Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Clinton responds to her critics: "They never said that to any man who was not elected." [View all]karynnj
(60,586 posts)45. There were many articles in 2006 that made it clear that the Clintons thought
no one should speak about Iraq because it could hurt in the midterms. Finding links from 2006 is difficult. What I will point to is the way Kerry and Feingold were treated when their amendment was brought up by the Republicans for debate. You can find it in the Senate record -- where Reid actually gave DEMOCRATIC time in prime time to Joe Lieberman who trashed Kerry and Feingold personally in addition to stating his position.
Here is a link that explains the split - http://www.nbcnews.com/id/13456702/ns/politics/t/democratic-fissures-senates-iraq-debate/#.Wr5SkojwY54 Here is a Daily Kos diary that described how Kerry was attacked. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2007/8/31/378899/-
June 2006 was yet another defense appropriation battle in the Senate. The Republicans ran the chamber with a healthy majority, and there was no doubt that the funding would pass. However, the anti-war sentiment out in the country found a voice in two Democratic Senators -- John Kerry and Russ Feingold -- who had put together an amendment that would set a timetable for withdrawal. It was a radical plan at the time, and the Democratic leadership was very angry that Kerry and Feingold insisted that their amendment be debated and voted upon. Many Democrats went to the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other publications, and said that John Kerry was a "big embarrassment", that his plan went too far, and that it could cost them in the midterm elections. Not only that, Harry Reid made sure that the Kerry/Feingold amendment would be debated after the evening news, safely late in the night, where no one would notice the plan. In 2007, this is all water under the bridge, seeing that the Kerry/Feingold amendment is now the Reid Resolution which at last count received 54 votes in July. It was an idea which needed time to gain support, as it only garnered 13 votes that June.
There was a NYT magazine article that described in detail the behind the scenes, but I can not find a current link - it is 13 years ago!
Before that, when Kerry returned to the Senate, there was a whisper campaign -- that spread to both DU and Daily Kos - suggesting that Harry Reid was angry that Kerry continued to speak as a Democratic leader. (Note A Democratic leader, not THE Democratic leader.) Search Daily Kos for 2005 or 2006. Kos himself made several posts that blasted Kerry whenever he accepted a chance to speak - claiming that he was not Reid's choice to do so.
My guess is you were possibly less interested in the post 2004 election or you agreed with the overwhelming sentiment on DU concerning Kerry. The fact is that both powerful Democrats and people on message boards were as willing to tell him to go away as they are now with Clinton.
As to hitting them when a statement they made was seen as potentially harmful, Hillary herself stabbed Kerry in the back calling his misreading of a joke (leaving out "us"

Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
70 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Hillary Clinton responds to her critics: "They never said that to any man who was not elected." [View all]
Miles Archer
Mar 2018
OP
I'd like to see her become more vocal and less circumspect in her statements than ever before.
Squinch
Mar 2018
#3
Why should she not speak out? Trumpie is still running against her, rather than actual governance.
mackdaddy
Mar 2018
#5
Lets face it--many Democrats have said or indicated for her to be quiet. Yes they have...
riversedge
Mar 2018
#51
"The Clinton wing of the party pushed Kerry to stop talking ... as he introduced Kerry/Feingold"
EffieBlack
Mar 2018
#16
Well, she pretty well nailed it because it is true & she provided the facts of the matter.
DylanUSC
Mar 2018
#17
Understand but for those you are speaking of that seems it will always be the case.
DylanUSC
Mar 2018
#43
I think she should speak as much as she wants, BUT I don't like her answer.
thesquanderer
Mar 2018
#18
Romney, Gore weren't constantly and viciously attacked by the new president, his base and a network
EffieBlack
Mar 2018
#23
The lame protest against her Rutgers speech (organized on Our Revolution) comes to mind...
NurseJackie
Mar 2018
#24
Actually... that's nonsense. They say it to almost EVERY man who was not elected
FBaggins
Mar 2018
#42
I know this isn't something that we're really supposed to say, but there were a lot of people
hughee99
Mar 2018
#56
I didn't say it was "totally" based on her gender. In fact, I explicitly said it was not totally
EffieBlack
Mar 2018
#57