Today's NYT profiles Robert F. Kennedy Jr., covering his environmental activism and his recent foray into electoral politics. Among other things, it contains this account of what inspired his Rolling Stone article alleging Republicans "stole" the 2004 Presidential election.
Mr. Kennedy spent Christmas skiing in Sun Valley, Idaho, at the home of Ms. David and her husband, Larry David, the "Seinfeld" creator and "Curb Your Enthusiasm" protagonist. Mr. David urged him to read a book on the 2004 election by the news media critic Mark Crispin Miller.
Mr. Kennedy did, and a few days later he was skiing with the Rolling Stone publisher, Jann S. Wenner, an old friend and Sun Valley homeowner. Mr. Kennedy suggested that Mr. Wenner commission a story on the "stolen election." Mr. Wenner said he would, provided Mr. Kennedy wrote it. He had written a much-discussed and much-challenged story for Rolling Stone last year linking childhood vaccines and a rise in autism.
After some hesitation, Mr. Kennedy said, he agreed to write the election article. Since it was posted on Rolling Stone's Web site on June 1, the Web has been ablog with a split between those who believe this is the biggest unreported story ever and those who think it's old news, discredited long ago. Mr. Kennedy said it's hard to prove that any election had been "stolen."
"If you're looking for proof and certitude, you're not going to find it," he said. Either way, Mr. Kennedy said he is committed to stoking the outrage of 2004, wherever it leads. "This is going to remain one of my central concerns for a while," he said, adding, "America should be indignant." But is it, beyond certain liberal airwaves and blogs? Congress has not exactly been rocked with speeches on the matter or with calls for investigations.
In a phone interview, Mr. Wenner said that John Kerry, the big loser in 2004, "does not question the validity of the piece," hardly a signal of outrage.
Senator Christopher Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat and a longtime advocate of electoral reform, called the article "tremendously compelling." But not compelling enough to talk about it: Mr. Dodd's comments were relayed in a statement from his office.
UPDATE: Tom Maguire comments on the NYT story here.
Related Posts (on one page):
- The Origins of RFK Jr's Election Story:
- RFK Jr. & Election 2004 (Continued):
- More on RFK Jr. & Election 2004:
- RFK Jr. on Election 2004:
p.s. In fairness he seems like he'd be a fun person to have as a law professor.
Losing the race for the presidency must surely be a crushing blow, but what's the point of this phrasing?
Slate article
WaPo article
Looking at it objectively, it's clear that both the Nixon and Kennedy camps were doing everything in their power to steal the election for their respective candidates. I only hope they were equally competent and canceled each other out.
I guess there were local, down-ticket candidates that Kennedy feels got shafted as well, so Kerry was the 'big' loser because the prez election was higher-profile? Other than that, I don't know.
Gee, perhaps if voting districts were not gerrymandered in such a way that we had "white" and "black" districts, it would have been harder to gin up this particular result...
As to the Colbert Report interview with RFK, Jr., I think Colbert's exact words were, "Assuming you are right, which is worse: Bush's stealing the election in 2004 or your uncle stealing the election in 1960?" Now THAT is television worth watching! The idiot actually tried to answer it as a serious question, rather than saying something like, "Bush was worse, of course. My uncle is a sainted and revered figure in American history."
The mystery pollster and others have shredded arguments such as those based on the exit polls.
There were some problems, and Blackwell is blameworthy, but the election wasn't stolen.
Too often, people opposed to equality in politics (not out of racism but due to the fact that richer, whiter people support their political preferences), tend to wrap the two together in order to avoid trying to remedy the former. It's unfortunate.
For details about the DEMOCRATIC effort to narrow the choice of Ohio voters, see here.
have there been especially good pieces anywhere about Kennedy's allegations?
go to mysterypollster.com and click on "exit polls." You'll not only see their pieces,but also links to other pieces.
But there is no obvious punch-line to this post so I honestly don't know what to make of it. Is it an attack on the quality of skiing in Sun Valley? Is it an attack on the idea that the wealthy and successful hang-out together? Is it a tee-hee about Kennedy's claims? Or is it merely a suggestion of an interesting article to pass the time on a hot summer day.
If you really want to check into stealing the election, check Pennsylvania where there were known problems in the Philadelphia area and the election was a lot closer than in Ohio or the Wisconsin election where there were major electoral questions such as more votes than voters in Milwaukee and the election was won by Kerry by a margin of 11K. That is also a lot closer than Ohio which had a margin of over 10 times that and a lot fewer problems as well.
You mean it wasn't sedan after all? The cloud-ride suspension must have "lulled" me.
Kennedy Jr. is a lightweight legacy parasite, nothing more. He's been a parody his entire "career." Kind of a real life Tommy Boy, wihtout the happy ending. He should ask Ron Reagan about that color seat opening up for the next Eukanuba show. That's about the only place his "ideas" should be taken seriously.
Dick Thompson -- great points. Don't forget about the Dem tire-slashing operation in WI led by the son of a Dem congresswoman that the MSM has covered up so fastidiously.
This post doesn't do that. It's the sort of "cut and run" post -- just an implication of disdain with no meat -- which I expect to see at other blogs but not here.
If Kennedy is lying, inaccurate, posturing, ignorant, ill-informed, or whatever -- spit it out and tell us. That the article originated in casual conversations among rich people in Sun Valley says nothing except that rich people hang around together and have good taste in pleasure.
I want to say it again in case it is not clear: this post falls below the standard of reasoned discourse which I have learned to expect from this blog. It should be supplemented with reasoned argument or withdrawn.
Sincerely,
Ted Sorensen