Edwards in a minute on CNN.

[amandabeech]

Do I ever wish that he were the president or V.P. now.

His face just says so much. Just like the Chimp's does.

[GetTheRightVote]

1. Edwards should be in the WH along with Kerry, stolen elections

create this type of bad Karma and it us, the citizens, who suffer behind them.

:kick:

[SunDrop23]

22. Nobody can convince me Bush won Ohio. Still. nfm

[bunkerbuster1]

67. No, not Edwards

to be technical about it, Leiberman should be the Veep, and Gore should be in his second term.

And yeah, for all the crap we all give Jomentum, I'd take his mug on the teevee over Darth Cheney any damn day.

[Inspired]

2. He is my VP.

In 2009 I hope to call him my President.

[sasha031]

6. I miss him

All the wonderful suggestions he makes about hiring the ex residents of NO for construction. Chimp has already lined up lucrative contract for his cronies.

[WiseButAngrySara]

17. This contrast alone shows the gravity of the US mistake in the 2004

elections (even with Diebold, Kerry and Edwards should have won hands down). I hope they're regretting it now. I miss them all too.

[Joe Chi Minh]

65. Simply not possible with bent machines.

Kerry did win, and in a tremendous landslide. In honest electoral terms, America made mistake in 2004, at all.

[bluedawg12]

3. His chance to look like a leader, I'm watching. n/t

[AmericanDream]

11. and what did you see?

[DemDogs]

15. Wisdom, strength, conviction

Edwards was terrific. And the best thing about it is that it came naturally to him as the cause he has been talking about and fighting for. Later, Howard Kurtz said the press hadn't been talking about poverty and neither had politicians, but he knows better -- Wolf asked Edwards about Two Americas. The great moral issue. And Edwards has ideas, too, about how we use this as an opportunity to start getting it right in this country. E08

[onecent]

4. Lordy he takes my breath away and I'm 60 yrs old. Ahhhhhhhh

Wolff asked if he will run for President, John said, "Let's not talk about that now while millions are homeless". Oh, I so hope he does.....maybe now people are READY for a breath of fresh air.

[chimpymustgo]

5. He could surely help heal our riven nation.

We will need some special talents to put us back together again. Under *, we have had a great fall.

[benny05]

13. That would be nice..

JRE is 52, Elizabeth is 56, so saying you are 60 is not old!!

[onecent]

63. Are you serious? WOW..I didn't realize ..I AM young, lol n/t

[AmericanDream]

7. I'm glad he proposed a progressive vision for NOLA rebuilding

[Catchawave]

8. He's working on getting the min. wage initiatives on

2006 state ballots too.

Lots of information on his website about that and NOLA rebuilding:

http://oneamericacommittee.com/

It was great Wolf brought up the Two Americans theme of his Presidential race, that message still resonates today. Especially that more middle-class people fall into poverty everyday.

[fooj]

9. I watched. It made me unbelievably sad.

I grieve for my country.

Peace.

[tjdee]

10. Missed it, but I'm sure he did a good job.

[Catchawave]

12. He kicked serious Hindsight Butt !

Two Americas will definitely be our 2006 leverage for the Dems that agree with his talking points.

[DemDogs]

16. This is the true moral high ground

And Edwards has been talking about it for years. Finally the nation is, too.

[AmericanDream]

14. Transcript....

In addition to the misery and ruin caused by Hurricane Katrina, the aftermath of the storm is exposing the pervasiveness of poverty right here in the United States.

Among those who are saying Katrina represents a chance to address America's growing class divide, among other subjects, is the former Democratic vice presidential candidate, the former U.S. senator from North Carolina, John Edwards. He's now the director of the Center on Poverty, Work, and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

And John Edwards is joining us now, live from Raleigh.

Senator, it's good to have you back on "Late Edition."

Thanks very much for joining us.

JOHN EDWARDS, FORMER U.S. SENATOR: Glad to be with you.

BLITZER: Let's get to the issue at hand, the recovery operation right now. Are you satisfied the way the situation is going?

EDWARDS: You mean now?

BLITZER: Right now.

EDWARDS: I'm satisfied with some things that are happening and, obviously, there's a more intense effort going on now than happened originally right after the hurricane hit.

There are some things that I'm concerned about. For example, they're moving away from the use of these $2,000 debit cards and instead they're suggesting they're going to put -- deposit into bank accounts for folks.

The problem is a lot of people -- they got devastated by this hurricane -- they don't have bank accounts. The president, apparently, is suspending Davis Bacon, which is a law that requires a prevailing wage be used in federal contracts in the reconstruction effort.

I think that's a mistake. I think there are a number of things happening which indicate what is continuing, which is a lack of understanding of the pervasiveness of poverty in the inner city in New Orleans: why these folks live in poverty, the problems they had in responding to the hurricane as a result and the ongoing problems that not only they, but the 37 million people across America that live in poverty face every day.

We don't seem, in this administration, to have an understanding of what their lives are like.

BLITZER: A lot of us who covered the campaign last year will remember: You kept speaking of those two Americas that you saw out there, one affluent, well-to-do, educated; yet, there was another America you used to point out, a very poor America.

Certainly we see that. We have seen that the past couple of weeks in Louisiana, specifically, and Mississippi to a certain degree. These are two of among the poorest states in the United States from unemployment, from wealth, from education, from very -- from a whole lot of perspectives.

What's the major lesson that you learned in the aftermath of Katrina as far as this whole issue of class and race, poverty in America?

EDWARDS: Well, it's a microcosm of the problem that exists all over this country. You just pointed it out. Mississippi has the highest poverty rate in America. Alabama also hit, the third highest poverty rate. Louisiana has the fifth highest poverty rate. Almost one out of four people who lived in the city of New Orleans live in poverty.

And it's a huge issue, not just on the Gulf Coast but all across America. And the people who got hurt by Katrina and got hurt the worst by Katrina are the same people that are always hurt the worst when something like this happens. They're vulnerable; they don't have any assets.

There's a huge asset gap in America. For example, white families have an average net worth of about $80,000 in this country. African- American families are about $6,000. That gap means something in people's lives, because if something goes wrong -- you know, a hurricane or something a lot less serious like their kid gets sick or they have a layoff or some kind of financial problem.

If you think about it, all of us have run into things that we don't expect that are bad. These folks have nothing to fall back on. And as a result their lives -- they go right in the ditch. Their lives are devastated. And so that's what we see.

BLITZER: Do you think the president, as some Democrats, some of his critics have suggested, including Howard Dean, the chairman of your party, the Democratic party -- do you think the president doesn't care about some of these people?

EDWARDS: No, here's what I think. I think that -- and, by the way, I think this has gone on for decades. I don't think this is something that's happened in the last few years.

No, I think what we've seen is a lack of understanding in the federal government of how these folks live their lives. You know, we issue an evacuation order, we expect everybody to leave. Well, a lot of these people unfortunately don't have bank accounts. They don't have a car. You know, the hurricane hits a few days before their payday, which they're waiting for to be able to get the money to buy gas and to buy food -- you know, they are in a very different place and that continues.

I mean, even now they're in a different place. They don't have a job. They didn't have insurance. They basically have nothing left.

And one of the things that I hope we will do is look at this as an opportunity not only to shine a bright light on poverty in America and do something about it nationally -- I think it's one of the great moral causes that face America today -- but to use New Orleans as a shining example of what we can do.

Let's have, for example, a WPA project in New Orleans. Take these displaced folks, put them to work in New Orleans. Pay them a good wage. Pay them decent benefits so that they cannot only reconstruct their city, they can reconstruct their lives and have the dignity that comes from having a good job and being able to support your family.

BLITZER: There was a "Time" magazine poll that's just come out this weekend -- are you worried that the government won't provide relief to your community after a natural disaster? Fifty seven percent of the American public says yes, 41 percent says no.

North Carolina could be a victim in the coming days. Hurricane Ophelia sort of hovering on the Atlantic Coast right now. Some projections suggesting it could hit the coast of your home state.

Is your state prepared for what potentially could happen?

EDWARDS: Well, we've had a lot of experience with hurricanes, Wolf, as I know you know. And we are as prepared as you can be, and right now it's a category 1 hurricane. We're not sure exactly where it's going to hit. You know, we hope it won't make landfall at all, but, yes, we're prepared. Governor Easley has focused on it. He knows what needs to be done.

So we have a lot of experience with this, and I might add, we know from our own state from having been hit with serious hurricanes in the past, we've had the same experience that you're seeing in New Orleans right now.

Principal (ph), a small town, largely African-American population, in eastern North Carolina was devastated when we were hit by a very bad hurricane a few years ago.

So this is not new, what we're seeing in New Orleans. We're not seeing it on this scale, of course.

But what we're seeing in New Orleans, which is the most vulnerable people being hit the hardest, the people in Ward 9, for example, which is the lowest lying area, which is about 98 percent African-American -- I mean, those are the people that get hurt the worst whenever something like this happens, and I might add they're also the folks that get hurt the most when anything happens in their lives. It's what they deal with every day.

BLITZER: We're out of time, but are you running for president again?

EDWARDS: I don't think we should be talking about that. I haven't made any decision about it.

Let's focus now on doing something to help these people on the Gulf Coast and doing something about 37 million people who live in poverty.

BLITZER: A lot of our viewers, Senator, want to know how your wife Elizabeth is doing. How is she doing?

EDWARDS: Thank you for asking.

She's actually doing very well. She's finished her treatment. Doctors are very optimistic. We're optimistic.

Obviously, it's a huge thing in our lives. We love and adore Elizabeth, and she's doing very well right now.

BLITZER: Well, that's good to hear.

Give her our best, Senator Edwards. We hope to have you back soon here on CNN.

EDWARDS: Thanks for having me.

BLITZER: Thank you very much.

[RallyInDC]

18. wow.....he's so eloquent with the words....

that was amazing.....he offers alot of great ideas too!!! I hope howard dean or someone jumps on those, and uses them for when democrats go on the offensive....it can really change things!!

[Catchawave]

21. Thanks so much for posting this AmericanDream

:hi:

"I choose to be inspired"

[MelissaB]

23. Thanks so much for the transcript.

I missed it live and this is the next best thing. :hi:

[RallyInDC]

68. he's amazing.

[madfloridian]

19. Edwards: Just say YES. Howard Dean was right. Bush does not care.

Why did not Edwards just say Yes, I agree with Howard Dean said!! Edwards says this has always gone on, but he forgets something very important. This administration has given huge corporate tax cuts. They have gutted FEMA. They have made it hard for the black community to vote. No administration in recent years has been this heartless. Edwards, you should have just said yes.

Dean opened the door again to point out that the Bush administration only cares about the richest in the country.

Obama pretty much agreed, used pretty much the same words as Howard Dean. He took a long time to say it, I gather, but he did not disagree.

Edwards does not agree with Howard Dean, he told Blitzer. NOW, don't get me wrong. This is NOT about something Howard Dean said....it is the fact that Edwards disagrees about an important issue...he disagrees with Dean that this administration does not care about 80% of the people.

BLITZER: Do you think the president, as some Democrats, some of his critics have suggested, including Howard Dean, the chairman of your party, the Democratic party -- do you think the president doesn't care about some of these people?

EDWARDS: No, here's what I think. I think that -- and, by the way, I think this has gone on for decades. I don't think this is something that's happened in the last few years."

He goes on to say this:

"So this is not new, what we're seeing in New Orleans. We're not seeing it on this scale, of course.

But what we're seeing in New Orleans, which is the most vulnerable people being hit the hardest, the people in Ward 9, for example, which is the lowest lying area, which is about 98 percent African-American -- I mean, those are the people that get hurt the worst whenever something like this happens, and I might add they're also the folks that get hurt the most when anything happens in their lives. It's what they deal with every day."

Here is Dean's statement from Friday after being confronted with Laura Bush's criticism of him:

BLITZER: Do you agree with the first lady?

DEAN: No. I do not think that this president cares about everybody in America.

"His policies have been devastating to middle class and poor people in this country, white, black, and brown."

People who were affected in this disaster, the people who are holed up in the Astrodome, look at the kinds of things that have been said about them. Look what the Republican representative from the Louisiana said this morning in "The Wall Street Journal"; that finally God has gotten -- or has cleaned up the public housing in New Orleans.

It's not enough to be a nice guy. I'm not disputing the fact the president is a nice man, and maybe he's compassionate in his personal life. The truth is that Americans have suffered deeply under this presidency, 80 percent of Americans, and that black people, Hispanic people, and poor people and old people have suffered disproportionately.

BLITZER: So, I just want to press you on this. You can't blame the president for what some Republican Congressman says.

DEAN: I think there's an indifference in the Republican Party towards people who aren't at the very top of the income level. Their whole tax policy has shown that.

BLITZER: You made a very powerful, serious charge against the president of the United States, that he doesn't care about everyone in this country.

DEAN: I believe that's true. Because look at his policies. It does not matter what they say, it matters what they do. Americans have suffered under this presidency, 80 percent of them, income has gone down on average of $1,700.

He should have said he agreed, that Bush is not compassionate.

I like what he said, I like him very much....but this second-guessing when Dean was right on the money has got to stop. He should have said, well, I'm not sure what Dean said...or something like that. If he disagrees with Dean's statement above, then he is wrong and Dean is right. He let the media play him on that one.

[Dr Fate]

20. Both are saying the same thing- Dean was more blunt & memorable.

I like Dean's framing better.

Edwards is always pleasant and I like him- but Dean framed this a little better.

[madfloridian]

25. Edwards is one of my picks right now. They should practice saying YES.

When asked if they agree with Howard Dean. They should know by now the media will play them like a fiddle.

Either say "I am not familiar with what Howard Dean said" or say "Yes, I agree with him" then present their case.

Or if they don't agree, they should change the subject rapidly.

If I had to pick right now it would be Edwards or Feingold. They just all need to stop letting this kind of thing happen. They did it to Obama today, and I gather he essentially said yes.

They will do it to every Democrat on the air for a month.

[AmericanDream]

24. He wasn't even given the quote... he was asked a general question...

with Dean's name just inserted in it.

Blitzer asked him if bush doesn't care about some of these people.

Edwards responded that even worse than caring, Bush doesn't UNDERSTAND these people. He was trying to portray him as "out of touch" with reality... a message that hits home harder with middle americans than just saying that "oh, bush doesn't care" because many of them just refuse to accept that.

Anyway, I think they are both essentially saying the same thing. As party chairman, it's Dean's job to be blunt and he's terrific. I believe Edwards' job is to focus more on presenting a progressive vision to counter Bush's proposals... in a manner that attracts voters towards what we have to offer beyond bashing bush (which is obviously very important too... and which mainly Dean should be doing as the party chair).

At the end, however, I think they were saying the same thing.

[madfloridian]

26. I think you are right...but he did say no.

He should have said yes and added his own thoughts, or said he did not know what he said.

[ultraist]

27. Well said American Dream! I agree. n/t

[blue neen]

28. IMHO, he didn't second guess Dean. He just said things in a

different way than Dean did. (framing)

Edwards definitely did not equivocate in the e-mail he sent out for the petition drive for the work programs for NOLA. He said that Bush did not take care of America.

It doesn't really seem to me that he disagreed with Dean, but I did not see the interview, so again it's just my opinion.

[DemDogs]

64. Loved the way Edwards said it

What Edwards said was hard for anyone listening to disagree with, except the most partisan Freepers. Dean is terrific, but the way Edwards framed it was simply better, more of an indictment of Bush, and harder to take aim at. Which question would you rather Blitzer asked the next guest:

Do you believe Bush doesn't care about some Americans?
Do you believe Bush doesn't understand the lives of some Americans?

This is an easy call. Which is why Edwards is the best Democratic voice we have out there.

[I_am_Spartacus]

30. Edwards is saying this isn't about the president's personality

He's saying that it's about political philosophy and about structural problems. This is basically what Lakoff said Democrats should be doing in his piece on alternet.

It's also consistent with Edwards' primary campaign. He was asked a couple times in interviews what he thought of Bush personally. He always said that he didn't know Bush personally, so he's not going to comment on his personality. He said that he does know something about the effect Bush's policies were having on ordinary people, and he said that it's good enough to judge Bush on that, regardless of what Bush is like personally.

Who could disagree with that.

Luring people into making personal assaults is an age-old political trick. It doesn't work. Not only does it not work across the board, we learned in 2000 that Bush had a particular skill of making personal attacks reflect poorly on the attacker. For some bizarre reason, people have the urge to defend Bush when he's personally attacked, which is why the media generally and Wolf Blitzer particularly try to rope dopes into channeling serious philosophical and policy issues into being personal attacks on Bush.

Edwards did a smart thing in this interview.

[madfloridian]

32. I disagree. He did say no, he did not agree.

Dean's statement which I posted above from Friday was not condemning personalities, it was speaking clearly.

Dean did a very smart thing in his interview. He said that it does not matter what this administration says, it matters what they do.

Now, this is not just about what Dean said. It is about being afraid to agree with him when he said something right.

BLITZER: Do you agree with the first lady?

DEAN: No. I do not think that this president cares about everybody in America. It's one nice -- I'm sure the suspect a nice man on a personal level. His policies have been devastating to middle class and poor people in this country, white, black, and brown.

People who were affected in this disaster, the people who are holed up in the Astrodome, look at the kinds of things that have been said about them. Look what the Republican representative from the Louisiana said this morning in "The Wall Street Journal"; that finally God has gotten -- or has cleaned up the public housing in New Orleans.

It's not enough to be a nice guy. I'm not disputing the fact the president is a nice man, and maybe he's compassionate in his personal life. The truth is that Americans have suffered deeply under this presidency, 80 percent of Americans, and that black people, Hispanic people, and poor people and old people have suffered disproportionately.

BLITZER: So, I just want to press you on this. You can't blame the president for what some Republican Congressman says.

DEAN: I think there's an indifference in the Republican Party towards people who aren't at the very top of the income level. Their whole tax policy has shown that.

BLITZER: You made a very powerful, serious charge against the president of the United States, that he doesn't care about everyone in this country.

DEAN: I believe that's true. Because look at his policies. It does not matter what they say, it matters what they do. Americans have suffered under this presidency, 80 percent of them, income has gone down on average of $1,700.

BLITZER: You blame the president, FEMA, the executive branch of the U.S. government, the Bush administration for doing a horrible job in the immediate aftermath of this disaster --

DEAN: I don't blame -- I don't think the president personally did a horrible job. The president didn't seem to be informed. I think he had incompetent people working for him. You know, Michael Brown has become a national joke.

There is just nothing there to disagree with. He could said he did not know what he said or said he agreed and then given his own opinion.

The media will play this for a week. What Dean said got great response in Europe. A friend of mine there emailed me about it. They were so impressed.

It is something the media will continue to do. He did say no, and that bothers me. I do like his ideas, but he gave them ammunition when he said no.

This is not about Edwards' words or Dean's words per se...it is about stopping the media in its tracks.

[AmericanDream]

35. Did you see the interview? He didn't...

say "NO" as an affirmative, authoritative "no, I don't agree with dean". Haven't you ever said something like "no, this is what I think" where you just say "No" in the breath of the moment. That is how he said... kind of dismissing the question put to him.

Anyway... Edwards doesn't like to make personal statements about what's inside people's heads. He is not going to say that Bush doesn't care for people because he doesn't know that. What he will say is that Bush doesn't understand ppl and is not in touch with them because his actions show that.

Frankly, I think you are making a bigger deal out of this than it needs to be. You said that Edwards is "afraid" of agreeing with Dean when he is right. C'mon man? What makes you feel Edwards was "afraid" to agree with Dean if they genuinely agreed on something? Personally, I don't think Edwards was even thinking about Dean while answering the question. Blitzer just added Dean's name in a slight tone... his main question was a general one.

Anyway, since we are talking about the two men, I wanted to point out that Dean and Edwards are going to be making a conference call in NC later this month... so that is the cool stuff.

[madfloridian]

38. It is about stopping the media from doing this...that's all I'm saying.

Stop them dead in their tracks everytime they start this stuff.

I heard about the conference call...great idea.

I am with Edwards or Feingold for 08, so I am not really being critical.

This is about all of them. They need to not let the media do this to Dean anymore. Not to any Democrat.

[I_am_Spartacus]

37. Edwards was responding to Wolf's statement.

Roughly, "does George Bush not care about these people."

He wasn't given Dean's quote, and he can't be expected to know everything Dean has said. Even if he had known Dean's statement (the one you quoted), how could he know if that was the only thing Dean said?

Viewers and Edwards were given a statment and Edwards was asked whether he agreed with that statement. He said no.

I see no problem with that.

You saw how short that interview was. Edwards had points he wanted to make. It would have been a waste of time to get into an argument about what Dean said precisely ("Wolf, could you read to me the quote you're asking to comment on?"). It was enough for him to disagree with the attempt to divert the attention from policy and philosophy to talking about George Bush's interior motivations and then make his own points.

[ultraist]

33. Lakoff is right!

Democrats have left the poor behind and have failed to articulate our core values.

For the first time, in a long time, many Dems are starting to voice the same message: Bush's policies are devasting to the poor and working Americans. Dean said it, Edwards said it, Pelosi said it, Reid said it, etc...

Dean has a different style. Edwards shouldn't be expected to change his style to become Dean or vice versa.

[madfloridian]

34. I like Edwards' style very much. But he did say he did not agree.

That is all I am saying. The media undercuts Dean by saying that other Democrats don't agree with him.

This is a crucial time in the party's future. All of them, all, have got to quit disagreeing in public.

[faithnotgreed]

36. im with you mad - this "president" absolutely does not care

and i want leaders who are going to call him out on that
i was glad to see howard say it straight this past week

and i also agree with your point that the media likes to offer up to other democrats what dean said and ask if they agree
often they say they dont or dont answer directly

i dont know what it is with the party but they are independent voices in that they arent on the same page but they are definitely not independent from the prevailing republican-like speak

now im not disrespecting edwards - i appreciate very much his call for addressing the real need of looking racism and classism in the eye - or anyone else but what i want in a leader is someone who says straight out that this administration is all about saying one thing and doing something much different

and even dean doesnt always do that but this week i really appreciated him stating the truth of this president - he does not care at all
and he stuck with it when pressed
just wish anyone else would back him up on that

[I_am_Spartacus]

39. I think that frame has proven to be unsuccessful.

Gore tried it in 2000. It didn't work. 2004 was more about hating bush on the left than it was about offering an alternative. That didn't work.

We're not even really running against just Bush anymore. We're running against Bush and everythign he stands for, and the Republican bench is very deep with people who believe the same things Bush believes.

It's time to try strategies that will work to make people's lives better. It's time to talk about what we beliieve and contrast that with what they believe (and not with Bush's personality traits) so that people know what they're voting for when they vote D.

[madfloridian]

40. I do so disagree with you.

When your so-called president and his cronies are about to take the country down, there is a need to speak up.

This being so nice and agreeable stuff is not going to work. We now have to point out Bush's flaws and hope they stick.

Dean said it will take decades, and I think he is right. We are so screwed right now...it will take rebuilding not just the party, but the country's infrastructure and economy.

Being real nice now is not going to work.

[faithnotgreed]

42. we are in a real mess but what i took from his post is

that we have to start speaking up about what democrats stand for and not spend all time just refuting bush
and that is true

thats something important about dean - he wants real change and he will talk about what bush is doing wrong but also encourage the needed talk of what democrats can offer

[I_am_Spartacus]

43. It's time for potential candidates to do what it takes to win.

We've seen in the past that any time Bush does something wrong, the media wants to lure democrats into attacking him personally so that nobody ever gets around to talk about contrasting ideas and political philosophies. Why do you think Blitzer asked that question? He wanted to make people think democrats have no ideas other than hating Bush.

If you're a liberal and you hate Bush, criticize him all you want. But you must know that a significant portion of voters respond to those PERSONAL attacks by thinking, "if the Democrats are just picking on Bush, I guess they don't have any better ideas."

So, here we have an example of Edwards coming on and making a very well-argued argument about contrasting IDEAS about how to make life for Americans better. NOBODY is put on the defensive and distracted by personal attacks. Even Bush supporters must be thinking that Edwards' ideas are better than anything they hear coming from Bush.

Remember, progressive political leaders aren't running for President of the Democratic Party. They're running for President of the United States (or, if they're not running for president, they're trying to sway all Americans to vote progressively, and not just preaching to the choir).

I'm not saying people shouldn't speak up. I'm saying people should speak in a way that wins elections and sways people to think and act progressively.

I'm really not saying anything Lakoff didn't say in his Alternet article.

Also, it's definitely not being nice and agreeable to talk about contrasting political philosophies in a way that's going convince a majority of Americans to vote for Democrats. In fact, nothing could be more agressive and in your face than taking back the white house, even if you don't use personal attacks to achieve that.

[ultraist]

45. Yes, and isn't it time Democrats stood FOR something

rather than just "we hate George Bush." We need a cause, a strong message that is framed effectively.

I have no problem with Dean assaulting Bush's character. It appeals to some Democrats. But in general, we need put the focus on who we are as Democrats, what our core values are.

[I_am_Spartacus]

48. Yes. And if Dems spend next three years making Bush the target

and explanation for everything that is wrong with America, then our party is going to be screwed in 2008 when we find out he's not even running and all our time in the media was spent only criticizing him instead of contrasting ideas about how government should act and contrasting values.

In fact, I bet the media is going to spend a lot of time luring democrats into doing just that -- into talking about Bush's personality instead of talking about what they believe.

[faithnotgreed]

52. agreed with 1st part but just for the record dean does offer alternatives

just in case you think that dean spends most time attacking bush
i dont know if you do think that but just in case i wanted to point it out

ive heard him numerous times cite specific guidance/suggestions for what democrats stand for and policies that need to be emphasized and strengthened but those arent the things that get as much coverage
the media loves to pit dean against bush and also other democrats v dean
besides the fact that bush destroys so much there is no end to the time that democrats and others need just to talk about that
let alone time on these shows to talk about what they can offer

[I_am_Spartacus]

55. Dean is doing a great job as DNC chair.

His primary campaign, however, was oriented more around Bush than any other primary campaign, which is why today Blitzer is able to use shorthand allusions to what Dean said that invoke images of personal attacks on Bush regardless of whether Dean actually personally attacked Bush.

[madfloridian]

57. Dean made it safe to criticize Bush last year.

We should have spoken up more loudly. This is getting silly, so I am off this thread. I made my point that it was about not letting the media do this.....I also read both transcipts. I gave you the link if you choose to read.

[1932]

66. I'm reading Richard Parker's Galbraith bio.

He describes the 1956 election. He was one of three speechwriters for Stevenson. They had a huge conflict with the political directors on the campaign who were encouraging Stevenson to engage in personal attacks of Eisenhower. The writers saw Stevenson tanking in the polls as a result of the personal attacks. The political directors prevalied over the writers and the personal attacks continued. He ended up doing worse in '56 than he did in '52. The writers weren't suprised at all. They saw it coming.

Back up four years: After the '52 election, Galbraith and a group of other prominent democrats decided that the democrats didn't stand for anything. They decided to have monthly meetings with other prominent democrats where they hashed out ideas about the tax code, agricultural policy, foreign polict, etc. Before the '56 primaries they convinced Stevenson (who was very conservative and showed it in '52) to run on these new ideas, which Stevenson did up to his acceptance speech at the convention. At the convention he tore up the acceptance speech written by Galbraith's group and did his own thing from that point on.

Eventually, Kennedy ran on Galbraith's group's ideas and just about every New Frontier piece of legislation emerged from that discussion group.

It's obvious: ideas win and personal attacks lose. There's historical precedent for that.

[madfloridian]

69. So I see 3 of you who want to leave Bush alone and not criticize.

That totally stuns and amazes me, and I am don't think you have a clue about anything the DNC under Dean's leadership is doing. There are ideas all over... he is traveling the country to organize. There are ideas all over the website, and there are plans.

That is a bunch of BS....not to criticize.

I am sick of the apologists who got us where we are today.

What Dean started last week was dialogue about race and poverty. It was continued by Edwards and Obama, though they were still sort of afraid of approving of him. I call it the Stockholm Syndrome...not wanting to offend the ones in control of you.

I believe 1932 and I have had differences over the role of religion in politics. Well, sir, we are coming down to the wire. You are going to win this one hands down.....but you will have lost. You will see the most utterly ruthless right wing religious zealots take over this country....but you can always say you remained nice and nonconfrontational. No one is going to listen to our ideas until we show what this bunch is like.

I can not believe, nor do I want to believe that there are still people here at DU who think we should ignore Bush as he takes this country down.

There is a time for niceties and complacence....there is a time to point out that we have just had our government hijacked by uncaring men.

Doing it the nice way lost us all of it last year. I am not believing I am seeing this still here at DU.

[1932]

71. I'm only weighing in with a little bit of history.

I'm reading the Galbraith biography and this very issue came up. Galbraith started a group to develop ideas for the Democratic party. He worked for Stevens in '52 and felt the reason Democrats lost was because they didn't stand for something -- people didn't know what they believed. He spent four years developing a set of ideas on which to base the campaign in '56. Stevenson used those ideas to win the primary, but abandoned them to build a campaign oriented around personal criticism of Eisenhower. He did worse in '56 than he did in '52.

It's just an historical lesson. Make of it what you will.

As for our past argument on religion, what you disagreed with was Jim Wallis. I read God's Politics and wrote about it here and you said you disagreed with almost every argument Wallis made that I wrote here. I also believe that you refused to read the book yourself, no?

As for ignoring Bush, JFK used Galbraith & Co's ideas and won in '60 when the Republicans were engaged in vicious anti-communism and racism. He didn't attack Nixon personally.

So, do you want to win or do you want to feel like your appetite for destruction has been sated even if that strategy has never worked to win a national election?

[madfloridian]

72. You misinterpret everything I say or said.

I very much like Jim Wallis, I subscribe to the Sojourners' newsletter. I just don't want the religious community running the government....not the left, not the right.

You are misinterpreting everything that is going on at the DNC. I have no idea of why you are doing it. I have no clue. There is positive rebuilding state to state.

I don't know why you are assuming that Dean, or whomever you are talking about was just bashing Bush.....I have no clue where you got that or why you persist in continuing to say it.

Today is like no other time in our history. We have become what many of us feared for years now. It may be too late. It may not.

But someone has GOT to point out the evil nature of what this bunch is doing. Someone has to do it. They can do it and still offer a plan.

I would appreciate it if you would take time to read what I say. I did not say those things about Wallis at all. I just don't want him or any preacher taking part in politics.

[1932]

74. I was responding to your post about Dean's primary strategy.

He wasn't head of the DNC back then, so I don't know where you get the idea that I'm misrepresenting what is happening at the DNC.

You may like Wallis, but I believe you said that you refused to read his book. His book has a very good argument about why Democrats shouldn't abandon the discussion of values, which lets the Republicans completely define it. It's nice that you like him, but you admit that you completely disagree with one of his central arguments AND you won't read his book, no?

As for imputing motives, here's my motive: I want people to READ BOOKS, ENGAGE IN THE ARGUMENTS AND IDEAS OUT THERE THAT SMART PROGRESSIVES ARE DEVELOPING, and LEARN FROM HISTORY.

If you think that my doing that is somehow "misrepresenting" facts, then I have to say that I really don't thinnk that indicates a problem that I'm having.

[faithnotgreed]

58. yes - wolf and chris matthews etc love that tactic nt

[blue neen]

75. You make some very good points.

I agree that even Bush supporters must be thinking that Edwards' ideas are better than anything they hear coming from Bush.

Intelligent discourse, plausible and workable ideas, and that those ideas include how to improve the lives of the poor. That one definitely needs to be hammered home, because Bush has made the lives of the poor infinitely worse--and that was on the television last week for all the world to see.

[faithnotgreed]

41. sounds good - democrats are supposed to stand for so much of

what is right in the world that they dont need to be anti-bush
they need very much to do just what youre saying here
though i dont know who actually follows through anymore on the real issues democrats are supposed to stand up for

on edit: however i believe govt is 90+% corrupt or disconnected and if not for those like john conyers or sheila jackson lee zoe lofgren henry waxman the % would be higher
the senate well forget about listing who is not compromised in some way

btw: im not sure what framing you are saying doesnt work
i want someone to tell it like it is esp during a tragedy such as we have in iraq and the other gulf as well
theres so much to dispute about bush policies that it seems all interest and time is spent refuting or arguing about the latest travesty

but on an every day level it makes every sense to just talk about what x candidate really stands for
in clear terms

[I_am_Spartacus]

44. I agree. 90% of gov't is corrupt and driven by greed.

That's why you can't say that the problem with N.O. is because Bush doesn't care about people. It's so much bigger. It transcends Bush's personal traits, whatever they might be.

[madfloridian]

46. Where did you get that statement? Dean never said that.

You just pulled that out of the air.

This is what makes me mad.

Go to www.cnn.com/transcripts

Choose the 9th, scroll down, and read what he said.

[I_am_Spartacus]

49. I address this in post 37.

Edwards was asked "do you think the president doesn't care about some of these people?"

I'll repeat my points in post 37:

Even if Edwards knew what Dean said in that CNN transcrip, Edwards can't be expected to know EVERYTHING Dean has said. And viewers probably don't know ANYTHING Dean has said and only want to know if Edwards things the problem with N.O. is Bush's personal feelings about people. (And that's why it was important for Edwards to unequivocatingly say "no" that he thinks the problem is much bigger than Bush's personal feelings.)

I suppose Edwards could have got into a discussion with Blitzer about what Dean actually said, but like I said above, time's short. He wasn't there to discuss Dean. He was there to make his points about what he believed (which he did very well).

[madfloridian]

50. See, that's the problem.

Bush IS the problem. His incompetency should have been pointed out by every one of our Democrats loudly from last year on.

He is not the only problem, but he is one scary man.

Please read the transcript from CNN before we discuss it anymore. Dean offered criticism, but he offered suggestions as well....when Wolf shut up long enough to let him.

I like Edwards very much. I am speaking mainly about the media pitting our guys against each other.

[faithnotgreed]

51. i just posted that as well - i hate what the media does to the

democratic participants and wish they would get called on it

why cant those on these shows say something to the effect of "thats not what im here to talk about" or something along those lines
there are lots of alternatives of course but i just wish "no" was not the one most frequently used

[I_am_Spartacus]

54. My Democratic principles are founded on so much more than

Bush's personality.

If there were no Bush, I'd still vote Democratic and I wouldn't vote Republican.

And I want to hear from my political representatives an articulation of those principles and values I hold dear which are the reason I vote for Democrtats and not Republicans. I don't want to hear them responding to every crisis by saying if Bush weren't president, things would miraculously be better.

Things will be better if politicians get elected and manifest the values and principles I hold dear and which motivate me to vote for Democrats.

[ultraist]

61. No, Bush is not THE problem. He wont even be running in 08

The dangerous, conservative philosophy and polices are THE problem. Bush is merely a figurehead for the radical wingnuts. Anybody but Bush, only goes so far and then hits the wall.

Democrats need to attack the Republican conservative policies that are destroying our country. Moreover, Democrats need to offer solutions and stand FOR something. We ARE the party that embodies the true democratic principles/values. This, our message, needs to be articulated. ABB is NOT who we are.

[madfloridian]

70. That is what I am talking about, OK?

That is what Dean talked about in the interview...that was Edwards and Obama were talking about.

Did you even hear his CNN interview? Where are you guys getting these ideas that he only attacked Bush.

Either you are baiting on purpose, or you truly are uninformed about the statements Dean made this week.

Unreal.

[ultraist]

62. sorry, dupe

[faithnotgreed]

47. but do you think this summarizes - in very simple terms -

why there was not funding for the levees
why there was great delay in rescue operations
why his photo ops have been missteps
etc

the average person may connect with this since its sound bite level

it is so much bigger that he doesnt care but its definitely truth and one that doesnt take the typical 9 paragraphs of democrats to explain~

on edit: i wish edwards would have said either "yes i agree with dean" or at very least to respond with "i dont know deans exact words and thats not what im here to talk about" etc

they are both correct and i dont like how the media and the participants play the game sometimes
they know there will be attempts to undercut subtly and otherwise when they appear

i dont like how dean is used - they will ask obama and edwards etc if they agree with dean and i dont like that approach at all and wish the participants would call the media on that and make it clear that game needs to be stopped

[I_am_Spartacus]

53. I think Edwards did a good job of drawing the bigger picture

I think he did a good job of opening people's eyes to structural, systemic, political problems.

Here's a chronological summary of his points:

Up front he hits on two policy points (which he fits into a fact-based argument).

- switching from debit cards to bank deposits is absurd because of the reality of the reality of the lives of the victims--they're not going to get the money they need because of a policy choice by the Bush administration.

- suspending Davis Bacon is absurd because people not getting enough money to live is the fucking reason so many people suffered.

Both of these points add up to the fact that "this administration {has no} understanding of what their lives are like" (which is a more powerful point that Bush personally doesn't care about people because it indicts an entire system and not just one man's personality problems or attention span).

He goes on to say these are problems (poverty) that exist everywhere and not just in N.O., and we're all facing similar risks.

And the solution: Put people to work, pay them good wages, pay them decent benefits and give people the dignity that comes from having a good job and being able to support your family.

That's not just a solution for N.O. That's a solution for all of America. This is what New Dealers believed. It's what progressive Democrats have believed since the New Deal, while Truman and Stevenson, and others who didn't really believe that were leading the party and breaking the hearts of New Dealers.

Just about everything else Edwards said after that fit within this basic frame he estabilished up front. I'm sure that even moderates and conservatives couldn't help but be swayed by the resonating logic.

[faithnotgreed]

56. he definitely made important points - no question

and i thank him for giving concrete examples of what bush is doing
certainly the media is not jumping all over the fact that bush undercuts poverty and this country yet again with his suspension of federal wage guidelines
and i again thank edwards for discussing poverty


my only statement was that i wish any dems would not fall for that trap the media consistently sets: dean said this and do you agree

like you said perhaps edwards does not even know what dean said but in this particular conversation it comes down to this: bush DOES NOT care about people and i wish that would be supported by anyone talking about this huge complex issue

this is another example of dean (or fill in the blank) making any statement against bush - which is really why they are invited on these dog and pony shows - and the next person on another show is asked do they agree

if the dems are going to be able to talk about their ideas as i know you have stated then i just want them to call the media on their bs tactics and get on with talking about the real issues
and yes edwards spent his time outlining his ideas which is crucial
i just dont know why he had to specifically respond that no (he doesnt agree with dean)
i am only sharing that i wish he would say thats not what he is there to talk about
and i certainly give edwards credit for steering the interview

and i also noticed wolf seemed more respectful of edwards and asked about his wifes health

i dont need dems to agree with each other on everything by any means
i just want them to state what we know is truth: bush doesnt care and he doesnt understand poverty

i hope you understand im not quibbling just hope that im sharing whats most important to me: calling bush out on his disastrous policies and responses while also clearly discussing what they would do instead
they should be able to do that

[madfloridian]

60. Video link for you.

All our Dems need to stand together. This is only a portion, the whole video is up at CNN under Video, Politics. Someone just posted this snip just now.
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/09/09/dean-calls-for-moral-leadership/

[blm]

73. I agree. They should be speaking with common cause at this moment.

Protect the people who need protecting and pull the mask off those who exacerbated this disaster.

[DemDogs]

76. Using Edwards' points - they don't get it. (n/t)

[Vinca]

29. Warning to Elizabeth Edwards: I LOVE YOUR HUSBAND!

:loveya:

[etherealtruth]

31. I love him too ...

I love his intelligence, his sincerity, his politics ...

[politicasista]

59. I do. I miss him and the Mrs.

:(