Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Edwards is the logical choice

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:34 PM
Original message
Why Edwards is the logical choice
He is the only candidate on both sides of the aisle that is NOT A CAREER POLITICIAN, all the rest have made their careers in politics. Edwards, imho, saw a need to change the way government does business and decided he should try, because no one else was doing it.

He is well respected in this field, a total success. He seems to be doing this for America, not his ego. This is not a do or die to his career, and he has no plans to become a lobbyist.

He is a shake up, wake up for the Democratic party and for America. He is what the founding fathers wanted to represent us, an average citizen who does his part to help his country.

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good point...
Career politicians are a HUGE part of the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pauldg0 Donating Member (608 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
34. A good money manager too!!
Go John Edwards.

Edwards 08
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mother earth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. Agree 100%!
There is no one else more transparent in who he will represent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. Because --
a man who has been a US Senator, A VP candidate and now a Presidential candidate could never be considered a career politician.

okay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. not a career politician?
a man with a Senate career who ran for VP and is now trying to run again for the Top Spot? How is that not a career politician?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogmarch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Edwards was a one-term senator
and ran for president twice and was Kerry's running mate once.

Edwards's career has been as an attorney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Over a third of his career --
from 1998 until present has been as a politician.

To me that says career politician.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #8
40. Wrong. He was a one-term Senator from 1998-2004. He hasn't held office since.
That's 6 years. That sure doesn't spell "career politician" to me.

He spent over 20 years as a successful trial lawyer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #40
53. now add on running for VPOTUS and running for POTUS
to me that spells career politician.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #53
69. running for political office is not serving as or being a politician.
John Kerry is a "career politician". Ted Kennedy is a "career politician". John Edwards doesn't even come close to being a "career politician".

I could run for office three times in the next 6 years and lose each time. After 40 years as an attorney, would that make me a "career politician" too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #69
71. Yes.
It would indicate to me that you have changed careers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #71
103. Even though I never served a day in any office as a politician that makes me a career poitician?
Wow. Just friggin' Wow.

By that leap of twisted logic you might just as well say that since I painted houses during summers while in college, and now, if after practicing law for over 40 years I retired from that career and as a favor to my neighbor offered to paint his house, I am therefore a "career house painter".

Uh, huh...

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #103
107. wow just wow yourself.
Has he done anything but be involved in politics for the last decade?

That sure sound like a career to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #107
115. So.....any thing substantive to say?
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 02:49 PM by mrbluto
...or are you just gonna float vague crap and meaningless negative terms all day.

Would you rather have an amateur politician win?

I actually might be with you on that one.

But can that amateur get elected?

Look, in medicine there are many in vitro (test tube) solutions to challenges, but we need an n vivio (living/working) solution to the Bush regime.

It's a shame that many good, perhaps optimal, candidates simply aren't viable given the current media environment - but how are we going to change that if we don't at least staunch the damage.

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Don't let th worst use the perfect as weapon against the good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #115
116. I'm just correcting the notion --
--that Edward's isn't a career politician. He is.

I also have zero problems with electing a career politician.

The whole subject is about as stupid as I've ever seen.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #116
120. We....agree?
Wait a minute!

We agree that tossing about the term "career politician" is meaningless and distracting?

Hmmm. You don't support the guy I favor, yet we agree.

...

We must be part of some CABAL we haven't been informed of.

Or we've accidentally wandered onto some forum other than Democratic Underground where idle contention and distracting banter often seems to rule discussion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #120
126. Yup.
I'll go further.

I respect your choice of Edwards as a candidate.

I find it hysterical that here at DU, if I say I don't support Edwards as my candidate --that this is somehow "bashing" Edwards.

I don't trust him. That's my opinion.

Will I vote for him if he's the Democratic nominee? --u betcha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #116
122. You're playing a very dishonest game.
You know perfectly well that the label you're tossing around as an insult to John Edwards, "career politician" has in common parlance, a negative, pejorative connotation.

Then when the obvious is pointed out to you that the common meaning of "career politician" is a description of someone who has spent the bulk of his/her adult life in politics, i.e., holding political office, like Kerry or Kennedy, you change the meaning of the phrase by dissecting it to mean something else.

You say his current "career" is as a "politician", which is true, and then add "career" to "politician" to come up with a completely different meaning for the phrase "career politician".

That is just as fundamentally dishonest as playing the straw man game.

I am just one of several posters here who have pointed out the true facts about Edwards' lifetime work to you, and yet you continue to persist in your nonsense by using the above phony baloney logic over and over again.

What a friggin' waste of time. Don't you have anything more constructive to do with yourself???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #122
125. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #107
124. You know perfectly well he did.
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 03:15 PM by Seabiscuit
He was not involved in politics for over 3 years between 2004 and 2007.

Wow. Just double wow.

What a steaming pile you shovel around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #124
127. Yes.
I'm sure he didn't do a darned thing between 2004 and 2007 to raise money for his campaign.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #127
146. sure he did.
He formed his "poverty center."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #103
131. You blew it by
by helping your neighbor! :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IA_Seth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #69
96. Only because he didn't win!
That's silly. If I opened a plumbing business that sucked and failed without ever doing any work, you'd still call me a plumber wouldn't ya? Edwards is the epitome of politician, changing as necessary to get support.

I dont see how anyone is enamored with this guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #96
104. Your hypo is defective.
If you opened a plumbing business (office, office phone, business card, advertising) and didn't get any work as a plumber, then NO, you're NOT a plumber. Edwards ran for President but never became President. After one term in the Senate. That's it. Now he's running for President again and by some twisted illogic you call him a "career politician".

Sorry, I can't help you out of the corner you painted yourself into. You seem to want to remain there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #104
108. Fine
He's a professional CANDIDATE

feel better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IA_Seth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #104
111. So running for President isn't politics?
If what he was doing was politics, he is a politician.

Jeebus, I don't care if you refuse to say it, the guy is a politician and has been since he began to run for Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #111
123. You're playing the same dishonest game as maddijoan.
See post #122 above.

What a waste of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #40
87. How many years was Obama a politician?
Including his years in the State Senate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. The bulk of his career was as a plaintiff's Attorney and he was considered the best in the nation. N...
one was as good as John Edwards.Lawyers came from around the nation to sit in and watch his closing arguments.Insurance companies settled when they heard his name.John only entered into politics on the death of his son.He had promised to make the world a better place. One term in the Senate and a run at VP doesn't make one a career politician.And he doesn't take lobbyists money.Unlike some, the man cannot be bought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogmarch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Super post, saracat! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
30. Thanks. Great Post Saracat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynthia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #7
31. you are an articulate one, saracat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:46 AM
Response to Reply #7
41. nice post saracat
hey lefty! This is one of the most awesome short posts I've read - you really outdid yourself here. This is a great way to describe him in brief words.

KUDOS!

Exactly, the man is anything but a 'career politician'. The person saying he's a career politician made me laugh, he got into politics 10 years ago, and he's mid 50's, how that's career politician is beyond me! :)~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:09 AM
Response to Reply #4
42. Thank you for the reality check.
"I'm not a career politician" is such a campaign cliche.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
6. Wonderfully put Zalinda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
9. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
10. He's a career losing candidate for the White House. n/t
That's all he's been doing for years now. Edwards is so consumed by lust for more power that he couldn't even hold back long enough to serve out the Senate term he was elected to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Munch Donating Member (55 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Kettle and Pot
Edwards is so consumed by lust for more power that he couldn't even hold back long enough to serve out the Senate term he was elected to.

And Barack Obama?

I live in Illinois, and in a sense Obama's presidential run began the day he was elected U.S. Senator (Nov 2, 2004). Or maybe that's hindsight. The man has missed close to 80 percent of Senate votes since September 2007. It's like having one employee on the job while paying for two.

It's ALL about the lust for power. Why else did HRC move to New York?

Stripped of power and prestige, who in their right mind would want to be POTUS.

Andrea
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #13
23. Welcome to DU, Andrea
They all must want it badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Munch Donating Member (55 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #23
38. Well...
you know what they say:

It's the ultimate aphrodisiac. Small wonder then...

Thanks for the welcome! I've been lurking around. Interesting board here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #13
89. I'll agree with Post N. 10 - and I don't have a candidate for you
to yell about pot and kettle to.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
119. Someone....
Who realized that it might be a job you can't justify leaving to those who covet (and abuse) it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #10
32. Lust for more power?
What power has he had? What in the world are you talking about? I don't think Edwards is in this for power. I think he is in this because he can't stand to watch America being run by the CEOs of the big corporations and their lobbyists. As an attorney in products liability law (his area toward the end of his legal career), you read case after case of terrible conduct by corporations. I believe that Edwards wants to change the imbalance of power that now exists between corporate leadership and ordinary people. Have you seen that (now older) film, The Corporation or read Naomi Klein's book, The Shock Doctrine? Read that book and then visit Edwards' website and think about what he is saying in the light of what you learn from that book, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #10
70. Lust for power?
Let's apply a bit of a filter here, ok?

filter #1 - People who are serious contenders for the presidency

filter #2 - persons with an above average "Lust for Power" (LFP)

filter #3 - Persons with a remarkable "LFP"

filter #4 - Persons known for their "LFP"

filter #5 - Persons who are the epitome of having a "LFP"


Let's run the US population through these filters and see what you get.

Does Edwards make it through #1?

I think so. For the sake argument let's agree on that.

OK, let's do the "LFP" filters.

Filter #2: By definition 50% of people make it through - Edwards amongst them. (IMHO)

Filter #3: He is an attorney and has run for office, we wouldn't be talking about him if he wasn't trying to change things. I'd actually have to wonder about any politician who didn't make it past #3. Someone who made it past Filter #2 and not #3 would basically be waiting to get drafted.

Filter #4: When someone says "Lusts for power" does Edwards immediately come to mind?

Not in my opinion.

If you were sitting amongst friends and made a game of listing people who "Lust for Power" how long before any of your friends mentioned Edwards? I'd venture it would have to be a marathon session before you got around to considering Edwards. I personally don't thing he'd make the list.

Filter #5: If you think he'd make it through #5 I'd have to question either your sincerity, your sanity, or your affiliations to have a chance of understanding where you're coming from on this one.

And since you assert that "Edwards is consumed by his lust for power" that's pretty much what I'm going to do.

Do you really mean what you say?

if so then...

...are you sane?

if so then...

...what political party do you support?

If you're a Democrat then I'd like to inform you that statements like yours are useless at best and, at worst, just the sort of crap that enables the old guard spine-less Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

If you belong to some other party then I'd like to inform you that the current monkey-wrenching duplicity of sock-puppeting such bullcrap in opponent's forums is one of the reasons why we don't have much of a useful dialog in this country.

Useful dialog is what democracy is about.

If you're sabotaging your opponent's deliberations then you don't believe in Democracy.

I, as an American Citizen, want my opponent's best argument.

Why? Because if I'm right then everyone will see it tested now - and trust it later. If I'm wrong then I want to know now. Then I can either accept the alternatives or work to find them.

So my remaining question is:

What do you want? (what was the objective of your statement?)

(if you are insane then I suggest you seek professional psychiatric advice.)







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #70
151. You can disagree with my observation but I don't see it as
so far out of the universe that you'd question the sanity of it right from the start. If you watch interviews of Edwards, he's usually
asked about being a phony and his mudslinging. I'm far from the only one who sees defects in Edwards' character. Desperation is a catalyst to loss of honesty. Dishonesty turns desire to lust. I could write a list of things Edwards has been dishonest about if you'd like.

I can't read minds so I do my best to guess based on behavior I can observe. The more a person sacrifices to get something, the more I assume the person wanted his objective. If I see a man who won't get up off the couch to get a beer from the refrigerator I can guess that he doesn't want the beer much (or he's very lazy). If a man walks 60 miles to get a beer I conclude he want the beer badly. I'd also take a chance on that person being an alcoholic. Dishonesty, desperation, alcoholism are all things that fit together.

Another sign of craving is impatience.

Edwards went after the presidency long before he'd earned it or even had a decent chance at getting it. He ran in the primary and didn't win. As soon as Edwards gave up on winning the primary, he went after the vice presidency. As soon as he lost the vice presidency, Edwards went back after the presidency. Ronald Reagan ran for president four times, once against an incumbent of his own party. Reagan was the all time rabid appetite for the presidency champion. Edwards is up there though. Edwards walked the 60 miles.

Combine the intense desire to win and the dishonesty and I call that lust. Call the funny farm on me if you must.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #151
162. Useless definitions
So, given your explanation of "Lust for Power", who is running that doesn't have a lust for power? Has anyone ever run that escapes your definition?

btw: you make the offer: "I could write a list of things Edwards has been dishonest about if you'd like."

I'd like.

Please post that list - it will help me make an informed decision.

Once I consider your list I'll also consider what I know of the other candidates and come to a decision.

Perhaps you will have persuded me that Edwards is not the overall best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #162
163. Here's a list
All candidates desire power or they wouldn't be running. Edwards desires it to the greatest excess.

EXAMPLES OF EDWARDS LIES:

1. Edwards said Hillary screened audiences and questions at her campaign stops. She doesn't.

2. Edwards said he would take away health care from members of Congress. He can't.

3. Edwards then said he'd take the health care away by shaming Congress into voting out their health care. That wouldn't be allowed under the 27th amendment and Edwards knows it.

4. Edwards then accused Hillary of defending the rights of Congress to health care over the rights of Americans without health care. Hillary did no such thing. She just pointed out that Edwards was passing off a phony promise.

5. Edwards said Hillary wanted to keep combat troops in Iraq but that he didn't. It turned out Edwards wants to keep combat troops there too - just moving their bases over the boarder but keeping the troops in country to fight Al Qaeda.

6. Edwards' plan to fight a war in Iraq with troops stationed in Kuwait is a farce. Its either logistically impossible or so hard on the troops that the country would never put up with it. Edwards came up with the plan not for a policy advantage, but the political advantage of being able to say he's for slightly more withdrawal than Hillary.

7. Edwards accused Hillary of mudslinging for challenging Obama's claim that he had foreign policy experience by virtue of living abroad as a child. That was a legitimate campaign issue for both Obama and Hillary to talk about. Edwards defined mudslinging as unjust accusations. That describes what Edwards does, not what Hillary said about Obama..

8. Edwards accused Hillary of laughing about NAFTA when in fact she laughed about the way Ross Perot acted when he debated Al Gore.

9. Edwards says Hillary defends a corrupt system. Hillary does not. Hillary said she'd like public financing and reform, but unlike Edwards and previous promisers of instant reforms, like McCain/Feingold or term limits, Hillary said that there are serious limits to what a reformer can do. The first amendment protects lobbying activity. Hillary was honest. Edwards is not.

10. Edwards circulated a video about Hillary Clinton's response to a question about driver's licenses for illegal aliens. The video proclaimed "It was a yes or no question." Edwards was asked the same question, yes or no, in the next debate and couldn't respond with a simple yes or no.

11. Edwards circulated a video that claimed Hillary still hadn't clarified her response to the driver's license question a week later. Hillary had in fact clarified her response the day after it was given.

12. Edwards falsely said Hillary did not support universal health insurance earlier this year.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-01-07 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #163
164. Nice List; Not convincing.
First off you don't seem to trust me to interpret the list for myself. Right at the beginning you assert that " Edwards desires it to the greatest excess."

Second off in nearly every element you indicate how you'd like me to believe.

What is it with the Hillary, Hilary, Hilary?

I asked you about John Edwards.

The bias way in which you've constructed this list makes it nearly useless, except as a starting point for research.

There's no direct quotes, only your biased para phrasing.

There's not much reason for me to have faith in your presentation when you use such loaded terms and vagueness.

Perhaps you could produce a list with less bias and more facts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
11. What's his career then? Ambulance chaser?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Here's a good article from 2001
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. It says Gore almost chose Edwards (instead of Lieberman)...
Edited on Tue Nov-27-07 08:11 PM by polichick
D'OH! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eowyn_of_rohan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #17
59. Would REALLY be nice if Gore would endorse Edwards
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 09:45 AM by eowyn_of_rohan
Since he has chosen (we assume) not to run himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zazzle Donating Member (220 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #59
158. That would be awesome!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Have you ever needed a lawyer?
I can tell you, there have been a couple of times in my life I needed the services of a lawyer. When I did, I wanted the smartest, toughest, meanest son of a bitch I could get.

I'd be proud to have Edwards represent me. In a courtroom, or as my President.

If you're not angry, you're not paying attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Is it true that Edwards handled that awful case involving...
...a little girl who got attached to a suction drain at the bottom of a pool?

(Please don't find the link ~ that case made me cry for days.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Yes, he did ... all of the cases
he took were to help those who had been wronged/injured by gross negligence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Again,
In Pakistan, who did they go after first? The lawyers.

Trust me, this guy is a fighter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. I'd want him in my corner -
But, I'll settle for POTUS. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #25
79. This could be a great tag line for an ad!
Edwards has represented X, Y, & Z clients

(as we pan and dolly-out on photos of clients with text explaining the ghist of thier case.)

He was their Lawyer....

For us?

We'll settle for nothing less than president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #22
77. That's GREAT! The Campaign should use that line!
No kidding!

What a way to make it clear what tyranny hates!

(deliberation, accountability, fairness, etc.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. Lawyers are paid to argue for their clients.
When I needed a lawyer I got the toughest, meanest SOB I could find, and when I turned out our case wasn't a high value case, he pawned us off on a junior partner, hosing our case.

The moral of the story is that lawyers only care about dollars. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. I'm sorry you had a bad
experience - too bad you lump them all together, Edwards was never like that:

After law school, he clerked for a Federal judge and in 1978 became an associate at the Nashville law firm of Dearborn & Ewing, doing primarily trial work, defending a Nashville bank and other corporate clients. The Edwards family returned to North Carolina in 1981, settling in the capital of Raleigh where he joined the firm of Tharrington, Smith & Hargrove.<12>

In 1984 Edwards was assigned to a perceived unwinnable medical malpractice lawsuit; the firm had only accepted it as a favor to an attorney and state senator who did not want to keep it. Nevertheless, Edwards won a $3.7 million verdict on behalf of his client, who suffered permanent brain and nerve damage after a doctor prescribed a drug overdose of anti-alcoholism drug Antabuse during alcohol aversion therapy.<13> In other cases, Edwards sued the American Red Cross three times, alleging transmission of AIDS through tainted blood products, resulting in a confidential settlement each time, and defended a North Carolina newspaper against a libel charge.<12>

In 1985, Edwards represented a five-year-old child born with cerebral palsy whose doctor did not choose to perform an immediate Caesarian delivery when a fetal monitor showed she was in distress. Edwards won a $6.5 million verdict for his client, but five weeks later, the presiding judge sustained the verdict but overturned the award on grounds that it was "excessive" and that it appeared "to have been given under the influence of passion and prejudice," adding that in his opinion "the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict." He offered the plaintiffs half of the jury's award, but the child's family appealed the case and settled for $4.25 million.<12> Winning this case established the North Carolina precedent of physician and hospital liability for failing to determine if the patient understood risks of a particular procedure.<13>

After this trial, Edwards gained national attention as a plaintiff's lawyer. He filed at least twenty similar lawsuits in the years following and achieved verdicts and settlements of more than $60 million for his clients. His fee, as is customary in "contingency" cases, was one-third of the settlement plus expenses. These successful lawsuits were followed by similar ones across the country. When asked about an increase in Caesarean deliveries nationwide, perhaps to avoid similar medical malpractice lawsuits, Edwards said, "The question is, would you rather have cases where that happens instead of having cases where you don't intervene and a child either becomes disabled for life or dies in utero?"<12>

In 1993, Edwards began his own firm in Raleigh (now known as Kirby & Holt) with a friend, David Kirby. He became known as the top plaintiffs' attorney in North Carolina.<12> The biggest case of his legal career was a 1997 product liability lawsuit against Sta-Rite, the manufacturer of a defective pool drain cover. The case involved a three-year-old girl<14> who was disemboweled by the suction power of the pool drain pump when she sat on an open pool drain whose protective cover other children at the pool had removed, after the swim club had failed to install the cover properly. Despite 12 prior suits with similar claims, Sta-Rite continued to make and sell drain covers lacking warnings. Sta-Rite protested that an additional warning would have made no difference because the pool owners already knew the importance of keeping the cover secured.

In his closing arguments, Edwards spoke to the jury for an hour and a half and referenced his son, Wade, who had been killed shortly before testimony began. Mark Dayton, editor of North Carolina Lawyers Weekly, would later call it "the most impressive legal performance I have ever seen."<15> The jury awarded the family $25 million, the largest personal injury award in North Carolina history. The company settled for the $25 million while the jury was deliberating additional punitive damages, rather than risk losing an appeal. For their part in this case, Edwards and law partner David Kirby earned the Association of Trial Lawyers of America's national award for public service.<13> The family said that they hired Edwards over other attorneys because he alone had offered to accept a smaller percentage as fee unless the award was unexpectedly high, while all of the other lawyers they spoke with said they required the full one-third fee. The size of the jury award was unprecedented, and Edwards did receive the standard one-third plus expenses fee typical of contingency cases. The family was so impressed with his intelligence and commitment<12> that they volunteered for his Senate campaign the next year.

After Edwards won a large verdict against a trucking company whose worker had been involved in a fatal accident, the North Carolina legislature passed a law prohibiting such awards unless the employee's actions had been specifically sanctioned by the company.<12>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards#Legal_career


I think another moral is Judge Not, least you be Judged.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Please read the article I posted to you earlier....
Edwards is very ethical and compassionate. Also, details of his Senate campaign against a popular incumbent who tried to destroy him by attacking lawyers....and how it backfired.

It's a good read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #24
82. I wish I had your superpowers.
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 12:09 PM by mrbluto
You know, the power to meet with one representative of a group and know about all of them? And then you make policy that impacts tens of millions based on that knowledge?

I thought Republicans had cornered the market on that power.

Remember? with the welfare queen? or was it people from the north east?

Anyway.

That seems to be one of the powers they like to exercise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #11
33. Here are some examples of his lawsuits:
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 12:32 AM by JDPriestly
http://news.findlaw.com/newsmakers/john.edwards.html#cases

5-year-old girl was disemboweled, but survived, after being caught and suctioned by wading pool's defective drain. Despite 12 prior suits with similar claims, manufacturer continued to make and sell drain covers lacking warnings.

850-lb. box delivered to attorney's home, fell on him breaking his back, causing paraplegia, and confinement to wheelchair.

33-year-old died during rescue attempt after head-on pickup–tractor-trailer collision. Settlement included worker's comp claim.

Worker fractured both ankles, jaw, and skull after fall from 24-foot scaffold in defendant's plywood plant.

14-year-old girl rendered quadriplegic from neck injury resulting from improperly supervised dive into shallow end of defendants' pool.

Application of abdominal pressure and delay in performing c-section caused brain damage to infant and resulted in child having cerebral palsy and spastic quadriplegia. Verdict set record for malpractice award.

Infant born with cerebral palsy after breech birth via vaginal delivery, rather than cesarean. Established North Carolina precedent of physician and hospital liability for failing to determine if patient understood risks of particular procedure.

There are more med malpractice cases

Suit against trucking company by estate of man killed by company driver, arguing that company acted recklessly in paying drivers by the mile, thereby encouraging unsafe conduct.

Head-on car-truck collision injured 5 in car, including 7-year-old who suffered fractured skull and massive brain injury

Part-time employee suffered severe brain damage after vehicle collided with defendant's semi-truck.

Real power hungry guy, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #11
74. Useful dialog.
Did you statement have any purpose? (other than to disparage Edwards)

Do you think what you said was useful to any sort of deliberations or dialog the rest of us might want to be engaged in?

Or are you like a child in a high-chair, spouting whatever reactive ideation that bubbles out of you and all over your keyboard only to sully our screens with your efforts to satisfy your urge of the moment?

I had intended to end this message by saying "I'd sincerely like to know.", but you know what? Based on what you've said my interest is mild, and that's putting it generously.

Hey - I have an idea! (a wish actually)

You surprise me and respond rationally.

It'd be a nice change from the over-masticated cud about lawyers you just tossed into this forum.

We'll work on "Usefully" another day, o.k?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #74
76. What constitutes a rational response?
Saying that there's something about Edwards that has been bugging me for years, and I have finally articulated what it is? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #76
83. Perhaps you'd agree with that "first, kill all the lawyers" quote.
I do.

Because in context it makes sense.

Shakespeare has a character say something along the lines of "How can you destroy civilization?"

And the next line is "First: Kill all the lawyers."

You got a bee in yer bonnet about Edwards?

Who the fuck cares?

I might if you have any evidence or analysis that might persuade me he's not a good choice for president.

Until then you might as well be blurting out "I like pudding" at random moments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #83
112. Um,
But I really do like pudding, is that still ok?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #112
118. Heck the phrase "might as well" probably constitutes consent.
But I should mention IANAL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #118
121. lol
Thank for the laugh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
90. Im surprised that you are using GOP smear tactics
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JMDEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #90
105. I bet ALL of the Edwards bashers are Hillary supporters. NT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #105
106. no, a lot is coming from DK supporters
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 02:17 PM by LSK
But the ambulance chaser claim is coming right from the GOP playbook.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #105
109. Then you would lose.
I'm a Kucinich supporter.

And I don't trust Edwards at all.

I think he's all talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #109
113. Coming from a guy that doesn't back up what he's saying...
...I'll take it for what it's worth.

Hey, I just had an idea - maybe we should get Nader to run again!

A Nader candidacy - just what the country needs now.

Naw. Let's be realistic.

Kucinich should offer Nader the VP spot on his ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiejoan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #113
117. What "guy"?
are we talking about here?

If you mean me --I'm not a guy --and I have backed up what I've said.

You trust Edwards. Okay.

Which Edwards do you trust?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balantz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
14. Excellent point!
I would add that the underlying "career" in his life is to uphold justice for the common, everyday American citizen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. That does seem to be a lifelong theme...
And, though I've had my doubts about his sincerity, I've come to believe that both Edwards are doing this for the right reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
16. I think you all know where I stand.

My pick in 08!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-27-07 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
28. there's nothing wrong with being a carrer politician...
...if you're honest and progressive. kucinich is, and has the best record and policies.

no sale.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
29. "Average citizen"?
The only reason he still isn't a politician is that he would have lost his senate seat (so I am told by several of his constituents here on DU) if he had run again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #29
36. really, who?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #36
143. According to the OP...Edwards was an average citizen.
"He is what the founding fathers wanted to represent us, an average citizen who does his part to help his country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last_texas_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-01-07 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #29
166. I've heard this claim made on DU
by a number of posters who aren't fans of Edwards, but I can't recall anyone ever providing any non-anecdotal evidence for their contention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:40 AM
Response to Original message
35. Edwards '08 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberty Belle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
37. He's headed up a poverty center, helped organize unions,
sued corporations that hurt consumers, and turned down corporate funding/accepted public funding for his campaign.

I trust Edwards to look after the public good, not the special interests--because he's already done so throughout his life.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:47 AM
Response to Reply #37
45. and recently worked for a hedge fund for a large amount
of dough. A hedge fund that foreclosed on poor people in NOLA. He says he didn't know, and I believe him, but the question is should he have known? I think the answer is yes. Hedge Funds are hardly known for being strong ethical players.

Oh and he's never taken even on pro bono case in his entire career.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:24 AM
Response to Original message
39. not for me.
And not being a career politician is hardly a qualification. Frankly, there are many career politicians I admire: Kennedy, Leahy, Bernie, Waxman, Kucinich, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Think82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:19 AM
Response to Original message
43. If you have been a good politician and demonstrated good judgment, it should not matter
"Politican" has become a dirty word, with good reason, but let's not forget that politicians, when they do make wise decisions (which is becoming more of a rarity these days), do more good than any "outsider" could. My candidate is Joe Biden. He is the second poorest Senator. He owns NO stocks or bonds. He commutes from his home in Delawre to work in washington, 250 miles, EVERY DAY FOR 35 YEARS. He has consistently pushed against conventional wisdom for 35 years and has succeeded in bringing about radical change IN the system.(The Crime Bill, the Violence Against Women Act, ending the genocide in The Balkans, his Iraq federalism plan, whcih, after 2 years of fighting, was passed with 75 votes in the Senate.) It is wrong to assume that the every candidate we elect becomes a corrupt person because they have had to deal with Washington battles.

I am not trying to bash Edwards but rather the thin argument put forward by the OP.

Two cents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #43
44. I'll join you on that. I really like Biden
If not for his IWR vote, I'd probably be supporting him. And he's been in the Senate the same length of time as my senior Senator, Pat Leahy. Like Biden, Leahy hasn't profited from his career. He's the 5th least wealthy Senator and owns no stocks or bonds either. I must confess to like Leahy's voting record a lot more than Biden's though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmosh42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 05:57 AM
Response to Original message
46. Not the 'corporate' candidate!
While the corporations are pouring money into the campaigns of Clinton and Obama, like they were Republicans, Edwards isn't taking any. That's the big difference to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stump Donating Member (808 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:19 AM
Response to Original message
47. I'm liking Edwards more and more...
But I'm still undecided. K&R for an informative thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zazzle Donating Member (220 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #47
159. Me too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
remember2000forever Donating Member (594 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
48. Edwards Is The ONLY Choice!
Wake up America. The reason John Edwards is not getting any Media coverage is because the Repugs do not want him as a Presidential Candidate! They would much rather have a First time go with a Woman Or Black Democratic Candidate. There is a HUGE Middle America out there. Unfortunately, I think, America is not quite ready for this kind of change in this kind of Political climate. Carl Rove is snickering. Can't anyone else hear it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #48
50. bullshit. he's hardly the ONLY choice
I won't vote for someone with 6 years filled with many lousy conservative votes. At least Obama was against the war from the beginning. Edwards? The biggest dem war backer in the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
remember2000forever Donating Member (594 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #50
52. Repeat After Me: Elect-ability .......
The most important thing in the next Presidential Race is to vote out the current ruling party. IF, or votes will count this time, it has to be a complete, overwhelming victory. We can't have the petty prejudices of this great country polarizing the election. As I said before, I want a candidate that the Repugs will fear. They are salivating and hoping one of the current top 2 will get the Democratic Nomination and propel this prophecy to a lost Democratic election. Just my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #52
60. It is your opinion and I for one totally agree with it
Edwards can win in red areas. He is very smart and works hard for common people. I think he could pick up some of the rural areas HC and BO could not.

January 4th, (day after IA primary) everything will change because JE will win Iowa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #52
72. Exact;u/
You just issued a string of unsupported opinions. They carry zero weight with anyone who can think critically.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #52
84. Important factor, but.....
...is there many things that piss you off more than dealing with people who think things are already settled in their favor before the contest is done?

As right as you might be it can't help to moosh it in people's faces.

Let's operate in a way that leaves room for everyone in the party to get behind the nominee. (whoever it winds up being)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #50
97. Biggest? Based on what? Numbers, give me numbers!
....and even then I'd have to ask what you think of the fact that he admitted that he wished he had voted differently?

This is a case where the aphorism "It takes a big man to admit he's made a mistake." actually isn't an empty cliche.

Look at Bush. The only thing he's ever sorry about is that he hasn't yet persuaded you he's correct. Luckily (for him) it doesn't keep him up at night. Unluckily for us he has signing statements and a raft of other tools to obviate our input.

Hillary isn't about to offer up a mea culpa on her war votes - because she's vulnerable on the "can a woman handle the military?" issue. I personally think she could be just fine on that task. What worries me is that she could easily get painted into some corner (like Thatcher into the Falklands) and have to act militarily for unsound reasons. Too weak to risk looking weak.

Don't have an opinion one way or another about Obama on this one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninga Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
49. We need a President who has had practical, real life experience, fighting, debating, listening
and planning strategy. In today's world, those are tremendous skills to have, let alone real life experience applying those skills.

In my mind, John Edwards fills the bill beautifully.


:hi:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
51. We can't have government without politicians. To say they're bad is an unhealthy prejudice.
We can't have government without politicians. To say they are are inherently objectionable is a a most unhealthy prejudice against a necessary segment of our society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. I'm not saying they are bad
I'm saying they need a wake up call. Most politicians seem to get tunnel vision when they get to DC. They go along to get along. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we the people were upper most in their minds, instead of how are they going to get the money to get re-elected. Edwards wants public financing for elections. He wants paper ballots. All the things we have been screaming for, he wants.

I think DC has become too polite, and the dems who are really working for us, get walked all over. I think we need some one in there who isn't afraid to ruffle some feathers. We elect a progressive rep and he gets shut down by the leaders of the house, if he wants to stay in politics, he shuts up and votes the way they want him to vote.

No, I want someone who looks at a budget like we do, not like it's a never ending credit card. I want someone who isn't on vacation for half of his term (which probably has been a good thing with Bush). I want someone who thinks that the working person is the back bone of this society and should be treated like an equal, rather than a serf. I want someone who thinks medical care is a right rather than a privilege. I want someone who knows that education is the answer to freedom, and not just here but around the world. I want someone who learns from his mistakes. In short, I want someone who seems to be on a quest to help us, the little people live life a little easier, even if we never get above our "station".

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:41 AM
Response to Original message
54. Edwards is an "average citizen"?
This is why he's the logical choice?

Because he's an "average citizen"? Because he's not a career politician?

If Edwards is an average citizen, then why aren't all of us driving around in lamborghinis, sleeping in castles, looking at our Rolexes, and getting $400 haircuts?

No offense, people, but this place has flipped off its rocker!

:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
56. Edwards makes the most sense to me. But anyone that makes sense
these days are put on the back burner and told to shut up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #56
67. Seems making sense threatens the status quo too much. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlertLurker Donating Member (877 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
57. "He is well respected in this field, a total success."
What field? The field of lawyers working for Hedge Fund Management Firms (whose employees pour $150,000 into your Presidential Campaign) for $475,000 per year, or the field of $16 million investors in sub-prime mortgage corporations that recently forclosed on 107 homes in Iowa and 34 in New Orleans?

Surely it CAN'T be BOTH?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #57
94. Can you back up what you're saying?
After all you happen to live in a country that rolled into a region and caused 100s of thousands of civilian (Iraqi) fatalities, spent 100s of billions of dollars, and lost 3000+ American soldiers deaths.

Are you responsible for that?

Well maybe not. Perhaps it's not fair to make such an association.

How about anything any company or person you've worked with? (IBM once helped Nazi Germany, perhaps you worked for IBM) Has anyone you know done something with which we can tag you using "guilt by association"?

Seriously, if you have something on Edwards other than vague allusions and weak associations, then please let me know. I'd like to make an informed choice.

Do you think there is anything Karl Rove held back when Edwards was on the Kerry ticket? After all, Rove was such a model of restraint and discretion during that campaign.

What do you know that Rove didn't?

That you didn't include more information in your post makes me wonder what your objective is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlertLurker Donating Member (877 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #94
147. Of course.
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 08:08 PM by AlertLurker
Here's your info. Knock yourself out. The WaPo article has more info than the others, the blog is a pretty good summary of the whole issue.

http://busmovie.typepad.com/ideoblog/2007/08/john-edwards-co.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118728685546999884.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051002277.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/09/27/subprime-lenders-linked-t_n_66115.html


If you happened to glance at my avatar, you might realize that I do not actually "happen to live in a country that rolled into a region and caused 100s of thousands of civilian (Iraqi) fatalities, spent 100s of billions of dollars, and lost 3000+ American soldiers deaths."

You might want to find out at least one thing about someone before attacking them, you know? Here's some juicy tidbits:

I am a farm wife, in Rural Southern Ontario. I have worked here (and at a local co-op) almost my entire life. I work at a food bank, too, but that's just volunteer - through the Kinsmen. My real name is xxxxxx xxxx (xxxxxx - long, stupid story my mother likes to tell at family gatherings). I highly doubt that any of our corn, alfalfa, carrots or turnips ever found their way into Nazi hands, but I'll ask my mother. I would ask my father, who lived on the farm from the time he emigrated to Canada from Germany in 1937, but he is buried in Beit Shemesh (1991), along with two of my older brothers (1982). He was a sneaky old bastard, though, so you just never know...

I have no idea of what KKKarl knows about Edwards, but, since Edwards' hypocrisy regarding his investments came to light only over the past three months, it's a pretty simple guess why it wasn't used against him during the last election cycle.

I didn't include more information because the issue is somewhat of a horse that has been beaten to death already, in other posts.

Oh ya....one more thing:

Bite me.

On edit - removed name.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUlover2909 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
58. John Edwards is that kook that talks to dead folks, right?
I love him! He is doing a great and wonderful service to all us folks that loves talkin to the corpses in the ground.

just kiddin

John Edwards rocks and he would make an excellent PotUS, southern drawl and all. He's the cat's meow baby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
surfermaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #58
129. He is going to win
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-01-07 03:24 AM
Response to Reply #58
165. Don't laugh about the name. There are no doubt morons out
there who'll see his name on the ballot and think they're voting for the "crossed over" guy. Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
61. He would landslide for us.
And we would greatly expand our hold on Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
62. I wouldn't mind voting for Edwards.
I might do... depending on how things are going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katadin706 Donating Member (19 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
63. What's Not to Like . . .
Three votes:

For the Bankruptcy Bill
For the Patriot Act
For the War

And this url: http://jre-whatsnottolike.com/category/senate/banking-committee/

I will never vote Edwards. He presents like a progressive -- and votes like a Republican.

Kucinich walks the talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #63
66. I ask you then,
If it's Edwards in the GE, who will you support?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #63
91. he wasnt in the Senate when the Bankruptcy bill passed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katadin706 Donating Member (19 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #91
114. From Talking Point Memo, Guest Blogger, John Edwards . . .
Guest Blogger: John Edwards

This morning Elizabeth Warren and her students invited me to say a few words about the bankruptcy reform bill. I'm grateful for the opportunity.

I'm now spending a lot of my time tackling the challenges of poverty, but I learned a lot about bankruptcy on the campaign trail last year. I saw how many good families end up broke and poor, and
how they need the safety net of a fair bankruptcy law if they're going to get back on their feet.

Like a lot of Democrats, I voted for a bankruptcy reform bill before. I can't say it more simply than this: I was wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
focusfan Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
64. I like alot of John Edwards ads that he has out there.
I just hope he gets nominated to run for president
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AzDar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
65. He's our best hope....
Go, Johnny, Go!!:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
68. Great post Zalinda
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 11:26 AM by MissDeeds
Edwards is the best choice. None of the candidates is perfect or without fault, but he admits errors and learns from them. The last thing we need is another president who will not acknowledge ever having made a mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stop Cornyn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
73. Thanks for keeping it positive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meowomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
75. And let's not forget his beautiful wife, Elizabeth
She would be such a blessing to the white house. Intelligence, grace, humility and a generous loving spirit. Quite the opposite of the barbie doll plastic Laura with her frozen botox face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #75
78. .

Had to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #78
85. Have to say...
...they look like real people!

Sappy and saccharine to say it, but it surprised me.

Those look like genuine smiles.

Like people you might know.

Even the people over their left should adds to the authenticity - just the sort of random, non-optimal happenstance you see in many family photos.

Thank god that lady doesn't have red-eye; republicans who saw the picture would talk of nothing else on Fox news for a week.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
80. Support your candidate...I'll support mine
I'm not going to say why I disagree that Edwards is the "logical" choice.

Support him, do grassroots work for him and I wish you and all those who consider him their number one choice the best of luck.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #80
86. Thank you!
I applaud your reply and your open mind! When I hear from people like you it makes me proud my daughter (all of 17) is a big Obama supporter. I think what he is doing for the youth of America is wonderful.

I wish you only the best luck for your candidate!


Two great choices!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
81. There's something about him that I just don't trust
call it a gut feeling. I feel the same way about Hillary. Neither of them seem genuine to me. They seem like typical politicians who will say anything whether they personally believe it or not. No I don't have any specifics, it's just a feeling I have.

All the others do seem genuinely more honest and I make no secret of the fact that I'm backing Joe Biden, a career Senator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #81
95. well...guess I don't want to argue with your gut.
That would be messy.

I don't agree though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #95
98. His presidential platform is so different from his Senate career
He's running a very populist anti-poverty pro-labor campaign. Where was this before? Or maybe this doesn't fly too well in North Carolina. Besides, he knew he wasn't running for re-election, but he had a chance to do lots of good, but he didn't. Sure, he apologized for several of his votes, but I want someone who does it right the first time.

He and Hillary want mandatory health insurance, which I have mixed feelings about. I also have problems with their "third way new democrat coalition".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #95
102. I met him once
when he was campaigning for president back in 2004. I heard him speak at a union hall in Rochester, NY. Something didn't feel right about his speech. I felt like he didn't really believe the things he was saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrbluto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #102
110. What can I say?
You know when I felt o.k. about Bill Clinton?

when I saw a picture of him as a kid in his band uniform.

Looking at that I knew that somewhere somehow at one point he had a normal life as a normal kid. Bill wasn't perfect, he had baggage, but I sensed it would be ok and that maybe it would take a bit of a trickster to thwart the republicans. Meanwhile Bush Sr. couldn't guess the price of a gallon of milk.

I just had a similar moment for Edwards looking at a picture of him hugging his wife at a party that was posted in this thread.

I looked at that picture with it's imperfections and saw that it was a real hug and that they were really having fun and really cared for each other. Whatever else, whatever dealing, so long as there's that bit of realness we're better off. Obama might have this realness, but I haven't seen it yet. And I say with real sympathy "Poor Hilary" when I think of how beleaguered and beaten down her hopes must have been over the course of Bill's administration. I can't blame her if we never see the real Hillary give her experience over that eight years, she's bounced back, but I want a real president, and I don't think she'll feel free to be real.

This time it will take a heap of lawyering and, not just mere repair, but punitive retribution, to roll back republican encroachments.

Seems to me that Edwards is the guy.

Take a look at the picture I mentioned and see if you can't feel it'll be ok.

Not perfect.

Not optimal.

but ok.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #81
100. Biden is pretty upfront
and there are things I like and don't like. Unfortunately I can understand his confidence in those things
which are on a different tack than Hillary. I think I understand Edwards too. Like JFK(well unlike JFK he was not so much bored as limited in his senatorial role) the Senate role was not a good fit for his natural populist passions. I think he was hamstrung between a tough seat to hold in red territory and the
ambitions he had(personal and visionary) and the bill of goods proffered by traditional liberals and the DLC. Despite being an enthusiast for the team in a disastrous iraq strategy vis a vis Bush he was squeezed out because the establishment didn't trust hi.

They didn't trust him because of his law record against big corporations and the fear he would too powerfully popular as a president. Hence Lieberman as Veep. Hence his sidelining in 2004. The record speaks of conflict and optimistic attempts to stand by the tattered party flag- as if it was not tattered. "Typical politician" is meaningless except that skilled pols seem to be quite rare in the media/money conferred advantages these days.

I'm all for instincts. I mistrust mine or anyone's projections of wishes not borne out by evidence. So underneath my enthusiasm for him as the clearest progressive standard bearer after DK, I would say I would trust his naivete or guile over that peculiar to the others. They all have it big time. I trust it to be more progressive and positive and for change once empowered and more capable of being empowered and empowering the left than any of the others. Than any of the others beside DK would be willing to go.

But Biden reminds us, amid the flaws of less experienced candidates of the solid qualities that go beyond bases and groups and even party. I think he injects foundational respect for seasoned leadership even if you don't like all of the package. That is something being lost in the alleged top two campaigns. Somehow Edwards gets stuck in the middle or edged out. Too Southern? Too centrist despite his lifelong commitments? Too branded by his Senate votes? Part of the reason is various prejudices and part is the reason DK is marginalized with institutional prejudice- for having a progressive platform against corporate rule.

Biden and Dodd restore my faith in the quality of the party candidates as a whole at a time when the politically awkward Obama/Clinton contest turns the whole picture kind of sour. Thanks to his strong presentation now I hope the selections will be tipped more in favor of people's justified instincts and loyalties to what is right. A great candidate. on one survey it seemed I was very close to Dodd, but that was no surprise either because of his astute experienced position on legislative issues. How trivial the "experience" brouhaha is by comparison with these solid liberal crafters of legislation. definitely they have one up on all of the "top tier" candidates and in solid campaigning as well. Richardson could be as easily in those rising fortunes for the same reasons.

In a very stupid analogy it kind of reminds me of the Winter Olympics(Finland???) where all the top male skaters got psyched and bungled the opening and then outshone the youngsters in the final competition despite having no chance at all for a medal. How odd that the veterans fared so badly in the early campaign stages but are hitting their stride now. They may not be awarded votes but they should be given greater respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aintitfunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
88. I agree wholeheartedly (eom)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Plucketeer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
92. THIS!!!
Is what I like to hear! There are a couple other hopefuls that I'd feel alright about, but JE is THE ONE who's NOT "Career" - IS in the running - and speaks for the minions such as myself.
Oh, I FULLY understand the two prevailing juggernauts and how their monetary mountains hold them up for the best viewing! But isn't that EXACTLY the problem we've had thru decades of monarchical escapades??? Enough of the "Royals" passing the keys to OUR treasury back and forth and watching out for the BIG guy instead of my ilk.

I can smell phony before my nose EVER gets a wiff, and JE carries NONE of that offensive scent! I know I'm not alone in wishing as hard as I've EVER wished - for someone to be my representative as much as I want John Edwards to be.

It's gag-some to hear the stumbling rhetoric of Chimpy:dunce: selling his fantasy plan of "spreading :nuke: Democracy" while instituting Fascism here at home. Full well realizing the futility of such a gesture - I still can't help but scream at my TV screen when Crawford, Texas' village idiot defiles it: :mad: "Hey ass hat! I'd like to see some Democracy spawned, right here at home!":mad:

I know the wheels of this nation turn slowly, but John's promise to threaten DC's premium health care if they can't extend it to the rest of us is ALL the proof I need that this guy's the REAL DEAL!
John Edwards gets in the oval office and gives it the ol' college try to change the tone of our federal government and I'll PERSONALLY pay some barber to cut 40 heads of hair of folks that HAVE TO work 2 or more jobs to make ends meet. OR... I'll donate an amount, in food, equivalent to that many haircuts, to our local food bank. (Not to include the $200 bucks worth I'm carrying to said food bank this week. ;-) )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hanging On Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
93. I met him at a campaign event in S.C. -
and was very favorably impressed. He was very nice and took time with people. I was already inclined to vote for him, but meeting him confirmed that decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #93
99. My feelings too.
I believe any doubter should see him speak or meet him, then decide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RiverStone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
101. Edwards has been my 3rd choice...
Behind Gore and Kucinich all along.

He would be a compromise vote to a degree, though one I can and would support enthusiastically.

I think he could win in every region of the country and out of the top tier (per the M$M) is far more electable then Hillary.

He also closely parallels Al Gore's global warming initiatives and has received environmental endorsements which acknowledge that.

I wish him the BEST!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #101
133. Since Gore has announced his new job...
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 05:17 PM by polichick
...and Kucinich may lose some support due to the Ron Paul thing, Edwards could gain a lot of votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
128. K for Edwards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
130. If Dennis keeps talking shit re the Nazi, I'm throwing my vote to John.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #130
132. imo Kucinich needs to address this...
There are probably a lot of voters who feel the way you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #132
134. k for Edwards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #132
135. He has, there's a post on it now.
So sad to see he would even consider it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #135
136. I really wonder if that whole thing was more DK saying that he'd...
...like Ron Paul to consider him as Paul's veep, should he get the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #136
137. Here's the audio.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #137
138. Thanks - now that I've heard the whole statement...
I'm even more convinced that he's letting Ron Paul know he'd like to be on Paul's ticket, just in case.

That's politics I guess ~ but I'm sure he'll pay a price in lost Dem support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
139. My sole opposition to Edwards is the IWR.
And then Hillary went and voted YES on Kyl-Lieberman, so it just shows to go ya that some folks, in point of fact, don't learn the first time the dog bites them.

Best of luck in the primaries. May the best candidate win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #139
141. There are more important things
than punishing people for their past mistakes, for example, how lobbyist money will possibly taint many future decisions, including those dealing with war:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp

PS---It's easy for people not in the Senate to say how they *would* have voted had they been in the Senate. That applies to Edwards recently and Obama WRT Iraq. Just something to consider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #141
142. nothing more important than holding those that voted capriciously for war accountable
but that's me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #142
144. But again
if Obama had been in the Senate at the time *then* you'd have a point. It's not fair that he gets a free pass in that regard because he was never truly tested.

But that's just me.

As Mark Twain pointed out in his short story "The Man That Corrupted Hadleyburg(sp)", people who go around proudly exclaiming how good they are despite never really having had the opportunity to fail in a given area should be taken with a grain of salt.

We can't assume they'd always pass the test.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #144
145. Or,
That he decided to be a no show on the Iran vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #145
153. "decided to be"
It was circumstance. Reid had tabled the vote and brought it up unexpectedly while Obama was out campaigning. Obama had released a statement that he opposed Kyl-Lieberman, as did every other presidential candidate EXCEPT for Hillary. The vote passed by 50+ votes as expected, and Obama was very clear that there are votes to rush back for and this wasn't one of them because if you do the math his vote would have made zero difference.

I realize this is a point people like to pick at around here in the battles de jour but, in the final analysis, Obama has been on the right side of issues of war all along and that's what matters to me. He doesn't have to do triple backflips to explain YES votes for war. If you are fine that your candidate of choice voted YES on the IWR, good for you; that is your prerogative. However, trying to bring down others that had the good sense to oppose the war is really only working for you as a rationalization.

>> "When I am this party's nominee, my opponent will not be able to say that I voted for the war in Iraq or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran ... And he will not be able to say that I wavered on something that as fundamental as whether or not it is okay for America to torture because it is never okay." ** Barack Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #144
152. no free pass
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 08:57 PM by AtomicKitten
Obama gave an unequivocal speech opposing the invasion of Iraq in 2002, before the invasion, not a convenient about-face after the fact.
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm

That is proof-positive that he would have voted NO had he been in the Senate at that time. That's not only fair but in my view the only prudent and reasonable conclusion to arrive at.

You are welcome to look at evidence any way you choose, but the evidence is clear where Obama stood BEFORE the invasion, and that resonates large in my world.

>> "When I am this party's nominee, my opponent will not be able to say that I voted for the war in Iraq or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran ... And he will not be able to say that I wavered on something that as fundamental as whether or not it is okay for America to torture because it is never okay." ** Barack Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #152
157. I disagree
The fact that he wasn't in the Senate at the time didn't just make it easier for him not to have to vote on the war, it also gave him more freedom to give a strong speech against it.

That's not to say he *wouldn't* have voted against the war, but to say you know for sure he would have is dishonest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #157
160. And on that point, we disagree and that is why we choose different candidates.
I have no problem with people supporting other candidates. I have no problem with a different POV. I do have a problem with people not accepting my opinion without feeling they need to piss on it. Live and let live.

My point here, ftr, and before it gets lost into oblivion, is that the metamorphosis of my opinion has been dramatic in the last year. I am a natural supporter of the Clinton/party line. I worked in the unofficial role of enforcer in that vein, unconsciously then but I realize it now. It required a few private apologies around here to effect a relative karmic balance from my perspective. But I've taken a hard look at the last couple decades and I literally fear a Clinton presidency. I don't think we will get out of Iraq anytime soon, and worse. I'm sorry if that offends some people, but it shouldn't; it's just the way I feel and I don't feel I owe an apology for expressing it.

The IWR really was something I couldn't ignore. And the Kyl-Lieberman vote sent me around the bend. This election it is that one issue that propels me, and I'm okay with that. I wish people could just accept this bottom line without feeling threatened or angry or annoyed. I now would consider Edwards as my #2 in the primary, which really doesn't mean anything in the bigger scheme of things, but it reflects the gravity of Kyl-Lieberman IMO.

So, I'm fine with my choice in the primary and probably can't be dissuaded, and I still say may the best man (wink, wink) win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #160
161. Funny, beacuse Obama is my # 2
within that context! I also can't stand Kyl-Lieberman, but my biggest issue is with campaign funding because it effects EVERYTHING else a candidate stands for (or claims to stand for), *including* war.

At least we agree Hillary is last.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #139
149. I respect your position....but
your position will help Republicans more than Democrats. Think about it :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #149
155. I consider it sound and reasonable criteria for my primary vote.
And since you insist on bringing the GOP into it, your rhetoric mimics Republican-esque brow-beating.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maryland Liberal Donating Member (168 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
140. ABH - (Anybody But Hillary)
Is fine with me. I am currently leading twords Kucinich - but I could vote 4 Edwards if he is the nominee
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #140
148. Thank you...welcome...and Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
150. I Agree With You... It's Simply Ridiculous That The Media Only Hypes
certain people. And it's because they want to protect their pocketbooks and wallets!

I'm more than angry that I'm being TOLD who the nominee will be at this point in time! Hey, I live in Florida and know about voter fraud, but at least I DID cast a vote before I knew it wasn't counted! Right now, I don't think I'm going to be ABLE to vote! From what you hear, only a few are running.

And THIS is the Democratic Way??

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #150
154. Keeping it real.
A fighter for America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bellasgrams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
156. If he's your choice vote for him.
If he makes it to the GE I'll support him but not in the Primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC