Kerry Throws Down the Gauntlet in NH

[kerrygoddess]

Kerry Throws Down the Gauntlet in NH
October 14th, 2006 @ 6:24 pm

John Kerry threw down the gauntlet last night in NH and those who watched his speech at NH’s Jefferson Jackson Dinner know exactly what I am talking about. The speaker was on fire, the crowd was couldn’t get enough, the standing ovations just kept on coming. John Kerry fired away at the Bush administration and the GOP right out of the gate last night… “A lie, a lie, a lie, a lie. What we have in Washington is a house of lies, and in November, we need to clean house.”

The Boston Globe reports, “Kerry, nurturing plans for a second presidential run, sought to recapture support among key Democratic activists last night by offering his strongest words yet on President Bush’s Iraq policy.”

From the look of the reaction in the house last night, when I watched the speech on C-Span, John Kerry did more than recapture the support. C-Span kept the cameras rolling on Kerry for a good 15 - 20 minutes after the speech and there were many who asked, “are you going to run?” There were the pleas –”Run again Senator — we need you,” or the reminders “I’ve still got your back!” Anyone who thinks Kerry doesn’t have support on the ground is fooling themselves, or simply doesn’t want to admit it. The video of the speech is available here(WM).

In his keynote address to the largest fund-raiser of the year for the Democratic Party in New Hampshire, the site of the nation’s first presidential primary, Kerry accused Republicans of telling “lies” about the conditions in Iraq. He once again called for deadline to withdraw a majority of the troops.

“This war in Iraq is a disgrace,” the Massachusetts Democrat said. “Set a deadline for Iraqis to run Iraq and bring our troops home.”

On that line, Kerry received one of a dozen standing ovations he received during his 30-minute speech.

The senator clearly hoped his crispness on the issue would offset resentment among some party activists for what they considered a muddled performance on the issue in 2004, when he defended his vote authorizing the war but criticized Bush for moving too quickly to oust Saddam Hussein.

“For those who question my opposition to this war, just as they questioned my opposition to Vietnam after I retuned let me tell you: When you know the truth then it is both a right and an obligation to disagree with a president who is wrong,” Kerry said.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=4464

[burythehatchet]

1. I wish I could get excited for him again

[fedupinBushcountry]

2. Move on

You don't want good Dems fighting for you, then just move on, this is about now. You know the elections that are going on in 24 days.

I could give a fuck about your pessimism its time for optimism, we need all the voices we have out there to speak truth to power.

So move along.

[politicasista]

5. Amen n/t

[kerrygoddess]

10. Now

is right. Pessimism didn't help much in '04 either quite frankly. Can we all just get the repugs out and then bicker again please. Enough with the pissing and moaning. Let's win some damn election by getting excited! Thanks FedUp I'd rather listent o some truth telling too and support those who do it on a god damn daily basis.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wisteria]

20. Do yourself a favor and watch the speech. C-Span 2 Sunday

"Road to the White House". This is a speech to get excited about.

[NMDemDist2]

3. he'd make an excellent president. I thought so in 2002 and I still think

so today

[kerrygoddess]

7. Me too

me too.

[Clarkie1]

4. He wouldn't be our smartest choice for 08', but irregardless of that

kudos to him for telling it like it is! :applause:

No more senator nominees.

[kerrygoddess]

6. Thanks

for sharing...

[Clarkie1]

25. You're welcome!

:-)

[seabeyond]

8. fooling themselves...simply doesn’t want to admit it. d*mn STRAIGHT

supporting kerry will be easy for me. i already know everythingthere is to know and so does the nation. nothing for rove attack machine to use unlike a new candidate that will be all about defense. not kerry...

he has earned it the last two years

i want him now as much as i did in 2004 with confidence he will do a good job as president and know what to do in iraq and our foriegn policy. nothing has changed on that. not to mention what he offered in helath care, small business and education. i want him in there to do the things he promised.

[texpatriot2004]

9. Thank you Senator Kerry for using the "L" word nm

[bobbie]

11. As if Kerry has a gauntlet

Kerry throws elections not gauntlets.

How can anyone trust this guy after his 2004 performance?

What is is Bush says?
"Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice...won't get fooled again."

[politicasista]

12. I am really glad that Clark and Kerry are working hard for 06

If you think that dumping on Kerry while promoting the General is great, than you're wrong.

It's too bad you are still stuck in the past and can't appreciate good Dems fighting for you.

[bobbie]

13. And how exactly did Kerry fight in 2004...

...when they blatantly stole the election by way of Ohio voting fraud?

[politicasista]

15. He has spoken out far more than most since 04

There have been facts posted everywhere here about. If you can't appreciate what you are fighting for, than I am sorry.

Speaking of voter supression in Jan 05 (he got slammed for it too).

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/kerry/art...

Here's William Pitt's interview with Cam Kerry from January, 2005 with lots of good quotes.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_05/011105W.shtml

From the RFK Jr. article:


By midnight, the official tallies showed a decisive lead for George Bush -- and the next day, lacking enough legal evidence to contest the results, Kerry conceded.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the...



Kerry continued legal efforts:


Today, Kerry-Edwards filed a document in support of that statement. Most significant, Kerry-Edwards also filed today a separate document in support of our motion for hearing with two critical attachments: 1) a declaration from Kerry-Edwards attorney Don McTigue regarding a survey he conducted of Kerry-Edwards county recount coordinators; 2) a summary chart of the results of that survey (which highlight the inconsistent standards applied during the recount).

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/24/183243/7...

http://www.truthout.org/pdf/cobbbadnariktransfertatemen...
http://www.truthout.org/pdf/kerryedwardsmctiguedecl2240...
http://www.truthout.org/pdf/kerryedwardsmotionforhearin...
http://www.truthout.org/pdf/kerryedwardssummarychart224... (counting)
http://www.truthout.org/pdf/kerryedwardstransferstateme...


They were thrown out by the courts, by partisan players, but if there was solid evidence not even partisanship would have been able to refute the case. As Conyers report stated:


Whether the cumulative effect of these legal violations would have altered the actual outcome is not known at this time. However, we do know that there are many serious and intentional violations which violate Ohio’s own law, that the Secretary of State has done everything in his power to avoid accounting for such violations, and it is incumbent on Congress to protect the integrity of its own laws by recognizing the seriousness of these legal violations.

B. Need for Further Congressional Hearings

It is also clear the U.S. Congress needs to conduct additional and more vigorous hearings into the irregularities in the Ohio presidential election and around the country.

While we have conducted our own Democratic hearings and investigation, we have been handicapped by the fact that key participants in the election, such as Secretary of State Blackwell, have refused to cooperate in our hearings or respond to Mr. Conyers questions. While GAO officials are prepared to move forward with a wide ranging analysis of systemic problems in the 2004 elections, they are not planning to conduct the kind of specific investigation needed to get to the bottom of the range of problems evident in Ohio. As a result, it appears that the only means of obtaining his cooperation in any congressional investigation is under the threat of subpoena, which only the Majority may require.

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/issues/issues/...

More in these interviews:

http://audio.wegoted.com/podcasting/122105SenatorKerry....

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/bits/2006_0517_kerry.mp3


As Rolling Stone now states:


Enough. Only a complete investigation by federal authorities can determine the full extent of any bribery and vote rigging that has taken place. The public must be assured that the power to count the votes -- and to recount them, if necessary -- will not be ceded to for-profit corporations with a vested interest in superseding the will of the people. America's elections are the most fundamental element of our democracy -- not a market to be privatized by companies like Diebold.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10463874/editori...

Bills co-sponsored:


S.195 : A bill to provide for full voting representation in Congress for the citizens of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. (introduced 1/26/2005) Cosponsors (13) Committees: Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Latest Major Action: 3/9/2005 Referred to Senate subcommittee. Status: Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs referred to Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia.

S.391 : A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit certain State election administration officials from actively participating in electoral campaigns. Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. (introduced 2/16/2005) Cosponsors (5) Committees: Senate Rules and Administration Latest Major Action: 2/16/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

S.450 : (The Count Every Vote Act) A bill to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified paper record, to improve provisional balloting, to impose additional requirements under such Act, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham (introduced 2/17/2005) Cosponsors (6) Committees: Senate Rules and Administration Latest Major Action: 2/17/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

S.1975 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections. Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack (introduced 11/8/2005) Cosponsors (4) Committees: Senate Rules and Administration Latest Major Action: 11/8/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

Misc:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=273&topic_id=96518


About the Ohio case:

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/blogs/tokaji/2006/06/back-to-o...

Where is your blame at Democrats that have been silent?

[bobbie]

17. No no no no, that wasn't the question...

The question was:

"And how exactly did Kerry fight in 2004...

...when they blatantly stole the election by way of Ohio voting fraud?"

In 20004. During the election. When it *mattered*. When he could have made a difference. When he could have demonstrated a belief the supposed right to vote and choose our leaders is, like, important.

[politicasista]

19. He is STILL making a difference

Based on the facts posted above. And he is one of the dems that cares about this issue. Again, why aren't you blaming the dems that are silent on this?

As I said earlier, I am glad that Kerry and Clark are out there helping candidates for 06. I think you should be too. Besides this thread was about 06, not election fraud.

If we don't get a Democratic controlled congress in 06, then 2008 may be a longshot period. Not to mention the power and impact of the corporate media.. If they smeared Gore and Kerry, they will smear/spin anyone.

[bobbie]

24. I'll have to take your word for it 'cause I can't link from your post

Seriously, I tried to look at the material you reference, 'cause I do appreciate the fact that you took the time to compile it, but most of the links are incomplete or dead or something.

>Again, why aren't you blaming the dems that are silent on this?

Why would you assume I'm not? I'm in no way a Dem (and I'm sure as hell not a Repug). I display Clark's avatar 'cause I have a high opinion of him as an individual, not of his party.

But the obvious difference between Kerry and the other Dems is that he was the party's presidential candidate in 2004, the most recent stolen prez election, and the other weren't. He coulda/shoulda anticipated dirty voting tricks in 2004, based on what 2000 was like, and coulda/shoulda had measures in place - on election day - to help people vote and/or help gather evidence if they couldn't. Election observers, lawyers, whatever it took.

Then again I realize that the media is in the pocket of the Rethugs, so it would be hard to even know if he had measures in place. It's not like they'd tell us.

[karynnj]

27. I seriously doubt he is supporting the General

This is one of at least 3 threads where he is throwing this mud. What's the name of those creatures who live under the bridge? I think he's trying to satart a fight.

[ohtransplant]

14. It's time to focus on 11/7/06...

and a lot could change in the next two years...but I hope he runs.

I'd be proud to vote Kerry(D) for President in '08.

[bobbie]

18. And if your vote is stolen in 2008...

Will you expect Kerry to fight for your right to vote?

[WildEyedLiberal]

21. Wow, Kerry really threatens you, doesn't he?

You poor, poor thing.

Seeing as Kerry is pushing for paper ballots, I'd say he's doing more about securing elections than you are.

Why are you in this thread? Wes Clark would be ashamed that you claim to support him with your divisive and untrue bullshit. He is a good man and would not support your lies.

[bobbie]

26. "Wow, Kerry really threatens you, doesn't he?"

Yeah...that's sorta the point. I don't trust him.

I think he took a dive in 2004 by running a very weak campaign, then being unprepared for predictable voting fraud in the very state where we all knew well in advance that diebold ruled and there was a partisan Sect of State, then failed to take measures (that I'm aware of) to battle the predictable problems on election day. I think this was intentional on his part; I don't think he intended to win.
I think he's an insider who snapped up the nomination so that an outsider couldn't win.

Insiders don't want another Jimmy Carter or...JFK in the White House. Someone who might actually try to change things, particularly things involving war and the attendant profits to big business. They're very serious about their war machine, and Kerry didn't threaten that.

So he very much threatens me, and not just me, but anyone who tries to vote, if he runs again. I hope he doesn't. And I don't understand why he would be given a second chance to take a dive.

>Seeing as Kerry is pushing for paper ballots, I'd say he's doing more about securing elections than you are.

Oh gimme a break; you don't know squat about me.
But I absolutely should have said "*IMO* Kerry threw the election" rather than stating it as a fact.
Sometimes I forget the IMO part.

[ohtransplant]

23. I'd expect the same of him I'd expect from any nominee.

There are harsh realities in politics. It's not a bar fight and it doesn't matter who screams the loudest. Accusations and anecdotal evidence don't change the tide. That was one of many lessons of 2000. Having the Supremes in your opponent's camp doesn't help either.

If there is any way to fight, then I'd expect just that. That said, a candidate has to rely on the analysis of those around him and in the party. We were all horribly disappointed at the outcome and took a long time to put it behind us but the focus must be on the future. The easy thing to do is second guess and engage in conjecture.

Many of the battles in Ohio happened quietly before a vote was cast.

A better question might be the venue of the fight. I believe several suits were brought, and supported by the Kerry campaign in Ohio. Sadly the courts and statewide offices in Ohio are stacked with pubs and these tactics were muffled.

The fight is on the ground. If Americans demanded fair elections in huge numbers - and voted out anyone who disagrees - that would go a long way in securing our electoral process. The truth is many are apathetic. I think that is changing slowly but...

Since 2004 I don't know of many Dems who have fought as hard or consistently as Senator Kerry. I considered him a great candidate in 2004 but he's a better candidate now. It's evident (to me at least)he has learned from "history".

[elocs]

22. Whoever is the Democrat candidate in 08

had better campaign with honest emotion and passion. That person cannot be somebody who can intellectually and equally explain both sides and the middle of every issue and then present where they stand. The average American voter has a short attention span and they are more likely to support a candidate who has emotion and a fire in their belly rather than an intellectual and well reasoned presentation on their position on the issues.

[McCamy Taylor]

28. He needs to sit down and explain why he did not fight for our votes in 04