• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

"If John Kerry was ever a populist, George W Bush is a Rhodes scholar"

H

heartsurgeon

Diamond Member
Howell Raines, the former editor of the esteemed liberal mouthpiece The New York Times doesn't have much charitable to say about Sen. John Kerry (a highly decorated Vietnam Veteran)

read all about it...

linky
 
Since when is the NY Times a liberal mouthpiece?

Granted, some newspapers will tend to be liberal simply because they believe in freedom (of speech, of liberty, of press, of information). If that means cracking the secrecy of the Bush administration, I can see where some would label the NY Times as liberal.

That said, how about we actually vote on issues, not on looks. It's time to give up the 30-second sound bite for true debate. Kerry represents the latter, Bush the former.
 
If George Bush is a Rhodes Scholar, I'm the freaking pope. 😛
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
So this is basically saying that Bush is dumb, too.
Click to expand...
... too??? 😕
 
And we all know GWB is not a Rhode Scholar, but, I don't see what it have to do with Kerry. 😀
 
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
So this is basically saying that Bush is dumb, too.

I like this editorial. It basically insults both candidates.
Click to expand...

it points out the major problem with the new democractic party.. the party that says 'we dont need the south': They are nolonger the populist party;
 
I don't see this as any kind of scathing indictment of Kerry's candidacy on the merits - it's just a critique of his style (or lack thereof). It certainly seems clear that Raines (along with most Democrats) would rather Kerry was not quite so charmless. I know I feel that way.
 
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
I don't see this as any kind of scathing indictment of Kerry's candidacy on the merits - it's just a critique of his style (or lack thereof). It certainly seems clear that Raines (along with most Democrats) would rather Kerry was not quite so charmless. I know I feel that way.
Click to expand...

Bring on the debates, I say!!
 
As I've been saying since early in the primaries, it seems to me that, from a marketing standpoint, Kerry offers the negative aspects of a Kennedy (in terms of being from great privilege and the extremely liberal northern state of Mass), with none of the charm.

Perhaps this is at least partially a function of the fact that Joe Kennedy was not especially wealthy before he got into bootlegging (someone correct me if I'm wrong on this - I am no Kennedy biographer), so the Kennedy kids had at least some inkling of what it meant to be working class. Kerry, on the other hand, is from a very privileged Brahmin background, and wears that blueblood pride on his sleeve. When you watch his testimony before Congress post-Vietnam, his upper-crust Brahmin accent is really hard to take. Marrying into the billionaire Heinz fortune (who can blame him!) hardly did anything to broaden his working-class appeal.

For what it's worth, I admire Kerry as a man and think he will be a solid President, but it's a shame he has so little, er, animal magnetism. IMO that's at least part of the reason Clinton was such a born politician (whatever one might think of him personally or professionally) - he just has a quality people warm to, and one that is totally lacking in Kerry.
 
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
As I've been saying since early in the primaries, it seems to me that, from a marketing standpoint, Kerry offers the negative aspects of a Kennedy (in terms of being from great privilege and the extremely liberal northern state of Mass), with none of the charm.

Perhaps this is at least partially a function of the fact that Joe Kennedy was not especially wealthy before he got into bootlegging (someone correct me if I'm wrong on this - I am no Kennedy biographer), so the Kennedy kids had at least some inkling of what it meant to be working class. Kerry, on the other hand, is from a very privileged Brahmin background, and wears that blueblood pride on his sleeve. When you watch his testimony before Congress post-Vietnam, his upper-crust Brahmin accent is really hard to take.

For what it's worth, I admire Kerry as a man and think he will be a solid President, but it's a shame he has so little, er, animal magnetism. IMO that's at least part of the reason Clinton was such a born politician (whatever one might think of him personally or professionally) - he just has a quality people warm to, and one that is totally lacking in Kerry.
Click to expand...

to his credit,
if there is one thing bush does have, it is 'animal magnetism'.
one cannot look that simian and not have that, if nothing else.
 
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
As I've been saying since early in the primaries, it seems to me that, from a marketing standpoint, Kerry offers the negative aspects of a Kennedy (in terms of being from great privilege and the extremely liberal northern state of Mass), with none of the charm.

Perhaps this is at least partially a function of the fact that Joe Kennedy was not especially wealthy before he got into bootlegging (someone correct me if I'm wrong on this - I am no Kennedy biographer), so the Kennedy kids had at least some inkling of what it meant to be working class. Kerry, on the other hand, is from a very privileged Brahmin background, and wears that blueblood pride on his sleeve. When you watch his testimony before Congress post-Vietnam, his upper-crust Brahmin accent is really hard to take. Marrying into the billionaire Heinz fortune (who can blame him!) hardly did anything to broaden his working-class appeal.

For what it's worth, I admire Kerry as a man and think he will be a solid President, but it's a shame he has so little, er, animal magnetism. IMO that's at least part of the reason Clinton was such a born politician (whatever one might think of him personally or professionally) - he just has a quality people warm to, and one that is totally lacking in Kerry.
Click to expand...
Nah, Joe Kennedy was well off and on his way to becoming more so before any of the Kennedy boys were even remotely of age. Still, the fact that his Dad had humble beginnings probably was a factor in shaping John Kennedy's more accesible personality.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Nah, Joe Kennedy was well off and on his way to becoming more so before any of the Kennedy boys were even remotely of age. Still, the fact that his Dad had humble beginnings probably was a factor in shaping John Kennedy's more accesible personality.
Click to expand...


I think my post was inartfully phrased - I know the Kennedys were raised in great wealth - I just meant that having a family with comparatively recent status as relative paupers (as opposed to being blooded) gives one a different perspective. I know I was raised in an upper-middle-class background, but both my parents came from fairly poor backgrounds, and on some level I think that informs the way I view things.
 
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Originally posted by: Perknose
Nah, Joe Kennedy was well off and on his way to becoming more so before any of the Kennedy boys were even remotely of age. Still, the fact that his Dad had humble beginnings probably was a factor in shaping John Kennedy's more accesible personality.
Click to expand...


I think my post was inartfully phrased - I know the Kennedys were raised in great wealth - I just meant that having a family with comparatively recent status as relative paupers (as opposed to being blooded) gives one a different perspective. I know I was raised in an upper-middle-class background, but both my parents came from fairly poor backgrounds, and on some level I think that informs the way I view things.
Click to expand...
My mistake. We can now agree that we agree, even on the personal level.

I was raised solidly middle class (not upper), and, though neither of my parent's were poor, both were non-trust-fund children of the Depression, who simply lived the work ethic on a bedrock level, rather than merely spouting it.

They were both life-long Republicans, btw. Neither of them would have had any use for the current ascendancy of the religious right, however.
 
Don_Vito:

Yes, you are spot on about Kennedy. His family was "new rich" and, heaven forfend, Irish Catholic. From Boston to Philadelphia the blue bloods were decidedly umimpressed with such credentials. Those WASPY 19th century views prevailed well past WWII and may still be found in some quarters.

If only Edith Wharton had lived to write about the Kennedies.... 🙂

-Robert
 
Raines is saying exactly what I said about Kerry six months ago. He must be a P & N reader. I'm going to email him and demand attribution. 🙂

-Robert
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top