Basically, there’s nothing new in the Iowa article regarding his earlier statement. Now IF he actually said “vow” and “promise” yesterday still cannot be confirmed. The first paragraph “Here’s why…” is out of context because we don’t, and looks like we won’t, KNOW what he was responding to. What’s the actual quote before that sentence? We don’t know. I’ll be needing that before I can full on condemn him. The reporter should be able to provide that quote and when it was said.

The newspaper article itself is all over the map and unclear if the first part is background or actually was said the 3rd. We have a widely circulated AP article where he said he’d consider ALL based on “competence”….. including republicans. Now, BT spins it to mean JE “NEEDS Republicans” to keep him from “screwing up” and that JE said that. I don’t know by what filter he could read the article and distill that from it. I completly doubt John Edwards said anything like “I need Republicans because I’m so fucking stupid they’re the only ones to keep me from screwing up” as BT says. No. Didn’t happen.

The story has been out there for 87 days now, widely circulated and only when JE gets bunched up with the other in the polls does it get spun around and actually believed. Well, ok. I say, if that’s allllllll you go BT, then go sit down with annie, billo, rush, et al. and if you’ve got something real…. bring it.

You can believe what you want and take action based on a poorly sourced, poorly substantiated newspaper report and a questionable blogger who spun it into something it was not.

I read just fine. :-)

The Des Moines Register staff reporter, Tony Leys, yesterday wrote, as his lead sentence in his article:

“John Edwards vowed Monday to include republicans in his cabinet if he’s elected president.”

Not BlueTex; TONY LEYS, wrote that.

Edwards followed that with:

“Here’s why; because I’m looking for the strongest, most capable, most
independent-minded people I can find. I want people around me who will say: “You were wrong about this, and you can do grave damage if you do it. Mr. President, you need to change your mind.” He said. “Because I’m not perfect. I’m capable of making mistakes.”

Now, if that isn’t John Edwards saying that he needs some repubs in his cabinet to keep him from screwing up, then Rush Limbaugh is fucking Jane Fonda.

BlueTex said: “This reeks of the Stockholm Syndrome.” I agree.

He also asked are there not enough honest democrats who would tell Edwards if he was about to screw the pooch? Which is a rather relevant question.

This is nothing less than John Edwards saddling up to join Hillary’s triangulation posse. He’s saying the same thing that she’s been saying, which is:

“I’ll gain more political benefits from sucking up to the people who’ve dragged us into the shitmire that I will lose political benefits from the people who’ve been at the core of my campaign and whom have been some of my staunchest supporters.”

It was every bit as unconscionable and every bit as politically stupid as Hillary’s referring to Colin Powell as “a distinguished american”.

Only, as I said, Hillary was at least honest in her attempt to run HER bullshit.

Edwards is all “I have a little list; that never will be missed…”

and he won’t give us the names of those republicans, whom he has somehow divined to be “strong, capable, and independent-minded”.

If I were standing beside Edwards when he so-described those anonymous gentlemen, I think it would be an eminently fair question to have asked him where they have been hiding for the past 5 years. (No smileface bitter enough…for that one…)

Do their track records, individually or collectively, include anything about their warning george bush that HE was about to bunghole the rabid Rottweiller? Because I would think that THAT would be a bottom-line requirement for Edwards’ including them in his cabinet.

And, for example, there was one (1) republican senator (whose name I don’t recall) who had the courage and the intelligence (which John Edwards, at that time, did NOT have!) to vote against authorizing george bush to pull the trigger on Iraq.

I think there are a lot of democrats who don’t understand what is going to happen in this election. One of the two major parties is going to come out of it mortally wounded. The “winners” are going to have the white house, and almost certainly, the Senate, and probably, the House, too.

They will be able to fill the vacancies coming up as the Supreme Court ages.

Unfortunately, there is too much of the same kind of “bi-partisanship” which John Edwards so foolishly demonstrated two days ago in Iowa, to force bush’s hand on ending our part in his clusterfuck, so that the denouement of the bloody soap opera will unspinnably be laid on bush’s and the GOP’s doorstep.

Underneath their “stay the course” idiocy, the republicans are shitting their political pants. They are quietly asking the democratic candidates:

“How many lashes are you going to give us in the general election? We can stand a few, but if you want gobbets of flesh flying and if you want to go for the whole enchilada, then we’ll fight to the last congressional seat. (Only, they won’t; they’ll cave, if we have a candidate who has the moxie, and the moral rectitude to hold them accountable for all they’ve done.)

But two days ago, John Edwards signalled them that HIS cat-of-nine-tails, just like Hillary’s, will be made of velour, and if they’ll just let him slip in the back door of the white house, he will wield it like a three year old child, instead of a hearty and pissed off bosun.

Sad.

Sure. I know snark. I know it well and I appreciate it. That was not snark. It was utter nonsense. How many people read the headline only especially with the new format? How many people repeated this on their blog or feed? Just the headline? Its not even in the same universe as what John Edwards said or is about…. there’s no source.

Sorry, that’s just ridiculous on many levels. The idea that an Edwards administration can only avoid serious policy mistakes if it contains Republicans is, on its face, totally absurd. Does Edwards really think he can’t find a handful of strong, smart, capable Democrats who disagree with him on stuff and won’t hesitate to tell him so? Really? – BT

Not snark. That’s a full on fabrication of anything that was said. I’m shocked. We get a REAL Democrat and this is what we do to them? He’s the second most PROGRESSIVE candidate and we’re going to do a takedown on him? An undeserved takedown? No. You bet I’m gonna take it to them. Wow, no wonder we lose elections. That is not snark.

And if I seem rather pissy about it. Well, its because I am pissy about the state of our country and hellish admin for the last 7 years and I’m willing to fiiiiiiiiight for something better. We’re better than this. John Edwards is the second most PROGRESSIVE candidate, and THE most progressive that can win by being an actual Democrat. Smearing John Edwards is not going help Hillary win, its going to help us all lose.

Shorter MJ: Not snark. Yes, pissy. Fiiiiiiiight. BT – show your work.

No really, I did . . .

1) Who are you? No really, who ARE you? Where’d you come from with no FDL intro that I’ve seen?

2) Where’s yer attribution that Edwards said what you say he said . . . or meant.

I haven’t read comments above, so you may have already ’splained my questions . . . but just in case.

‘Splain them now if ya would, or let me know ya did above. . . cuz other sites are callin you ‘fulla it’ for what you’ve posted (MY inuendo) . . . and you SHOULD have yer day and due. *G*

Afterall, TRex spoke his mind in here, OFTEN, with cloying clarity and sweetness, now that I think about it . . . but he did it with attribution most of the time, even in his most HEATED rages . . know what I mean? But he’s gone, and yer, well . . . yer HERE . . . and he ain’t.

*SWEETLYSMILES*

Who da phook ARE ya, BT? A Little Intro, perhaps? I mean, it’s not like the other blogs celebrated yer opening or gave ya any free press . . . and I’m a lil behind . . . no time to scroll back a few days.

N good luck, btw . . . *G*

-The Dem brand is much more popular than the Gooper brand by the stat listed (14%)…

-Bubba let his dumb self get slapped around so badly that when he had to find a new SecDef, he bowed to the Goopers and picked… a Gooper – Cohen…

-BT says this towards the end:

This just reeks of 1990s/DLC Stockholm Syndrome. I’m really over Democrats who say we need Big Grownup Republicans to save us from irresponsible flaky selves. It’s bad for the Democratic brand. It’s bad politics. Can you imagine Rudy or Willard or Thompson making such a pledge? I can’t.

I like Edwards, and I’m not trying to single him out. Bill Richardson did the same thing (see same article).

-Finally, there was more than a hint of attitude in the piece… we commonly refer to it as snark here. And expressing revulsion at the thought of appointing a Gooper to a cabinet post isn’t exactly out of the mainstream here, either.

Edwards starts speaking about 6 minutes. Unless he jumped up, grabbed the mic from Bruce Braley and started speaking this insane business on how he “neeeeeds Republicans” to keep him from “screwing up” then your entire premise of your post reeks. He didn’t say that or ever infer that. Period.

Here’s the tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIJ15FPciy0

And such wonderful fodder for the concern trolls.

I still learn something new every time I read FDL.

You old doggies all know how intolerant I am of Republican creeps and posers, but they aren’t all creeps.

Some of them are humans, too.

And they represent about 30% of the population.

That is an awfully big pool of people to exclude just because some of them are intolerable jerks. Some of the smartest people I know are the Republicans who DID NOT vote for Bush, and if you think it takes courage for us progressives to defy the Bush/Cheney bots here or anywhere for that matter, imagine what those poor souls suffered when they defied their own party.

Course, there’s always Democrats like Hoyer and Lieberman and Feinstien for those cabinet positions.

C’mon people, get serious.

Edwards wants to consider cabinet members on “competence” …… and that pretty much leave out repubicans.

Sending new “Twister” mat to Blue Texan for Christmas. Geeeeze.

the DesMoines Register story is a throwback to the September 9 story. Until there is a more definitive source for what Edwards said this week, I’ll assume this is just a September 9 rehash. The biggest problem I have with Edwards currently is his focus on slamming Hillary. To me it just makes Hillary look more and more like the nominee.

Edwards needs to say something like, “There are Republicans still on my list, and when I meet an intelligent, capable, experienced, honest, thoughtful, balanced, sincere Republican, I’ll consider them, I won’t rule them out strictly on the basis of their being Republican. But it’s way too early to mention names, Republican or Democrat.”

So Edward’s promises to appoint Republicans (plural) into his cabinet for the great advice he’ll get.

So far as is known, Edwards promised nuttin’. All that has been established is that he has a list of possible cabinet members and that some of them are Repubs. We know nothing about that list. We don’t know, for example, if any of the repubs have ever held elective office–or ANY office before.

Anything else appears to be folks putting words in the guy’s mouth.