Who is Jonathan Kaplan?

Summary: After a conference call with Sen. John Kerry and Pennsylvania Democratic congressional candidate Patrick Murphy, Hill reporter Jonathan E. Kaplan commented on an argument Kerry had made by saying: "Screw that and screw him."

On August 21, The Democratic Daily weblog noted that after a conference call with Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and Pennsylvania Democratic congressional candidate Patrick Murphy, a reporter, who, according to The Democratic Daily blog, was later confirmed by his Hill editor to be Jonathan E. Kaplan, commented on an argument Kerry had made by saying: "Screw that and screw him."

During the call with Kerry and Murphy, Kaplan asked Murphy whether Connecticut Democratic Senate candidate Ned Lamont's primary victory over Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, in a campaign in which Lamont contrasted his support for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq with Lieberman's opposition, "hurts or helps your chances of defeating the GOP incumbent." Kaplan's question echoed the Republican strategy -- explicitly laid out by White House senior adviser Karl Rove earlier this year -- to stress the Republican's purported strength and the Democrats' purported weakness on national security. Kerry objected, noting that it is the responsibility of the media to "not allow them [Republicans] to be able to try to transform failure into an offensive policy to suggest that someone else is weak because they have an alternative that works." Kaplan responded, asking: "Isn't that your job, not ours?" Kerry said: "We're -- we communicate through you. And we need to invite you to be holding them accountable. ... We speak, but if it doesn't get out there, the American people don't hear it."

After Kerry and Murphy left the call, Kaplan attacked Kerry "for blaming the media for how he can't communicate with the American people." When another participant in the conference call noted that "the media does not put the Kerry message out," Kaplan responded: "Screw that and screw him. For him to criticize us? It's his own fault." When then asked to identify himself, Kaplan refused, saying: "Actually, I shouldn't have even said that because I'm gonna get in trouble now." Audio and transcripts of the conference call are available at The Democratic Daily blog.

Kaplan has a history at The Hill of repeating unchallenged partisan attacks on Kerry. He devoted the entirety of a July 7, 2004, article to simply reprinting Republican attacks on Kerry and former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) following the announcement that Edwards would be Kerry's running mate. The entire article, titled "GOP swiftly goes on the attack," is reproduced below:

Republicans began trashing Sen. John Kerry's new presidential running mate, Sen. John Edwards just minutes after Kerry made his decision public.

On the air, in cyberspace and print, Republicans said Edwards is too liberal, has too often has disagreed with Kerry on issues and is too wedded to the trial-lawyer lobby. And Republicans characterized Edwards as Kerry's inexperienced second choice after Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) turned down Kerry's offer to run with him.

"This is the most out-of-the-mainstream ticket in American presidential history," said Christine Iverson, spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee (RNC), which posted its opposition research highlighting their disagreements and past votes.

The Bush-Cheney campaign has produced a commercial called "First Choice," which highlights McCain's endorsement and appearance with Bush in Reno. The commercial alludes to Kerry's courting, which ended in June when McCain let it be known that he was not interested in serving on a so-called unity ticket with Kerry.

Scott Stanzel, a campaign spokesman, said: "They continually deliver pessimism even if Edwards delivers it with smile and drawl," adding that Kerry chose political expediency after McCain rejected his overtures.

Others lampooned Edwards's career as a trial lawyer. Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and a conservative political operative, told The Hill: "Trial lawyers are the new funding source for Democrats. They dissed the labor unions' guy, [saying] 'Thank you very much but you're not important to us.' They'll take the black vote, but give them nothing. They chose to dance with the trial lawyers."

He added, "Kerry is an environmentalist who will close down your steel mill. Edwards will sue you out of your existence."

John Feehery, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert's (R-Ill.) spokesman, said: "These guys make up the dream team for ambulance chasers all across the country," referring to trial lawyers. Kerry was a prosecuting attorney.

While the National Republican Senatorial Committee said Edwards would not help Democrats win Senate races, most congressional leadership offices and the National Republican Congressional Committee remained on the sidelines.

"He talks North Carolina but votes Massachusetts," said Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), adding that the trial-lawyer Edwards "talks a good game ... tries to cloak it like he's fighting for little guy, but he's tearing down incentives to go in and invest."

Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio), who like Edwards is a bereaved parent, said Kerry's choice was not surprising. But two weeks earlier she told reporters she believed Kerry's lack of charisma would have made Edwards an unlikely choice given his potential to overshadow Kerry.

The RNC also sought to emphasize personal and policy disagreements between Kerry and Edwards, especially on their backgrounds and trade issues.

During the primary, Edwards emphasized growing up as a son of a mill worker and an outsider. During one debate, Edwards asked Kerry: "Do you believe that change is more likely to be brought about by someone who has spent 20 years in Washington or by someone who is more of an outsider to this process?"

Kerry responded: "Yes, because that's where the Congress of the United States is, and that's where 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is," and added that the last time he looked, "[Edwards] ran for the United States Senate, and he's been in the Senate for the last five years. That seems to me to be Washington, D.C."

Edwards had said he would have opposed NAFTA had he been in Congress in 1993; Kerry supported it. Edwards also voted against trade agreements with Singapore, Chile and the Caribbean nations; Kerry voted for them.

Kaplan's September 2, 2004, article was devoted to repeating -- again, unchallenged -- smears of Kerry and praise of President Bush at the 2004 Republican National Convention by former Sen. Zell Miller (D-GA) and Vice President Dick Cheney (whom Kaplan described as "an extraordinary tag team"):

Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.) made an extraordinary tag team last night, with the Democrat delivering a speech of sustained fury against his party and its presidential nominee, and the vice president calmly praising President Bush and occasionally applying an intellectual scalpel to Sen. John Kerry.

Miller was the keynote speaker last night, and, as a lifelong Democrat who had been keynote speaker for Bill Clinton in 1992, subjected Kerry and the Democrats to withering fire. Cheney delivered a subtler speech, more deliberative and thoughtful -- and perhaps more effective -- making the case for a second Bush term and attacking his challenger with irony rather than a frontal assault.

Cheney and Miller played good cop and bad cop, as The Hill reported Tuesday that they would. The vice president turned out primarily as a character witness for his boss, and Miller attempted to eviscerate his Democratic colleagues. The Republican delegates packed into Madison Square Garden loved it when Miller said, "Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure."

He listed defense programs that, he said, Kerry opposed, and then asked, his voice dripping with anger and contempt, "This is the man who wants to be commander in chief of our U.S. armed forces? U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?"

The former Marine also told the audience and American voters that his party had changed beyond recognition from the one he had been proud to join: "Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked together to ensure that freedom would not falter. But not today. Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator."

He said America must not elect a commander in chief from a party that saw the armed forces as occupiers. The Georgian also praised Bush, openly admiring his Christian faith and adding, "He's the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning. ... I have knocked on the door of this man's soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man."

Perhaps the biggest applause line of the night was when Miller said, "God is not indifferent to America."

Cheney's attacks on Kerry were laced with humor and a touch of sarcasm. He said Kerry's "liveliest disagreement is with himself. His back-and-forth reflects a habit of indecision and sends a message of confusion. ... Senator Kerry says he sees two Americas. It makes the whole thing mutual - America sees two John Kerrys."

But Cheney used most of his speech to praise President Bush's record of accomplishment on tax reduction, education reform, healthcare and especially national security, in which he lauded Bush's toughness in fighting al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

He called Iraq "a gathering threat" and argued that because of the war Saddam Hussein sits in jail and Libya turned its nuclear material over to the U.S. government.

Cheney sought to reassure undecided voters who might be leery about an overextended commitment in Iraq. He told the delegates and the television audience that Bush's goal is to "stop terrorist violence at its source, and to help move the Middle East away from old hatreds and resentments. ... This is not the work of months, but of years -- and keeping these commitments is essential to our future security."

At one point early in the vice president's speech, a demonstrator from the Code Pink women for peace group forced her way to the front of a balcony and started shouting. She was quickly hustled away by security staff.

It was the third time since the previous evening that protesters had managed to get into the auditorium and disrupt proceedings. Last night's disturbance was, however, so swift and slight that Cheney appeared not to notice it.

Kaplan's March 3, 2005, article dealt with William Shakespeare's Coriolanus, but in his discussion of the play, Kaplan managed to insert a gratuitous smear of Kerry and former Vice President Al Gore:

Four centuries ago, William Shakespeare's Coriolanus fared well as a warrior but so poorly as a politician that he was banished from Rome and killed.

"Coriolanus,' one of Shakespeare's most political and least known plays, is timely as ever. Watching the play brings to mind the faults of both former Vice President Gore and Sen. John Kerry. Each did their bit in Vietnam, but, as with Coriolanus, their intellect and patrician air alienated the electorate when they ran for president.

On a separate topic, in an April 6 article, Kaplan described himself as "addicted to war":

In January 1991, the U.S. military started waging the first Gulf War. From the moment my friends and I gathered in a dorm room around a tiny television to watch CNN reporting live from Baghdad, I was addicted to war

Within a week, I covered an entire wall in my dorm room with a collage of magazine photographs of the [Persian Gulf] war. Some students were so alarmed by my obsession and the pictures that they hinted I should remove them. Fifteen years later and more than three years into an altogether different war, I remain equally obsessed about the emotional journeys of soldiers and reporters who witness the raw violence and fear of war up close.

At the start of the first Gulf War, I could have dropped out of college and enlisted to see the war firsthand. But by the time that idea popped into my head, the war had ended and the roaring 1990s had began. But this time, with the help of friends and colleagues, I spent a few weeks in Iraq in 2004 and again in 2005, and got a glimpse of a war that most people would never see.

I doubt I'd go back, but being able to read memoirs of soldiers and journalists is the next best thing to being there.

—S.S.M.