For whatever reason, John Kerry is the other big story today, mostly because he was the main guest on MTP, causing a great deal of blogospheric reactions. This strikes me as an interesting juxtaposition to the Iraqi election story.

There is also an interesting story from Bloomberg in which George Soros criticized the Kerry candidacy: Soros Says Kerry’s Failings Undermined Campaign Against Bush

Billionaire investor George Soros, the biggest financial contributor to the failed effort to defeat President George W. Bush in November’s election, said Democratic challenger John Kerry was a flawed candidate.

Soros, chairman of Soros Fund Management LLC, spent $26 million in last year’s campaign that he said was undermined by the candidate he supported.

“Kerry did not, actually, offer a credible and coherent alternative,'’ Soros, 74, said yesterday in an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “That had a lot to do with Bush being re-elected.'’

Indeed.

Update: Stephen Bainbridge has some apt comments on Soros.

(Note: all quotes below from today’s MTP).

I was struck by his response to today’s news out of Iraq, as it struck me as disingenuous:

MR. RUSSERT: Election day, Iraq. Condoleezza Rice, the new secretary of State, has just told the United States and the world, “It has gone better than expected.” What is your sense?

SEN. KERRY: I think it’s gone as expected.

That may well be the case, but I honestly find it very difficult to believe that he thought that turnout would be high and that violence would be low.

Generically, his capacity for being on both sides of an issue in a given response continues to amaze me. In regards to Senator Kennedy’s speech this week, Russert asked the following:

MR. RUSSERT: Specifically, do you agree with Senator Kennedy that 12,000 American troops should leave at once?

SEN. KERRY: No.

MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe there should be a specific timetable of withdrawal of American troops?

SEN. KERRY: No.

MR. RUSSERT: What would you do?

SEN. KERRY: I understand exactly what Senator Kennedy is saying, and I agree with Senator Kennedy’s perceptions of the problem and of how you deal with it. I would–in fact, last summer, if you’ll recall, I said specifically that if we did the things that I laid out–the training, the international community, the services and reconstruction, and the elections and protection–we could draw down troops and begin to withdraw them. I think what Senator Kennedy is saying–and here I do agree with him–is that it is vital for the United States to make it clear that we are not there with long-term goals and intentions of our presence in the region. I agree with Senator Kennedy that we have become the target and part of the problem today, if not the problem. Now, obviously, you’ve got to provide security and stability in order to be able to turn this over to the Iraqis and to be able to withdraw our troops, so I wouldn’t do a specific timetable, but I certainly agree with him in principle that the goal must be to withdraw American troops.

Ok, he initially says that he doesn’t agree with any of Kennedy prescriptions, but then goes on to state that he largely agrees with Kennedy.

Yes, I see the distinction he is making, but it still has that typical Kerry formulation of saying yes and no in the same answer. It is problem that he needs to address if he has any aspirations of running in 2024 (which seems to be the case). Of course, I don’t think he will ever be able to overcome it, however.

Same thing here—Rice is qualified to be SecState, but she isn’t:

MR. RUSSERT: But you voted against Condoleezza Rice to be secretary of state. That’s not finding common ground. She is qualified to hold that job, no?

SEN. KERRY: Yes, and I said so. But I also said that she was a principal architect, implementer and defender of a policy that has made the United States of America less secure in the world. And that was a fight that was central to my campaign. It is central to what I think is one of the major issues that faces our country. And I think it’s important to have accountability. I paid her a great tribute for her journey of life. I mean, I think she’s a remarkable person. And I think she’s obviously accomplished a great deal. But I wasn’t voting on whether she was just qualified. I was voting on the judgments that she brought to the table. I was voting on the answers that she gave us in committee. And I was voting on the vision that she offered to the country. And I found all three, frankly, faulty.

MISC OBSERVATIONS

• There is no doubt in my mind that he is planning on running again in 2024, despite the fact that he claims to not be thinking about 2024 at all.
  
• Kerry stated his generic support for Dean for DNC Chair. He also praised the job did by McAuliffe.

Some blogospheric reactions to the interview:

• Ann Althouse’s response to the interview squares pretty evenly with my overall impression:
  

  The Kerry interview on today’s “Meet the Press” is exactly what you would expect. There are many of the familiar lines from the campaign, including the repeated assertion that he had a better way to handle things in Iraq. Now, success in Iraq depends entirely on the “four-point plan,” which he (he says) articulated precisely and clearly during the campaign and which still applies.

• Michelle Malkin notes the Russert-Kerry interchange over the SwiftVets business.
• Powerline addresses the same issue.
• PoliPundit: Sourpuss Kerry
• Captain’s Quarters: John Kerry’s Tone Deafness Continues.
• Mark Griffith, a.k.a. Political Man notes the following quote from Betsy Newmark:
  

  Hmmmm. Whom would you rather watch on the Sunday shows? John Kerry explaining how the President should have listened to his four-point plan to Tim Russert? Or Condi Rice talking about the Iraqi elections while wearing some high heeled, kick a** black leather boots?

  Indeed.

• Update:: Jim Geraghty of NRO’s Kerry Spot e-mails to note he has a post on today’s MTP performance as well. Amongst several salient observations he hits the nail on the head as to why the booking of Kerry on today’s show had such an odd feel (at least to me):
  

  The Kerry Spot on National Review Online
  You are no longer the Democratic presidential nominee and the face, and most important voice, of your party anymore, Senator. You’re just the junior senator from Massachusetts.

  Exactly right.

• Bryan S. asks: “Where’s someone who can talk about TODAY?!”. Indeed.