Reason Exclusive: John Kerry Steals His Jokes!

Radley Balko | November 1, 2006

From The Simpsons:

Marge: [to Bart] Now we have to find another school for you.
Homer: And if you get kicked out of that one, you're going straight in the Army, where you'll be sent straight to America's latest military quagmire. Where will it be? North Korea? Iran? Anything's possible with Commander Cuckoo-Bananas in charge.

Watch clip here. Right-wing bloggers seen setting phasers for "righteous indignation."

Comments

|11.1.06 @ 1:22PM|#

Homer Simpson is a gay, commie, anti-Christian, America Hater who should be waterboarded at once.

|11.1.06 @ 1:24PM|#

If only John Kerry had Homer's charisma....

|11.1.06 @ 1:25PM|#

and tact.

|11.1.06 @ 1:27PM|#

and grasp of reality.

|11.1.06 @ 1:29PM|#

But oh! That hair!

|11.1.06 @ 1:41PM|#

"Right-wing bloggers seen setting phasers for "righteous indignation.""

Is right-wing blogger's "righteous indignation" over Kerry's commments any less valid that left-wing blogger's indignation over Rush Limbaugh's comments about Michael J. Fox?

I think the reality is that Kerry accidentally said what a lot of the liberal elite think.

|11.1.06 @ 1:42PM|#

Kids, Kerry tried his best and he failed miserably. The lesson is, never try.

|11.1.06 @ 1:44PM|#

If at first you don't succeed, go inside and watch TV.

The Wine Commonsewer|11.1.06 @ 1:49PM|#

Sending young offenders to the military was once a time honored way to straighten out kids that were headed down the wrong path. I don't see a problem with it at all.

When I was in Marine Corps basic training we had a guy from the Detroit ghetto who joined to get off heroin, we had a guy from Chicago who was there because the judge said four years in the pen for armed robbery or four years in the USMC. He ended up as a sqad leader. We had several other guys who were there because they chose the Marines over jail time. One said he wished he'd have taken the jail time.

The lurker's right about the selective indignation.

|11.1.06 @ 1:51PM|#

Lisa, why didn't you tell me that being smart would make me miserable?

|11.1.06 @ 1:53PM|#

Last time I noticed Homer was not a US Senator.

Kerry is hugely stupid. All he had to do was apologize to the troops and say he meant that Bush was a moron. He says that all the time anyway. No biggie. But, NO, Mr. "reporting for duty" Kerry has to compound his gaffe by sticking his foot even further down his throat.

I'm sorry. I think we would have benefited from two years of a congress that could do nothing.

|11.1.06 @ 1:57PM|#

Kerry accidentally said what a lot of people think, right, left or other. Because it's true. This is just typical PC. "That's offensive! You've insulted an opppresed group! You can't say that! Say you're sorry! Grovel!"

As to joke stealing, I seem to remember an Onion story a while back, "America's stupidest 18-year-olds head to Iraq", but can't find it online now.

|11.1.06 @ 2:05PM|#

"In summary, we found that, on average, 1999 recruits were more highly educated than the equiv­alent general population, more rural and less urban in origin, and of similar income status. We did not find evidence of minority racial exploitation (by race or by race-weighted ZIP code areas). We did find evidence of a "Southern military tradition" in that some states, notably in the South and West, provide a much higher proportion of enlisted troops by population."

http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda05-08.cfm

Daze there are about a millions studies that say the same thing. All you have to do is run an internet search to find them. What Kerry said and most liberals and you think is not true. In Kerry's defense despite being one of the dumbest people ever to grace the political stage, he honestly believes he is smarter than everyone else to the point of self parody. It is of course also hysterical for guy whose main accomplishments in life seem to be being born to a rich family and banging the even richer widow is lecturing college students about the importance of hard work. "Gee Senator Kerry, if I study really hard can I also marry to former trophy wife and heir to Heinz fortune to?"

The picture on Drudge right now is a hoot. I am sure every humorless liberal is having kittens over it as we speak.

|11.1.06 @ 2:05PM|#

Ugh, was watching the monitor on the cardio machine at lunch, and scarborough cuntry was on, and there these three idiotbags, in addition to Joe, all carping about this "scandal", claiming that it was going to tip the election in the favor of the GOP. And then Scarborough had the nerve to claim that "we're now getting into serious political discussion, this close to the elections". Pfft. This story has as much legs as that MJ Fox-Rush Limbaugh thing.

|11.1.06 @ 2:06PM|#

"What Kerry said and most liberals and you think [...]"

I'm not one to stick up for liberals, but would you care to back up that "most liberals" statement, John? Or are you in Michelle Malkin "they're all moonbats!" mode?

|11.1.06 @ 2:07PM|#

Along with the Skull & Bones thing, I think it's pretty clear that Kerry (along with Bob Shrum, anyone else?) is a republican sleeper cell who pops up at just the right time.

|11.1.06 @ 2:18PM|#

Evan,

They are not all moonbats. I should have qualified by saying "liberal elites" believe that. The average Democratic voter? No. The average Democrat on a college campus or in a newsroom? Absolutely.

|11.1.06 @ 2:19PM|#

The picture on Drudge right now is a hoot. I am sure every humorless liberal is having kittens over it as we speak.

That picture on Drudge is pretty hilarious, although I can't help but wonder how many of the soldiers in that photo are on their 3rd or 4th tour of duty so far,... or as they put it "stuck in Irak."

|11.1.06 @ 2:20PM|#

Awesome. John just called someone humorless.

Also, am I incorrect or is it pretty obvious Kerry was directing this at Bush? I guess if you remove a couple of words it could become an attack on the troops.

|11.1.06 @ 2:21PM|#

Help us Jon Carry.............

|11.1.06 @ 2:25PM|#

Obviously, Kerry meant it about Bush.

But I certainly don't think that this makes Kerry look like he'd have made a better president. "Bush is dumb" isn't exactly a compelling reason for a Kerry presidency.

Ad hom attack jokes - especially from a guy who can't get a laugh unless he accidentally falls off the stage - just make the guy seem even more bitter and whiny than usual.

This has the opposite of the intended effect - it makes the average citizen relieved that they didn't accidentally elect the guy who thinks that a novel of manners is a real side-splitter.

|11.1.06 @ 2:27PM|#

Observer,

If Kerry had said something like "You can stay in school and study hard and do well, or you can coast through school like our President and end up stuck in Iraq." I could see your point. But that is not what he said.

Beyond that, it is far beyond the point of what he said. If Kerry had come out after the speech and said "I understand how people could have mistaken what I meant, but I didn't mean to insult the military, I meant to insult Bush. Sorry for any misunderstanding". This whole thing would have gone away that day. But, again that is not what he said. Kerry is so stupid and arrogant that he comes back with the "I am not going to back down, only an idiot could not have understood what I said" defense. In the end, this is not about Democrats or Republicans, it is about what an awful moron Kerry is. I don't understand why Democrats just don't admit that fact, throw Kerry over the side and move on.

|11.1.06 @ 2:31PM|#

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

|11.1.06 @ 2:34PM|#

Obviously, Kerry meant it about Bush, not folks serving in the military. The partisan uproar surrounding is obviously manufactured and just appears desperate.

However, I certainly don't think that this makes Kerry look like he'd have made a better president. "Bush is dumb" isn't exactly a compelling reason for a Kerry presidency.

Ad hom attack jokes - especially from a guy who can't get a laugh unless he accidentally falls off the stage - just make the guy seem even more bitter and whiny than usual.

This has the opposite of the intended effect - it makes the average citizen relieved that they didn't accidentally elect the guy who thinks that a novel of manners is a real side-splitter.

The Wine Commonsewer|11.1.06 @ 2:34PM|#

Sorry Boys, didn't realize that the photo link I posted above was already mentioned (on Drudge). It's also on Free Republic. Apologies for redundancy, but it was emailed to me a little while ago and I just LOL and put it up on the blog.

|11.1.06 @ 2:53PM|#

No one who spent anytime in their youth wondering where their position would be in the lottery would think his comment was about anything other that staying in college and getting that deferral.

|11.1.06 @ 3:11PM|#

rob OUTRAGEOUSLY comments: Ad hom attack jokes - especially from a guy who can't get a laugh unless he accidentally falls off the stage - just make the guy seem even more bitter and whiny than usual.

savagely mocking WWII hero Bob Dole. I smell a scandal, right here at H&R! John- can we join hands and denounce rob as a moonbat antiamerican?? John??....rats- he must be listening to the radio......

Homer Simpson|11.1.06 @ 3:21PM|#

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

|11.1.06 @ 3:32PM|#

One thing Balko will not mention that Bush and flipper went to the same school at about the same time, but stupid ole Bush got better grades. Maybe flipper was really making a joke about himself.

|11.1.06 @ 3:39PM|#

"carrick | November 1, 2006, 2:53pm | #

No one who spent anytime in their youth wondering where their position would be in the lottery would think his comment was about anything other that staying in college and getting that deferral."

Great point, carrick, but he was speaking to a group of TODAY'S kids, not the student's of '67.

John Kerry lies; he lies a lot.

|11.1.06 @ 3:51PM|#

MUTT - Thanks for catching the irony of me complaining about an ad hom attack while conducting an ad hom attack.

(I was sure that my efforts had gone in vain - but I still wanted to avoid "explaining the joke.") Cheers!

|11.1.06 @ 4:13PM|#

Great point, carrick, but he was speaking to a group of TODAY'S kids, not the student's of '67.

Right, but those students of '67 are now running the world and that is really who Kerry was speaking to regardless of who he was standing in front of. And it is those students of '67 who are calling for him to apologize or to not campaign for them.

|11.1.06 @ 4:17PM|#

It just dawned on me where the confusion comes from. I had just assumed that the misreading of Kerry's obvious dig at Bush was completely phoney, but it occurs to me that people are misunderstanding Kerry's use of the term "stuck in."

It could credibly be claimed that Kerry was referring to the troops if you read that as being a form of the verb "to stick," as in, the boxes got stuck in the back of my closet.

But that's not how Kerry was using the term. He was using "stuck" as an adjective, as in, I got the car stuck in the mud. Or, George Bush got stuck in a quagmire.

I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was Kerry's intention, because Kerry has been relentless in his use of the phrase "We're stuck in Iraq," and variants like "We're stuck in a quagmire," "George Bush got us stuck in Iraq," etc. Just find some news reports of his stumping over the past month.

I guess I can see how someone reading the statement out of context - ie, not realizing that it was one of a number of lame one liners Kerry shot off about Bush - and not having heard Kerry's use of the term could misunderstand his meaning.

And John is right, there really isn't a noticeable difference in education levels between the public at large and the military. It's a good thing Kerry never suggested any such thing, because that would have been not just incorrect, but insulting.

|11.1.06 @ 4:23PM|#

"Right, but those students of '67 are now running the world and that is really who Kerry was speaking to regardless of who he was standing in front of."

So in effect, Kerry was talking to a group of folks that weren't there? Most would find that self-serving and rude.

|11.1.06 @ 4:28PM|#

Joe,

If you are right, and i don't think you are, then why didn't Kerry just put out a statement similiar to your post and add that he understands how his statement could have been misunderstood and he apologizes for any misunderstanding? Would it have been that hard? Why do you continue to defend this clown?

If he did mean what you say, he is an elitist moron. The people who support the war Bush and the infamous NEOCONs (read Jews) are hardly uneducated and hardly hold their beliefs out of some slacker mentality. Does Kerry really believe that anyone who disagrees with him does so because of slovenly ignorance? If anything the statement as you read it reflects a more poorly on Kerry than if he had just come out and said, "hey work and study hard so you can get a job and don't have to join the Army and go to Iraq."

Democrats are totally incapable of policing their own. Regardless of what Kerry meant, from a purely partisian perspective, he ought to be drawn and quartered for giving the other side something to get motivated about this close to an election.

|11.1.06 @ 4:31PM|#

So in effect, Kerry was talking to a group of folks that weren't there? Most would find that self-serving and rude.

Standard campaign practice is to put a politician in front of a friendly audience so that the media can carry the desired sound bites to real target audience.

|11.1.06 @ 4:40PM|#

I'm not convinced the joke was a mistake. The Democrats have been pushing the "Iraq is the next Vietnam" meme for months.

I would guess that Kerry or his handlers were intentionally ambiguous in this joke and were trying to get the middle-aged, middle-class voters to think about Vietnam.

|11.1.06 @ 4:41PM|#

joe

The line that Kerry was supposed to read was clear in it's meaning. He flubbed it (and has admitted that he did) and left us with the ambiguous line that the Republicans are making hay with.

I'm satisfied with the explanation, but, frankly , joe, you can explain till your blue in the face and the party faithful just isn't going to leave it alone.

The Republicans will run this as far as they can make it go. The rest of us will be left murmuring and rolling our eyes.

Oh, and a tiny core of the Demo loyal will wail about the injustice of it all.

If you are right, and i don't think you are, then why didn't Kerry just put out a statement similiar to your post and add that he understands how his statement could have been misunderstood and he apologizes for any misunderstanding?

Umm, as I noted above, he did. The punch line he was supposed to read was read on NPR this AM. He blew the line. His comic delivery is what is wanting not his opinion of the troops.

And no, I'm not defending JK, I just don't like to see people falsely accused of things.

Even if I can't stand them.

|11.1.06 @ 4:42PM|#

joe -

While I do believe, as you do, that Kerry's intention was to take a shot at Bush, and I agree that his intent was NOT to insult U.S. troops.

But I don't think you're right about this being an honest case of mistaken interpretation of the word "stuck."

It's being used by a bunch of partisan knuckleheads to thump the Democrats with so blatantly and obviously that it makes me think both Republicans AND Democrats are grateful for the opportunity to fling poo rather than defend their actual positions.

Sound familiar? (Sorry... Couldn't resist the cheap shot...)

|11.1.06 @ 4:42PM|#

John,

"If you are right, and i don't think you are, then why didn't Kerry just put out a statement similiar to your post and add that he understands how his statement could have been misunderstood and he apologizes for any misunderstanding?"

Because wanted to have the fight. For an entire news cycle, the story was about John Kerry firing back after having his patriotism attacked yet again by the right-wing noise machine. You no doubt saw his response - he tore into Bush and Limbaugh, and got maximum news exposure for it. Kerry has been travelling around defending Democratic veterans as the Republican opponents try to swift boat them.

The Republicans are trying to party like it's 2002, thinking their smears of the patriotism of their opponents is still going to be a good strategy. But ever since John Murtha, that doesn't only not work, it works against the Republicans. Especially when they're spending a news cycle making their cheap accusations, trying to keep alive a mini-scandal whose 15 minutes of fame are over, while the rest of the public is thinking about Iraq and bin Laden. Kerry's obviously been waiting for the Bushies to try to swift boat him again, and they walked right into it.

I hope Jean Schmitt gets into the act. That would be awsome.

|11.1.06 @ 4:45PM|#

Isaac,

I don't care if the Republican faithful want to keep working this line. I hope they do. The public isn't buying it anymore, and it just draws attention to the fact that they're playing politics as Iraq falls down around their ears.

rob,

Even Republican knuckleheads need something to hand their hat on. If Kerry had delivered the line correctly, they wouldn't have been able to convince people that he meant to insult the troops' education.

|11.1.06 @ 4:47PM|#

The punch line he was supposed to read was read on NPR this AM.

Haven't seen the intended text yet. Do you have a link or can you post the quote?

|11.1.06 @ 4:51PM|#

As I heard it read this morning (IIRC), it was supposed to be, "You can wind up getting us stuck in Iraq."

dhex|11.1.06 @ 4:53PM|#

"infamous NEOCONs (read Jews)"

i've never tried to read a jew before, but i'm probably just afraid they'd drink my blood.

|11.1.06 @ 4:54PM|#

I think the reality is that Kerry accidentally said what a lot of the liberal elite think.

It is not just the elite...I know a poor uneducated alcoholic lefty who says the exact same thing.

I will admit that Kerry's joke is funnier then my friend's jokes on the subject.

|11.1.06 @ 5:04PM|#

According to Kerry's handlers, the joke was to be read as follows:

"Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush."

Maybe, I guess, but that was one hell of a misread by the junior Senator from Massachusetts.

|11.1.06 @ 5:09PM|#

No fucking way "us" was on his notes at that podium. That is total bologna. That would mean slacking will make you president, which Kerry, as a Pres. wannabe, would never say.

|11.1.06 @ 5:15PM|#

"Even Republican knuckleheads need something to hand their hat on." - joe

Because they certainly shouldn't try to hang it on their political stances!

"If Kerry had delivered the line correctly," -joe

If horseshoes were hand-grenades... I wonder what you'd get if you crossed Bush's speaking 'abilities' with Kerry's? Now THAT train wreck would be a horror story fit for Halloween...

"[Repubs] wouldn't have been able to convince people that he meant to insult the troops' education." - joe

I don't really think they're convincing anyone with an IQ higher than 70... which is approximately the combined IQs of the '04 presidential candidates.

|11.1.06 @ 5:50PM|#

"In summary, we found that, on average, 1999 recruits were more highly educated than the equiv­alent general population, more rural and less urban in origin, and of similar income status. We did not find evidence of minority racial exploitation (by race or by race-weighted ZIP code areas). We did find evidence of a "Southern military tradition" in that some states, notably in the South and West, provide a much higher proportion of enlisted troops by population."

http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda05-08.cfm

That study is complete bunk. It defines education solely in terms of high school graduation rates, not grades, likelihood of attaining a higher degree, test scores, etc. As every branch specifically requires a high school degree or a GED (perhaps with a few exceptions), this study is basically a tautology: It defines "educational achievement" such that it exactly matches a baseline qualification for enlistment.

It would be interesting to see a study that chose a better indicator of educational achievement, aptitude, or intelligence. Until then, the scandal surrounding this remark falls squarely into the PC category. Of course, Kerry is still a complete dolt.

|11.1.06 @ 6:02PM|#

Jesus Joe,

Only you could think this was good news. Yeah, the Dems wanted this fight. That is why so many Democratic candidates including Kerry's own campaign chairman have come out and demanded an apology and why Kerry has canceled all of his campaign apparences. Do you even listen to yourself?

|11.1.06 @ 6:10PM|#

Rep. Harold Ford

"He needs to apologize to our troops"


Sen. Hillary Clinton

"What Sen. Kerry said was inappropriate"


Gov. Janet Napolitano

"It's just wrong"


U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez

"I think his comments were inappropriate"


New Jersey Senate President Richard Codey

"I think it's offensive"


Senate candidate Jon Tester

"Senator Kerry's remarks were poorly worded and just plain stupid"


North Carolina State Democratic Party chairman Jerry Meek

"John Kerry's botched joke was wrong and he should apologize"


Congressional candidate Bruce Braley

"I believe that Senator Kerry's brief statement was inappropriate"


Congressional candidate John Pavich

"I believe he should apologize to the brave men and women in service."

Look, I am inclined to beleive that this while fun is probably non news and no one really cares that much. But to claim that the Dems wanted this fight and are happy about the whole thing and that is good news is to be in complete denial of reality, which unfortuneately par for the course for you.

|11.1.06 @ 6:43PM|#

Read gooder, John.

I didn't say the Democrats wanted this fight.

I said Kerry wanted this fight.

I know it's hard for you to get your head around the idea of a party that doesn't marchin lockstep.

|11.1.06 @ 6:56PM|#

"It defines education solely in terms of high school graduation rates, not grades, likelihood of attaining a higher degree, test scores, etc." - Chris S

Really? So the officer corps doesn't usually require a 4-year degree or better?

"this study is basically a tautology" - Chris S

Hmmm... you mean tautology as in "a statement true by virtue of its logical form"? This study is not a tautology in that sense, clearly, as the study equitably compares levels of education attained. Frankly, I doubt you can find a better measure due to Privacy Act restrictions and the sheer amount of manpower it would require to tally the grades of every student and whether they chose military service or not.

I'm also guessing that since the overwhelming number (98%) of military officers have at least a baccalaureate degree, and the general population doesn't vaguely approach this percentage, you somehow think it would be tautological to use this in a determination of educational levels between the general population and the military?

The complaint that this is a tautological argument simply doesn't hold water. It's like looking at a study that concludes Haiti has a lower literacy rate than the United States (51% vs. 97%) and arguing that perhaps the comparison is flawed because it doesn't examine each individual to see how well those who are literate read and write.

While you and I can argue whether or not a high school diploma is a level of educational "achievement" or not, there are plenty of people in the general population who do not achieve that level of education.

(This would be similar to arguing that because there are very few Ivy League university graduates in the military, it means that those serving in the officer corps from other educational institutions aren't well-educated. This is clearly not the case.)

"It defines 'educational achievement' such that it exactly matches a baseline qualification for enlistment." - Chris S

This is actually more along the lines of a tautological argument...
Just because there IS an educational standard required for eligiblity to serve, military personnel are more likely to be better educated than the general population.

The standard to be in the military is actually higher than it is to NOT be in the military. This isn't a tautology, it's a simple fact. That it is a fact does not make military enlistees less likely to be intelligent than the general population (which doesn't require an educational standard), but more intelligent - as long as you posit that educational level and funcional intelligence are closely correlative.

|11.1.06 @ 7:18PM|#

Oh, just one thought, is there anyone here who actually believes that Kerry writes his own speeches?

Anyone,.....show of hands?

|11.2.06 @ 8:47AM|#

Everyone ask yourself how much you really care about the verbal gaffes of a has-been wanna-be?

Seriously. This is so non-news-news I am embarrassed so many people are wasting time wagging fingers at each other about it. as in, 'whats your *position* on the Kerry comment?? You must have a position!'

Please god let us get to election day and put all the shitheads back in their cages for a couple more years.

|11.2.06 @ 10:49AM|#

Rob,

Why all the talk about the "officer corps"? The officer corps comprises a small percentage of the military population, and officers aren't really the focus of this debate. Let's both agree: Officers are well educated, but that's not the group we're talking about.

"It defines 'educational achievement' such that it exactly matches a baseline qualification for enlistment." - Chris S

This is actually more along the lines of a tautological argument...

That's right, and that's exactly why I said "basically a tautology." Much like your discussion of the officer corps, your long winded explanation about the meaning of tautology was unnecessary (shall I define the word "basically" for you?). What if I showed you a study concluding that high school graduates are really smart, because they're likely to be high school graduates? Is this a useful study?

Just because there IS an educational standard required for eligiblity to serve, military personnel are more likely to be better educated than the general population.

The standard to be in the military is actually higher than it is to NOT be in the military. This isn't a tautology, it's a simple fact. That it is a fact does not make military enlistees less likely to be intelligent than the general population (which doesn't require an educational standard), but more intelligent - as long as you posit that educational level and funcional intelligence are closely correlative.

About 85% of Americans over 25 have graduated from high school (as of 2003). http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/education/001863.html. Is 85% of the population above average? No. Are people in that 85% group more likely to be above average than the general population? Barely, but it's a terrible indicator. Even if it were a good indicator, and even if we assume that everyone in that group is more educated and intelligent than the remaining 15%, is it possible to find a large population within the 85% group that is below average in terms of educational achievement or intelligence? Absolutely. In fact, about 41% of that group is below average (defining average at exactly the 50th percentile of the general population, leaving 35% of the below average population within the 85% group, which amounts to 41% of that 85% group). How helpful is a study that tells us (1) High school graduates tend to be high school graduates, and (2) military enlistees fall within the elite top 85% of the general population in terms of education?