Yesterday, I took John Edwards to task for his promise to appoint Republicans to his cabinet. Some in comments, for whatever reason, doubted the accuracy of this Des Moines Register story I cited, which was also picked up by TPM and Chris Bowers, who wrote:
Earth to Richardson and Edwards: America is voting for Democrats in order to remove Republicans from powerful governmental positions, such as cabinet posts. And putting Republicans in your cabinet would not distinguish you from Bush, whose cabinet has quite a few Republicans. Having Republicans in the cabinet is part of the problem. At TPM Election Central, Eric Kleefeld muses that this pledge by Edwards "could help him appeal to more independent voters." I disagree. Given that Republicans have a favorable rating of 40% or lower in every poll not taken by Fox this year, and that about 30% of the country self-identifies as Republican, it strikes me that bowing to have Republicans in your cabinet is about the best way I can think of to not appeal to independent voters.
As promised, I wrote the reporter who penned the article, Tony Leys. He stands by the story as reported.
I’m not sure why I have to point this out, but just because I think Edwards’ "Republicans in my cabinet" platform is neither politically wise or helpful to him — or to Democrats generally — that in itself doesn’t mean I a) don’t agree with Edwards on a whole host of other issues; b) think that Edwards should be disqualified from the Democratic primary; or c) that Edwards would be a bad President.
If at some point the Des Moines Register posts a correction to the original story, I will post it.
Related posts:
- Donna Edwards, Where Are You?
- Matthew Continetti Sees “Moose Burgers in the White House” Because Palin is More Popular than John Edwards
- Iran: Don’t Lead, Don’t Follow, and Instead Get Out of the Way
- Is Donna Edwards Catching the #Rahmflu?
- Donna Edwards (and others) could learn a thing or two from Jerry Nadler
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
BT!!
Howdy!!!
‘allo..BT!
No doubt one or two of the Republican candidates wants Edwards in their cabinet.
You think? Which ones?
Quel disappointment!
first OT of the thread (sorry)
GWB on teevee right now throwing his intelligence community under the bus – saying that England, Germany, France, and Russia. These countries “understand” that Iran is still scare-worthy, thank you very much.
Furthermore, we must continue our valiant effort to kick the shit out of Iran for having a “covert” nucular weapons program – back in 2003.
So there.
If Edwards is concerned about being surrounded by “yes people,” this little kerfluffle ought to demonstrate that he could probably find a few Democrats willing to tell him on occasion that he’s wrong about something.
For instance, BT, Christy, Jane, and Looseheadprop come to mind, just to name a few.
Mitt! They both have good hair!!
Edwards needs to clarify this. Good that you asked the reporter, and fine, he’s standing by it, but what does Edwards say he “vows” to do this?
Because while I don’t have an issue with him putting a republican in his cabinet, if the person is qualified, I do take issue with him promising to do it, and it’s for the reasons I stated yesterday – it feeds into the right wing framing if inept, weak democrats, and how it is the Daddy party that will protect you.
Somebody go wake MyrtleJune up.
Given the recent example of Time Magazine and its “reporter” “columnist”–or whatever he calls himself–Joe Klein, I’d not only be fact checking with the DMR “reporter” I’d be directly contacting Edwards to ask for his statement.
1. Is this truth or truthiness?
1a. Reporter injecting his spin into discussion?
2. If this is Edwards’ position accurately reported, why?
Words are a slippery business as we’ve learned from WH spinmeisters. We need direct, honest statements accurately reported. Both the politicians and media are under the microscope these days. And well they should be.
I don’t think there’s anything necessarily wrong with a Dem appointing a Republican but I don’t see why it would be necessary. If what he’s looking for is a braod spectrum of views – and I think that’s what he’s saying – there are plenty of pretty conservative people in the Democratic party -despite what Faux News would have you believe. I just don’t see it as helpful to announce during the Dem primary season that you want to appoint Republicans. I like Edwards too, but i dobn’t see what he gained by this. Maybe it’s too many early morning breakfasts in iowa and he just needas a good night’s sleep to get his head together. Besides, not all that many Republicans will wanna be in his cabinet i don’t think.
That’s hilarious.
Do we have to?
‘zactly.
Exactly. Even leaving out the “conservative”/”liberal” labels, half a dozen Democrats can’t agree where to eat lunch.
The only way it could theoretically help him is in a primary State like Iowa or New Hampshire where people can participate in the Caucus/Primary of the OTHER Party…Edwards may theoretically draw off some of the “disenfranchised” Republicans, or “Hillary Haters” itching to spoil here victory.
Personally I can’t see how any “True Republican” would find Edwards acceptable, either. He represents too much a labor unionist position, rather than the “laissez faire” bullying by businessmen that they espouse. Edwards also is for immigration reform and nailing employers for hiring undocumented workers for lower wages, longer hours, or in conditions that are illegal. I suspect most “pissed off” Republicans will stay on the Republican side of the ledger to support Ron Paul. The St. Paulites might also draw off some Democratic supportto the Republican Primaries from other candidates…probably Edwards and Kucinich, but maybe also Dodd and Gravel.
Why in the world would one need to look outside of the Democratic Party for someone willing to disagree?
This is the Democratic Party we’re talkin’ about here, John – we rarely agree about anything.
I suppose the calculus is that some of these statements can bring in more voters than they would lose by turning off other voters.
I tend to consider all Rs as lying craps of shit, but perhaps there are a few who might have some integrity left. But it would be slim pickins, fer sure. Would that statement make me vote for HillGoil? Hardly, as she is already close to the repukes… member Mark Penn?
Speaking of slippery wordsmithing–Team BushCo are the prime example of corrupting the language.
Anytime Bush uses the phrase–and he uses it often–”I fully understand that…” he’s sayin’ I get it and I don’t give a sh*t.
A more corrupt and cynical group of people I’ve never seen in my lifetime nor my reading of history. They learned at the feet of the Medicis, methinks.
Demand better. Be Better.
Still takin’ Edwards ‘08!
Maybe a vision of Bill Cohen just happened to flash across his mind, or he missed the fact that Jim Webb switched.
A more artful way he could have worded it: I plan to include the most qualified people in my Administration that I can find, regardless of race, gender, religion, political party, or any other category that some are using to divide this country.
Second o/t but this one’s *really* good:
Shrub is taking a do-over on his Iran presser in Nebraska. :-(
OTOH -
CNN just did a marhhh-velous take-down of some of his past verbal flubs. Also showed a podium back-shot of yesterday with diagram of reporters (a big “X” over Helen Thomas’ name). May just leave that channel on the rest of the day to catch a rerun.
Pssssst…….pass it on…..
George Bush is afraid of Helen Thomas.
Taylor Marsh takes apart “Lieberman lite” Obama for the same mentality. Here
CNN just did a marhhh-velous take-down of some of his past verbal flubs.
Any mention Cronkite’s op-ed yet? (She asked with baited breath…)
Blue Texan, a fine post and a fine defense of yesterday’s post. Actually, the story was far more widespread than just that one article. As I commented yesterday, USA had an article about this now 87 days ago. Here’s the link:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/p…..9162_x.htm
There were several other articles available to choose from, a simple MSN search reveals.
Also, while I might not object to a Chuck Hagel in the cabinet, or even calling on one of the most Democrat of Republicans, Lincoln Chaffee, I still think this is suicidal strategy in the primary season.
On another topic, I was unable to do the link like I usually do. I can’t believe this is the first time I’ve tried to link in the new application, but I never had this problem before. Anyone know the secret? Can you impart it to me?
I want to hear what Edwards and others have to say about online privacy.
At this pivotal moment the Internet is becoming evermore subjugated to commercial interests of a cartel of domineering big media corporations. The scary Facebook “Beacon” is just one example.
Watch this entertaining and informative video animation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkGmNJWbQaU
-now is the time raise these issues…
For more Visit http://freespeech.org/ourweb
What eCahn said… You should be a consultant to politicians. Good wisdom in that framing.
Ann in AZ,
first type in the text you want to use for your link title, then select it. Then you click on the link button and paste in your url. And voila!
Ha. Thanks. Looking for to this evening’s meetup.
How can he say this with a straight face when Putin is figuratively jumping up and down saying “I told you so.” Apparently they are still following Hitler’s tactics and trying to tell the “big lie”. Do you think a majority of the people are at all convinced? Do they? Do they think this will enable them to attack Iran before Bush leaves office with the full support of the people, or any support? Where do they think they’ll get the army to do it? Will the army support an attack on Iran, or will they have to have a coup just before the next election just so that we don’t end up in WWIII. I might also add, a coup caused the Congress’ refusal to do its job and Impeach the President earlier.
I don’t know if he vowed this. But his statement seems to suggest that Democrats would be a bunch of potted plants who wouldn’t speak up if he was doing something stupid. I think from the debates you can see that there are a heck of a lot of Democrats more than willing to call him out on Bulldada if he appointed them to his Cabinet. He doesn’t need Republicans for THAT!
But I get the feeling that Edwards is awfully full of himself. He reminds me an awful lot of a Southern-Fried Tony Blair. And I get the feeling that he thinks he’s always right. In the NPR debate he constantly cut people off and tried to make people think that everyone running voted for the Iraq resolution and thought that Iran was working on nuclear bombs (Kucinich, Dodd and Biden all protested this as a misrepresentation).
I can’t make that work. When the link box comes up, it won’t let me cut and paste anything into it. Anywhere I go, like to get the URL, it just dings at me, and – no go.
Any idea what I’m doing wrong? (and that’s not an invitation to answer in a real broad sense, *g*)
Hi all
Not all Republicans are poiticians!
I think its unfair to take Edwards to task for this. Back not so long ago Republicans were people too and had views that were worth considering.
we’ve embraced a few here.
Or he was thinking of somebody LIKE COLIN POWELL ;-)
Oh wait, did Colin Powell ever argue with any President he served under?
Hullo! This morning I see a link uptop here to the ever snarkalicious TBogg. FDL is well on the way to becoming my one-stop source for the morning blog-run.
WarOnWarOff @ 25 -
And a very happy birthday to you; love the handle, btw.
Truth to tell, I was so floored that CNN was nailing him, I didn’t take in all the content…don’t think so. Reason I’m gonna leave them running to *really* pay close attention next go-round.
That’s what I always do, and what I’ve done before. It didn’t work. I highlighted USA before I hit link. The box came up to ask me the url, I pasted it in. It did not ask me if I wanted USA to be the link. It just pasted the url into the post. I did the whole procedure again, the same thing happened. Others have had the same problem and I wondered why, but I never had this happen before.
There is no gray area of Conservative Dems and Mod Thugs. This is best illustrated by looking at the “Progressive Punch” voting scores. The worst of the Dem Bush-dogs have scores in the mid-70’s with the exception of Ben Nelson with a score of 50. The Mod Thugs, Specter, Snow, and Collins have scores in the mid 30’s. The rest are mid-teens to John Barrasso’s 1.75. All of the Thugs who would have filled the gap between 36 and 74 have been purged in Thug primaries over the past two decades. The crap by Obama of middle ground and working with Thugs, like his “good friend” Tom Coburn, is just that..crap.
Edwards is doing the political equivalent of Dennis Connor’s 1995 ‘do or die’ America’s Cup qualifier against Mighty Mary:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/f…..nted=print
He’s counting on so-called ‘Good’ Republicans coming over vocally, in droves, once it’s obvious that Bush and Cheney are going down for their malfeasance, to fill the sails of his campaign – it’s a reasonable gambit, given his polling against Hillary.
Good morning, Blue Texan, and thanks.
If you’ll forgive a brief EPU from below for eCAHNomics, I’m pretty sure this is the song she’s remembering. If I’m right, it was written by Sheldon Harnick and made widely popular at the time by the Kingston Trio. It’s entitled The Merry Minuet.
Here’s a Google video rendition.
well fwiw I’m using firefox on windows xp
Cinnamonape, the lede on that Des Moine article said he “vowed” to put republicans in his cabinet – that’s where I got the language from. BT says the reporter is standing by his reporting.
If he didn’t vow it, he should clarify. If he did vow it, shame on him because it was stupid and unnecessary, and he should know better. Framing on this is everything with the RWNM and their feeding of lizard brains. Ecahn has a good frame – the one Edwards used sucks.
Thank you, Waccamaw!!! Uncle Walter certainly is making it a better day than I thought it would be! (My toilet stopped up this morning before I left for work this morning…ugh.)
Finally, some incentive to go to work *g*
I contacted the Edwards campaign with links to yesterdays post as well as the Des Moines Register article, asking for a clarification/explanation. All I received back was a form email referencing some push polls that Politico had run a story on. Generally saying that the personal attacks are out in force.
I emailed back asking again about the Des Moines article and providing a link to it and yesterdays post. No word yet. No reassuring.
I wasn’t an Edwards supporter before, but I like him better than the other “top tier” candidates. This has not helped.
You have to copy your target URL into your browser’s clipboard BEFORE you hit “link.” Then you can put it in with no problem. Once you hit “link,” that little box is the only option you’ve got.
As for changing the text you want to highlight for that link, you can go back into the code and replace your old text with something new in the same spot inside the bracketed “a . . . /a” code.
Whoa, tbogg! I figured the FDL borg would assimilate Digby next.
Awesome. This place is going to be a one stop for all my bloggy needs.
IIRC, Edwards’s campaign manager is Joe Trippi. Wikipedia:
Trippi has never participated in a winning presidential campaign.
IMHO, the Democrats should get rid of all of their former campaign managers. They still have GOP envy, cringe at the word liberal, and want to be seen as “bipartisan.” They represent everything that is going wrong with the Democratic leadership in this congress. And they write the best concessions speeches in the business.
So am I. As I said, I think I’ve linked before with the new app, and it never happened before. I wonder if it’s because I used only 1 capitalized word for the link? Waiting for next time I try to link to see if it happens again.
Finally, some incentive to go to work *g*
It was, it was. Got here before 7 am. ;)
He tried to screw Bill Clinton at every turn; he would have been fired for insubordination if he hadn’t been the Thug hero of Gulf I. IIRC, Powell and Sam Nunn hung bill out to dry with the Gays in the Military flap.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. That was EXACTLY what I was looking for. Although Lehrer’s National Brotherhood Week works too.
well TBogg is a somewhat popular blogger *g*
For years, up through the mid 70’s, the Republican Party could legitimately claim that they were in possession of a larger “talent pool” when it came to filling cabinets with effective administrators. There is no doubt that the Democratic Party has closed that gap.
It was Ronny Raygun and his rabid cult who initiated the Ideological Purity Test for any hires.
Bush/Cheney/Rove elevated this practice to religion; as demonstrated by the ousting of even their own, e.g., Christy Whitman. The US Attorney fiasco would serve as the worst example of loyalty losing out to competence, along with just about every other Executive Branch appointee.
To use poll numbers in an attempt to criticize Edwards for taking a refreshing “anti-Rovian” approach to his talent search is rather specious.
For folks working on links:
When you click the little link icon and paste in the url, it puts the link on the word you have highlighted – it does not ask for the text so you need to type the text first. One thing to watch – after you paste in the url, you need to click the link box on the left where it says “insert” otherwise it cancels. (Some interfaces put “insert” on the right so make sure you are not clicking there out of habit)
[mod note; Also, make sure you don’t have two
http://when pasting in the link URL.]thanks Peterr, but my computer still won’t let me do it. When i go back up to “edit”, to hit ‘paste’, the box just dings at me and won’t let me do it.
No biggie – I couldn’t do it before either.
IMHO, the Democrats should get rid of all of their former campaign managers.
Yep. You hear that, Donna Brazile? Please go away.
IIRC, both Joe Trippi and Mark Penn come from Simom Rosenberg’s shop, the NDN. The NDN was founded by the core of the early Clinton DLC that split off in 1996.
Thank God Shrummy is gone.
I continue to use the < href = a " " > < / a > method to post links and it seems to work okay.
Here’s another article where Edwards suggests he would consider placing Republicans onto his Cabinet
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..=informbox
He apparently pulled out a sheet of paper with some names on it and said “I’m not gonna show it to you, but there are several Republican names on it”.
I have to say this…I could think of 40-50 Democrats that would be better implementing just about ANY Cabinet position better than the BEST Republican. The latter party has just about exhausted any talent and reputation that they once had in running the Economy, the Military, or as Diplomats. I’d keep them miles distant from those positions, as well as Education, Transportation, Trade, the Environment, “Heimat-Sekurity”, Intelligence, Energy, HHS..etc. I can’t think of a single Cabinet level position I’d trust a Republican to run.
Yet Edwards has several on a one page list? I think he’s looking to appear “bipartisan” rather than create the best Cabinet to put this country back on a better path.
I can think of several Republicans Senators (as well as Lieberman and DiFi) that I would consider for Ambassadorial positions…to Turkmenistan, Mongolia, the Central African Republic or the Dominican Republic.
“He stands by the story as reported” doesn’t clarify whether Edwards stood up and volunteered that he would definitely appoint Republicans, or whether he said “sure,” in answer to a question of whether he’d appoint any, which was the only real distinction worth checking with the reporter about. The fact remains that “promise” and “vow” are the reporter’s terms, not a quote, and it would not be uncommon in general for a newspaper to use those terms to refer to either of the above cases.
Ambassador…to the MOON!
c’mon, its not like there aren’t a few decent people who identify as “Republican”
Lincoln Chaffee comes to mind…
and that’s about it for my list :)
Fixed the typo for you. *g*
WOWO, sign HoJo up for that one right now.
Digby would be good..Hopefully the FDL Borg can offer economies of scale..Go Jane!!!
Couldn’t have said it any better. Looking forward to this evening. Any additional pups attending? We can toast Cronkite and National Brotherhood Week. Dang, still no preview.
Chafee’s not a Republican any more. Though for purposes of appearing “bipartisan,” he would probably still count.
Right! Murtha for Secretary of Defense!
Considering what the modern day GOP has become, any repug he appoints would actively work to undermine his administration.
Seems like the attendee list is set for now.
Actually, it’s been a pretty good week. One of the best in a long time. Lots to toast.
The reason that the repubs grew so much was that the aligned with the corporations who had the marketing thing down pat. It was win win for them… they got the marketers on board and they got the cash flowing in because they gave back to corporations – corporate welfare, the mic and so forth.
America is all about corpporations and marketing. The government is only the enabler for business activities.
The dems? Their base was labor… a small piece of the corporate structure.
Repubs first set about to destroy the unions and appeal to the INDIVIDUAL and his NEEDS and DESIRES. Lifestyle free thinkers could then embrace the repub meme… get the gov out of my life and let me do my thing.
The religious right came along for the ride and to further break up the labor and middle class support for dems by appealing to a higher allegiance.. god.
The dems have been seen as obstructionist whiners and haven’t been able to or willing to advance a new vision… socialism brand has been trashed, workers paradise was stomped out… What is their ECONOMIC vision? Tax success? death tax? That’s how the repukes frame the progressive tax system.
OT..I think the Huckster is in for a bad time of it..He and Rudy can cry together: Murray Waas is on the story..Huck is in deep shit.
Waas
As soon as I read your post yesterday I got three new facial tics, felt more were coming and needed an outlet. So I referenced your post and wrote a diary on daily Kos.
As you can see, folks there were not very happy to see my criticism of Edwards on this. No matter.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/4/13404/7810
Perfect!
How many pups are showing their muzzles downtown?
Too old..too corrupt..He usually makes the CREW top 20 most corrupt.
WOWO, sign HoJo up for that one right now.
He might be a better ambassador to the sun. ;)
Bush is a wussy.
Re my last post — I’ve been having problems logging in here lately, so I may not be back if someone posts a reply.
Jesus, Paul.
Thanks for the sinus flush.
One of the problems of lving in the reality-making world is that you come to believe it is so.
Thinking that America is all about marketing has finally sent the Rs into a tailspin. Americans can be marketed but if there’s no there there, they eventually come back to reality. Foreigners are nearly immune to American marketing (ideas, not products), which is why Hughes & Beer had no success with their “hearts & minds” program.
Or we could send him to that alternative universe they think they just found!
We need to hear audio/or see video of the exchange, to clarify things once and for all. The story as framed by the Des Moines Register doesn’t make much sense:
Edwards vowed to include Repugs in his cabinet because he’s looking for the strongest, most capable, most independent-minded people he could find. Meaning: Repugs are the only people who are strongest, most capable, and so on, and so on.
Doesn’t make much sense.
OT..More bad news for Rudy:
TPM
Sargent
Link test
Lincoln Chaffee has left the goopers so he would not count in the quotas
What’s Lincoln Chaffee doing now? (He talk funny.)
Apologies, drive by, Blue Tex, your fine post yesterday sounded like “loyal dissent” to me. Perfectly acceptable for musicians to question what belongs in a specific genre.
Don’t agree. Advertising is HUGE. Everyone is fashioning themselves as some sort of IMAGE they want to project and identity with.
Naomi Klein called it in No Logo
We consume not because we need, but because we desire to “be something” or “express something”. If we can’t “be and express” ourselves we are left behind in the faceless mass>
I am an Ipod, a porche, a DKNY, a Coach Bag, an Italian leather sofa, and Rolex blah blah blah…
From an earlier thread, Siun has asked those having troubles to contact her at
media DOT firedoglake AT gmail DOT com, she’ll help you out.
I was talking about marketing ideas, not products.
Bruce Fein is certainly a repub that could help get the constitution back.
http://www.projo.com/news/cont…..dd3fe.html
chaffee is teaching at Brown and happy not to be a member of the goopers
My candidate is John Edwards. But he’s wearing a wing collar, top hat and “Kick Me” sign on his back. No doubt, a truly bipartisan administration would be good for America; Kennedy had nominal opponents in his inner circle, too. But he lived in an age where professional respect and the national interest could sometimes trump party affiliation. The GOP of Tom DeLay squashes such thinking like a bug.
Consequently, the “bipartisanship” Edwards may have in mind is an extinct species whose DNA is preserved in a few think tanks and universities (and in the memories and hopes of Main Street Americans). But it no longer exist in the political jungle. (Lieberman? Jello Jay? Please.) This jungle is filled with mutant hyperpartisans, raised on the Island of Dr. Rove.
Edwards’ appeal has the right heart, but woefully misplaced political and practical judgment. (The Demos Syndrome.) He’s still my candidate, but he has some ’splaining to do.
To restate, SanderO, one of the big R mistakes was to think they could market ideas the same way you can market products. You know, statements like ’you don’t introduce a new product in the summer.’
They had a big initial success in this country, which led them to even bigger follies. But once Americans figured out there was no truth in advertising, they tuned out.
I am an Ipod
But not an entree!
(In the thread below I’d mentioned that I searched for “Cronkite” in today’s NY Times and…found him there.)
Ok, thanks. Yesterday was almost impossible, but today it seems fine so far.
I’ve been looking for those dog noses with the elastic band for the meetup.
See ya this evening. I’ll be the guy in bluejeans. hehe
I love Murray Waas. From the end of the story, about Huckabee:
“What was he gonna say? That he believes these women made up their stories? That women lie when they say they are raped?”
To people who think God says women must obey men, it’s never rape.
Jane: Love the video of the day on the right hand column on the firedoglake homepage. Thanks Howie!
Hey. We Are Highly Serious People. No Costumes.
Maybe muzzles would be appropriate though.
4-5 of us.
This story may be getting some traction.
MyDD
My 104 was supposed to be a response to you, but somehow the reply button didn’t work that time. Seems OK now after a hard refresh.
bjnts
check out first pic here
http://www.fordogtrainer.com/
Someone should ask the Huckster what he thinks about:”teaching women how to cook, manage time, and “joyfully submit to their husbands.”
ccmonitor
If we had to wear those we’d just drink with a straw.
Fair enough, BlueTex.
I don’t think there’s any more confusion about what Edwards said. And I’m damn sure not confused about why he said it.
As I said on the original thread, he’s saddling up to join Hillary’s triangulation posse.
When I saw him speak in Georgetown, S.C. about 3 months ago, he was all over Iraq.
Now, he speaks that word in passing, and only grudgingly. If he thinks that he, and we, can win in the general election doing that, he’s in for a rude awakening.
This is not rocket science. NO democratic candidate needs to, or should, suck up to the republicans. All we have to do win this election in a cakewalk; a REAL cakewalk, is find a candidate who is as deeply outraged about what george bush and his coterie petro-fascists have done to us, as we are.
After 7 years of bullshit and koolaid, the voters are ready for some real leadership, and for some real anger at what the republicans have dragged us into. “Bipartisanship” is WAAAAY down on their “to do” list for any democrat, and if John Edwards is too stupid to realize this, then he’s not the candidate we need, to run these people back into the political wilderness for a decade or three.
Hey folks! Ya don’t have to just talk about Tbogg being on the masthead; ya can over and welcome him and leave a comment as your Lake ID is transferable.
But I already got the first zed in his new digs so…
Then there’s Huckster’s problem with all those “love offerings” he solicited from the mass Moonie-type marriages…
new Jane thread – and I still can’t link….
Who’s Tbogg? What’s this person’s background? I need all bio and pro info before I can welcome this person to FDL *g*
blue texan, please forgive this ot but this is something to brighten the day…taken from the lead at think progress right now…anyone here ever think they would be agreeing with pat buchanin?
Scarborough has been throwing bush under the administration for a while now but I love when a republican does it…check this out;
there’s a video too, go watch it
here
man that is tons of fun
I think you should read this article from CNN on John Edwards. This is coverage of the same speech he gave in Waterloo, IA. The Des Moines Register article highlighted one response and did not even state what the question was. IT was a reporter surmizing.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITI…..o.running/
I hope the link works. Thanks.
Hey folks, if Edwards actually said this in his speech it CAN BE CONFIRMED.
Apparently there was a video taken at the event at Hawkeye Community College.
http://www.iowaindependent.com…..aryId=1568
The above cuts the video off during Edwards speech but she might have the rest of the footage where he discusses the Cabinet issue.
Lynda Waddington, who took the video, can be contacted at the following email address lynda [AMPERSAND] essentialestrogen dot com
The do market “ideas”.
Look at how the war was marketed. All the catch phrases, tag lines on the teevee scrolls, Shock and Awe and islamofascists are examples of “idea marketing”.
Heck we speak and think in tag lines. That’s what corporations and PR did to our minds.
Who doesn’t have a PR person or team when they are pushing something?
Link?
SanderO’s analysis is dead on. From 1980 on the Republicans employed automobile ad campaign tactics — and the money it cost — to destroy the Democratic brand. It worked better than even they expected. Gingrich and Atwater took it to new heights by adding the Southern racist touch. It’s hard to find any political move as successful in the past 50 years. Of course, because was all advertising, we got policies like the American clunkers the ads were originally designed to sell.
That well is dry. The interet arrived just in time to prevent that regime from sealing its control in concrete, so that it would last even when the branding began to fail.
Ann in AZ, well, I’ve finally flipped my lid. I have so many windows open I sometimes don’t know what I read, where. I was talking about this piece but it’s not what steve was talking about.
My apologies.
You bet he is afraid of Helen. Her absence in the room was a mighty shout throughout the entire Q&A session. No one in that room was as present as Helen. Now that, King Georgie, is real power.
Steve- I’m very ambivalent about both Obama’s explanation, and the value of this as a strategy.
One would think that ANY pro-Choice candidate would have more than enough Statements and votes that he could be targeted on those issues by the Right Wing in any case. As pointed out, Obama was in a safe district. But he argues that he did this (with NOW’s consent) in order to “save himself” from challenges on his votes on controversial issues. Wouldn’t we want a candidate to be willing to stand up on those issues rather than some “stealth candidate” who never actually had to defend those positions?
And why should some Pro-Choice voters have to be taken out of contention for “higher office” while others are “protected”. Whatever happened to “voting ones conscience” and defending ones positions with ones constituents?
This all seems so Machiavellian and manipulative of the voters. “That’s not how the game is played”…but doesn’t Obama keep asserting that he’s no the typical politico?
I saw Edwards in person in Burlington, Iowa on Monday night AFTER he had appeared in Waterloo, the venue that was the subject of the Des Moines Register article.
He was asked about who he would appoint to his cabinet and Edwards said, “That’s a great question.” Edwards DID then say that he may appoint Republicans. He said he wanted the best person for the job, no matter what their party. He didn’t want “yes men/women,” yadda yadda yadda. He didn’t PROMISE to appoint Republicans. But basically, what he said following that is exactly what was stated in the article.
I’m a little disturbed by the Register article. Edwards was in Burlington hours after Waterloo, but “someone” asked him who he would appoint to his cabinet.
Since all of the articles on his Iowa visits on Monday sound like he gave the same speech at all of them, I’m somewhat suspicious that the questioner in Burlington was a plant. And I’m an Edwards supporter who committed Monday night to caucusing for him.
I don’t think there’s any doubt he spoke those words.
They were in quotes in Leys’ original article. Was he lying, or did he accidentally misquote Edwards? Seems highly unlikely.
It BlueTex lying about contacting Leys, and having him stand by his article? I doubt that, too.
As someone who’s been outspokenly FOR Edwards, I emailed his campaign site yesterday and asked them for an explanation, telling them that the speech was becoming an issue for them on the internet. No answer, so far.
As far as I’m concerned, Edwards said that he WOULD put repubs in his cabinet. Leys did not quote words to that effect but he stated that Edwards “vowed” to do it.
Edwards’ reply confirmed that, to me.
I hope what happened was a brainfart, on the part of Edwards. I hope it’s not part of a “triangulation” move to the right, seeking conservative votes. But this election, my cyinicism knows no bounds. Let us not forget that Edwards, himself, voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq. His apologies for that have been numerous, and welcome, but if any democrat thinks we can win this election without hammering bush and the GOP for Iraq, then they haven’t got the political acumen of a pissant.
Let’s watch him carefully, to see if he moves toward Hillary.
I would really like to hear him say that he will reject any offer of the VP position on the ticket, no matter who it comes from. The veep slot has never been a good springboard to the white house. This election, with Iraq looming as the warpimps political bequeathement to the democrats, it’s a graveyard headstone for a vice-president.
Edwards’ blanket refusal of it would be a sign of character and intelligence, on his part. It would end speculation that he’s sucking up to Hillary and running for second spot on her ticket.
Right now, IMHO, he badly needs that.
BTW, I don’t care if the question about putting republicans in his cabinet came from a plant. It’s a good question, and he gave the wrong answer. Before I send him anymore money, I’d like to see some more tough questions, planted or not.
Did he ever.
I’ve seen the video; there’s nothing in there relevant to the issue of his statement about putting republicans into his cabinet.
It’s about 2/3rds intro from the congressman endorsing him, and about 1/3rd Edwards making the standard political speech, which is fine by me, except, he only mentions the word “Iraq” once, and that only in passing.
And that is very Clintonesque. I’m starting to think that he has no more enthusiasm for raising Iraq as an issue, than does Hillary. And if that is true then that reluctance will cost us dearly in the election.
Iraq is GOING to be the main issue of the campaign. ANY democrat who soft pedals that issue will be doing nothing but shaving points for bush and the republicans. One of the characteristics of this election is going to be that the candidates will be having gut-checks for character and honesty, early and often.
The republicans are, predictably, coming up very short of the mark.
It’s my feeling that an ass of american voters are waiting for a democrat to “tell it like it is” on Iraq, and on the rest of the degradation of our country that bush and his administration have engineered.
John Edwards needs to get his shit together soon, and to stop giving Hillary-style ass-rubs to republicans, or he’ll lose the opportunity to do that telling.
It is fine with me if he drafted the ex-treasury guy that was CEO of Alcoa…he was a very bright honest guy
scratch that i remember some talk of him privatising SS….yup
nevvvvvvvvvvvvvver mind
“He was a very bright, honest guy…”
Thanks, Sadly. In the runup to the clusterfuck, did he stand up and warn that bush was dragging us into a Mesopotamian tarpit?
About the only republican I recall doing that was Anthony Zinni, the former Commandant of the USMC.
Now, Zinni has looked at the debacle, for 5 years, and the last I heard, he
was of the “We can’t leave; it’ll be worse than staying” school of thought.
My 2c, that aint good enough for SecDef.
Right you are, Sadly; “Hands off SS!” is a HELL of a red line for me, and for most other dems, too. :o)
BTW, here’s Clinton, getting caught with her hand in the “I’ve got it won” bullshit vat:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/clinton_ministers
I think Edwards is doing a great job in the campaign. He has been outspent 200 to 1 and the national media has all but ignored him and yet he is still in a three-way tie in Iowa. I think Edwards vision for America is resonating and he is outworking his rivals. The fact that he said he would have Republicans in his adminstration is fine with me because I trust Edwards to have good people in his administration whether they are Democrats, Independents or Republicans. Perhaps he will have Bruce Fein (conservative Republican who called for Bush & Cheney’s impeachment) serve in the Justice Dept. to help restore our Constitution.
I was locked out of this topic this morning before work. I’m back now. :-)
Blue Texan. That was a lame follow up. Did you ask the reporter the quote where John Edwards said “I promise” or “I vow”? Or even the exact quote prior to the paragraph that starts with “Here’s why:…”? I mean he’s got the quote of that paragraph so how doesn’t he have the quote of the paragraph before? I’m gonna guess you didn’t as him that. I have no reason to doubt the reporter’s integrity. It’s just not a very well written actual newspaper story, but I don’t doubt his integrity that his perception was that John Edwards “vowed” or “promised” anything. That’s his perception and his use of words is without the exact quote. That’s all.
I’m going to also guess you did ask for confirmation of the your very own spin into John Edwards’ saying “I need republican’s in my cabinet to keep me from screwing up”. Have you ever been to the Grand Canyon? Well, that about the distance between what the reporter “reported” and what your take-away was. I know you’re just salivating at getting to break John Edwards’ Howard Dean moment or even Kerry’s Swiftboat event or maybe the Monica moment….. all non-events until people like you give them legs. I’m sure the ad clickers were very happy :-)
Now, as for your claiming you went after him for saying he’d put republicans in his cabinet….. well, okay. That was valid since a widely circulated AP story on Sept. 9th, but that’s not what you did. That’s where John Edwards said he’d consider everyone, regardless of party (or gender or race or…. whatever that silly little equal rights federal law is) and solely based on merit. Oh. Now if he had any other answer you’d have gone after him on that and heavens if he didn’t answer at all. So he said he wouldn’t discriminate….. how unAmerican can he beeeeeee? :D :D
How many republicans can there be in this country who can claim competence and could qualify by that standard? You really seem give the pubbies MUCH more credit than they deserve. MUCH more.
And you lack journalistic integrity which kinda just renders FDL a little lower than many of the other posters here deserve. That’s sad. Six months ago we had a place to go where journalisitic integrity ruled. Miss that place.
Good for all the other commenters who called you on this “fine” piece of writing….. and the facts they pointed out to you. Good to see that. They rock. :-)
Hey, Blue Texan I’ll be waiting for your “I endorse Hillary (4more years, yay)” post. Its only obvious. You’re not very good at the manuvering of people, are you. LOLOLOL
Good Luck driving those ad clicks here, BT. Great job!!! :D
I concede that Myrtle June has a point, in her question of:
“You have the quote for Edwards response to either a question from someone else, or he’s responding to his own statement, with the “…and here’s why…” paragraph. Why can’t Leys, or BlueTex, or SOMEONE who was there, including the person who made the 9 minute video clip, state flatly, and put into quote, Edwards words that he WOULD put republicans in his cabinet.”
I’m not trying to play both sides of this issue, I just want the truth, and to that end, Myrtle, if Edwards DID make a straight statement that he would put republicans into his cabinet, and there are people there who heard him say it, and say so, themselves, will that be enough for you to say that he made a stupid mistake, or are you OK with his putting republicans into his cabinet?
I think it’s a fair question to ask. :o)