wait, I forgot -- right wing crackheads hate context about as much as facts, fairness, logic and science.

"'His emotional announcement?'" "'was really infuriating'"

"What? This punk ass fraud starts crying because he was exposed by another Democrat SwiftBoat Veteran after all the time and effort he put into deceiving his way through life and you get all emotional?"

Do you come by your mean-spirited, lying-ass stupidity natually or did you have to learn it at the "Karl Rove Academy for Clueless Kooks" aka KRACK?

The Swiftboat Liars apparently all graduated KRACK with honors.

"You are not sorry for jack shit, you are just a sorry shit."

I know you are, but what I am? Still wondering why the US never got Hussein to turn in his good buddy bin Laden?

"'Hope this clarifies.'"

"Sure, it clarifies exactly why your own Party calls you Stupid especially when they say things like : Hillary Clinton: 'We're Going to Take Things Away From You on Behalf of the Common Good'".

You mean about rolling back those worthless, irresponsible tax breaks to the rich that Bush got passed?

And how about putting that quote in context (whoops, sorry, I forgot that KRACKheads don't do that): "We're not coming to you, many of whom are well enough off that actually the tax cuts may have helped you, and say 'we're going to give you more.' We're saying, 'you know what, for America to get back on track and be fiscally responsible, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

"'but these moronic, malicious attacks on....'"

"Non-friends such as political opposition is the best strategy that is nothing more than election fraud . Standard opperating procedures of the democrat criminal frauds."

I have no idea what you just babbled/drooled.

"To 'Rob LA'"

"'I think the term "Swiftboated" should have two meanings:'"

"I believe you believe that. Just like 'Slick Willie', you know what it 'IS' that I am talking about , the story you wish you could forget. LOL , or do you need to have me explain what the meaning of 'IS' is?"

May I quote you on that?

"Now run along and join the rest of your empty headed tools like this one and keep passing the ignorance."

Well I am passing the ignorant, if that's what you mean....

Have a nice drool.

-BC

MikeSC wrote:"Are ... (Below threshold)
BC:

MikeSC wrote:

"Are you REALLY going to argue that Bush, at ANY point, got positive stories? Are you going to argue that the last 3 months of the campaign were the "golden days" of Bush coverage? Even Evan Thomas said the MSM's coverage would boost Kerry's numbers."

Yes. In journalistic circles, American press coverage of Bush and Iraq during the beginning stages of the Iraq is now being seen more and more as a very dark period for journalism. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice and the war itself were essentially given undeserved free passes to uncritical mainstream media coverage despite many, many indications that things were not at all as represented by the Bush administration.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/medindex.htm

"I didn't mention Halperin's memo, which I could have and am now."

You mean the Oct. 8th, 2004 memo by ABC News Political Director Mark Halperin that goes: "the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done" and "I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.

"It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right."
http://www.drudgereport.com/mh.htm

That memo just shows a major news organization waiting until just one month before the elections to finally do "right" in acknowledging and doing something about the nasty smear campaign against Kerry the Bush campaign and their toadies have been getting away with for several months prior. Too friggin little, too friggin late for "the public interest".

"Nor did I mention the forged memos."

"Forged memos"!!!???!!! Hah! You might perchance consider clicking on my "BC" link for enlightenment (yeah, for those lurkers out -- I've been traveling and been too busy to finish the daisywheel test, but hopefully by the beginning of February....)

"Or the percentage of reporters who vote Democrat every time."

Well, it's a fact of life that people who are in the arts and sciences tend to have liberal viewpoints. It is what it is.

"Nor did I mention the story of missing ammo that was wrong."

How about Fox News, on March 23rd 2003, spending an *entire* day, right up to the news brief before O'Reilly's show, continuously reporting an utterly bogus WMD lab report that had been dropped by all the other TV news media by late morning. Talk about double standards: CBS, Mapes and Rather get crucified, both in the right wing and left wing press, over a 12 1/2 minute piece about Bush's guard service that was already known to be true (an AP FOIA lawsuit forced the release of more Bush military records just prior to the CBS piece) even if they didn't *fully* authenticate the memos; whereas Fox News get away with 12 hrs plus of utterly irresponsible, unbridled BS with nobody giving them much grief. Where was the "liberal MSM" in giving Fox News any sort of of grief over this? Why was no outside panel formed to see what went wrong in Fox's news judgement?

"To claim Kerry had anything but fawning coverage is a lie."

Ya think? http://snipurl.com/8thg

And just look at what the darling of the right, Michelle Malkin, tried to get away with claiming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Awynald_Yk

That was too much even for Chris "softball" Matthews. Perhaps "malicious smear" is too euphemistic for this type of vile behavior towards Kerry, going on even today, and even after the poor guy almost completely braking down in announcing his withdrawal from the running for 2008.

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champagne_unit"

"You're citing wikipedia.

Sweet feathery Jesus, you're quoting wikipedia.

Why even waste your time with that link?"

Umm, because it's generally has more info, footnotes, cites and accuracy that *anything* on the right and most of the stuff on the left. I tend to regard the right's antagonism towards Wikipedia as being more of the same antagonism they show towards logic, science, fairness and context. If you want other sources, just Google: Champagne Unit

"And he volunteered to fly airplanes in Vietnam but he lacked the flight hours in his aircraft to be sent."

Sweet feathery Jesus, you're repeating an assertion that has no official documentation supporting it -- why do you even waste your time doing that? And even if true, it wasn't at all volunteering "to fly airplanes in Vietnam". From this Washington Post article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm

"Bush says that toward the end of his training in 1970, he tried to volunteer for overseas duty, asking a commander to put his name on the list for a "Palace Alert" program, which dispatched qualified F-102 pilots in the Guard to the Europe and the Far East, occasionally to Vietnam, on three-to-six-month assignments."

However, somewhat more substantial evidence shows that Bush had no desire to be sent overseas, as I already pointed out:
http://www.smithersmpls.com/graphics/bushfiledetail.gif
And in context:
http://www.smithersmpls.com/graphics/bushfile.gif

"He volunteered. Whether you like how he did it or not, you have lied here about it."

Umm, I brought up a official DoD form and Bush's own quoted statement showing he had no intention of being sent to Vietnam, and you've only offered Bush's unsubstantiated claim, with no official application backing it up. Who's more credible?

"If Bush had Kerry's coverage, he would've won by 20 points."

Actually, if our much ballyhooed "free press" had done its job in separating fact from fiction, lies from truth, and had gotten off its collective, lazym latte-sipping asses and had taken its journalistic and public interest responsibilities seriously, not only only would Bush have lost to Kerry by 30+ points in the election, but there would have a huge public demand for impeachment months prior and Bush may never have gotten a chance to run again.

-BC




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy