Edwards Paints Obama As An Out-Of-Touch Intellectual

[wyldwolf]

Through a spokesman, Mr. Edwards responded to Mr. Obama’s speech in Des Moines today, in which Mr. Obama said that “others in the race” say that he is not “angry or confrontational enough” to bring about change.

“Why on earth would we expect the corporate powers and their lobbyists – who make billions by selling out the middle class – to give up just because we ask nicely,” Mr. Edwards said in the statement. “Compromise and conciliation is the academic theory of change. It just doesn’t work in the real world.”

Mr. Edwards has been increasingly painting Mr. Obama as an out-of-touch intellectual, while describing himself as someone who uses his “gut” and “passion” to lead. He often reminds voters that there’s nothing “academic” or “analytical” about the way that he makes decisions.

Last week, in response to a question from a voter, Mr. Edwards said in a subtle jab at Mr. Obama, “There is a difference between somebody who speaks in an academic, intellectual way about these things, and somebody who’s driven from here,” he said, gesturing to his chest.

Mr. Edwards directed more criticisms at Mr. Obama during a news conference after his second town hall event today.

“We have a very different ways of bringing about change,” Mr. Edwards said. “His philosophy seems to be that you negotiate with people, you give oil companies, drug companies and insurance companies a seat at the table and they’ll voluntarily give their power away. I just don’t think that’s ever going to happen.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/edwards-responds-to-obama/

[PresidentObama]

1. Not surprising. Edwards had to respond to Obama's mudslinging some how.

He couldn't just leave the lies unanswered.

Obama knows Edwards has ALWAYS denounced 527's.

And Edwards can bitch and moan, but he can't remove an outside groups advertisement. And his campaign isn't responsible for it.

If Obama wants to throw mud, Edwards will throw something right back at him...

The truth!

[Hieronymus]

38. Of course, Edwards must stand up against attacks.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[PresidentObama]

4. Well that was unnecessary.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. Jesus H. Christ... what is happening to people?

[Catch22Dem]

8. Uh...ok

Well done. Don't even know you, and I already don't like you.

[zulchzulu]

12. Please change your avatar

Your idiotic comment next to Elizabeth Edwards' smiling face is pathetic. I'd suggest you leave DU.

[PresidentObama]

14. I agree.

Get my candidates wife away from your idiotic views.

[sniffa]

32. agreed

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[XemaSab]

33. They let negroes graduate these days, yes

:popcorn:

[sniffa]

35. and some think that's a mistake

;)

[Nailzberg]

39. Did you?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

40. No, but he was president of the Harvard Law Review.

Clearly small pickings. :eyes:

[depakid]

54. Actually- that DOES NOT reflect very well on some of his actions

What it says to a reasonable and objective person is that he should know better than to behave as he has on issue after issue.

For instance, criticizing the Alito filibuster- he above most anyone would have known what confirmation would portend.

Yet did we see him out there leading the charge? Nope.

That clued me in early on that what have here is a phony.

[cali]

47. yes, and he graduated from Harvard Law summa cum laude

Now would you like to share your academinc achievements with us?

[annie1]

3. I agree. i'd love to see Obama with more passion. that what i'm waiting for...

i feel like i've been waiting to see it, and none there. nothing has moved me. I saw his STAND UP STAND UP speech and just thought, he's just randomly yelling. lol. I don't think he's out of touch, but hot damn edwards, ouch! lol.

[jefferson_dem]

6. Don't support Obama! He's too smart!

:rofl:

[PresidentObama]

9. I don't think that's what Edwards is saying, he's saying he's out of touch.

Which is a fair argument to make.

Whether it's true or not, that's up for debate.

[Renew Deal]

7. Edwards sounds more and more like Hugo Chavez every day.

Edwards is trying to run so far to the left it's ridiculous. What makes it ridiculous is that his past political views don't match his current rhetoric.

[PresidentObama]

10. Edwards/Chavez 08': Because DUers will post ANYTHING in the last week before Iowa!

[Moochy]

23. Si se Puede! Edwards y Chavez!

Don't you just love primary season! :puke:

[Joanne98]

15. What does Hugo Chavez have to do to get cut a break?

Venezuela's GDP has increased by 10%. We should be so lucky!

[LSK]

27. read Four Trials

You are so very wrong.

[Mass]

46. That would not be bad, except Chavez is honest, contrarely to Edwards.

Too intellectual? We need more of them to fix this country, not more panderer. If we do not want an intellectual, the GOP has all we need.

[Joanne98]

11. Actually he's right. Obama's biggest problem is that he's a Harvard

Law fellow and his chief economics advisor went to the "University of Chicago", he needs to be CLEARER about Social Security and Medicare. Because we are NOT privatizing anything!!!!!!!!

[Nailzberg]

24. University of Chicago can claim 25 Nobel Laureates in the field of economics

I don't see that as a minus.

I thought after Dubya, Democrats would want someone smart in office. Slamming candidates for being intellectual is so right wing.

[Joanne98]

31. Yeah I know!

[Gman]

13. I'd call Obama more of a political suicide bomber

he has a talent for political suicide.

[2rth2pwr]

16. Does Edwards really mean this? He's saying that diplomacy doesn't work

that we can't expect others to listen to compromise. He sounds like Bush.

[PresidentObama]

17. Diplomacy with lobbyists and special interests? Hell no, it doesn't work.

Greed has eaten our system, and you want to sit at the table with these people?

[2rth2pwr]

22. And what would the difference be with hostile countries? .nt

[PresidentObama]

26. Everything is the difference.

Comparing hostile nations, which Edwards has advocated diplomacy, and special interests who have rigged and corrupted our system is totally different.

No comparing the two at all.

[2rth2pwr]

34. It is exactly the same, the same world view. The same way of looking at

human beings.

[PresidentObama]

43. No, not at all.

[2rth2pwr]

44. Is too. nt

[LSK]

28. he has NEVER said this in regards to foreign policy

[2rth2pwr]

37. What's the diff? nt

[zulchzulu]

18. That's unfortunate that Edwards would take that strategy

As for Edwards saying that Obama would want to work openly with those that want to come to the table somehow giving away policies, it has been admitted by Edwards supporters here that Edwards would in fact do just that if he was President.

Edwards also needs to answer why he voted for the China free trade bill and yet wants to talk about how back doing free trade with China is. The IWR issue and his apology are not even something I can honestly take seriously.

What's fascinating about this OP is that it was started by a devout Hillary supporter. Triangulation at its finest...

:sarcasm:

[PresidentObama]

30. Edwards responding to Obama's lie about him "not" walking the walk is OK by me.

It's fair to call Obama out of touch. Especially in fair criticism as response to Obama's lies that Edwards wasn't walking the walk because an outside group ran a pro-Edwards advertisement. Edwards has always denounced 527's, and even denounced this one. But Obama continued the same lie over and over that this meant Edwards wasn't walking the walk.

And Obama has advocated that the system is broken, but we have to sit down with the people who have corrupt it and some how talk them into talking their power away. Edwards believes that's a fantasy, and said if they won't restore the power of our democracy back to the American people--he'll fight and beat them. He's clearly making a difference between himself and Senator Obama, and stating why he thinks Obama's approach is out of touch.

And I agree that the fact that someone who supports Hillary, the lobbyists favorite candidate, is somewhat odd.

ZZ, at least our candidates don't take Washington lobbyist money and want to change the way Washington runs. They may have different approaches, but I like them both :)

GOBAMA!!

GO EDWARDS!!

[bunnies]

19. This kinda turns me off...

I dont see being intellectual as a bad thing.

[creeksneakers2]

50. That's what I thought too

Appeals to the intellectually lazy who would rather make excuses than work to learn. They profess that learning makes one less likely to make a correct decision. That's nuts!

[frazzled]

20. Oh goody, the "intellectual" canard: right out of the GOP playbook

You know, those intellectual elites they've been haranguing about in the Democratic party for so long. That's how Bush got into the WH ... (however illicitly): playing good ol' boy and man of the people as compared to that intellectual, wooden snob, Al Gore.

Jeebus. Stop listening to the candidates: all of them. Stop trying to read any meaning, one way or another into anything any of them says these last few frantic days before the first caucus. They're all making stupid attacks and playing their last Hail Marys. We're all overreacting to everything anyone says. It's all just a giant wad of bullshit.

[ClarkUSA]

29. The problem with the past 7 yrs. is too little brains and too much chest-thumping "gut" talk

I welcome a big change. I think most Americans would, too.

[Andy823]

25. Hmmmm

Looks to me like a "Hillary" supporter trying to start trouble, what do you think? :spank:

Now, to get down to waht was said, I have to agree with Edwards that you aren't going to get the "big money" guys to sit down and "give" anything away, it just isn't going to happen. They have been making "billions" with Bush in Office, and they like it. Do you really think they will just "give up" because Obama "asks" them to? Don't think so!

This whole post seems to have been started for only one reason, to get the heat off Hillary. That's my opinion on it anyway. Just another low blow by the "Hillary camp"! :nopity:

[Lucinda]

41. Ya know...some of us are capable of talking about and

being interested in more than one candidate at a time. :)

And welcome to DU. :)

[MadBadger]

36. Its about time we have an intellectual represent this country

If we elect people cuz they talk from the gut, well end up with Bush and Colbert

[Inspired]

42. Hillary supporter starting a thread to pit Edwards and Obama supporters against each other.

I refuse to bite.

[MadBadger]

48. Kind of like those mailers in Iowa

[YOY]

55. First thing I noticed too

n/t

[Mass]

45. Edwards adopting GOP rethoric blaming intellectuals. What this country needs is a little more ...

respect for intellectuals, not just thinking that workers are too stupid to understand them.

[Beaverhausen]

49. I don't see Edwards using the word "intellectual" anywhere. This is the bloggers statement

not Edwards. Sheesh.

[creeksneakers2]

51. Its in there where the link leads you.

"There is a difference between somebody who speaks in an academic, intellectual way about these things, and somebody who’s driven from here,” he said, gesturing to his chest."

Other statements by Edwards in the article condemn the same thing under a different name.

[BeyondGeography]

52. Minor league I'm-the-real-man schtick

now who's embracing right wing talking points, Krugman?

[Catchawave]

53. "Through a spokesman.." ?

I call bullsh*t on the NYT blogger.