| Home | About Us | Login/Register | Email News Tips |

A liberal dose of news, national and local politics, commentary, opinions and common sense conversation…

Kerry on Fox New Sunday (Video): Bush Administration “Living in a World of Make-Believe”

by Pamela Leavey

John Kerry was on Fox News Sunday this morning for an interview with Chris Wallace. Off the top, Kerry and Wallace discussed North Korea who the U.N. just voted to impose sanctions on yesterday. It comes as no surprise that the wingnuts are trying to pin the blame on North Korea’s nuke test on the Clinton administration, but as Kerry points out in the interview their claims are all wet.

Watch the interview here:

The following is a partial transcript of the interview on “FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace”:

HOST OF “FOX NEWS SUNDAY” CHRIS WALLACE: Joining us now, not by cable line, fiber line, from Camp David, but here in the studio with us is the 2004 candidate for president, Senator John Kerry.

And, Senator, welcome back to “FOX News Sunday”.

SENATOR JOHN KERRY: Glad to be with you.

WALLACE: Let’s start with North Korea. What effect do you think that the U.N. resolution is going to have on North Korea and its effectiveness in trying to stop their nuclear program, and what would you do?

KERRY: Well, let me begin by saying that North Korea is a renegade nation and it’s a nation we all understand does threaten.

That said, I think the administration — and just listening to what I could hear — I couldn’t hear all of it — of the secretary’s comments, they’re living in a world of make-believe, Chris. They’re living in a complete fantasy with respect to the foreign policy they put in place.

It is a failure. It’s a failure in Afghanistan where they have a sort of cut-and-run policy of not completing the job. We have seven times the troops in Iraq.

WALLACE: Well, forgive me.

KERRY: Well, I want to comment, because it’s all tied together.

WALLACE: Let’s talk about North Korea.

KERRY: Well, this is about North Korea, because the problem with Iraq is that it has diminished our hand and reduced our ability to be able to deal with Iran and North Korea. They are related.

One of the reasons that North Korea can misbehave the way it is today is because the United States has lost its leverage, lost its credibility and doesn’t have the capacity to be able to bring countries together in the way that it used to. That’s number one.

Number two, with respect to North Korea itself, you hit it on the head. This administration is tolerating. This administration is doing exactly what it said it wouldn’t do, which is allowing North Korea to get away with what it’s doing.

These sanctions are not the bold, tough sanctions that the secretary talked about. China walked out of there and said we voted for it, but we’re not going to enforce the cross-border mechanism, it’s too dangerous for our region.

So you have sanctions that are just, by statement of those involved, not going to do the job.

WALLACE: So what would you do differently to deal with this very erratic regime of North Korea?

KERRY: I would do precisely — I would do precisely what I said for the last five years consistently, which is engage in bilateral, face-to-face negotiations with North Korea, make it absolutely clear to North Korea that we are not intending to invade and have a regime change, and work on the entire set of issues that are outstanding since the armistice with regard to the north.

WALLACE: But, Senator, let me ask you about that. Let’s look at what you espoused as your basic foreign policy principle during the 2004 campaign. Here it is.


KERRY: America is stronger. Our troops are safer. And our success is more certain when we build and lead strong alliances, not when we go it alone.


WALLACE: Alliances, not going it alone. Multilateral, not bilateral. Doesn’t it still make sense to engage North Korea in talks with all of its neighbors, including China and South Korea, who have a lot more leverage than we do, rather than just get into a conversation about nothing with them ourselves?

KERRY: But it’s not a conversation about nothing, Chris. It’s a negotiation. Just as Ronald Reagan was prepared to go negotiate with the evil empire and come to an agreement with Gorbachev, we have to be prepared to go negotiate with North Korea, just as Nixon…

WALLACE: But what leverage do we have?

KERRY: … was prepared to send Kissinger to China — the leverage of the stakes between the two nations.

Let me go back in time. Bill Clinton was in office for eight years. When he started out in office, there was enough fuel for bombs for about one to two bombs. They were members — North Korea was a member of the non-proliferation treaty and North Korea had not tested.

At the end of Bill Clinton’s term, they had enough fuel for one to two bombs, they were members of the non-proliferation treaty, and they had not tested.

Now they have enough fuel for nine to 10 bombs. They say they’re going to build — get enough for five to six more. They’ve pulled out of the non-proliferation treaty. We no longer have cameras in the reactor. We no longer have inspectors in the reactor. We no longer know where the fuel rods are. We know that they have now tested.

The United States of America is less safe, and the six-party talks have been a cover to get away from the idea, because George Bush and Dick Cheney decided ideologically in 2002 they would break off the oil trade, they would not build the nuclear reactors, they would not keep the framework that had been agreed on, and from that moment on, it’s been downhill with North Korea.

WALLACE: Senator, there are several points you’ve made that I’d like to ask you about.

KERRY: Absolutely.

WALLACE: But first of all, one, all independent experts say that by 1997, North Korea was cheating on the Clinton agreement.

KERRY: Absolutely. But cheating…

WALLACE: If I may ask my question — and in fact, had already begun secret uranium enrichment. I think to get to the larger issue…

KERRY: Can I stop you there for a minute? Because it’s very important, what you just said. Uranium enrichment — their bombs are plutonium.

And the fact is with respect to the threat of the United States, while we knew they probably were cheating, we were on a road where we had them in the non-proliferation treaty. They didn’t have additional bomb capacity, and they hadn’t tested.

And if we had stayed on that road, then we could have perhaps had a better opportunity to be able to curb this.

One other very critical thing. Eisenhower taught us this. I mean, Richard Nixon taught us this. By working through the diplomatic process and doing it in a legitimate way that builds you credibility, you bring people to your side so that if and when it comes to the moment of crisis, they’re prepared to be with you.

Nations are not prepared to be with us today because this administration has broken faith with all of that kind of effort.

WALLACE: I mean, some people would say you want to have it both ways. In the case of Iraq, you blister the United States for acting unilaterally, and here you’re attacking them for acting multilaterally.

KERRY: No, Chris.

WALLACE: But if I may, let’s go to a speech that you made in New Hampshire…

KERRY: No, no, no, you can’t make a statement like that and just get away with it. I am not going to let you do that.

WALLACE: I’m going to ask you a question, and then you can answer the whole thing. You made a speech in New Hampshire on Friday night where you blistered the Bush approach to North Korea. Let’s take a look at that.


KERRY: When George W. Bush turned his back on diplomacy, Kim Jong Il turned back to making bombs, and the world is less safe today because a mad man has the Bush bomb.


WALLACE: The Bush bomb?


WALLACE: I mean, don’t you really think you should blame this on Kim Jong Il, not President Bush?

KERRY: It’s a bomb that has been developed because of the unwillingness of this administration to engage in opportunities that every expert says have been there all the time.

President Carter went over there in 1994 and President Carter negotiated an agreement. Now, rather than continue that agreement in 2002, this administration just arbitrarily decided, out of ideological whatever — anything but Clinton — they proceed down a different road.

And things have gotten worse. Things have gotten worse in Afghanistan. Things have gotten worse in Iraq. They’re not telling the truth to the American people about a civil war in Iraq.

They don’t listen to the generals on the ground in Iraq. The generals have said it’s a debacle. They’ve said Rumsfeld doesn’t have credibility. They’re not standing down while the Iraqis supposedly stand up.

In every aspect of our foreign policy, this administration has misled Americans and misled the world. And they don’t have credibility. Chris, this is not political. This is not political.

WALLACE: Well, it’s a little political.

KERRY: No, it’s not political. No, it’s not political. It used to be that foreign policy was something that was done on a bipartisan basis. It used to be that the politics ended at the water’s edge.

And the fact is that they have so left people out of this process, so disregarded all the advice that they’ve been given, even their own advice in their administration, that they’ve now isolated themselves in the world.

And our troops are paying the price of an administration that has not leveled with the American people and has lost credibility in the world. And that’s why Iran is emboldened, and that’s why North Korea is emboldened.

WALLACE: Senator, back in 2004 — and this is the summer of 2004 by which point we all knew that, in fact, there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq — President Bush challenged you on whether you would still have voted for the authority to go to war. Here’s what you said.


KERRY: Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have.


WALLACE: But this week you wrote this, and let’s put it up on the screen, “There’s nothing — nothing — in my life in public service I regret more, nothing even close. We should all be willing to say I was wrong. I should not have voted for the Iraq war resolution.”

Senator, if it was right to vote for the Iraq war resolution in 2002 and it was right in August of 2004, why is it now your biggest policy mistake?

KERRY: Because this administration has made every mistake and abused every authority that it was given to such a degree beyond where we were at that point in time.

And also, we have learned since then, Chris, of the degree to which they misled us, the degree to which they have abused the authority that they were given. At the time…

WALLACE: But you didn’t know that in August of 2004?

KERRY: No, we were about one year out from the start of the war then, Chris. A whole series of things that we thought could be done — I was still saying that I thought we could, hopefully, if they made the following decisions, make it a success.

I went to Fulton, Missouri. I went to New York University. I went to Georgetown University. I gave three speeches in which I laid out what I thought the president needed to do to make a success of Iraq.

In each case, we offered the president the best advice that we could give. The president didn’t follow that advice. On the last occasion, I said this may be the president’s last chance to get this right. The president didn’t do what’s necessary. He still hasn’t.

You have to resolve the differences, political differences, between Shia and Sunni. And there’s nothing our troops can do to do that. General Casey has said this can’t be resolved militarily. Condi Rice has said this can’t be resolved militarily.

So I ask you, Chris, and I ask the president, where is the summitry? Where is the statesmanship? Where is the diplomatic effort similar to those we’ve seen in the past in American history to resolve those differences and end the civil war?

And if you don’t engage in that, then our troops are going to continue to die with a strategy that is wrong.

WALLACE: But I want to ask you a question which goes to you…

KERRY: Sure.

WALLACE: … not to President Bush, because this, quite frankly, is a rap against you. Isn’t this — and I’m talking about your vote now for the war resolution and now your recanting of this — isn’t this another case of I was for the $87 billion before I was against it?

KERRY: No. I was for the $87 billion if we paid for it and if we had a plan, and we voted on that in the Senate. And when the vote lost, then I voted against it because I thought it was a matter of conscience and principle. And I should have said that more clearly.

In the same way now, this vote — look at what the president’s done. He said he would go to war as a last resort. He didn’t. He said he would exhaust the remedies of inspections. He didn’t. He said he would build a legitimate coalition. He didn’t.

He now has made every mistake possible so he has isolated our troops, isolated America. This is a civil war. He even continues to mislead Americans about Iraq being the center of the war on terror. It is not now and it hasn’t been the center.

We were attacked by Osama bin Laden from Afghanistan. We have seven times the troops in Iraq that we have in Afghanistan, where they’re still plotting against American airliners and against Americans. The center of the war on terror is Al Qaida, now distributed in some 65 countries around the world.

And this administration even cut and run and failed to do…

WALLACE: All right.

KERRY: … what it could have done at Tora Bora to capture or kill Osama bin Laden.

WALLACE: We’ve got a little over a minute left, and I want to ask you a little about politics, because it’s no secret that you are actively considering the possibility of running for president in 2008.

And you said in a recent article, “Next time I would campaign in more states, next time I would respond more aggressively to the swift boats.” But why shouldn’t Democrats say look, here was John Kerry in 2004, he had a great chance, he was running against a president who had gotten us into war for reasons, for intelligence that turned out to be wrong, he had his chance and he blew it?

KERRY: Well, some will ask that question, and they have a right to. But there’s an answer to that question. The fact is that in the course of a campaign, you make some judgments.

Our judgment was that the truth was out there, that enough newspapers, enough people had the truth about my record. That was a misjudgment, a miscalculation, but I don’t think that a tactical miscalculation necessarily eliminates you from whatever basic policies, basic experience, basic life commitment and ability to be president.

And finally, most importantly, you know, I think the real test is that it was a very different time. We were at war, one year out from the war. Osama bin Laden appeared in the last hours of the campaign, changed the whole debate.

I’m not embarrassed by that campaign. We did a hell of a job. Our people were extraordinary. You know, I’m proud that I won 10 million more votes than Bill Clinton did winning reelection in ’96.

We exceeded our vote goals in every precinct in America. We came within 59,000 votes of wining in one state against a president in time of war who lied about my record personally — the campaigns did — and who lied about the war.

WALLACE: We have only 30 seconds left. A lot of Democrats, I’m sure, are saying look, a lot of bad things happened over the course of these four years from 2004 to 2008, because you — it may have been a good campaign, you got a lot of votes — you lost.

KERRY: That’s right.

WALLACE: Why shouldn’t you be held responsible and why should you get another chance?

KERRY: Well, Some will, and I’ll make the decision based on what happens over the next few weeks. And when I do, I’ll make the argument for why I should get a chance.

But look, why should Ronald Reagan have won four times for the nomination and finally on the fourth he won the nomination? John McCain, their leading candidate — didn’t he get kicked around South Carolina by the same president because he wasn’t patriotic enough as a prisoner of war? He’s now their leading candidate for president.

Richard Nixon seemed to get kicked around pretty badly both running for president and governor, turned around and came back and got elected president.

I think in America, Americans give people a second chance. And if you learn something and prove you’ve learned something, maybe even more so. Now, I don’t know what I’m going to do yet. We’ll make that decision down the road.

WALLACE: And you always have a place here at “FOX News Sunday” to make that announcement, Senator.

KERRY: Oh, thank you.

WALLACE: Thank you so much for coming on and talking with us again. And please, don’t be a stranger. Come on back.

KERRY: I’m happy to be here.

WALLACE: Thank you, sir.

KERRY: Thank you.


23 Responses to “Kerry on Fox New Sunday (Video): Bush Administration “Living in a World of Make-Believe””

  1. Wallace cut Kerry off from attacking the stupid comment on whether advocating for unilateral action in negotiations with NK and insisting on multilateral action in the invasion of Iraq isn’t having it both ways. Which, Wallace said ‘you can’t have’.

    This is such a no-brainer you wonder how Wallace can get away with it. Until you remember, it’s FOX Fable News.

  2. Kerry was as excellent as usual. I have been to other sites on the web. I came here after Pamela posted the link to the video. Perhaps you saw the running conversation I had on Crooks and Liars? And I must say that Kerry’s worst and harshest opponents are likely to be Democrats who feel betrayed by his decision to concede in 2004. Despite the facts they tend to think that JK decided not to challenge the results out of a pure demonic motivation to maintain the status quo. I really can’t believe some of the things I read. As I hard as I try to convince people of the truth, they get even angrier. They can’t seem to get past their anger over 2004. It is bizzare.

  3. Hey Oncall

    Nice to hear from you. I saw you over there on C&L fighting the good fight for JK. I hear what you are saying on that. There’s a whole segment of folks that need to be courted on this issue and JK has been moving towards it. I also think some like to just piss and moan for the heck of it. It is bizarre.

  4. oncall and Pamela,
    In a recent article in American Prospect, on Barack Obama (and how he’s not the man for 2008), Ezra Klein offered the view (I’m paraphrasing, and adding a bit of my own take on this) that the judgment of many Democrats is clouded these days by anger, confusion , despair and insecurity over our several losses of presidential races since 1980 (and 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004–well, not really the last two, but , whether fairly or not, we didn’t regain the White House. . )and, of course, by the special horror of the current administration. I think he’s got the right idea here. Many of our fellow Democrats are grasping at straws, and, in their diminished state, are particularly vulnerable to fantasies about (1) how easy it would have been to win the 2004 election, if only we’d had a “better candidate” or “better strategy” or whatever (my conviction is that it was a STEEP uphill battle from Day 1, since our country was still deeply in the thrall of the Far Right Koolaid that’s intoxicated our country since 1980–and, given the fact that W.’s approval ratings are STILL, even after all that’s happened, as high as (!!!) 43% , way too many of us seem still to be Under the Influence )(2) some magic fresh-faced Messiah, or heartthrob-du-jour, who will deliver us the White House, no matter what his or her experience or skills or character, etc.
    These guys, frankly, drive me NUTS. I try to think of them as sick patients who need healing, just to keep myself from yelling at them in a nonproductive way. But it’s a struggle, at best.

    And, yes, those folks who “like to just piss and moan for the heck of it” REALLY drive me nuts. (In my experience, a lot of those people also are doing nothing to try to change the situation, and make no effort to pay attention to , or give credit to, the people who ARE making a difference, and that makes me really angry).

    I have the faith that, as events unfold, these people will see the light. But in the meantime, just keep talking and spreading the word. JK is the best example of how to do it. That is, believe in our cause, and just DO it.

  5. Amazingly as I just read your comments I have been going through the same rage reading a post over at DailyKos. The author of the diary says that Kerry has to answer to his IWR vote (and basically admit that he allowed solidiers to be killed so that he could be better positioned for 2004 election). CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS HATE FROM OUR SO-CALLED LIBERALS??!! I can’t believe there are over 400 comments (with what seems to be the majority bashing Kerry).

    It was nice to see such strong support from some of the comments but again we have so many misquoting, painting their own negative perceptions of him, etc. If all that energy could be spent on supporting Dems for 2006, imagine where our party could be. Even during the constant negative comments on the post, some level-headed commenters would plea to put these complaints off until later and focus on supporting our Dem leaders TODAY.

    But as you all stated, some just will complain and moan forever…AS IF this country is under such great leadership now. These same people fussing over the past are probably the ones who did not have Kerry’s back when he needed it but now instead of supporting his statements and efforts for the party, they again treat him as their adversary.

    I truly hope this anger resides in only a small percentage of the liberals and progressives. Otherwise, our leaders will have a hard time getting to truly be leaders. I don’t want us to shoot ourselves in the foot. What a disgusting waste. We spend all our energy tearing down our own. It truly makes me ill.

    I know Kerry is aware of these rumblings and I try to be open-minded about the concerns others may have about his decisions. However, I am truly disappointed at the level of disrespect toward this man who is truly an honorable man. We can’t stand for this…no more distractions. Kerry On…

  6. Kerry certainly held his own against the Propaganda channel.

    I am glad to see democrats of distinction going on Fox, they should continue until we have the house senate and presidency to flood them with interviews etc, then after capturing back government, lock fox out, completely, until we can pass a bill banning infotainment news.

    Love from Canada Mr. Kerry!

  7. DAS, check out this chart from NYT today, on changing voter registrations: times are changing!

  8. DAS

    Unbelieveable. I added my 2 cents over they, thanks for the heads up.

  9. Thanks mbk,

    Yes…nice being on this side of the tide!

    Especially after these last few years of utter frustration.

  10. Pamela,

    Sock it to ’em! Thanks.

    I haven’t registered with them but today I was about to so I could put my 2 cents in. (Unfortunately, I think new registrants are delayed a day or so from commenting).

  11. DAS

    It does take 24 hours to be able to make a comment there – best get it done so when the urge to comment strikes you, you can fire away.


    Thanks – see the latest post.

  12. I agree with DAS, mbk, Pamela and others about the negativity towards Kerry.

    It is very sad and extrememly selfish. I wonder if he will still want to post at Kos after all the Anti-Kerry vitrol the last few days?

    It’s very sickening that they are trashing a good dem to promote Gore, Clark, Edwards, Feingold, Hillary just to name a few. I like those dems too, but their mean-spirted attacks on Kerry over the IWR (unfortunately) to the concession are making me not want to support their candidates.

    I too wish our energy was spent getting candidates elected next month, but they are so busy playing Rovian games about 08 that is much more fun to complain than make a difference in the real world.

  13. It seems to me that the sheer intensity of the anger and venom being directed at Mr. Kerry because of what he did or didn’t do back in 2004, what he will or won’t do in 2008, et cetera rather belies the accusations that he is too aloof and distant a man to inspire passion in others.

    What concerns me most about all the backward backbiting and the anticipatory antagonism swirling around him is that all of it just clutters up the foreground and draws attention away from what Mr. Kerry is doing right here, right now, in 2006.

    And what Mr. Kerry is doing in 2006 is very impressive. He is one of the strongest and staunchest advocates our side could hope to have in these critical times. His earlier presidential run enhanced his status as a senator and gives him a powerful political base from which he continues to speak truth to power.

    Mr. Kerry is, of course, fully aware of the options that he might have as far as running for president again in 2008. But he is choosing to focus very strongly on doing what needs to be done right here and right now. I only wish that more of the people whose beliefs he so ably represents would do the same.

  14. Otter is correct, of course, on all counts. How unfortunate that John Kerry cannot get the respect he deserves.

    The internet has become a wonderful way of interacting and building activism, but it is still a place where the naive, ill-mannered, politically adolescent still live and share without responsibility.

    The more reality of Kerry being effective threatens their favorite from 04, their new prom king or queen for the new games, the more we get opinions not worthy of the debate of ‘Who can best lead the country?’

    Many candidates are worthy to varying degrees and strengths, and the nasty dialogue doesn’t do their favorites any more justice.

    I fear for the future of this country without the next generation understanding the realities of government and politics.

  15. Marjorie G Says:

    “I fear for the future of this country without the next generation understanding the realities of government and politics.”

    I’m not sure it just the adolescents however, plenty from all ages seem to feel the internet is place where wild free for all is acceptable and it’s okay to bash and trash. They ever have role models to carry on after.

    The edgier the conversation the more popular the blog sometimes.

  16. Well, JK stuck it to wallace to and he didn’t even have to resort to a tantrum to do it. Well done interview from what I could read. He didn’t let Wallace and Faux get away with stuff and acted like a statesman who while diplomatic still has his edge.

    I’ve been away so I don’t know what all the sudden broohaha about JK’s IWR vote is from lefties again. The left eats their best and brightest alive while the GOP stands behind their not so bright candidates and that’s why Bush has been able to consolidate his power.

    As this one black person whose vote Barak Obama won’t get.
    a. he doesn’t have the expierence,
    B. He has been a great dissapointment in several of his votes since coming to the senate
    C. He claims lieberman as a mentor
    D.He doesn’t have a prayer of winning any votes JK didn’t and he is stupid enough to believe the hype about himself.

    I don’t know if there is much JK can do to ease the kossaks and other lefties like hollywood heavy hitters, and progressives and frankly I’m to the point why bother.

    They are punishing JK while Edwards, Hillary and others get away with the IWR vote among others and I’m tired of it. If they want to stew in their own hate the hell with them.

    I still believe if JK and momma T get their story out their they may ease some of it.
    I think as long as JK stays away from DC dems he will be pres.

    While Obama, Warner, Hill, Biden, and others have been playing to the media and DC types KErry has been going around the country helping state candidates, county candidates and national candidates laying a ground work for support in 08.

    We can’t let the press beat up on JK and we can’t let the left wingnuts or right wing nut attacks against JK go unanswered.

    Its good to see JK going into GOP terrritory and calling them what they are. This was something that should have been done in 04 more and he knows that which is why he’s doing it now.

    Kerry has learned a lot far more than many of those who attack him so viciously have and more than either clinton has.

    Keep it up senator.

  17. Hello All,

    I’ve been lurking around over at Kos – what a mad house! What a Deaniac world it is over there.
    They are either trashing JK because he conceded to soon in ’04, just went along to go along in the first place, are turned off to JK’s personality, want to burn him over the IWR or are pushing their own candidates to what ever extreme.
    That said, there are a lot of good souls over there who defend the Senator and point out the errors in many of their arguments. There are a lot of folks at Kos who have an axe to grind.
    Statistically speaking, I wonder what the response is to JK’s mailing list is as opposed to the responses there are at places like Kos? Obviously better, but by how much? What I’m trying to say is, I wonder what the mood of the general public is towards JK?
    (And I don’t take much stock in straw polls – HRC? Give me a break.)

    BTW, it was nice of Wallace to invite JK back – did he do that with Clinton? HA!

  18. Blue W

    Did you watch the speech Friday night on C-Span? Because if what I saw after the speech is an indicator of the ground support for JK I would say he’s in a good place. Maybe that’s what eating at the Kossacks and the naysayers. 🙂

  19. I’ve said it before, anyone who sits back and flames certain dem’s at the keyboard is just a blogger; they’re not going to back, organize, canvas, etc. for any candidate. They are just spewing hate. People who argue rationally and still have spirit will back thier favorite candidate without flaming those who have similar ideals (IE – other dems) and will ACT. If the actual election were held on the internet maybe JK would get toasted in a primary and an American Idol would get elected to the White House. But “it ain’t so”. I’ll bet at least 30% of these bastadds aren’t even registered, and I’ll guess at least half of the remaining 70% don’t vote consistantly.

  20. Marjorie G Says:
    October 15th, 2006 at 7:19 pm
    “The internet has become a wonderful way of interacting and building activism, but it is still a place where the naive, ill-mannered, politically adolescent still live and share without responsibility.”

    This was PERFECT! Thanks!

  21. Margorie G (noted by mbk also) and Javelin have pounded a nail I have been eyeing for too long. I’ve called a few on this individually – never get a response to “what are you doing’?

    Also post at Kos to highlight what DNC activities and campaigns need help. The folks who complained about the sluggish, out dated DNC should be the ones leaping at the chance to join in the reform – the larger the newbies, the bigger chance for reform.

  22. I agree with Javelin. 98% of the kossacks/deaniacs/whatever they want to be called aren’t even going to vote. They just whine and whine and try to tear down JK instead of the GOP.

    That’s why JK needs to post at other sites and forget Kos.

    But he doesn’t mind wading into enemy territory so if it keeps them in a tizzy then he must be doing something right.

    Hey Pamela, are you going to have the hardball chat with Elizabeth Edwards?

    After some of the junk she said in time mag about JK and momma T I couldn’t stomach watching her any more than her husband.

  23. Pen

    I’m not sure what to think of EE’s book. I haven’t read it so I can only judge on what I have seen around. It’s seems to be rather shallow and honestly I think puts the dim light on the author.