Centerfield

First, make it identifiable as a joke.

Second, make the joke intelligible and funny...THEN tell people they can't take a joke.

But it failed the first test. Kerry may have the chin, but as someone else noted, Leno's job is secure.

Posted by: Tully at November 1, 2006 03:32 PM

Here's another Republican that "can't take a joke."

"Senator Kerry's remarks were poorly worded and just plain stupid," Tester said in a statement late yesterday. "He owes our troops and their families an apology."

Oh wait, that's Jon Tester, and he's a Democrat, isn't he? Lemme try again.

"Whatever the intent, Senator Kerry was wrong to say what he said," Rep. Ford said. "He needs to apologize to our troops."

Oh wait, that's Harold Ford, and he's a Democrat, isn't he? Oh well. Lemme try again.

"It's a dumb thing to say and he should apologize."

Oh wait, that's Claire McCaskill, and she's a Democrat, isn't she? I'll keep trying.

"What Sen. Kerry said was inappropriate."

Oh wait, that's Hillary Clinton, and she's a Democrat, isn't she? I'm starting to get really confused here. Are those all right-wing Democrats? One last try.

"If it was a botched joke, someone show me the punch line."

That one was actually a Republican! We're still looking for the lost punch line, which apparently did not arrive with the rest of Senator Kerry's luggage. Once he produces his claim check they can start tracing it.

Posted by: Tully at November 1, 2006 03:54 PM

OK, so the latest score in this silly season episode? Well, first we've got infinite outrage among the ranks of those who'd never ever ever vote for Kerry in a gazillion years.

And we've got Tully quoting 4 people piling on because they're afraid the brush is so broad it'll smear them. One, Ford, is a democrat losing an election battle, and another is Hillary Clinton, who has a vested interest in looking better than Kerry.

Keep looking Tully, I'm sure you can find a few more democrats in close election battles who are eager to throw Kerry under the bus. For that matter, can you find a democrat who ISN'T eager to throw him under the bus? The wanker just won't go away.

Posted by: bk at November 1, 2006 04:00 PM

Too many cameras. Too many microphones. Too many TVs. Too many channels. Too many news shows. Too many websites. Too many computers. Too much inf0rmation. That's why this crap gets talked about. When media resources were more limited, they were allocated more prudently. (I don't really believe that there are too many of all of those things, but that there are too many of those things for a lot of people to deal with them in a healthy and effective manner.)

Posted by: WHQ at November 1, 2006 04:13 PM

Joke or not, whatever it was, Kerry deftly demonstrated why he was a terrible choice for the democratic nomination in 2004.

Posted by: Ike at November 1, 2006 04:59 PM

There's lots more, Brian, but Kerry has now apologized, even if he did weasel-word it. Well, heck, he is a politician.

And we've got Tully quoting 4 people piling on because they're afraid the brush is so broad it'll smear them.

Are you saying those four prominent Democrats really support what Kerry actually said, but are afraid to defend him? That they agree with Kerry's statement, and are only saying he should apologize to save their own campaigns? Heck, Hillary would have to blow a 30 point lead to lose. Tsk, tsk. What depths she'll stoop to out of fear she could lose those thrity points in just a few days...

I'd prefer to think they're sincere. If they're not, it says such ugly things about them.

Posted by: Tully at November 1, 2006 05:24 PM

Tully, perhaps Brian's point is that any time a Democrat agrees with him, it must be merely political pandering rather than conviction. At least, that's what I took from his analysis.

Posted by: wj at November 1, 2006 05:31 PM

The joke is the logic of behavior. The Republicans were fools to wait until the story broke to disown Foley. They are fools to allow Rush and others to act like asses and swiftarians run their lame ads.

The pressure is on the Democrats. Pelosi can keep her mouth shut, but Kerry cannot. Even Dean has learned to muzzle his words. The sad truth is that much of the Democratic leadership and their supporters have only contempt, anger and a lack of clear policy behind their “time for a change” stuff, should they get a chance to govern.

I found Lieberman's ad cheery. There will be little discussion of issues even with Iran preparing a major military exercise in the Gulf at election time. The military has cracked down on its military bloggers while our soldiers question the confidentiality of the ballots they are asked to fill in. Diebold is a question mark and Acorn is being investigated as we speak.

I bet there is another two years of arguing over the coming election results. Gee....how special.

Now I know why Democrats are for gun control. If guns were more widespread they’d be shooting themselves in the foot in huge numbers.

Clinton won't loose. Her comments about Kerry were about 2008 and she is expected to play moderator between Pelosi's agenda and her more DLC approach if the Dems win the House.

I hear Webb has some erotic chapters, that Allen eat pork. Cheney’s wife had her own Clinton meltdown with Blitzer while Colbert dukes it out with Tim Robbins. Tell me that wasn’t expected.

Ahhhgggggg!!!!!!

Posted by: Maxtrue at November 1, 2006 05:48 PM

Another of the Democrats "piling on" to avoid being tarnished is that notorious right-wing appeaser John Murtha, who said that John Kerry "needs to explain" what he meant by his earlier remarks. Yeah, there's a man who's shy about what he says in public in order to appeal to the right in a tight election.

Posted by: PatHMV at November 1, 2006 06:07 PM

The most truly manufactured outrage of the last couple of weeks in my eye, the most something out of nothing, was the selective quotations from Webb's fiction books. As long as no one is being forced to read Webb's oft-tortured prose and bad sex scenes...which would be detestable, and is probably against the Geneva Conventions. (I much prefer the quite literate prose of Lynne Cheney's historical lesbian western romance novel. Completely non-explicit and un-titillating, BTW.)

I thought the anti-Ford commercial was both funny and effective but not racist, but I also thought Ford handled it beautifully.

Kerry just makes the "what a moron" list. No matter how you look at it, he screwed up, and Dem candidates in close races are the ones who will pay for it. His real sin was his original non-apology. Which frankly was downright moonbat, and showed utter political deafness.

Posted by: Tully at November 1, 2006 07:49 PM

The best joke I heard tonight as Sullivan and Hitchens listened in on CNN was Bush calling Cheney's and Rumsfeld's performances as "fantastic". Sullivan called Bush completely "unhinged" as Hitchens actually chuckled. KATRINAIRAQKATRINAIRAQ seemed the mantra.

Now aren’t I pretty stupid too, if I agree with our supreme leader's assessment? Hitchens said that "fantastic" is related to the word "fantasy" and "what is imagined". Fantastic might be a valid description of our present fiasco. Meanwhile Boehner pulled a boner of his own and is under fire for declaring that the “generals are in charge” in Iraq. Viva El Rumsfeld! Democrats demand an apology. To who? Our generals? I am confused.

I guess Iran will be the first up to face a post-election Congressional line-up and a busy DOD.

This Friday I suggest Borat for some comic relief.

It will be a wild weekend. Go Bears………

Posted by: Maxtrue at November 1, 2006 08:30 PM

this story might be the counter to the Kerry flap. Bush leaves a soldier behind.

Yeah.....that's the ticket, Bush leaves a soldier behind.

Posted by: Maxtrue at November 1, 2006 08:43 PM

Joke or not, whatever it was, Kerry deftly demonstrated why he was a terrible choice for the democratic nomination in 2004

My initial thoughts EXACTLY. Posted by: c3 at November 1, 2006 10:29 PM

Yeah, why can't Kerry joke about beating up a cripple, like Rush does? That was hilarious. ;->

Posted by: Blue Jean at November 1, 2006 10:48 PM

"Cripple?" What are you, Jean, some kind of bigot? That's "differently abled individual!" :-)

Posted by: Tully at November 1, 2006 11:01 PM

I am rightly chastised, Tully. In pennace, I offer you this spoof..

Yeah, it's somewhat OT, but it's hilarious anyway. :-)

Posted by: Blue Jean at November 1, 2006 11:09 PM

Another of the Democrats "piling on" to avoid being tarnished is that notorious right-wing appeaser John Murtha, who said that John Kerry "needs to explain" what he meant by his earlier remarks.

Pat, I don't recall claiming that John Kerry didn't need to explain his remarks. And I don't think that saying someone "needs to explain" counts as criticism. No matter what a person says, if a firestorm ensues, that's evidence that the speaker ought to better explain his remarks. It doesn't speak to whether the remarks were inaccurate or intended to disparage.

Tully, I can't help but notice that this is the first time in my memory that you've EVER gone out of your way to suggest that Hillary Clinton is being sincere in her remarks. :-) Should we assume that your hypothesis is that when a democrat criticizes another democrat, that's sincere, and when they criticize George Bush, they're just suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome. No, that wouldn't be fair, would it?

Once and for all, let's notice this:
"If A, then B" does NOT imply as "If B, then A." This is precisely the inversion that this GOP distractor is claiming. And any logician worth his salt will tell you the 2nd simply doesn't necessarily follow from the 1st.

Kerry basically said that if you don't study and end up stupid, you might end up in Iraq. All his critics are suggesting that he meant that "if you end up in Iraq (in the armed services), you must be a dummy."

Let's try it out on something easy and concrete:

If it is Wednesday, then I visit my mother.

Does this imply that if I visit my mother, it must therefore be Wednesday?

Nope. it doesn't. Game over.

Posted by: bk at November 2, 2006 09:57 AM

Two things, Brian.

First, for the umpteenth time, you're defending something that Kerry denies saying! He has not once tried to defend his remarks on the basis you make. He's said this was a joke about President Bush, and was not at all intended to suggest that if you don't study, you'll join the Army.

Second, I asked my hypothetical to you first yesterday at Stubborn Facts. If I said to a bunch of young students, "If you don't work hard and study, you'll wind up flipping burgers for a living", are you seriously telling me that you wouldn't consider that a disparagement of burger-flipping as a job?

Posted by: PatHMV at November 2, 2006 11:56 AM

Pat, I'm talking about what I understood the meaning of his words to be at the time he said them. That's the only thing that it makes sense to me to "defend." I just can't bother to be held responsible for what Kerry decided he meant later on, and I won't. That's a moving target, as we know.

I agree that the case you state sounds like a disparagement of burgwer flipping. I just don't agree that they are directly analagous, as you are so eager to demonstrate. Most importantly, because the context of his remarks was an (admittedly clumsy) segue from college aptitude to criticism of our war in Iraq. he was trying to talk about 2 diferent things in one sentence, which is obvious from the context. Your burger sentence is constrained to one single idea about aptitude and career, but Kerry was trying to connect disparate ideas. It's plainly obvious to me that his remarks weren't directed at the quality of our soldiers, just as it's plainly obvious that many folks, community college students or other, would find "being stuck in Iraq" to be an undesirable outcome.

Not everyone sees being a soldier as a desirable job. This includes many in the audience Kerry was speaking to. Suggesting that a job is not for everyone is very different from suggesting it's a bad job, or one for dummies only.

You're still stuck trying to prove that "If A then B" implies that "B therefore A=S" must also be true. But it still aint.

Posted by: bk at November 2, 2006 12:23 PM

If you want to talk about the words he actually said so much, and defend something Kerry disclaims saying (and has from the beginning), then the analogy I used is exactly what he said.

The words he used are just as disparaging to our troops as my burger-flipping line is disparaging to burger-flippers. There are some smart burger-flippers, and plenty of burger-flippers who are using this only as a stepping stone to bigger things down the road. But that doesn't make the suggestion that the drop-outs are going to "get stuck" burger flipping any less insulting to the career of burger flipping.

So pick your defense, Brian. Either defend exactly what he said, or defend that he didn't mean to say that, but don't mix and match between the 2 posts and invent some other meaning on his part. As others have shown, MOST soldiers are there because they see the job as desirable. That some people (mostly white upper class liberals) see it as a less than desirable profession doesn't change that fact or entitle John Kerry or you to disparage the military as a profession by likening it to other undesirable jobs like burger-flipping.

Posted by: PatHMV at November 2, 2006 02:22 PM

That some people (mostly white upper class liberals) see it as a less than desirable profession doesn't change that fact or entitle John Kerry or you to disparage the military as a profession by likening it to other undesirable jobs like burger-flipping.

I find it totally unfair of you to claim I've ever likened military service to burger-flipping. I've repeatedly said otherwise, and you know for a fact that I have siad otherwise. I think you've gotten a little unhinged over this, Pat. I've got no intention of conceding to the way you keep trying to re-frame my comments. I've already "picked my defense," repeatedly and at length. I've defended my understand of what he said _AND_ what he meant.

Clearly you aren't buying it. That's your mileage and that's Ok with me. Let's just agree to disagree. I'm not even going to ask you to show where I ever likened burger flipping to military service. The hoirse is dead. let it go.

Posted by: bk at November 2, 2006 02:41 PM

Brian, I'm going to take one more shot at this, then I'm done, and you can believe what you want to believe as you continue to defend someone you do not like for something he claims not to have meant to say.

You acknowledge that if I were to go out and tell students that they should study and work hard, or else they will get stuck flipping burgers for a living, that would be a disparaging comment towards the career of burger-flipping. So if we look just at Kerry's actual words, he was disparaging a career in the military.

You then say, well, that's not a good analogy because he was trying to "connect disparate ideas".

But THEN you go back to your original argument, that the sentence about being stuck in Iraq, standing alone, does not imply a criticism of military service, because some people see military service as an undesirable career, when you use your A, B & S argument.

You say: "It's plainly obvious to me that his remarks weren't directed at the quality of our soldiers". As a strictly logical matter, your correct about the necessary implications. One could believe that being a stable hand is a crappy job, yet still believe that all stable hands are brilliant, industrious workers. So calling stable hand a crappy profession that you might get "stuck in" if you don't study hard does not, technically, imply that you think all or most stable hands are idiot lazy drop-outs.

But imagine you are a stable hand who has chosen to do that job because you see it as performing a very valuable service. Not only do you shovel the manure, but you have to care for the horses, know something about their health and feed requirements, know how to calm them when they're upset, show up at work whether you're sick or not, etc., etc. Despite other options, you CHOSE to be a stable hand, because you saw it as a valuable form of service. Now, that being the case, would you or would you not be offended if someone said (as you are but John Kerry claims not to have) that your profession was one which others might "get stuck in" if they were lazy and dumb?

Posted by: PatHMV at November 2, 2006 03:34 PM

During a Vietnam-era run for Congress three decades ago, John Kerry said he opposed a volunteer Army because it would be dominated by the underprivileged, be less accountable and be more prone to "the perpetuation of war crimes."

I think he meant what exactly he said, and what he said was clear. Even if he really was trying to make a Bush joke and miserably blowing his lines, I still think he believes exactly what he actually said.

“You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

Posted by: Tully at November 2, 2006 04:15 PM

Yeah, why can't Kerry joke about beating up a cripple, like Rush does? That was hilarious.

C'mon Jean, surely you can see the difference between an elected official on a campaing stop making a statement than a radio talk show host. Neither remark is praiseworthy but I'd expect more from a US Senator. Posted by: c3 at November 2, 2006 05:54 PM

Well, Chris, you're the medical man here; everyone can choose whether to go into the armed services,* but how many people choose to be sick?

No, I'm not talking about hypochrodriacs who think they're sick, or those suffering from Munchausen's Syndrome who injure themselves and infect themselves so they'll have medical attention. Nor am I talking about Limbaugh...*ahem*...I'll be nice here and say "optional" medication. I'm talking about a real disease. Do you really think that Michael J. Fox would choose to have Parkinson's, if he had the option?**

Besides, it should be noted that Kerry volunteered for Vietnam, rather than use draft deferments for college (like Rumsfeld) or have his rich, powerful father get him into the National Guard, (like W) or complain of a minor medical ailment (like Limbaugh) or get his wife pregnant at a convenient time (like Cheney). No, Kerry volunteered, when Limbaugh, W, etc, all had more pressing concerns. He went to Vietnam where he was wounded and performed heroically under fire. If anyone is entitled to make comments about army volunteers, it's him.

Funny thing how all the above people who are complaining about this remark never bothered to volunteer themselves, ain't it?

If I was in Kerry's shoes, I'd say "Yeah, I botched a joke, but W and the rest of the non-volunteers botched this war."

*Sure, there are some people who volunteer for the armed services but get rejected. My grandfather volunteered after Pearl Harbor, but he was rejected on account of his myopia. The point is, none of the above subjected themselves to the draft (except maybe Limbaugh), much less volunteered in the first place.

**Of course, Limbaugh has never suffered any serious illness (unless you count morbid obesity and addiction) so his attack on the crippled Fox has--shall we say--no leg to stand on. ;-)

Posted by: Blue Jean at November 2, 2006 06:32 PM

What was really funny was the fact that Kerry, if we take his subsequent explanations at face value, was trying to point out that Bush was a dumb-ass.

Who said irony was dead?

Posted by: Literally Retarded at November 2, 2006 07:02 PM

Funny thing how all the above people who are complaining about this remark never bothered to volunteer themselves, ain't it?

Speak for yourself, lady. We ever meet f2f I'll trot out credentials--and buy the first round. (I'd do that anyway!) But you're changing the subject to play CPD. The subject is Kerry, not Limbaugh. You wanna play CPD I'm gonna pull out our favorite mentally ill Democrat.... :-O

Of course, Limbaugh has never suffered any serious illness (unless you count morbid obesity and addiction) so his attack on the crippled Fox has--shall we say--no leg to stand on.

I think this is getting silly but I'll still play one more round. You do know that Limbaugh is almost completely deaf, that he has "hearing" (of a sort) only through the courtesy of modern technology and several painful inner-ear implant surgeries? And will need periodic surgeries in the future to keep that artifical hearing working? Surgeries which might fail anyway? That his addiction was the result of a chronic spinal condition, and a botched surgery for same? That he has consistently refused to portray himself as a victim for having become an addict?

(All those who've ever had a serious back problem, raise your hands! Bwa ha ha! Sorry, back sufferer's joke...)

Yeah, it's fun to make fun of him for gettin' hooked while still railing about dopers. I've done it too. I hope it taught him some humility. But it doesn't bear on Kerry.

Posted by: Tully at November 2, 2006 08:44 PM

Jean;

Do you really think that Michael J. Fox would choose to have Parkinson's, if he had the option?**

Where is this coming from? Was I not clear when I said

Neither remark is praiseworthy but I'd expect more from a US Senator.

I have no doubt Michael J. Fox suffers signficantly from his Parkinson's. While I have a few misgivings about the stem cell research push(if only because its so oversold) I don't doubt Mr. Fox's sincerity and responsibility to publically advocate for that position.

Believe me, I have nothing but contempt for Rush. In fact, I think more highly of John Kerry than Rush.

And that's part of my point: I have higher expections of Mr. Kerry.

Posted by: c3 at November 2, 2006 08:57 PM

Sorry, Pat, but I'm not playing. I'll give you the credit of accepting that you truly believe you are 100% in the right and have your teeth firmly into the absolute moral rectitude of the situation.

But I don't agree with you. Kerry didn't say that all, most, or even many of our soldiers are stupid. I'll cheerfully concede that it's plainly obvious that many found his clumsy remark offensive. I don't happen to believe he thinks our soldiers are stupid. The quality of our soldiers wasn't even the topic he was discussing. I won't get lured into a discussion of what people ought to find offensive. People are entitled to their opinions on that. If posting here has taught me anything, it's that you can try very hard to qualify and explain your thinking and respect the views of the folks reading your remarks, and they'll still be offended. And when this happens, the offended folks often respond by claiming that you said something very different from what you said or were trying to say. So it goes.

I am inclined to give people the benefit of the doubt when I think that what they said really wasn't quite what they meant, and I'm inclined to get irritated when I think other folks are disinclined to ever give the benefit of the doubt to someone on the wrong side of the partisan divide. Many folks in the business of partisan politics start each day with an empty cross, and are determined to put someone up on it. Kerry's an easy mark, and I don't like him. Maybe he even deserves this for lifetime achievemement, sort of like when an aging onetime star player gets placed on the All-star team even though he's hitting .220.

I'm clearly in the small minority of folks (at least here) who find his apology to be completely accurate and acceptable, as opposed to being a non-apology apology or whatever. Clearly our mileage varies here.

I'm inclined to agree with whoever it was who said above that Kerry is the guy who thinks he's much better at playing politics than he thinks. IF there's any silver lining to this, it's the hope that this may finally drive Kerry from the public stage. Better late than never. I kinda doubt this is the last round though. I get the feeling he'll hang around tone deaf until he's forced to withdraw after months of obvious shunning. This episode gives everyone who wanted Kerry to go away before but was too polite to say so a good excuse to encourage everyone to kick him until he gets the message that democrats really don't want him. He's been anointed a pariah by this. Well done, GOP.

Posted by: bk at November 3, 2006 09:21 AM

His "apology" was "I'm sorry I misspoke." It was "I'm sorry if anyone misheard me and was offended." What he meant? Dunno, I'm not psychic. But we didn't mishear him. He said what he said, and it was insulting.

“You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

I hear he's scheduled a round of golf with OJ, so that OJ can keep looking for the missing real killer and Kerry can seek the missing punch line.

Posted by: Tully at November 3, 2006 09:46 AM

For what it's worth, I've talked to about two dozen Soldiers here in Baghdad, and-- with the exception of two-- they all felt that Senator Kerry had offended them, implied they were less intelligent than their non-military peers, and demeaned their commitment to serve this nation. (The two exceptions hadn't heard anything about the issue).

I don't think Sen. Kerry was intending to offend Soldiers or demean their service, but when it comes to these things, it's not intent but impact that matters. For example, with sexual harassment in the military, in many of the cases that I saw, the male soldier(s) did not intend to degrade or demean the female Soldier-- they were just "out to have a little fun," as they would put it. Unfortunately for them, usually because of ignorance or just plain foolishness, the female Soldier did feel as if she were being degraded or demeaned. In other words, the intent may not have been there, but the impact was-- and every one one of those male Soldiers found themselves with some form of non-judicial punishment.

But whether he intended to or not, from my limited view within the military, they feel as if he offended them.

Posted by: Bobby at November 3, 2006 10:56 AM

And I would point out one last time that Sen. Kerry has still said almost nothing in PRAISE of the intelligence and commitment of the troops.

As I put it elsewhere, if I mistakenly say something to my girlfriend that comes across to her as calling her fat and not very bright, then no matter what I meant, if I want any peace, I better spend the next few days singing her praises and telling her, repeatedly, how smart and thin she is.

Posted by: PatHMV at November 3, 2006 11:07 AM

That analogy doesn't work, Pat. Dumb, fat girls are really, really sexy. (OOPS! I'm not supposed to tell people I feel that way.)

Posted by: WHQ at November 3, 2006 12:09 PM

Having said that, WHQ, you might better be careful about calling any women reading this blog "sexy", as they may take it the wrong way... ;-)

Posted by: PatHMV at November 3, 2006 04:00 PM

I think Kerry has a compartmentalized take on our troops. On one hand, he served and has high regard for our soldiers. Maybe I am wrong, but I believe that. I am sure in his day of the draft he met those that he liked and those he didn't.

On the other hand, Kerry shares the Leftish view that the poor and uneducated enlist because it is a respectful option for "those" people. The old class warfare game. White or black, it doesn't matter (unless Kerry was at a mostly black school). The theory holds that rich non-military elites exploit the lower classes for their dominating, power hungry goals.

Although I believe Kerry's intention was to blast Bush and steer clear of negative comments about our soldiers, what came out IS consistent with the partisan belief that only the stupid could serve in Bush' army and illegally invade/ botch Iraq. And yet, many Democrats believe the majority of soldiers are against Iraq (or are simply too stupid to see their futility). Kerry had all these threads confused in his head as he delivered his pitch and the Republicans hit the lame change up out of the park. Yes, it was sloppy, but even worse it was careless. I almost felt sorry for Kerry, but then I have been watching his “evolving” remarks since 2004. The final straw was how quickly he turned on Lieberman.

I guess if we were all as smart as Kerry, we would have no army, just smart politicians.

Borat makes more sense.

Posted by: Maxtrue at November 4, 2006 12:51 AM

Lefties won't be laughing either come election day. They will lose once again! Why would anyone vote for higher taxes,a weak National defense,few clear plans,if any,treating terrorists like citizens,and people who have a negative view of our Military? Are you for any of that? Think about it! Vote Republican!!

Posted by: Paul Daly at November 6, 2006 02:28 PM

Paul, will we hear from you again on wednesday, regardless of the results, or is today "get out the drive-bys" Monday.

Posted by: bk at November 6, 2006 04:02 PM

No, it's Wake Up bk,Tuesday!

Posted by: Paul Daly at November 7, 2006 02:18 PM