CALLING ELIZABETH EDWARDS!!!

[Seabiscuit]

I know you read DU.

Regarding Ann Coulter's speech the other day calling your husband a "faggot", he needs to come out swinging on this one. Not only is it a golden opportunity to gain some much needed attention in his campaign, he will be remembered for how he responds or fails to respond to this, just as Kerry was with the Swift Boaters. He needs to call a press conference on Monday to slap down this poster child for RNC hate speech and homophobia by referring to both that fact and the fact she's been investigated for perjury and voter fraud. Call her out and tell the truth about her NOW. And get some leading gay rights and civil rights organizations to call their own press conferences denouncing her hate speech, and the RNC which sponsers it.

I know you care, Mrs. Edwards. And I know John is a gentleman's gentleman. But to sit passively by in the face of this would create the appearance of condoning that kind of diatribe by the likes of Ann Coulter, and could only make John look like a weak candidate who won't stand up to her.

Dr. Howard Dean has already issued his statement. John Edwards needs to issue his own. It's crunch time.

[madfloridian]

1. She has a great post up at the blog.

:hi:

[Seabiscuit]

2. What blog?

[movonne]

3. It was posted here a couple of hours ago....it is Edwards site..

[Seabiscuit]

4. I read it. It's way too polite and civil, and it isn't John doing the talking.

It's not time to play nice, and it's not time for John Edwards to let others to his talking for him.

Just letting his campaign manager send out e-mails asking for contributions and letting Elizabeth post a far-too civil and polite critique on his blog doesn't cut it.

The Repukes are using Coulter and her statement as a test baloon - testing Edwards to see if he pulls a John Kerry and hides from this kind of Swift Boating, because they want to destroy Edwards' campaign early, and if Edwards doesn't come out in a press conference Monday and pound this Coulter witch into the sand, his goose is cooked, and they'll do it again and again.

Why? Because he's the only serious threat to Barack and Hillary among the Democratic contenders right now, and these Repukes believe anyone they run can beat Barack because he's black and Hillary because she's a woman.

[madfloridian]

6. Whatever.

Ok, whatever. He will be damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. It is all smoke and mirrors.

[Clarkie1]

5. Really, they ought to just ignore.

This kind of maggot craves attention...don't give it to her.

[Seabiscuit]

7. The Swift Boaters craved attention too, and guess what?

The more John Kerry ignored them, the more attention they got, and the worse Kerry looked.

The MSM feeds on this salacious crap, and blows it all out of proportion, and as long as Edwards remains silent he looks weak. While Coulter's got the MSM's attention, Edwards needs to forcefully strike her down while the fire's hot.

See my last post.

[Jack Sprat]

8. You are right, Seabiscuit

But our guys never seem to learn. They just take it on the chin and beg for more. If we ever have a fighter like FDR to take them head-on, we will win elections in landslides from then on. If we ever....

[Seabiscuit]

18. Thank you, Jack Sprat. Good to see someone here gets it.

Turning the other cheek is a formula for disaster when up against the right wing spin machine these days.

[Clarkie1]

15. This is different.

This is so over the top the vast majority of Americans will just turn away from it in disgust.

The benefit to Coulter is it promotes her among her little base of support which is so hateful and close-minded we can never reach them anyway.

I just heard on the news Coulter has already posted Edwards letter about 100,000 Coulter dollars with a link on HER website...for her, it's all about herself. Best to just put her on ignore, anything else is giving her exactly what she wants.

It makes our candidates look bad to respond to this kind of crap. It's below them.

[OHdem10]

9. CNN carried a report this evening

Howard Dean, DNC, Mitt Romeny Republican Candidate
and John McCain, Republican Candidate all issued
statements criticizing Coulter,s behavior.

I deliberately watched Fox to see if they would
cover it. Neither Beltway Boys, nor Media Watch
Program even mentioned it. Of course, Coulter
is a frequently used commentator there--when
they need someone to "chew on "libruls"

If this had been a Democrat Fox would be flaming.

[benny05]

12. Absolutely!

So we have to speak up. :banghead:

[benny05]

10. John Edwards' Statement, speaking on the Campaign Trail

"Ann Coulter's use of an anti-gay slur yesterday was un-American and indefensible. In America, we strive for equality and embrace diversity. The kind of hateful language she used has no place in political debate or our society at large.

I believe it is our moral responsibility to speak out against that kind of bigotry and prejudice every time we encounter it."

http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/3/3/172259/3775

It is simple and to the point. No ragging on him.

[DearAbby]

11. our moral responsibility

believe it is our moral responsibility to speak out against that kind of bigotry and prejudice every time we encounter it."

http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/3/3/172259/3775


:applause:Here Here, Mr Edwards. :applause:

[Seabiscuit]

14. It's a blog entry on his own website. The blog notes Edwards "released this statement"

today. I'd like some clarification. The blog said nothing about him "speaking on the campaign trail". It merely said he "released this statement". To whom? His own blog? So what? To the press? Who in the press? Why haven't we heard anything about a major press announcement? Why is the entire TV and print media silent about this statement? Because it only appears on his own blog, where only his supporters will see it?

Not good enough.

That aside, I like what he said, although it was a bit brief.

[benny05]

20. It is an official press release

The fact that the MSM has been ignoring this is an issue, as you rightly point out.

David Keene, president of the Conservative Union, did not denounce Coulter's comments this morning on C-SPAN, which tells me he tolerates bigoted comments.

[Seabiscuit]

25. I cought the release on a local Air America station this morning.

It's OK, I suppose. Just a tad mild for my tastes, is all.

[AshevilleGuy]

13. For attacks by serious persons or groups, I would say,

tear them a NEW ONE, and take no prisoners. But in this case, assuming she lets it go after this, I think getting into a piss fight with a weirdo attack dog like AC would only serve to degrade him. NO one is going to take her accusation seriously, anyone who thinks he is gay would probably vote repuke anyway.

Now if she does it again and makes it even worse, he should, ONE TIME deliver a counter attack so withering, so over the top that it takes everyone's breath away. And then let it drop.

[Clarkie1]

16. I agree. nt

[Seabiscuit]

17. Did you consider the Swift Boat Liars "serious persons or groups"?

I sure didn't. I'd never even heard of them. And there wasn't a single poster child of the RNC among them, whereas Ann Coulter *is* the darling poster child of the bigoted wing(s) of the RNC, and she's a regular fixture on Faux News and Bill Maher.

Yet look at all the damage they did to Kerry's campaign because Kerry chose to ignore them for too long because he didn't take them seriously and wouldn't "dignify" them with a stinging response for so long.

Therein lies the danger.

[AshevilleGuy]

24. I understand, but they were accusing Kerry

of lying about his record in Vietnam and coming back and protesting the war, etc. It wasn't true but it was plausible.

AC accused John of being gay. That just is not plausible. She also accused Gore and Bill Clinton (!!!) of the same thing. That is just nuts. No serious person will entertain that nonsense for a moment.

[Seabiscuit]

26. Good point re: Kerry. But again, this is an election season

and the point Coulter was making was not that Edwards is gay - that's absurd, as he's straight as an arrow, with wife and children - the point was that she used a major presidential candidate in an election season to use the "f" word, which in gay circles is equivalent to the "n" word, to amuse here Repuke audience. My point about it is that far worse than her trash talk was the way the Repuke audience stood and applauded her for it. It was all a setup.

Edwards didn't go after the Repukes who encourage her disgusting behavior to spread their hate-mongering.

[karynnj]

27. Kerry lying about his record was if anything more implausible

No sane/serious person would believe:

-that a 25 1st lt could falsely get two major awards - each presented to him before the people at his base that were based on false information with no one complaining. He also could not just "ask" for purple hearts and get them.

- that had that happened, all of the career Navy people would stay silent when Nixon looked for anything to destroy him with.

As to coming home and protesting - this was NOT rumour - it was something that Senator Kerry was very proud of and said so in 2004. His actions here were completely honorable and his actions were reasonable, moderate and in the finest American tradition. The effusive praise he got from the Senators was well earned. He was incredible for two things - his testimony and how he managed the entire protest.

I've watched enough Senate hearings to be able to understand why his testimony was so unusual. He was asked to speak about the Winter Soldier hearing and normal testimony would have been for Kerry and others to read exerpts from soldiers speaking of abuses.

Instead, Kerry condensed into one extremely intense paragraph the types of abuses spoken of - the Senators aready had the full Winter Soldier testimony. He then followed with a condemnation of the way returning soldiers were treated - that sounds like the VA/Walter Reed stuff in today's news - and spoke of PTSD, which was not recognized at that time. Then he spoke of how the war was already lost - summed up by his famous question. McNamara's book, "Fog of War" shows that he knew the war was lost in 1968. Then, he ended on a note of hope that America would turn from that type of foreign policy.

He got 5 minutes of coverage on all of the three networks because the newcasters were blown away by that testimony. That testimony would have been impressive if it were given by a leading Senator of that day - it was awesome coming from a young veteran. The Nixon tapes show that they were extremely impressed by him and because of that they wanted him destroyed.

The second reason he was impressive was how he managed that whole protest - that went off with no violence. Kerry insisted that no Jane Fonda or other Hollywood people be involved - just soldiers. He also made sure they had all the permits needed, although at the last minute they were told they could stay in the mall - but not sleep there. He spent the days of the protest peacefully resolving problem after problem between the police and the veterans. Bobby Mueller in Going Upriver spoke of how he calmed the very angry veterans and spoke calmly for them. Doing this was not trivial. At this point, the Nixon people were not afraid of the protesters as they KNEW the anger and behavior of most protestors had scared and turned off many Americans. Kerry and the vets were able to speak to many Americans other protestors couldn't.

I seriously doubt that John Edwards is gay and there is absolutely nothing in his history to suggest it - but it would be easier for a man (or woman) to hide his true attraction than it would be for someone to fool the Navy into giving him 5 undeserved medals. There are people who have done that.

[win_in_06]

19. Her blow was effective. Unfortunately he will be answering questions

about it all through the campaign. I wonder why she lashed out at him out of all the candidates? Did he piss in her Cheerios before?

[Seabiscuit]

21. She was just doing the RNC slime machine's bidding: she chose Edwards because

he's the only Dem candidate today they see as a real threat. After all, Obama's black and Clinton's female. The RNC will never take a black or female candidate for the oval office until there's already been one or two.

They're trying to knee-cap Edwards early on then continue to hobble him until he folds in the primaries.

That's why a strong response by Edwards in the MSM is critical at this moment in time. Stuff the bitch down her own pie-hole while the time is ripe.

[win_in_06]

22. Sorry, don't agree that being black or female is a liability.

[Seabiscuit]

23. Neither do I. Sorry, that sentence came out really badly.

I meant to say that the RNC wants to promote Barack and Hillary because they think a black or female Democrat will be easy for any Republican to beat in the general election.

That's why they want to take down Edwards, because he's the only leading candidate they take seriously right now, simply because he's not black, and he's not female.

Sure, that's really dumb. But that's just the way the RNC is.