Press disses JK on the 2004 election (this morning on his show)

[ray of light]

Frankly, I never listen to the Press show because it's early and honestly, I much prefer other 'talkers.'

However, I had it on today, on the way to work, and Press made the assertion that John Kerry never addressed the National Security issue (and foreign issues) during the 04 election. For the time I had the radio on, nobody refuted him. I would have called but they didn't give out the number.

I'd say Mr. Press needs to hear some facts?

I seem to remember JK stating that our national security was at risk because we left Afghanistan to go to Iraq. We let Osama go somewhere in Pakistan. We needed to treat this as a police enforcement, not as some willy-nilly war(mongering).

What do you guys think? Was there more that he did? Do you think we should contact that show?

[Mass]

1. He needs to get his head cleared. If anything, Democratic pundits were saying that Kerry

talked TOO MUCH about these issues and should talk about the economy.

[ray of light]

2. Also, (call me bitter), but he was abused because he actually TALKED DIPLOMATICALLY

with France and other European nations. And he always said how the global community is safer when we all work together!

[ray of light]

3. OH! And while I'm on my soap box...

Wasn't it JK who spoke about all the things coming into our ports uninspected?

And wasn't it JK who actually did the BRAVEST THING OF ALL! He had a PUBLIC BLOG on which people could come and post what was happening across the globe! It's how many of us discovered the torture was not just a few bad apples. It's where I remember reading about the rapes and abuses in Iraqis prisons that could be heard outside the walls. It's how many of us learned of how much our safety was compromised by a media that didn't tell us about the real 'terror' that was brewing beneath the surface and why.

Sorry. But I think his blog was integral to the whole way he campaigned on ALL the issues and how he circled the media to get to the real issues.

[karynnj]

5. Yep and Port Security was something he was on before 911

Kerry was speaking those issues in the 1990s - when Press was defending sex with interns. He also should read Kerry's book, It is still relevant. Part of what he was saying was that crime had globalized, and just as you needed new ways to look at a legit economy that was global, crime being global changed things. He spoke of the fact that if they eliminated the mob in Middlesex County when he was a prosecutor, it was gone for years. Global terrorists aren't as easily controlled in an area. He spoke of non-state terrorism as a subset of this.

I think with Press, it is the need to find a reason why Kerry failed rather than the media or the electorate. As a liberal, he (thank God) doesn't say the SBVT were right, but he says - incorrectly - Kerry didn't fight back. Now, he is saying - what the slimy Bill Clinton said in 2005 - Kerry was weak on National Security. Anything but the truth. Bush terrorized the country via fake terror level changes and the media let him and filtered out Kerry's message more than they have in any election.

Kerry wasn't perfect - but if you compare him to HRC, Obama or McCain - he was better off the cuff and made VERY few gaffes. All three 2008 people have made several.

[karynnj]

6. Exactly, with the whining led by people like Carville and Begala

and other Clinton people - the same who later said he was weak on national security.

[karynnj]

4. Not only that but he was attacked in 2004, by the Clinton allies in the media

FOR talking on Iraq, terrorism and national security. Kerry's numbers went up when he gave his NYU Iraq speech, followed up by giving about a 1 to 2 minute summary on Letterman in the evening (short, but very substantive) He also gave the University of Pennsylvania speech on terrorism - which was the speech that led George Will in 2006 to say he was right. Does he remember the first debate?

He spoke of Iraq and terrorism every single day on the stump. Does Press remember Kerry speaking of the Iraqis making ieds from ammo from known dumps they failed to secure? and killing and maiming our kids?

How pathetic. His job is liberal pundit - mine housewife - quess who likely watched more of the campaign?

If we contact him it should be to give him links to the U of P speech, the first debate, and the matt Bai NYT magazine where Kerry spoke of reducing terrorism to a "nuisance".

I suspect it is partly a way to define why this this is different - ignoring that Kerry's national security and foreign policy credentials trump Obama's (and would have trumped HRC's)

[beachmom]

7. Gotta love the amnesia and stupidity of pundits, liberal or otherwise.

Just because they can't remember doesn't mean it happened. This is why I prefer blogs, especially with linked sources. On radio these guys seem to pull things out of their you know where because I guess they can't think of what else to say.

[wisteria]

8. I enjoyed Press on CNN in 2000, but that was before I realized he doesn't bother to check facts

and just blurts out whatever he thinks is true. In other words, he is an idiot who deserves to be ignored. Thank goodness he has just a rinky dink radio show and is no longer on major cable news stations expect for a very occasional visit.

[ray of light]

9. He's like Jerry Springer. Remember the Springer show? (on Air America)?

[wisteria]

10. Yes, you are right. n/t

[Mass]

11. Another leftist pundit who does not know what he is speaking about

http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/rosenfeld/?ses=5866892071adf4861453a6991b132713

..
In 2004, Sen. John Kerry, (D-MA), that year’s democratic nominee, accepted public financing but ran out of money after the primaries and before the party’s convention, after which the public funds become available. That shortfall allowed the GOP to portray Kerry in unfavorable lights to voters while Kerry was unable to respond with his own television commercials.
...

:sigh:
Would it be too much for these pundits to know what they are talking about. Until the Convention, Kerry had plenty of money to defend himself. The attacks were after the Democratic party convention and not financed by the GOP or the Bush campaign, but by soft money and Kerry had to last one more month than Bush with the same money.

Is that so difficult for these people to get the fundamentals?

:banghead: