Obama Takes Some Passing Shots at Edwards

ABC's Sunlen Miller Reports:

Obama's campaign bus passed John Edward's "Main Street Express" bus while whizzing through Clear Lake, Iowa. The close proximity of the two candidates this week in Northern Iowa is a product of the feverish last ditch efforts candidates are making to woo undecided voters in the precious 17 days left before the Iowa caucus.

Obama has been sharpening his rhetoric during his 22-stop drive through the state, but not against Hillary Clinton. Obama's rhetoric has been focused on John Edwards, a candidate he's largely stayed away from mentioning on the campaign trail.Obama's shots at Edwards indicate that the Iowa caucuses are a three-way fight between Obama, Clinton and Edwards. During this Iowa dash, Obama has been needling Edwards on health care and special interests.

"John Edwards for example said that there will be a mandate and if you don't buy health insurance he will take it out of your paycheck," Obama said in Estherville, Iowa. "My attitude is the biggest reason people don't have health care is not because they're not trying to avoid buying it, but because they can't afford it, because of costs. So we emphasize cost savings more than anything."

Earlier in the day at a town hall in Emmetsburg, Obama mentioned Edwards three times by name. "John and I agree on a lot of stuff, but he says you know you can’t negotiate with these drug and insurance companies, you just got to beat ‘em. Well listen, like I said, nobody’s done more to actually take on the special interests than me.... if you don’t listen then you’re not going to get much done, even when you’re dealing with the drug and insurance companies."

Obama's comments on negotiating with drug companies comes on the heels of Edwards' criticism Friday.“I think that’ll never work. If that would work, it would have worked years ago. If that worked, we’d have universal health care. We don’t,” Edwards said.

David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist has said that part of the reason for the stepped up talk is due to Edwards "challenging him." Axelord said on the issue of lobbying reform Obama has done more, citing his work on the ethics reform bill. "I can't think of one thing like that, that Senator Edwards did in the Senate," Axelrod said. On the passing of the two buses, Axelrod chimed in, "I think ours was headed north and his was headed South. "

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/obama-takes-som.html

No Kindergate or character attacks or pissing matches as to who's tougher/more experienced/a Muslim Manchurian candidate/rolling dice, etc.

It's time Obama sends some his way. Overdue, in my opinion.

for adults who don't buy insurance for themselves and Edwards' accomplishment-free Senate record are easy targets.

swing a better deal for American consumers.

That's like Congress saying they want to negotiate or compromise with George Bush. It's all one way...the wrong way.

Negotiating doesn't mean giving in to them.

The drug companies charge Americans more than they do consumers in other countries. Why? Do we really expect them to give up anything out of the goodness of their hearts? They know American consumers are strapped right now, and they haven't lowered prices on their own. They do have a few very restrictive programs to help with drug costs, but face it, they are making a fortune, and that fortune is being protected by Bushco.

They won't be forthcoming with any help until they are forced to. They've had the chance already.

Where are they going to come from? How are you going to get price changes without dealing with drug companies?

As I said in a previous post, they know high drug prices are preventing many from access to drugs that could help them. And they've not lowered their prices yet. They charge Americans more for the same drug. Why?

Because they are so patriotic?

And there you have it. Even John Edwards will have to deal with them.

Every other country has price controls on drugs. There is no way this country will regulate only drugs, and no other part of the medical establisment. Won't happen. So what does that mean? Oh yeah. We'll have to negotiate.

See, point blank, Edwards isn't telling the truth. And that's why I don't support him.

That formula sure works in real life, doesn't it...

:sarcasm:

for a single payer health care plan, with no incremental half measures, because he understands Americans are tired of incremental change and half measures. That's why he's going all out for single payer, and if the insurance companies don't like it, they can lump it.

"I think ours was headed north and his was headed South. " :D

pointing out issue differences. It leads to dialogue, which last time I looked, was a good thing.

This goes nowhere near the low-ball gutter slime that HRC and her minions have done, are doing and will continue to do.
Good article !

That's what campaigns are supposed to do. Both Edwards, Biden and Obama have been sticking to the issues, while Hillary's minions spread fear and smears.

that neither Edwards nor Obama are getting personal or nasty in this dialog ... they are merely expressing different conclusions based on their different experiences. These are real differences in policy and approach to policy ... just the kind of stuff I want to hear about.

Better than a lot of meaningless crap we've been hearing lately ...

Well, yeah. I think we could live with that outcome. :)

It is not the immature, nonsensical drivel that has come from the Clinton campaign.

have been pretty good about staying on the subjects that count. Sharp elbows and such are to be expected in politics as candidates try to draw distinctions between themselves and their positions on issues. That's acceptable, unavoidable, and even necessary.

More negativity from ObamaNation.

What negativity? He was responding to something Edwards said about him. :eyes:

More stupid ad hominem attacks from Hillaryworld.

It's hilarious that some people think only Clinton supporters think their candidate sucks.

Just thought you missed my question the last time...

Don't think because your posts aren't responded to that they were 'missed,' jen.

So I wonder if you have the same opinion of Edwards.

Gee, jen. It's like asking me which pile of poo is less offensive.
OK, you win. Your pile poo is more offensive than Edwards.

Hypocrisy is thy name, Hillaryworld. Shovel your shit where it belongs - in the Clinton campaign's backyard.

If that delusion makes you feel better about your choice of bigot-pandering candidate, well... there's nothing rational people can do to help you.

and his many weaknesses!

Now, If the Obama camp could just point out the "not so much discussed" weaknesses in John Edwards' matching fund handicap going towards the General Election in the caucuses, when Edwards supporters speak of "electability", Obama could put a dent in Edwards' 1st place real possibility in Iowa...especially now that the media (as they did in 2004) are now back to pushing Edwards positively for the next two weeks (cause they want a McCain vs. Edwards match- which is the GOP's only chance to keep the WH)!

Independents don't like this "fight rather than negotiate" stuff, and will choose to caucus for Obama or McCain (McCain getting a big boost with his recent endorsements, making leaning conservative Indies more apt to vote for him, which is not good for Barack).

MSNBC's countering the Globe and Register's endorsements of Clinton and Obama, with the Newsweek puff piece. Edwards is getting lots more coverage for THAT today.

It's only a matter of time before Edwards picks up where Hillary left off and makes mincemeat out of Obama.

Or, was it the other way around?

:rofl:

Do you think they should put on another embarrassing event in Iowa like the one that flopped in SC?

I could actually see these guys helping each other if one of them falls by the wayside. I hope it is Obama left standing, but I get the feeling that both would help the other take on Clinton.

-Barack Hussein Obama