John Kerry

end up in the articles that say he did not answer or his spokesman answered that he was "reading the bill". I wish that just once, someone asked a detailed question that required more than a yes or no on a bill that he had just voted on - presumably after he read it.

His comments on Warren show the same disinterest in any policy. All he does is bring up two comments - one out of context. As to Warren not being able to work on a bipartisan level, her answer is incredibly easy. She crafted what the consumer protection agency would be and got it included in the Dodd/Frank bill when most people thought it was impossible. I know the Senate had 59 Democrats then, but not all were open to regulation.

As to his being the most bipartisan - in reality, Kerry's vote for Gramm/Rudman in his freshman year, which he still stands by is more impressive than any of Brown's crossing the aisle episodes. Brown had to do them for his own career not to end. Kerry's vote was actually potentially harmful to him and was based on a complicated, thoughtful view that if there is too much debt, you can not do what is needed to help people and help the country. That view made him unique in 1985 among New England Democrats. In addition, in 2005, when Bush and the Republicans wanted to pursue a line item veto that used the Kerry idea of needing a supermajority of Congress to approve (or reject) the entire package of Presidential line items removed, Kerry was the only Democrat at the White House meeting - and the only Democratic sponsor. In doing this, Kerry stood against the entire Democratic caucus. Both of these votes were risky for Kerry, where Brown's crossing the aisle were not only not risky, to NOT do them was risky.