Edwards and Dean Supporters: What's up with this?

[Clark2008]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/04/AR2005060401733.html?nav=hcmodule

Edwards also disagreed with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean's controversial comment in a speech to liberal activists Thursday that many Republicans "have never made an honest living in their lives."

"The chairman of the DNC is not the spokesman for the party," Edwards said. "He's a voice. I don't agree with it."

Please, no flaming... I'm in Tennessee and picked this up, which is why I posted it.

However, it does, well... it confirms what I've felt about both Edwards and Dean for a long time.

Comments?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Seems like an odd thing to say.

Personally, I'm liking it a lot when Dean calls out the Repubs, and I can't think why Edwards would want to contradict him. Maybe there's some context missing here. It just seems strange.

[Clark2008]

6. It could be. I didn't go to the dinner (I'm not in Nashville)

and I'm just seeing what's reported.

However, it was direct quotes and no paraphrasing, so I'm wondering.

Tennesseans don't hate Dean as DNC chair - in fact, that's where many of us thought he belonged because of his fire and fund-raising abilities. I don't see why Edwards would need to distance himself from Dean here. Especially, not in Nashville - which is blue to the core.

[FreedomAngel82]

9. Right

I'm in Tennessee and really like Dean. He's great and so perfect as the chairman. I also like Edwards. :shrug: I didn't go to the event since I went to visit my grandfather in the hospital.

[saltpoint]

11. FreedomAngel82, I hope your grandfather is ok.

I'll send some positive vibes that way for good wishes.

[Radical Activist]

16. He had to distance himself from the statement

because there are a lot of hard working Republicans which makes that statement thoughtless and pointlessly insulting. That doesn't seem odd to me.

[ultraist]

61. I agree! Biden also distanced himself from that statement

Dean can be a loose canon. WHY insult so many Republican VOTERS? It was a stupid comment. Granted, Dean is attempting to fire up the base, but he needs to THINK before he throws these comments out.

He ended up apologizing for his rebel flag comment.

I like Dean and made a donation to the DNC the day he was nominated but he is NOT perfect.

[napi21]

79. If you would have heard what Dean actually said, you'd see he was

RIGHT in what he said! He was referring to the Pub politicians! And he's right, most of them haven't ever heald a working class job where they would have to stand in line somewhere! Especially our President!!!!

The media, as usual, has cherry picked the statement to make it sound like he ws referring to all Pubs!

Look at the people in the House and the Senate on both sides! How many of them do YOU think had to ever wait in line for many hours to vote???

[ultraist]

83. We didn't know he wasn't referring to Repuke voters too, UNTIL

he clarified his remarks this am on Blitzer. Dean should have framed his comment more carefully. Dean is one of our major spokespeople for our party. He is not in Kansas (VT) anymore. ;)

It was a careless statement. I like Dean but he has a pattern of being too loose, at times.

[Zhade]

85. Don't know about this comment, but Dean never should have apologized...

...for the Confederate flag remark, since it's clear to anyone who thinks it through that he was illustrating that poor whites in the South consistently vote against their own economic interests thanks to bullshit wedge issues.

[aquart]

2. I have no problem with this.

Let them think it's disunity.

[usregimechange]

3. Dean needs to be smart about this stuff.

[DebJ]

4. Wolf Blitzer, I believe it was, had Dean clarify his statements on

his show, where Dean said he wasn't referring to Republican voters, but to Republican leadership in Washington. Blitzer chided Dean to be more accurate in his speaking, and Dean agreed, and Blitzer was correct. I think he handled it well, giving Dean a chance to clarify..

[Hatalles]

8. The Dean interview is over at www.dembloggers.com.

http://www.dembloggers.com

Dr. Dean did an awesome job.

[corbett]

31. Agreed - Dr. Dean's Screed Was For Beltway Insiders

I still love John Edwards but am a little worried about him at the moment. A few days ago, he met with Tony Blair to talk about poverty and is bragging about the sit-down he had. All of this was well after the Downing Street Memo broke. As I understand it, Blair is as guilty of treason as Dubya. Edwards should not associate himself with that type of person and I have sent him an email to that effect.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050601/the_key_to_impeachment.php

[ultraist]

62. Good! Glad Dean clarified. He should be a little more careful

And not use broad generalizations that can be easily construed.

[stillcool]

5. a non-article?

saying nothing about nothing...except a little side-ways bashing of Howard Dean..guess that's the point...if you're into that kind of stuff...

[tmorelli415]

7. Dean's choice of words were the problem...

I'm not necessarily a Dean or Edwards supporter, but I did see his speech on C-SPAN at the 'Take Back America' Conference. I think the point he wanted to make was that many Republicans have never had to work for a living in their lives - I can't say I disagree with that. But His choice of the words "never made an honest living," suggested that they made a 'dishonest' living rather than didn't work for a living at all (as in living off of daddy's estate, or an investment portfolio). That's just how I perceived it at least. I think he ought to just smile and chuckle at himself and explain what he meant since it came out a little muddled: 'Now, Wolfe, you know the point I was making is that many of them have never had to work for a living - honest or dishonest - a day in their lives. We Democrats are just not as concerned about the pocketbooks of those people as are the Republicans - they don't need our help, but the middle class does. Can't argue with that now can you?' Real simple, leave it at that with a smile and a wink. But once again Democrats suck at handling the press, while this could be neatly disposed quite handily. One can only hope it will change.

[Awsi Dooger]

30. I think you nailed it

Dr. Dean speaks off the cuff and seemingly can't avoid staggering his own cause with improper choice of words. Pathetic irony because Bush can't complete a coherent thought but his gaffes come across as laugh-it-off botching of the language while Dean is frequently on the defensive even when he isn't reciting our great states. This is somewhat similar to fall 2003 when Dean should have said NASCAR sticker on their cars instead of Confederate Flag. You would think Dean would realize that words like "never made an honest living" and "confederate flag" can easily be tagged as inflammatory. Frankly, I think some of that stems from winning so many elections (Vermont votes every two years) in a brief period of time. You assume a margin for error and words flow freely. As a minority higher-up Dean needs to distance himself from scattergun comments that label a huge chunk of voters we need to woo. I'm an Edwards supporter and it's utterly predictable he shot down Dean's remark. Remember, Edwards has won only one election and he dealt with 12 jurors for decades, utilizing and perfecting a vocabulary that's unlikely to offend.

[Mairead]

32. No, Edwards's interpretation was the problem

To live off of someone else's labor is not an 'honest living'. It's a parasitical one. But that's not the same as an illegal living--something can be legal but (ethically) dishonest: Capitalism is based on that kind of dishonesty.

I'm far from being an admirer of Dean's politics, but he called that one right.

[AmericanDream]

95. Oh, so no repubs have ever made an honest living?

C'mon gimme a break. There are in fact many Republican senators and congressmen who have very humble roots... there is a limit to generalizaiton and Dean crossed it with this one. Edwards interpreted exactly what the rest of the world did.

[saltpoint]

10. The thing to remember is that Dean once came over to Edwards' house

and set fire to the garage. A pure act of savagery. Inexplicable.

In retaliation, Edwards shot flaming arrows at Dean one morning as he pulled out of the driveway.

Dean, wounded and blinded, lost control of the vehicle and crashed into Dick Gephardt, who was on his way back from yet another stop at the local brothel. You just can't keep Dick Gephardt out of a brothel.

Trouble is, that particular brothel was owned by Wes Clark, who had in the meanwhile, hired Carol Moseley Braun to run it. Hide the paper trail is ALWAYS a good strategy, except when Dick Gephardt leaves his credit card on the counter and who should pick it up but -- John Kerry.

Kerry then USES Gephardt's Visa card to buy off Osama bin Laden's people in Baghdad to HIDE the weapons of mass destruction from the inspectors. A great plan, if a bit illegal. But then that's how these people all operate.

So Dean holds a press conference to OPPOSE the war on Iraq, and behold! No weapons are found.

That's what you have to remember.

[Radical Activist]

14. hilarious post n/t

[saltpoint]

17. thnx, RadAct.

By the way, your Che quotation?

It's absolutely perfect.

[janx]

15. I remember that!

All of it--as if it were yesterday. It was on Fox News, and that cable channel had its own theme song and graphics throughout the entire affair. Dammit, *that* was entertainment!

[saltpoint]

18. Indeed it was. Ah the allure of halcyon days...

...on FOX!

[Clark2008]

21. LMAO!

Great post!

Way to keep it light! :7

[saltpoint]

24. Hi, Clark2008. It's getting late so I just couldn't muster a --

-- coherent, serious response. Sorry about that.

Called to bed, I think I will wrap it up on DU for tonight.

Good wishes to ya.

[globalvillage]

33. LOL

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Except Kerry didn't take the Visa card.

It was Discover, and I hear he got lots of Cashback points.

The rest, I'm certain, is true.

[saltpoint]

64. LOL!

Yep -- those Cashback points are where it's at.

[Zhade]

87. He's holding those Cashback points for his 2008 campaign!

:evilgrin:

[Fleshdancer]

51. Poor Gephardt. Those interest charges will eat him alive.

Someone should make this into a Visa commercial. :D

[saltpoint]

65. Hi, GloriaSmth. No! If somebody does make this into a

VISA ad, I'm in the slammer for life for MAJOR libel!

[XemaSab]

97. Damn!

I don't have a TV, so I didn't realize.

Should have voted for Kucinich after all..... :spank: :shrug:

[AmericanDream]

12. What does it confirm about the two?

It's interesting how the article doesn't mention what the reporter asked Edwards, for him to say that. It is yet another example of taking stuff out of context. I bet Edwards was simply stating that he does not agree that no Republicans have ever earned an honest living... and he's damn right about that. Dean has yet to learn some of the basics of national politics... he should be straightforward but also show some class. You do not have to indulge into such generalizations to fire up the Dem activists, and it causes unnecessary controversy and turns away the independent voters that we need to attract.

As for Dean and Edwards, I think they understand each other well and get along fine. In fact, I've often heard Dean say that we need someone from the south to lead the party and has indirectly hinted at Edwards. However, publicly, if Dean is going to make some outrageous comments, then Edwards is not going to stick by them because as the DNC chair, Dean can get away with such stuff but Edwards, who definitely has plans for higher office, is going to be no good if he aligns himself with some of Dean's misstatements.

BTW. in that quote Edwards is saying what he has repeated earlier, which is that the DNC chair is only one voice in the party, the elected officials and other dems are going to have their own voices within the party.. because frankly its the officeholders or potential officeholders who give the party its image, not its chairman. How many republicans even know Ken Mehlmen?

[Clark2008]

22. No... no... it was MY personal opinion about the two of them

Nothing more.

[PeaceProgProsp]

37. Which was?

That they needed to be played off against each other to allow another candidate to slip past them?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

45. Who could that be?

:freak:

[Clark2008]

102. No.

This has nothing to do with Clark.

I have respect for Dean.

And, I'll leave it at that.

[tmorelli415]

26. Edwards was only responding to a reporter's question

Likely having not heard what Dean had said, Edwards was asked by a reporter what he thought of XYZ statement by Dean. Of course, Edwards was not going to defend such a thing so he responded in a way that he felt would not implicate the entire party with Dean's words as he understood them and also not implicate himself. This is a trick reporters use all the time: get you to respond to a quote without providing any background. Edwards should have said, "I didn't hear what Howard said, so I don't feel comfortable responding until I have. It doesn't sound like something a Democrat would say." He didn't handle this the best way but his intentions were noble; the result was that the press characterized it as disunity in the party when in fact they manufactured the entire episode by manipulating the situation. Once again in Dean's defense as well, I saw his speech on C-SPAN and his delivery was not at its best - he tripped over a few parts of the speech and it was clear that it was just not one of those days when things came out as they were meant to.

I just want to add that I am not necessarily a Clark supporter either. I like all of these guys: Dean, Edwards, Clark - they're all good guys as far as I am concerned. Read my previous post in this thread and you'll see that I've defended both Dean and Edwards - this is a manufactured story by the media. That is who is to blame, and also the fact that Democrats in general need to be a little more media savvy.

[XemaSab]

98. Have you heard the full quote in context?

n/t

[Radical Activist]

13. Dean has a history of making poorly worded, rash statements

that other Democrats, even very liberal ones, have had to distance themselves away from. That's nothing new. I'm not sure what you think it says about Edwards.

[Pepperbelly]

19. God love Dr. Dean but why in the world, with all of the low-down

despicable things these criminals have done ... apparently including Amnesty International's requests for international warrants on these thugs, did Dr. Dean make a point that was so demonstrably false as well as not even making a point as a populist?

I mean ... it probably felt good but it really didn't sear them with the truth either.

[XemaSab]

99. How is it demonstrably false

that many republicans have never made an honest living in their lives?

There are the republicans who don't work and have never worked, yes, but then there are also republicans who live off of trust funds and republicans who are tobacco lobbyists. There are also democrats who are in these categories, but there seem to be fewer filthy rich democrats and fewer soulless democrats than there are republicans.

[snowbear]

20. He clarified himself on Wolf Blitzer..

And it Wolfie-poo seemed to be perfectly satisfied... :shrug:

Did they also print Limbaugh's comments that someone on here posted a couple days ago (someone here that actually listens to his show :o ) that ..."most Democrats don't work"

[PurityOfEssence]

23. The extremist Clark supporters' hatred of Edwards is amazing

Okay, folks, and especially you moderators, please hear me out.

This is a divisive thread from a Clark supporter against the scurrilous old bugaboo: John Edwards.

Not having heard the full content in context, I can only go on what's represented here, but if this is verbatim, it could have been a bit more deftly turned on Edwards' part. Howard Dean, as Chairman of the Democratic Party is a voice of the party and if not the "spokesman" of all in the party, certainly a front man for the operation. Edwards says "he's a voice", but goes on to say that he doesn't agree with it.

Dean has done a good job as Chairman, and much as I've had many problems with him in the past (and present) it's a good position for him. Still, to say that "many Republicans have never made an honest living in their lives" is reckless beyond foolhardy. "Many" means "a whole bunch", and in a country of over a quarter billion people, the statement is equally valid for any large group.

It's a combative and ill-reasoned statement on Dean's part.

Edwards is correct to distance himself from this statement, and if people are paying attention, he's been supportive of Dean and a real team player.

I would like to know what the passive-aggressive statement by the thread starter means. What does this confirm to you about Edwards and Dean? Please elaborate on their unspeakable moral deficiencies. Obviously Edwards is a sidewinder and Dean is some version of imbecile, but in lieu of your putting words into your own mouth, I'm just guessing. Please state, SPECIFICALLY, what the unseemly traits of these two are.

Howard Dean is a moderate. He's perhaps even a bit to the right of moderate, and I've taken issue with him for many things, but he's got guts, a heart and more than a scrap of integrity. As Party Chairman, he's made many mistakes, but this is a very good position for him: he's not one to make sins of omission; he makes mistakes of commission.

This thread is mealy-mouthed flame bait, and I'd like to hear a response.

Mods, once again, if this is unacceptable, please contact me.

[Clark2008]

25. I put IN my OP that I did NOT want flame

And, yet, you accuse me of being mealy-mouthed.

I could have espoused that Edwards was being a jerk or that Dean was being a creep, but I didn't.

YOU, however, accuse me of starting shit.

Look, this happened in my home state and at the JJ dinner. I get Google alerts on this stuff and posted it because it made MY eyebrows rise. We're all talking unity and this doesn't speak to that. Is it real or is it Mem"rightwingmedia"Ex? I don't know.

What this confirms to me, as I read it, about Edwards and Dean is that they are cut from two different cloths and which cloth I prefer is NONE of YOUR business.

[tmorelli415]

28. The dischord here is playing right into the hands of the press

Again, I don't mean to sound like I know it all but I am a PR consultant and I have been working with reporters for 12 years. Read my previous posts in this thread and then we can all kiss and make up. ;)

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Inspired]

38. Very well said..eom

[Clark2008]

104. And you can't read.

Stop jumping to conclusions because I don't like Edwards. Did you ever think that this kind of crap is WHY I don't care for him much?

And I don't owe you any answers. I'm not running for president.

[JNelson6563]

44. You are right on one count at least POE

Found this from MadFloridian elsewhere:

First this:
http://tinyurl.com/9hweg

Then I found this.
http://tinyurl.com/chf57

(#102) (Rated 5.00/1)
by ________ on 06/04/2005 11:47:08 PM EST
Snip..............

"Edwards also disagreed with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean's controversial comment in a speech to liberal activists Thursday that many Republicans "have never made an honest living in their lives."

"The chairman of the DNC is not the spokesman for the party," Edwards said.
"He's a voice. I don't agree with it."".........more

http://tinyurl.com/8dfwk
Reply

(#104) (No rating)
______ I'm speechless.Parent | Reply

(#109) (No rating)

Doesn't it just look as if we need to keep our powder dry and stand back and watch. How delicious to see HD and JE's supporters tangling.Parent | Reply

(#110) (No rating)
I just hope it doesn't make us all look bad.Parent | Reply

(#132) (No rating)
How can it? We're just observing whats going on and doing our own thing!Parent | Reply

(#113) (No rating)

Yes, keep our powder dry.

Those supporters will, of course, be the voters we will be courting if General Wes runs.

And, I would think, some of them are among our visitors these days.

Parent | Reply

(#114) (No rating)
I just saw that online! I posted it on DU for their, erm... well, take.

Edwards is... shoot. I can't say. It would be bashing another "Democrat."
Parent | Reply
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Interesting, no? ;-)

[Jai4WKC08]

52. All of which proves....

What? Nothing that I can see.

The first post from the Clark blog (don't know why you'd try to hide the fact you've been snooping there again, JN) expresses dismay that Edwards would call out Dean for his remark about Repubs. Not a particularly outlandish view, altho not one all of us share by any means.

Then another poster implies he/she looks forward to watching the fireworks. Well, given Edwards' record of denouncing Dean (remember the confederate flag debate?), I don't find that too surprising. But again, one poster--not a commonly held view. And in fact, the first poster is concerned about how the conflict reflects on the party.

Finanlly, a third (not necessarily the OP above since this has appeared several places at DU) wants to see the DU take. Now there's an offensive sentiment, right? Oh, and that poster happens not to like Edwards much. A much more common view, and not one without history or cause. As tho there aren't Edwards (and Dean) fans who don't like Clark? Not you or PoE, I bet, heh. At least he or she declined to say anything bad about Edwards... more restraint than I've seen from a lot of Clark-haters, and on this much more public forum. I also notice that he/she didn't post a DU link, for all the rest of us to pile on. Isn't that what we usually get accused of? Even when it doesn't happen?

Bottom line is, so what?

Is it cause for PoE to attack the OP poster for asking a legitimate question? Rather viciously at that. And by extension all Clark supporters?

Reminds me of the Bushies blaming Newsweek and CBS for reporting Geneva Convention abuses. Attack the messenger instead of speaking to the underlying issue or problem, if one even exists.

But hey, Clarkies are fair game at DU, aren't we?

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CarolNYC]

58. Could you please post links

to these MANY derisive threads started by Clark supporters? I think I've missed a lot of them.

Thanks much!

[PurityOfEssence]

77. The archives are inaccessible

As I said above, things have been rather quiet of late, since the last hullabaloo that got Skinner to post a thread on the subject.

As I've also said before, it's not just threads started by Clark supporters, it's often in benign pro-Edwards threads that the ante is upped. With the speed of the board these days, not being able to access beyond the twenty most recent pages makes it impossible for me to meet your challenge.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[XemaSab]

100. Wait....

I thought it was Dean supporters who were the divisive posters of flame bait.

What did I miss?

[janx]

55. When anyone (and I stress ONE) attempts to seed division in this forum,

especially by appealing--once again--to the divisions of last year's primaries, then yes, that person is "fair game."

"Edwards supporters" and "Dean supporters" are direct references to just that.

Excuses for, interpretations of, or justifications for such behavior will only make the situation worse.

[CarolNYC]

60. I agree wtih you on this....

The calling of "Edwards supporters" and "Dean supporters" shouldn't have been done, IMHO, unless there was some attempt to get these people at each others' throats...We should all be Dem supporters here. All of these guys are fighting for us...or at least I hope they are.

[Clark2008]

105. And it wasn't done to be devisive.

It's just that so many Dean supporters started supporting Edwards after it was clear that Dean wasn't winning, so I wanted their take.

Period.

[ultraist]

67. Edwards does NOT have a record of denouncing Dean!

That is total BS. Edwards did not tear down ANY Dem candidate during the primaries. He disagreed with Dean's stupid ass rebel flag comment and Dean APOLOGIZED for the comment stating that it was INSENSITIVE as the rebel flag is a "painful symbol."

Dean made yet another stupid comment which he has now clarified. Dean and Edwards get along great. Nice try though. :eyes:

[CarolNYC]

59. ooh, more Clark obsession....

monitoring the Clark blog.....Come on, add one of those rotating stars to your posts...You know you want to...The Clark Side is calling...Others have given in...you can too....

[Darkamber]

27. I'm glad Edwards said what he did.

We need to bring this country together and not pull it apart. I'm sure that Dean was taken out of context somehow. They love to jump on Dean and as the DNC...he'll always be the one to be the hardest on the GOP, but I'm glad Edwards made his statement.

And I'm not sure what you think of Edwards, except that he's keeping the door open on for our party to include everyone. Edwards is a popularist and comes from a heavy GOP state. Do you think for a moment that he would be publically supporting such a statement?

[ultraist]

66. I agree Darkamber!

The FACT is, Dean and Edwards are on the same page in many respects. BOTH talk about returning to our core values. BOTH talk about buidling support in all states. They have appeared together at events since the election.

During the primaries, Dean endorsed Edwards over Kerry when he dropped out. They get along great. That doesn't mean Edwards agrees with every single comment of Dean's.

Dean clarified his statement on Blitzer; obviously because he realized that it was overgeneralization. That statement was BAD FORM.

[Adelante]

71. Did Dean endorse Edwards?

Wow, I don't remember that. Oh, well, it couldn't have lasted long.

[ultraist]

74. Dean said publicly Edwards posed more of a challenge to Bush than Kerry

Dean has said publicly that he believes Edwards poses a more formidable challenge to Bush than does Kerry. Tuesday night, Dean talked with Edwards, prompting speculation that Dean might endorse the North Carolinian.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50741-2004Feb18?language=printer

[Adelante]

76. Well, that's interesting and all

But did Dean in fact endorse Edwards as you stated? Not "might endorse" but did endorse.

[ultraist]

84. What precisely do you mean?

Why don't YOU look it up if you are so interested.

I'm not sure if he "formally" endorsed Edwards during the primaries, as Nader did. Edwards had a LOT of support from major Dem leaders for VP selection---perhaps Dean "formally" endorsed Edwards at this point. I don't recall exactly.

I did remember Dean's favorable statement about Edwards when he first dropped out of the primaries. (The quote I provided from the WP).

My point was made. Dean liked Edwards a LOT during the primaries and he STILL DOES.

What is your point?

[Adelante]

103. Your post #66

"During the primaries, Dean endorsed Edwards over Kerry when he dropped out."

That is precisely what I mean.

My point is, whether Dean liked Edwards a LOT or not, it doesn't mean Dean "endorsed" Edwards. That's all. Not a big deal, just inaccurate.

[otohara]

96. Oh Me Too! Media Jumps All Over This Shit, Makes It Sound Like ALL

democrats criticize Dean.

Yep, gotta love all this attention.

Did you read about Dean's remarks before Biden & Edwards? I didn't!

So Yeah, Bring it on Senators, keep criticizing Dr. Dean - the Right-wing Corporate media loves this more than you know.

[martymar64]

34. Dean was calling it like it is

It sounds like Edwards doesn't want to upset the Rethugs (ooooooh, they might get mad at us!!!) I wholeheartedly back Chairman Dean's statments. We are faced with the most corrupt administration EVER in this country and you guys want to play nice with them, lest they become offended!?! I saw Dean's clarification with Wolfie and it was spot on, despite Blitzers whorish needling and badgering. Come on you guys! Quit being a bunch of pussies and grow a spine!

[JNelson6563]

35. Just like there are "two Americas"

There are two Democratic parties. The one is busy cow-towing and avoiding offending the simian and his fellow zealots, the other has had enough and is calling a spade a spade.

Some want to keep the (kid) gloves on, some of us have taken off the gloves and are ready to do battle as fiercely as the Rethugs. The prize is no less than the very soul of this country.

If John Edwards and his fellow DLCers want to keep pussyfooting around that's their business. Some of us are taking a different way, one that hasn't proven to be the losing way for the last several election cycles.

Julie

[PeaceProgProsp]

39. Read post 23.

[candy331]

53. J Nelson 6563 seems the old saying " The more things change the

more they stay the same" is quite apropos. Dems keep fighting over trivial word games and yet they can't recognize since they are duking it out with each other that the bus is pulling away and they both will be left behind at at the bus stop. Dean smells the fumes of the bus as it is about to pull away and is willing to run to jump on.. The others will lay on the ground and keep fighting each other because they can't fathom that the bus would actually leave them behind. The people will rise up, trust me and Dean sees it.

[ultraist]

68. Edwards is NOT a DLCer.

OBVIOUSLY, you have not listened to any of his speeches late in the campaign or his recent speeches. He has come down HARD on Bush. He is not defending the zealots.

Why do people post blatant LIES such as that about fellow Dems?

I can only imagine the absolute FLAME WARS if I started posting blatant lies about Clark.

[janx]

75. You know who I remember as being a great poster in the Edwards

camp last year? AP. I had one disagreement with AP during that whole fiasco, and we discussed it rationally.

Anyway, I suppose this thread is beginning to accomplish its purpose, sadly.

[Guaranteed]

36. Edwards always disagrees with Dean.

The only thing they really agree on are economic issues. As far as foreign policy and social issues Edwards seems to be pretty well to the right of Dean.

[ultraist]

69. More LIES about Edwards

Dean and Edwards agree on most major issues.

Please cite some FACTS to back up your claim.

Fighting poverty and racism is to the right of Dean? WTF?

[Darkamber]

78. Edwards is to the right of Dean in some issues...

They are on the same page when it comes to Domestic and economic issues and that is Edwards main concern. His direction is more towards helping the poor and ending poverty.

But in terms of the War they were on opposite pages and some people really held that against Edwards. And it gave Edwards some more support with Repubs and Independents then.

But I'd like to believe that our party is big enough to include all and yes, Dean and Edwards are on the same page on many issues.

[ultraist]

86. Dean's recent Iraq war statements

Have you had the chance to read Dean's recent statements on Iraq? Kuchinich wrote an open letter to Dean denouncing his remarks.

Furthermore, Dean did NOT vote on the IWR.

Dean and Edwards really didn't differ on any issues during the primaries. In fact, none of the candidates did except Kuchinich who stood out as the most liberal on the war and gay marriage.

[Darkamber]

89. Actually no I haven't read Dean's recent remarks.

But I'ld rather not go back to the past and the primaries. I was/am an Edwards supporter, but I believe we are better served as a party to not go back and get bitter about every word that was said back then.

The future is far more important and this war will continue to be a finacial drain on the country and the Memo wasn't known back then either. The whole thing makes me pretty sick now.

But back then I remember listening to Powell before the UN and believing him.

[mittenlandgirl]

40. another possibility

good cop bad cop routine

intentionally or not, it can be a good strategy

[Pryderi]

41. DEMS SHOULD STFU, AND LET REPUBLICANS ATTACK!

THAT GOES FOR EDWARDS, BIDEN, AND BARNEY FRANK!!!! STOP TEARING AT YOUR OWN PARTY!!

WE NEED UNITY! I DON'T CARE IF YOU DISAGREE!!! LET'S GET BACK INTO THE MAJORITY, AND THEN WE CAN ARGUE AMONG EACH OTHER!!!

[hollowdweller]

80. Right on!

[Coexist]

42. Edwards seems wishy-washy and lightweight to me

so I am not surprised he backs away from strong comments like this.

[Inspired]

46. Dean's strong comment?

This is the same type of rhetoric that stopped Dean's presidential campaign cold. (BTW...Dean didn't even back up his own words. Why should Edwards?) Did you see Biden today? He agrees with Edwards that Dean shouldn't have said this. Is he wishy washy too? Is he a lightweight?

You can have the opinion that Edwards is wishy washy and a lightweight. I can't make you change your opinion. But at least base it on something more than this. I think Edwards showed STRENGTH and GUTS to disagree with the party chairman. That's my opinion.

Dean was wrong to say this. Sure it sounds good with a liberal audience but it doesn't play well nationally and for God's sake it isn't true. Like it or not there are millions of hard working Republicans. Saying otherwise sounds juvenile.

[Coexist]

47. My opinion on Edwards will never change

I never understood why he was added to the ticket (personal opinion). He didn't ever seem to bring much and looked like a goofy kid next to Cheney.

"Like it or not there are millions of hard working Republicans. Saying otherwise sounds juvenile."

Yes there are, but the point was that those who run the elections haven't a clue about how hard it is for the working class to vote, much less vote with obstacles thrown in making it almost impossible.

He was throwing the "out-of-touch-with-the-salt-of-the-earth" label BACK on the Republicans. They threw it at us during the election with the advent of phrases such as "liberal elite". They made Democrats seem like the rich and powerful by constantly hammering that phrase into the minds of U.S. citizens night and day, and convincing them to vote against their own best interest.

They can have that label back, thank you very much. And Dean has started the process by pointing out that they don't get why people can't stand in line indefinitely to vote. When repeated enough, it will sound quite sane to the masses.

[Inspired]

57. I'm not trying to change your opinion.

I'm just saying that Edwards did not appear wishy-washy or a lightweight on this subject.

I didn't realize you were turning this into yet another DU-lets-trash-Edwards discussion.

Is anyone focusing on the entire content of Dean's statement? NO. They are only focusing on one aspect of it. The point was missed entirely by the MSM and that is the problem with Dean's rhetoric.

[Coexist]

63. I am not turning this into a bash Edwards thread -

I've never even seen one. I've seen bash Kerry, bash Dean and Bash Clark, bash Biden and bash Galloway threads. But I can't recall a Bash Edwards thread. You are being defensive. I gave my opinion on Edward's response to Dean. Edwards (to me) isn't a forceful personality. Dean is. I was not surprised that Edwards was not going to get behind strong-minded comments. I promise not to talk about Edwards any more, will that make you happy? Because I don't have much positive to say about him. He doesn't inspire me. Sorry.

[Zhade]

91. Pro-PNAC Biden disagreeing with Dean is not exactly an endorsement.

I agree that Dean should have specified "Republican politicians" - I know even Republicans who think that way about their own leaders. It's true, too.

[ultraist]

70. Clark seems wishy washy and lightweight to me. He voted REPUBLICAN

in the past. WHO knows what he will do.

[janx]

82. Don't fall for the flame bait.

:smoke:
It's not worth it.

[ultraist]

88. You're right. It's really not worth it!

It seems pretty obvious to me that the M$M is blowing this out of proportion so they can start a rumor that there is a conspiracy against Dean and infighting. They LOVE to portray our party as weak.

Too bad some are falling for it and using it as an excuse to tear down our party.

[NYCGirl]

43. BTW, that statement was made addressing VOTING PROBLEMS IN OHIO AND

FLORIDA, made by Dean as part of a speech where he was talking about how unfair it was for hard-working citizens having to wait in line up to 12 hours to vote, and that the people running the vote in Ohio and Florida obviously don't understand that.

[Cha]

49. So once again.

something is taken out of context by the press to rail on our Dems?

[NYCGirl]

50. It's a pattern, isn't it? And we seem to be falling for it, too. NT

[seabeyond]

48. as wolfie said, dean needs to be more specific in trashing a whole party

instead of just saying i hate republicans. he needs to say i hate republican leaders. lesson learned

[ultraist]

72. exactly! That's why Dean CLARIFIED his broad stroke statement

Because it NEEDED clarification. This is just being used as an excuse for some Clarkies to attack Dean and Edwards and attempt to pit them against eachother.

It's unfortunate that some Clarkies are so hate filled and vicious that they will use something like this to tear up our party.

[theboss]

56. Dean has to realize he is not in Vermont anymore

I think his background in Vermont has hurt him from the moment he first declared for President.

You can say these kind of wild things at a pancake dinner where the only press is the Burlington Daily Shopper or whatever. You can say them in front of reporters from the New York Times.

It's just looks so small-time.

[dchill]

73. Dean said...

that many Republicans "have never made an honest living in their lives."

>That would be the truth.

Edwards said, "I don't agree with it."

>That would be politics.

I like Howard Dean. I like John Edwards. I like them both, but I always prefer the truth.

[spooky3]

90. There's nothing wrong with what EITHER of them said.

Dean expressed his views in his way (and taken in the context in which he likely spoke, he could probably find data to support him--"many" means different things to different people). I notice also that there are no quotes in Tanner's article around "many." Did someone else put that word in his mouth?

Edwards is right that Dean is ONE VOICE, as is Edwards. He may also be right that, if the vast majority of Reps. have made "an honest living", then he'd rather not call those who haven't, "many."

Both are entitled to their opinions and to voice them reasonably and wisely on behalf of the party, and I think both did, here.

Democrats do not require that everyone think and act in Nazi-like lockstep. It also may be a good strategy to have Dean express his views strongly, given the role he is in, and for other Dems who are so inclined to speak more "moderately." I see nothing wrong with that.

[AmericanDream]

92. Dean never said "many" and that is the problem

As far as I remember Dean just said that the Republicans "who've never made an honest living in their lives"... if he would have said "some of them" or "many of them"... I think it would've been more acceptable. But why does he even have to take such a low road? Edwards is right to call him on this.

[AmericanDream]

93. Nevermind .. he said "a lot of them"... I stand corrected!

[spooky3]

94. Here's a bit more context (if they quoted him accurately):

Dean's 25-minute speech to the Campaign for America's Future annual gathering was interrupted frequently by applause, but his line about Republican work habits also produced an undertow of "oohs" and "aahs" from a decidedly anti-GOP crowd.

Noting some Florida voters stood in line for eight hours in November, Dean said that was a hardship for people who "work all day and then pick up their kids at child care."

But, he said, Republicans could stand in eight-hour lines "because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives."

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0603dean03.html

I just think it's yet another tempest in a teapot, to try to attract the runaway bride, Michael Jackson trial types.

(oops, I just now saw your reply post)

[Catchawave]

101. I love you KOEBie- Clark2008.....but

...what were you thinking? Haven't read all the posts here, but have a feeling you pissed off alot of Dean and Edwards supporters....my 2 cents....

Dean's original comment was probably taken out of context, as was Edwards'. You know the uphill battle we have with MSM on DU ...
:shrug:

I love Dean, because he shoots from the hip and it creates discussion and talking points in this Republican Denial World (aka: Swifties PAC), but I know the Edwards' philosophy more after over a year of being involved with his "camp", so to speak. Edwards has created a gentle revolution of "don't say anything, if you can't say anything nice", otherwise known as uniting this great country.

I understood the Edwards response, I agreed with it :)

Carry on :popcorn:

[Moderator]

106. Locking for clean up, thank you for your patience n/t