Reply #38: I re-wrote mine to send to her because I think you're right [View All]

[karynnj]

She needs to get a lot of mail. I put a different link to the Ireland speech from the thread months ago. She really needs to listen to it and getting at least 2 links that are different may make the letters seem more independent.

I remember an editorial in fall 2004 in the NYT, that spoke of how in the past the liberals were the ones who laid claim to idealism where the conservatives were the pragmatists. It went to say that Bush's actions in the ME were based on the idea that democracy was good and everyone should have it, where Kerry was more of a realist. This speech is important because Kerry succeeds in articulating on optimistic, inspiring view of how the world can deal with the current problems while respecting other cultures. I assume, like all Kerry speeches, he will continue to rework themes in this.

I've heard a speech on roughly the same topic by Biden - it was convoluted, contradicted itself and did not seem to be based on a consistent world view, which Kerry's did. I have never heard this type of intellectual speech on anything from Hillary or any of the other candidates.

Anyway, I wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the week of a landmark speech, rather than complimenting your Senator, who you voted for 6 times, for saying what needs to be said on both dissent and Iraq, you beg him not to run. Senator Kerry has said he will make up his mind later this year. Why not comment on the speech - and realize that Kerry is leading on Iraq and the repression of dissent, serious important issues NOW, not in 2008? Why not comment on the climate that has made dissent hard - that you as a journalist can impact?

You claim that Kerry doesn't have ideas, only policies. But vague ideas, without policies are not implementable, otherwise we could elect any random former Miss America candidate (now old enough) who said she was for world peace. In my opinion, Kerry has expressed thoughtful ideas on more issues than any of the potential 2008 candidates.

His plans to change the course in Iraq are more detailed, thought out and well constructed than any one else's. His speech on how to deal with terrorism given in Ulster provides an equally idealist alternative to the neo-con plans. (This speech is important as the neo-con views have been presented as the idealist, spreading democracy path, ignoring that they do it at the point of a gun and never in history has that worked. Here's a link to the speech: http://www.ulster.ac.uk/news/john-kerry-speech.pdf
His linking of developing alternative fuels to creating jobs to improving the economy, and his various programs to help small businesses which create the many new jobs are very creative ideas to help the economy. His health plan in 2004 was praised by many independent groups. All these plans are driven by ideas.

The other complaint was that he was a bad campaigner. If this is true, he won't win the nomination, so you should have no worries. That you are writing an op-ed nearly 2 years before the election indicates you are worried he can win, possibly because you realize how comelling and strong his speech at Faneuil Hall was. You should also consider that 2004 may be a much easier election for any Democrat to win. In 2004, many people still believed that invading Iraq was necessary, that Bush was a strong President who could and would protect us and the media did a very poor job in reporting much Kerry said from the campaign trail. Watching the electrifying rallies on CSPAN then reading the media was strange. In 1992, in October the broadcast media showed the ever intensifying Clinton rallies. In 2004, Kerry broke records on crowd size and the media hid it as much as possible.