http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washin gton/articles/2007/01/24/kerry_to_bow_ou t_of_08_presidential_race/

seems like a good source

A story in the Boston Globe says Kerry will announce his plans on the Senate floor this afternoon.

I'm sure the wingnuts will brag that the "botched joke" took him down. But it wasn't the joke that led to the spate of bad press, it was the other way around.

Because he was Kerry, and because the media loves nothing more than (a.) providing free oxygen to even the most inane republican smearjobs, and (b.) ridiculing politicians to get back at their own high-school tormentors, all the same old refrains from '04 returned again: Kerry is so lame and stiff and dumb and fake and he windsurfs! Ha ha!

The hysterical orgy of anti-Kerry commentary and media coverage only showed what was waiting for him around every corner in '08. If it wasn't the "joke" last year, it would've been a harmless misstatement at a pancake breakfast or a minor policy gaffe during a speech next year--the media's scorn was always just below the surface, and he must've seen the writing on the wall.

It's unfortunate, because Kerry is a good and loyal Democrat, one who went straight back to work after losing, and who busted his hump more than just about anyone in order to get Dems elected last year. But political tastes change quickly, and we've already left him behind to focus on the next new thing. Hopefully, he's able to find some measure of satisfaction in being an influential elderstatesman in a majority Congress.

Egad. Won't he be like a hundred?

I liked Kerry and still like him, but I think this is the right decision.

I think that an early campaign of "Use It or Lose It" might actually provide some strategic uncertainty to Republican planners, making them more vulnerable and more cautious (if we assume that they have some smart strategists there, a pretty safe assumption.)

The RNC got burned hard in Rhode Island.  They spent like madman, and in the end had to pound sand.  Santorum, Allen and Burns too, to a lesser extent.  They remember.  Their donors remember.  So if can even look like wealthy sapphire-state or sapphire-district Dems are more than willing to share the wealth, Republican money might see little or no return on investment or an intolerable risk factor, and go fishing instead.

Brandishing the threat may help some Dems in purple states, especially incumbents avoid serious challenges.  Brandishing it NOW will remoralize the troops and make it easier for those wealthy Dems to squeeze a little more out from their donors, all for one on a big Blue tidal wave.

And lets see his 2004 presidential warchest go to the primary winner next year, not be wasted or go to a candidate before the primaries are over.  

And maybe send $1,000 to BlogPac =)

Watching his speech now on MSNBC (they carried it CSPAN style), you notice his voice cracking when he says "When I came back from Vietnam..."

I believe this emotion. I don't think this is staged for political purposes. One, we know he's wanted to be, and expected to be, President since college. Now he realizes he will never realize his ultimate dream, and that's got to be painful on a personal level. Remember, these guys may be public pinatas, but they're still people with real emotions. Second, he was speaking about Vietnam, a personal subject for him. Remember, prior to the '04 campaign, he almost never spoke about it publicly. In his Senate campaign against Weld, he alluded to Vietnam, and that was a bombshell. And, the first time I met him, I thanked him for his service in Vietnam. Everything about him suddenly changed - his eyes dropped, he mumbled more, he was obviously in a more heartful/personal mode. The subject of Vietnam touches him inside.

Say what you will about John Kerry and his failed '04 campaign, but the emotion we saw on the Senate floor today was real.

The Wayward Episcopalian: Nathan in New Orleans
http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/

I just received the email from Kerrry, with a link to his announcement that he is not running.  I think he did a very classy job with this.  I am...well...impressed.  

He is advocating support for a national movement to set a deadline for beginning the withdrawal from Iraq.  You can see his announcement at:

http://www.setadeadline.com

I think this is probably the right decision for Kerry and I'm glad he made it.
Can I ask about another point however:
"my desire to see the 2008 set ASAP"
Why do we have to have the field set ASAP? I'm a little annoyed that everyone's already jumped in. I think a competitive primary with a number of good candidates will be a good thing, especially for the "inexperienced" like Obama, who will have to prove to me that they can survive and win a big campaign against tough opponents, but I don't see why that has to start 22 months before the election. In fact, mightn't this early start cause the big names to draw all the air out of the room and ultimately diminish the primary? I think one of Dean's advantages was that he started very early, but had everyone been out campaigning hard that early, perhaps he never would have gotten traction? Personally, I'd also rather focus on legislating with the new dem congress for at least a few months before all the news and politicians focus on 08. So explain to me the advantage of an early set field?