Edwards has been moving left, but here is where he falls short

compared to almost all the other Democratic candidates:

Favors: Teacher-led prayer in public schools
Supports: Individual school prayer, not teacher-led prayer.
Favors: Death Penalty
Opposes: decriminalizing marijuana

link

He's doing what Gore did, move left, but he's no Al Gore. He's not even Chris Dodd.



Edited for information at original link, still right of other candidates on the issue.

He wouldn't have HIV and cancer victims arrested now.

but not the war on bad breath?

thing.

Q: Would it be your hope that the Supreme Court would allow public schools to encourage more prayer in schools?

(Edwards)A: What I'm not in favor of is for a teacher to go to the front of the classroom and lead the class in prayer. Because I think that by definition means that that teacher's faith is being imposed on children who will almost certainly come from different faith beliefs. Allowing time for children to pray for themselves, to themselves, I think is not only okay, I think it's a good thing.

http://ontheissues.org/2008/John_Edwards_Education.htm

over this. I don't like it too much, but it's not a huge deal. I believe there should not be prayer in school. I don't see why it's a good thing.

what?

Copied directly from the link: Supports individual school prayer, not teacher-led prayer.

That is the distinction made if you follow the link in the OP>

It's a lie.

Q: Would it be your hope that the Supreme Court would allow public schools to encourage more prayer in schools?

(Edwards)A: What I'm not in favor of is for a teacher to go to the front of the classroom and lead the class in prayer. Because I think that by definition means that that teacher's faith is being imposed on children who will almost certainly come from different faith beliefs. Allowing time for children to pray for themselves, to themselves, I think is not only okay, I think it's a good thing.

http://ontheissues.org/2008/John_Edwards_Education.htm

It's just rude, rw, and stupid. The people here are smart, they will always call you on it.

OP was edited after your post.

Is this another campaign spreading disinformation???

is how Edwards put it.

As long as they don't make a big spectacle out of it, I have no problem with it, even though I'm an atheist. The prayer huddles in hallways, etc., are even okay with me if they occur before, after or in between classes, as long as the huddlers aren't loud and obnoxious, and don't try to drag in passersby.

You posted before you knew all the facts? Okay then, thanks for the "information."

Just more crap from the crap masters.

Don't try to change the subject. The OP is correct.

If you really want me to post all of Edwards' shift, contradictions, etc. I could, but on the three issues cited in the OP, he is right of the other candidates.

Is that incorrect?

I do not support the death penalty, but I realize that the majority of Americans does. As for marijuana, that is not a huge issue for me. I think prosecuting marijuana violations is a waste of public resources, but I don't think that marijuana (or alcohol) use should be encouraged or viewed as a bagatelle.

So, Edwards' stances on these issues are not important to me.

display their remarkably thin skins when they're confronted with any criticism whatsoever about JE. If they had to put up with the lies and innuendo that Clinton and Obama supporters are confronted with, I fear they'd go stark raving mad.

lies being told about him. And that's the way it should be.

Edwards supporters perpetrating lies about other candidates and cheering them on. And the OP made an error and corrected it. And I still maintain that many Edwards supporters have a fit over genuine criticism. When you label Edwards being called a phony a smear, or have a fit over someone saying that they find his hedge fund activities a negative, that's pretty good evidence for the existence of a "how dare you criticize JE" mentality.

My integrity is important to me. I try not to post lies, in fact, I really try to make sure what I post is true. When you say:

"Edwards supporters perpetrating lies about other candidates and cheering them on"

You don't even bother to add, "some" to the beginning of your statement. We have a great group of Edwards supporters here, in fact, a few days ago, when I asked them if I should go really negative and post some of the the stuff I have on the other candidates, they said to a man, NO! There might be one or two Edwards Supporters here that don't follow our positive creed. But it in know way is all of us.

Also, when the Edwards supporters here, out number all of the other candidate supporters by a very, very wide margin, there are bound to be a few "bad apples."

And one more thing, most of the "anti threads" I see here are from either Obama, or Hillary supporters. Or from you, and you still refuse to say who you support, but you have no problem letting everyone here know who you don't support.

You really crack me up.

And in all likelihood, it's only a handful. You are not a positive face for Edwards supporters when you go around ranting and raving. And I read that thread. They weren't all Edwards supporters, and at least one of them told you to go for it. So it wasn't "to a man".

I don't refuse to say who I support, I honestly don't care all that much who gets it. And I've said ad nausem that I'll support Edwards gladly if he's the nominee. Furthermore, it's simply a falsehood to state that I post largely negative threads. Most of the threads I post, are neither negative or positive. I tend to post analysis more than anything else.

And I clearly don't crack you up. You're obviously upset.

If you find JE supporters touchy, have you ever considered that it's partly because of all the negative threads you yourself have started? It's one thing to question this or that about his activities, but most negative threads about Edwards are started for the sole the purpose of attacking him. It's easy to get a chip on one's shoulder when confronted with this crap again and again.

I don't mind criticism, when it's true. We can talk all you want about his stance on the issues, but when a post starts with an obvious lie, such a lie that he had to change the op, then what do you expect us to do? Just like when people mis-represent his voting record, or talk about phony affairs.

Disinformation must be squashed the second it comes out.

And innuendo? Showing the other side of your face?

Just a short list: Haircut, hedge funds, house, affair, phoney... we hear all the right wing attacks here.

And by the way, since when is standing up for yourself, or for your candidate, considered "thin skeined?"

Are you serious?

Please try again later, liar.

for you desperate attempt to spin the OP as a lie.

or step away from the keyboard. You're losing it.

Everything you don't like hearing about him, you label as a right wing attack. And I've seen you personally cheer on outright lies about Clinton.

If you believe that disinformation about YOUR candidate must be squashed, but engage in posting or supporting misinformation about another candidate, your outrage has to be taken with quite a few grains of salt.

You consider someone saying they think Edwards is phony a right wing meme, and yet you had no problem repeatedly posting a picture of Clinton next to one of bushco, with "meet the new boss, same as the old boss". I'm surprised you don't see how that looks.

Your passion and dedication to your candidate is great, but having a double standard isn't.

You really crack me up, I'm not kidding. I could start posting those again, since it's been like a month since I've do it, and I stopped because some people found it offensive.

And name one lie I've tried to perpetuate here at DU. And let me ask you a question, since you are so concerned about lies, then why aren't you jumping all over the OP for starting a thread with a lie in the very first line?

Guess that's okay huh?

Hypocrcy is not a pretty shade on you.

And the reason I didn't jump on the OP is because she'd already been jumped on and corrected it. And I believe you cheered on a thread yesterday that was both misleading and contained mistruths.

lame, to try and label me as the hypocrite here, and a bit copy cattish. I guess you just don't like being reminded of the noisome stuff you did.

You really don't think people here just take your word do you? And by the way, you lied the other day, and I didn't call you on it. You should really look closer at the Yucca Mountain vote. You got it wrong.

And I'll just wait, while you find that thread where I actually helped to perpetuate a lie.

The problem with a lot of people like you? You just think your smarter than everyone else, and most of the time you are, I'm sure. But Edwards supporters are smart too, and we'll always jump on the liars.

on jgraz's thread, but I don't see it. There are a lot of deleted posts. If you didn't, sorry. You have been much better about that stuff in the past month.

But I didn't lie the other day and I didn't get it wrong about Yucca Mountain. You seem to justify anything Edwards did. Edwards voted for it alright.

You made a nasty accusation toward me the other day, that was way out of bounds. We could go back and forth trading real and perceived slights, and more. But I don't think that'll accomplish anything. And in the spirit of the season, I'd rather just wish you a Merry Christmas.


And just for the record, I'm sick of the "you think you're so smart" crap. I don't particularly think that way at all. I'm not even someone that thinks "smart" is the be all and end all.

http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/07/31/edwards_factsheet/

I'm just trying to keep the playing field as level as possible. I've never believed in the "win at all costs" method of campaigning, that is not the way I raised my kids, and I don't want to see that in my candidate, so I really try to stick to the issues. I always, speaking of my kids, told them if they lie to me once, it makes it harder to ever trust them again.

It never makes me feel good to make another feel bad. (Lol, maybe if you weren't so smart, you wouldn't get that thrown at ya all the time?)

I'm just a regular guy, hell, I didn't even finish high school because I had to go to work. But I think I know what's right. And I know how to read the entire page,
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_i...

Just read the whole page, you'll see. I know you have integrity, and I know you don't want to spread bad information.

As always, attack all you want on the issues, on his honesty, but in the spirit of the season, please be correct on your attacks.

And kiddo, I never need to take a "breath", I learned how not to loose my cool many years ago, in a jail cell.

Can't stop that, even if you wanted to.

Are Clinton and Obama in favor of decriminalizing marijuana? I think Edwards could be convinced of the justice in that move.

but Edwards, Richardson, and Gore - at least according to the info I could find - are all in favor of the death penalty. The death penalty is obviously one of those "mixed-bag" sort of issues when it comes to Dems.

I personally don't like that they are in favor of it, but I still really like these Dems. There are much bigger and higher priority issues to me right now that these folks ARE right on.

Oh, and as others have pointed out, Edwards is for INDIVIDUAL prayer, not teacher-led prayer.

of putting medical marijuana under the FDA. I think at this point, it is something that is not a huge issue, so he hasn't given it a lot of thought. But, he didn't think that the DEA should be going after users of medical marijuana.

zalinda