Kos v. Kos on Kerry

Kos has a post where he looks back at his first cattle call ever from November 8, 2002. Here’s his entry on John Kerry:

John Kerry

Pros: Distinguished war hero. Distinguished peace movement hero. Wife is worth a fortune. New England liberal.

Cons: Stiff. Crazy hair. Senator. New England liberal.

Kerry has become a media darling, kind of the Bradley of 2004. He’s extremely intelligent and pursues the sort of liberal policies certain to excite the party faithful. He’s also untouchable on foreign policy matters (though I said the same about Max Cleland), and has been one of the few voices from the Democratic side of the aisle criticizing Bush’s war efforts directly. The fact that he’s a New England liberal should prove helpful during the primaries, but it remains to be seen if it will prove a negative amongst moderates. (Republicans are so enamored with Bush that it’s irrelevant what they think. They won’t abandon the president.)

He misses another aspect about Kerry where he was wrong. In his initial assessment he got it right in saying Kerry “has been one of the few voices from the Democratic side of the aisle criticizing Bush’s war efforts directly.” As the year wore on, Kos, whlle on Dean’s payroll, helped spread false claims that Kerry supported going to war as they distorted the meaning of the Iraq War Resolution to attempt to portray Dean as anti-war and Kerry as pro-war when they actually had very similar views on the war, and Kerry had far better credentials as an opponent of Bush’s policies from the start.

Next time Kos tries to drag up the false claims that Kerry supported the war, we can quote Kos’s own assessment of Kerry’s position on Bush’s war efforts.

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. 1
    Probus says:

    I don’t think many people take Kos’ proclamations seriously, since most people are aware that it is far too early to pick a candidate or to write anyone off. I have trouble when people say that someone voted for the war which of course is not true. No senator voted for this war, they voted to give the president the authorization if and only if he thought that going to war was a last resort. It is unfair to blame dems for going to war, when it is the president who went to war. He favors Obama because he “never voted for the war” but that is only because he wasn’t in the Senate at the time. Also it’s far too early to pick any candidate or to write off any candidate at this point. DKos polls and other straw polls have no meaning are and are not accurate like the “likability” poll that came out recently.

  2. 2
    Ron Chusid says:

    Of course this is all meaningless with regards to predicting a candidate. This is significant in showing that as of November 2008 Kos realized that Kerry was critical of Bush on the war, contradicting his later attacks on Kerry. The IWR didn’t become a “vote for the war” until later when they invented tha attacks against Kerry.

  3. 3
    Probus says:

    I wish some in our dem party would get over the vote to give authorization to the president to go to war. It is not fair to blame dem senators like Edwards, Biden, Kerry, Bayh, Clinton and Dodd for something that was the president’s decision. Only the commander-in-chief can decide whether to go to war. It is not accurate to say that Kerry voted for the war. He voted to give authorization. Why don’t those who criticize the vote realize that this war is Bush’s choice and not theirs.

    Bush broke his word in a number of areas when he asked for authorization from Congress. He promised we would only go to war as a last resort which he didn’t do. He promised he would let the weapons inspectors do their jobs even this he didn’t allow. He promised that he would work with NATO allies and not go to war until he had a strong coalition of other countries supporting him even this he didn’t do. He went into Iraq alone.

1 Trackbacks

Leave a comment