To add to the 97343 threads, John Edwards DIDN'T contradict himself on Reagan.

He said in 2007, that Reagan, along with guys like Truman and Clinton, built strong alliances and respect around the world.

How is that not true, first off?

Second off, what he said today is that Ronald Reagan and the concept of change don't belong in the same sentence.

Alright, that's true...isn't it?

So where's the contradiction? We see tons of posts about this on DU, but no real reasoning behind why people are saying he flip-flopped.

Let's tell the truth: Reagan sucked, but he did build strong alliances.

Reagan sucked, but we were respected in the world.

Edwards outlined why he believed President Reagan shouldn't be talked about with the word change, so where's the beef?

here though. The issue here is CHANGE in the context of a political environment in America. Edwards is right and was right.

And you guys want to criticize Obama???

:rofl:

his quote was about change and Edwards said he won't use Reagan as an example for change in this country

and after reviewing it I think it's perfectly appropriate for Edwards to use it in the context he did.

which has zero to do with Obama.

-butlittle todowithReagan

Soviet Union down. Jesus H. Christ on a trailer hitch.:spank: :banghead:

After he loses in South Carolina people will forget about him and everything he said.

But I'm stating it as a fact and history will prove me right. Dennis, he still has a job in Washington and he will win his next re-election plus...

His wife is so damn HAWT!!!

Now I've literally seen it all.

:rofl:

The world hated Reagan as much as they hate Bush. He was the original cowboy of cowboy diplomacy.

But the fact that you believe that proves Obama's point completely.

the quote was about the American brand vs the Soviet Union, not about Reagan

I'm responding to the OP's claim about the wonderful image Reagan presented around the world.

You look at what he implemented and 80% of it was proposed by Reagan or Poppy Bush.

the elephant in the living room, the turd in the punchbowl...

.

did.

years?

Shit, if Obama wanted to get to the heart of the matter, the President repsonsible for the greatest amount of "transformational change" is George W. Bush.

Much ado about nothing.

Reagan was a change for the worse. Change is not always for the best.

Obama's comments were comparable with what Edwards said: he said something about Reagan that was true. He put it in context. He did not say that he wanted to emulate Reagan's policies.

Neither one was a declaration of policy and thus, both can be dismissed.

quote
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.


The previous poster 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

Reagan did NOT gather us respect around the world, nor did he "win the cold war" or "defeat communism".

Reagan WAS an agent for change. Not a good change, but change nonetheless.
People wanted "something new" and they went for Reagan's bully diplomacy and supply side economics. That's change.

Challenge the critic, make him the story until everyone forgets what this is all about. You see it over and over again with the Obama camp.

Invaded Grenada. I'll never forget Star Wars. Iran-Contra. Alliances with mass murdering dictators in Guatemala and El Salvador. Bankrolled religious jihadists in the ME. Supported Saddam's chemical war on the Kurds. I don't know where to stop. We were so not respected in the world. Until GWB, we were never so disrespected in the world.

Understand, Obama is talking about Reagan's politics being successful in its aims, not his policies being successful. And Obama gets fire and brimstone from Edwards. (I guess he's given up on all those Reagan Dems he was after.)

Edwards commends Reagan's vile foreign policy and that's okay.

...by distorting that Obama said Reagan as some kind of agent for change.

Obama didn't SAY THAT! He mentioned that the Democrats need to have a unifying leader like Reagan, who is a freaking GOP demi-god, to help start a progressive movement. Did he say he liked Reagan's policies? NO!

Edwards stepped in it by not checking out his pretty recent statements PRAISING Reagan's leadership before he attacked Obama. He needs to get his own opinions straight.

Hate me for pointing out the truth. Sheesh....

Reagan had another world to play in. That Soviet communism should pick that moment to fold, well, that's only unfair.
But that changed the world and Reagan will forever have this moment stuck to him, although Gorbachev was the real reason.

But to say that Reagan was anything but a jerk is to stretch the truth. He was George W. Bush' precursor; a very weak president without any control over his administration. America was then run officially by his elder circle while the younger circle consisted of the very people we're struggling to contain today, and ran all the illegal operations. Reagan just signed whatever they brought him and drifted off.
And if you look at the after effects ...

The Reaganites built the Al-Queda fetus.
The Reaganites built and armed Saddam Hussein.
The Reaganites had deep dealings with the Khomeiny regime, how deep we have still no answer to.
The Reaganites established the Paki-US-Brit-Arab money laundering and drug smuggling network, and probably fucked up the world's intelligence services in the process.
The Reaganites ignored AIDS, and made it the world wide disease it is today.
The Reaganites supported the South African apartheid regime, and made it last longer than it needed to. And a number of other regimes that we could have been spared.
They fucked up the US media, the US economy and the US religion, evangelical version. They just fucked up everything they touched, but the shit didn't hit the fan publicly until his presidency was nearly over. Rings a bell?

Dubya makes Reagan look moderate in comparison, and that's the only thing that makes Reagan 'positive'.

That said, we must understand that politics is politics and even though Reagan was the great undoer of good things, he WAS the president and has a historical place. So the candidates, especially if they fish for former republican voters, will hold him up as an example. Somehow, I wish they'd use Ike instead.