ALERT: John Edwards praised Ronald Reagan!!!

Whoops, Johnny! You should google before your open your piehole.



I guess you'll apologize for this too...

:boring:

I guess he was hoping folks wouldn't notice.

Smarmy bastard.

Wow.

I didn't mean that as strongly as it probably came off.

lol

Oh the guy in third place :rofl:

Awwww ... :kick:

you know...just like so many other things he's had to "apologize" for.

nonsense

You obama freaks are killing me.

You Edwards freaks are making me laugh. :rofl:

But since you got obama on the brain, i guess you couldn't figure it out.

The sooner you see that the better. It appears Obama is willing to just give us more of the same and you are willing to go along with it? If I want republican policies, I'll vote republican.

about. Not to mention Edwards pledged to have Repubs. in his cabinet. How do you feel about that?

Guess that depends on whether or not you are a republican? I dont want reagan's policies or republican policies. And if you still cant see the difference, you are lost.

about that?

And promoting rayguns legacy. FDR had repugs in his admin. How do you feel about that?

Obama has lost his fricking mind. Get over it. He deserves to nosedive and hopefully will. Promoting reagans legacy, wtf? I dont want to vote for a repug lite.

I'm not surprised. And Obama is NOT "Repug lite." As a matter of fact, he's the most liberal of the 3. Edwards is a phony whose rhetoric doesn't match his record. Get over THAT!

If you are too stupid to comprehend the inference of FDR, then vote Obama.

Obama doesn't want to be like Reagan regarding his policies. He simply said he was elected as a CHANGE president. Relax. I couldn't care less about FDR. Edwards' rhetoric doesn't match his record. Period.

I couldn't care less about RR, until some supposed dem tries to win a few conservative votes by invoking him.

if you want to remain blind to the truth I can't help you.

Everybody pulling shit out of context is just plain stupid.

Obama was talking about politics and JRE was talking about policy.

Edwards didn't attack Obama for praising Reagan.

He attacked him talking about Reagan and change.

Reagan and change don't belong in the same sentence.

So everything is ok now.

that was funny.

doubt on where he himself stands on domestic issues. People vs unbridled corporate power.

Obama won't talk specifics about his stands. He touted renewal energy at the last debate but it took Clinton to point out that Obama voted for the energy bill giveaway to corporations which donate to him.

and seems to be basing his own campaign on Reagan's and comparing his campaign and Reagans.Ugh.But then Obama wants the insurance companies and the corporations to have a "seat ' at the table" and he believes in "bipartisanship" , it has worked "so well for us' . Bleh.

and using past Presidents names in the same sentence DOES NOT mean he's adopting the "ideas" of Reagan!! He mentioned his name, only mentioned his name! He also mentioned Clinton's name, but has his OWN ideas about what he believes should happen. Whereas Obama actually seems to embrace WHAT Reagan did and how he was so GOOD for America by WHAT he did!

There IS quite a DIFFERENCE HERE, but I see many WON'T even understand the difference. Obama keeps doing this stuff over and over, not just about REAGAN, but other issues too!

It's sad to see this going on, really sad! I don't even THINK there is a comparison between what both are saying AT ALL!!

I just don't think Obama "remembers" what REALLY happened. Reagan was perceived to have United America... therefore it was a given. He did present an IMAGE that made other countries respect us, but HE DID NOT help Americans themselves! He did many many things behind the scenes that were simply AWFUL! Many others, most others have pointed them out!

But sure, HIS IMAGE is one of being "that President" who tore down THAT WALL! I remember a very different Ronnie RAYGUNS!!!

It's about the 5th time I've posted that today, but I just love typing the word cajones :evilgrin:

In any event, Obama used Reagan to win an endorsement from a conservative leaning newspaper. We'll see if it works for him (Reno Gazette).

I even made a mistake this AM, had a really bad headache but not so bad that I didn't "remember" to get up and make "my donation" for Edwards on the 18th... which today ISN'T, made the donation THEN realized today is THURSDAY the 17th!

Must have been the headache, but I guess it's MORE help for Edwards! I'll have to give tomorrow again... but hey I like the GUY! He has CAJ0NES! Having lived in El Paso, that's a quite a COMPLIMENT!

I am sorely upset that Edwards still isn't getting his due respect! I'm back to trying NOT to watch CNN & MSNBC other than debates, since they RARELY mention him in conjunction with the others.

Let me thing of the Reagan alliances that made the world respect us:

He had an alliance with the Contras in Central Americs, but they weren't the government - they wanted to overthrow it.

He did have a tight alliance with Noriega of Panama, who the CIA protected as he ran drugs.

He did have a very strong alliance with Iraq, giving them poison gas to help them fight the Iranians ... who we covertly armed to get hostages in Lebanon released and to get money for the Contras.

Then there were the mujahadeem in Afghanistan who he saw as the George Washingtons if their country.

In context, Edwards was trashing Bushista foreign policy ... pointing out that even Ronnie Raygun paid closer attention to alliance building and diplomatic action.

You Obamites are slayin' me, man!

:rofl:

In all seriousness, I think Obama was trying to talk more about Reagan's ability to build a coalition that could push through big changes than anything else. Perhaps I need to research this a bit better ... but I don't think he was advocating Reagan as a policy model resource. At least, I certainly hope not.

You don't see me in these "skirmish" threads, 'cause I can usually see both sides.

Obama has been my second choice, but several things he has said in the last few days have startled me. But, no one is perfect (I know, I know, CERTAINLY not Edwards).

I'm not trashing Obama, but I will say that the desperation some of his supporters here are always talking about with regard to Edwards and Clinton supporters is sure coming through loud and clear in the last day. You're not helping his cause. At all. Nor are you hurting anyone else's campaign.

Honestly, there's enough factual things to "trash" other candidates about (and there are tons of them available here, as you well know) than to try to pull them out of your ass.

Reconsidering that now. After the past couple of days, I think I'd rather go with a known quantity.

No Democrat has heaped more praise on Ronald Reagan that Bill and Hillary.

It's politics.

The faux outrage here which is selective against Obama insults the posters themselves.

John Edwards is a good man.

We need a new path, one that will lead to re engagement with the world and restoration of the United States' moral authority in the community of nations. President Harry Truman once said, "No one nation alone can bring peace. Together, nations can build a strong defense against aggression and combine the energy of free men everywhere in building a better future for all." For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us.

unquote

The clear point of the sentence is that up until Bush there has been basically bipartisan approach to multi lateral-ism that ended with George Bush and his messianic unilateralism.

At no point in the article (and thank you for bringing it to my attention it is very good) does he single Reagan out has having provided any particular Reagan leadership qualities that should be admired except those that were exactly the same as all of the other presidents.

Cherry picking quotes out of context usually is the playing ground of Clinton supporters not Obama.

You did fail to mention that John Edwards goes on at length in citing the one President who should be emulated for his particular leadership

quote
We need to return to President Kennedy's vision. He said in 1961 that the American system was fragmented, awkward, and slow and that improvement was necessary because "the nation's interest and the cause of political freedom require it." Kennedy reformed the American foreign-aid system, and we need a similar fundamental restructuring today. As president, I will create a new cabinet-level position to coordinate global development policies across the government. I will also replace Kennedy's Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 with a Global Development Act to modernize and consolidate development assistance, and I will ask Congress to improve its oversight and revamp its committee structure so that it can be a more effective partner in this effort. With measures like these, we can reclaim our historic role as a moral leader of the world while at the same time making the world safer and more secure for the United States

unquote

I do not support the candidacies of either Clinton nor Obama, but I would never derive pleasure from viciously attacking them or their supporters.

Yet I think it is clear that there are many here who do immensely enjoy savaging and smearing other candidates and their supporters on the slightest pretext.

I have defended, and will continue to defend the other candidates and their supporters from smear attacks.

I have to assume that the reason people feel compelled to smear the other candidates and insult and antagonize the supporters of other candidates is because they do not have the ability to, or can't be bothered with, effectively communicating the message of their candidate to others. They then think that the only way they can be on top is to kick others to the bottom. This is so contrary to the principles and ideals that we all share.

I have to assume that the reason these people derive such pleasure from engaging in these attacks is because the selfish need to win is more important to them than the future of the party and the country.

I encourage all Democrats to denounce and resist these smear attacks against fellow Democrats.

Thank you!!

Of course, some think he gets a free pass on his statement that he would never use Reagan as an example of a leader...except that he is ON RECORD praising Reagan. I cited one quote out of a few in that article he posted.

Edwards was the one who wanted to smear Obama by misrepresenting what Obama said. He forget there's this thing called Google. It took me 23 seconds to find the article.

I don't find pleasure in pointing out the truth about how a candidate's rhetoric is paradoxical. I find disgust and made a point to send the message out.

Edwards should apologize, like he did for all the other crap he's apologized for. I've lost count.

I don't believe you.

I think you found a way to trash another Democrat in a misguided attempt at promoting your own candidate.

If you were an Edwards supporter trashing Clinton or Obama this way I would say the same thing.

Speaking as someone non-aligned, this doesn't help.

True, it was sweet music to hear someone say in national press that Reagan should hardly be on Mount Rushmore and I savored that like good wine, but that doesn't mean I'm an Edwards supporter. On the other hand, a "whoops...piehole" post doesn't make me any warmer towards Obama's remarks, either.

As an aside -- Obama packages himself as the candidate of change and new politics, and it seems more and more that to defend him, his supporters have to find examples of everyone else saying/doing the same thing. If he's just saying/doing the same as everyone else, including the other candidates you seem to hate, then that really erodes the change argument.

There are those of us who cringe at the very mention of Reagan, without any further agenda and for extremely good reasons. I really don't like that Reagan was even included in the quote above. But that doesn't excuse Obama's invocation of Reagan as an example of optimism, clarity, or hope. It would be great to hear in strong, uneqivocal words that Obama recognizes the Reagan era as a disastrous, desperate one for so many -- far too many -- in this country. YMMV.

He didn't say he wants to BE like Reagan or have a Democratic leader that has the horrible policies that Reagan had. He said there should be a Democratic version that is as uniting as Reagan was to the Repugs. He also mentioned that triangulators like Bill Clinton are not uniters.

Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

can ever be a neutral model to hold up, especially given that he argues that Reagan instilled clarity, optimism and hope. I mean, it would be an easy thing to clear up, if it's just a misunderstanding... if he said what you said above, including the "horrible policies" part, it would make clear his position. But telling me I don't understand your argument is not helping, because I do understand the argument you're making. However, Obama seems like he's pretty skilled at the triangulating himself when he doesn't clearly recognize Reagan as a monumental destructive force. If he goes after Bill Clinton, whatever, it's a primary and that's to be expected; they all do the same. But Reagan? Do you believe that words like optimism and clarity suggest that Obama repudiates Reagan?

The Reagan administration is where a lot of our current problems arose, and clarity is important for many people on this issue -- not because they're pushing another candidate (though some are), but just because we suffered so very badly. It is a bad, bad example for anyone to bring up, and a worse one to claim as neutral.

A guy on a baseball team says we need to have a catcher like Pete Rose, who was a stunningly talented catcher for his time.

Does that mean the the guy is saying he wants someone who was a tax evader to be on the team?

No.

Get the analogy now?

Maybe you should stick with anniversaries of bjs.

Today is the tenth anniversary of Bill not being able to control his zipper and making all of us Democrats have to clean up after his goddamn mess.

Happy anniversary!

:puke:


As for Edwards...it's called stepping in a pile of dog turds. He can't keep his stories straight either.

Reagan, no matter what you think of him, is prolific in politics. And he's still adored (yuck) by many Americans, to this day. Chances are that at some point in your political career you had to kiss his ass, just a *little* bit. In this day and age, it doesn't take much to unearth those things.

Obama stated a fact when saying that Reagan was an influential president and everyone's jumping on him so....

And, in my opinion, that quote where Bill Clinton was fawning all over Reagan was much worse.

Mountain out of a mole hill.

This country was respected until the ass George W. Bush got power.