Dept. Of LOL

2:01 am EST January 3rd, 2006 | Democrats | 13 Comments

That’s where you have to file every story about Kerry running for President in ’08.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

13 Responses to “Dept. Of LOL”

  1. Ryland says:
    January 3, 2006 at 5:01 am

    “He believes in his heart and soul that he came just a whisker away from being president,” said Ronald Kaufman, a veteran GOP operative with Massachusetts roots.

    He did come just a whisker away from being president, much as the right would like to believe that Bush has a “mandate”. Ohio was just a whisker away from going to Kerry, and that would have won him the election.

  2. SaveFarris says:
    January 3, 2006 at 8:01 am

    Yes, Yes, Yes. But then Pennsylvania (21) and Wisconsin (10) were even less of a whisker (whiskerette?) away from going to Bush, making Ohio irrelevant.

    We can play this all day.

  3. spitar1 says:
    January 3, 2006 at 10:01 am

    I hope the Democrats field better candidates than Kerry for ’08. I ain’t talkin’ Hillary either. Kerry just got the votes cuz he was not Bush. They could have run an old leather boot and the election results would have been just as close. Let’s get some new blood out there. Someone with charisma and an actual vision for the country. Thank you Mr. Kerry but we’ll pass this time.

  4. Ron Chusid says:
    January 3, 2006 at 11:01 am

    This sounds like what a lot of people were also saying when Kerry was behind Al Sharpton in the polls and his candidacy was written off–before going on to easily win the nomination.

  5. Bushwacked says:
    January 3, 2006 at 1:01 pm

    I guess you will vote for Hillary, huh?

  6. MichaelFB says:
    January 3, 2006 at 1:01 pm

    I backed Kerry with money and time in the general election (after backing Dean with money and time in the primaries),so I’m on Kerry’s list of 3 million alleged supporters. He wasn’t my choice in 2004, and he most certainly won’t be my choice in 2008. His support at this point in time is a mile wide and an inch deep – much like that of Hillary Clinton.

    Kerry 2008 will make Lieberman 2004 look like an unstoppable political juggernaut.

  7. spitar1 says:
    January 3, 2006 at 7:01 pm

    REALLY? Oliver is “swiftboating”?! Why? Because he thinks there may be a better alternative to the guy who ACTUALLY lost the popular vote to Bush? Gore didn’t even do that! A LOT of people only voted for Kerry because he was the only choice they had. The Democratic Party has SO much more to offer than a long winded, non-charismatic, visionless candidate such as Kerry. I am a hardcore Democrat and I don’t think the guy has what it takes. The party needs to move on and pick someone that will bring back balance to the American people. Kerry ain’t it and, in my personal opinion, neither is Hillary.

  8. bobsadviceforstocks says:
    January 3, 2006 at 7:01 pm

    Oliver,

    I am not laughing about John Kerry.

    Come visit my blog, John Kerry for President 2008, and you will see that I am serious.

    Like the boxer in Raging Bull, John Kerry was knocked down once in 2004 but he is not out of the match. Kerry understands a conflict like Iraq more than any other candidate out there. He is the decorated Vietnam Vet that testified in Congress about not sending another American for a mistake.

    Who else can say that?

    When you put Kerry in the LOL department, you are joining the Swift Boaters who took down a great American with an additional smear. You have bought into the lies.

    I really like your website, I appreciate your opinions, I just don’t know why you would start smearing Kerry with this. Correct me if I misunderstood your intention.

    Bob

  9. Jonathan Versen says:
    January 3, 2006 at 8:01 pm

    It was difficult for me to muster up enthusiasm for a candidate who thought he was too good to defend himself when the Swift Boat vetrans attacked. If you wont stand up for yourself, why should we stand for you, especially a second time?

  10. MichaelFB says:
    January 4, 2006 at 6:01 am

    Dear Bob,

    Laughing at someone for having delusions of grandeur is not the same as claiming that the same person didn’t deserve the medals and commendations he earned in defense of his country. Nor does it mean that the people laughing believe right-wing smears, and “supporters” casting such aspersions do their candidate no favors.

    John Kerry had a chance, and he either lost or was Diebolded. If he lost, we should think about a new candidate next time out. If he was Diebolded, his lack of visibility on the subject of election reform counts heavily against him.

    Kerry will find that both his big and small donors will be looking elsewhere in 2008, though for wildly different reasons. I’m sure he’ll find a way to stay in the race for a while (he has plenty of his own money, after all), but he shouldn’t count on another media lynching of opponents at an opportune moment to save his candidacy.

  11. Dugger says:
    January 4, 2006 at 10:01 am

    John Kerry had a chance, and he either lost or was Diebolded

    “As a member of the avant-garde who is capable of perceiving the conspiracy before it is fully obvious to an as yet unaroused public, the paranoid is a militant leader. He does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. . . .

    The enemy is clearly delineated: he is a perfect model of malice, a kind of amoral superman–sinister, ubiquitous, powerful, cruel, sensual, luxury-loving. Unlike the rest of us, the enemy is not caught in the toils of the vast mechanism of history, himself a victim of his past, his desires, his limitations. He wills, indeed he manufactures, the mechanism of history, or tries to deflect the normal course of history in an evil way. He makes crises, starts runs on banks, causes depressions, manufactures disasters, and then enjoys and profits from the misery he has produced.”

    Dugger, quoting Hofstadter

  12. qkslvr_wolf says:
    January 4, 2006 at 11:01 am

    Bob, have you looked at Wes Clark recently? Wes ran a hell of a campaign for a beginner, I guarantee he has a very clear view of modern warfare , as well as a very logical and attainable progessive platform. He has compassion, forethought, and you should him fight stupidity.

    There are, I’ll grant, some myths out there about clark, but please check out this site before giving credence to those myths.

    CLARK 08!

  13. factcheck says:
    January 5, 2006 at 11:01 am

    Clark looks like a good candidate, also. In 2008, I would like it if we could not nominate a Senator this time- they have too much of a smearable paper trail. I could go for Mark Warner, maybe even a Jon Corzine or Elliott Spitzer but the latter are better 2012 candidates than 2008.