Edwards undecided about 2008 run(differs with Dean on Republibums)

[Algorem]

http://www.cleveland.com/newsflash/politics/index.ssf?/base/politics-7/1117934549165310.xml&storylist=politics

6/4/2005, 9:37 p.m. ET
By GARY TANNER
The Associated Press

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — ...

The former U.S. senator from North Carolina said his family is focused on the recovery of his wife, who was diagnosed with breast cancer the day after the 2004 general election.

"Our first priority right now is making sure Elizabeth gets well," Edwards said at an annual state Democratic fundraising dinner. "There's a lot of work left to be done."

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."...

[James T. Kirk]

1. He should give it a rest and let someone else run.

He lost the primaries and lost in the general election. We need someone new.

[Melodybe]

21. Actually I'm kind of mad that Edwards is even bringing this stupid shit up

He is reaffirming the false RW spin that Dean was talking about ALL republicans, when in fact he was talking about republicans in congress and the WH.

Dean has clearified this plenty of times since his statement, Edwards saying this defends asshole like Delay and is a slam on Dean.

It's stupid and Edwards doesn't know what he is talking about.

[Skwmom]

37. Since when has Edwards let the truth

stand between him and his presidential ambitions?

[Total Disaster]

54. Bingo. n/t

[dad]

98. Someone needs to remind Edwards

what the Republicans think of the way he's earned his money.

[OzarkDem]

50. Actually I think he's one of the best

His problem in the primary was going with a team of discredited DC insider Dems - ex Dukakis campaign folk and they gave him really, really bad advice.

I still believe had he been at the top of the ticket in 2004, we would have won.

[Total Disaster]

55. Well then, one does have to question his skills if he surrounded himself..

.....with, "a team of discredited DC insider Dems - ex Dukakis campaign folk and they gave him really, really bad advice.

[saltpoint]

2. I hope Edwards' wife Elizabeth is restored to full health.

How lucky for others that someone as vibrant and affirming as Elizabeth Edwards would be at optimum health in her life.

How lucky it would be if the discussion in domestic issues would turn toward the way-too-many people without health care and who are living below the poverty level tonight. How good that Edwards' One America work is timely and necessary. Let it be heard long and loud.

If these two people wound up in the White House in 2008 no one at my house is going to complain one iota.

Long live John and Elizabeth Edwards.

[CottonBear]

8. Long live John and Elizabeth Edwards. Hear, hear!

I am a native North Carolinian (family here since 1700s).

John & Elizabeth are true patirots, well-educated and for the people!
I'm not sure if I think that he should run for President again in 2008.
However, I will always support him and Elizabeth. Greater minds than mine shall frame the primaries in 2008..
I voted for John in the primaries and was well pleased to support him as the D-VP candidate.
America would be so lucky to have him as our president.
He is a good man.
Elizabeth is amazing! She is a great American and a beautiful woman and a great wife and mother, not to mention,a KICKASS lawyer!
GO ELIZABETH! I love you!

[saltpoint]

15. Hi, CottonBear. A clear mind and good heart --

-- and that applies to John, Elizabeth, and you, too.

Thanks for your post & good steps!

[CottonBear]

88. Hi Old Crusoe! How are you?

I believe thaqt we posted about James Taylor a while back. I loved your story about coming to NC!

Thank you for your kind words. I'n no great intellect or great political mind but I do know good and genuine people and John and Elizabeth are such people!

Peace. CB

[Adelante]

3. "The chairman of the DNC is not the spokesman for the party"

Who is the spokesman for the party? Does anybody know? :shrug:

[saltpoint]

5. Can I nominate Bill Moyers?

He'd be a great spokesperson.

[BattyDem]

6. "The chairman of the DNC is not the spokesman for the party????"

:wtf:


From the DNC web site: "Join Governor Dean as he travels the country talking about his plan for the Democratic Party!"

Stay home, Doc ... apparently you don't speak for us! :eyes:

[CottonBear]

9. Dean is our spokesman. He is amazing and under the MSM radar.

Don't let the MSM and the GOP fool you. Dean and Edwards are leading to the future! Rock on Gov. Dean and Sen. Edwards!

[Eric J in MN]

14. Howard Dean was interviewed by Tim Russert and then by Wolf Blitzer

recently.

The MSM is aware of him.

[BattyDem]

58. I'm not being fooled by anyone, I was being sarcastic ...

I guess that didn't come through in my post. :-)

It's funny ... in all the years Terry McAuliffe was the DNC Chairman, I don't ever recall ANY Democrat saying he wasn't the spokesman for the party. It doesn't matter if that's his role or not, the point is, the Dems shouldn't be taking down one of their own. When asked if they approve of Dean's comments, they shouldn't answer - instead they should turn the tables and point out that the Repugs say nasty things about Dems every chance they get and Dean is simply playing the game by their rules. Dems are total idiots when it comes playing the press! They take the bait every time! :grr:

I am so sick of the Dems bashing Dean! He has done more for this party in two years then the rest of them have done in decades. He got "ordinary people" to care about politics again. He's inspired a grassroots activism that the party hasn't seen in years. He making tons of money for the DNC and it's coming from average citizens, not corporate interests. He's going after Repugs in the same way they come after Dems and in case the DINOs haven't noticed, WE WANT OUR LEADERS TO HAVE SOME BALLS!

[Eric J in MN]

11. Of course Dean is a spokesman for the Democratic Party.

That's what it means to be chairman.

John Edwards is welcome to disagree with things Dean says, but Edwards shouldn't claim that the CHAIRMAN of the Democratic Party isn't its spokesman.

[saracat]

19. Well the point is, the Chair doesn't set the "message" and Dean was

offering his "opinion" which was not in the role of "spokesperson".

[PeaceProgProsp]

36. From article, seems Edwards is saying Dean isnt THE voice, but one of many

voices of the party, and some of the other voices say something else.

[Total Disaster]

56. Really, that was a bullshit thing for Edwards to say. n/t

[PassingFair]

76. Agree, he should stick with

"Ma Daddy was a mill worker". We certainly heard enough of it during the primaries.
I call "crap" on the "mulling over" thing, too.
He's running in 08.
A member of his team confirmed it a month ago.

[Rainscents]

81. LOL

[AllyCat]

102. Not unlike most of what he said while campaigning.

Little substance. And now he is attacking a key figure in the DNC who actually wants to make some waves?

Jeez...get him out of there. No Edwards in '08!

[PeaceProgProsp]

33. The highest ranking elected Democrat is probably a better spokesperson...

...than the chief fundraiser. At least then, you know that Democrats actually endorse their strategies and attitudes.

However, after reading the article, it seems that Edwards is saying that Dean isn't THE spokesman for the party -- he's just one voice of the party. I agree with that.

[ClevelandSportsCurse]

4. Why are people like Edwards so afraid of offending Republicans?

Do they not realize that such timidity is the reason why Democrats have lost on a consistent basis in the last few years?

[Rose Siding]

7. I can see the value of moderating influences in the party but

the timing for this sucks.

I don't want to be suspicious, but I am; there will be some big donor money up for grabs in opposition to the direction Dean is going.

[Total Disaster]

57. I agree fully!

Being so wishy-washy does nothing for us. Dean in an OUTSTANDING spokesman for Democratic principals and the American voting public needs to hear it.

[Iowa]

10. I agree with Edwards...

There are many incendiary comments that can (and should) be made about those who are pushing this extreme Republican agenda. Right off the top of my head I can think of several. But whenever you set out to expose the hypocrisy of some large extremist group (which, in this case, certainly needs to be done), you've got to think it through before opening your mouth!

This is all about bringing down a very dangerous, evil, powerful, and well entrenched ideology. This is very serious business, and we can't afford lightweight, fumbling, bumbling, amateurism. Dean has a tendency to speak before thinking, and his inflammatory comment about Republicans not making an honest living was simply dumb. This was a missed opportunity; there are a great many good "hot-button" comments he could have made...

Edwards is absolutely correct.

[Pepperbelly]

12. I agree with you 100% except ...

I am not certain that is what Edwards had in mind.

[Eric J in MN]

13. How about Bush and Cheney and their history of crookedness?

Don't you think that is what Howard Dean was referring to about Republicans who don't earn an honest living.

[dad]

16. I took that a different way

I was thinking of people who live off of an inheritance or trust fund. Maybe Dr. Dean should elucidate.

[Adelante]

29. He was referring to the leadership, not the people

He did clarify in this interview on Blitzer.

http://www.dembloggers.com/story/2005/6/3/153632/2932

[Iowa]

17. That's exactly my point...

We shouldn't have to sit here and guess what he was referring to. The language one uses when engaging in conflict must be precise, razor-sharp, and deadly. Words can be very effective weapons, but one must know how to use them to elicit emotional reactions. Dean's comment wasn't even close to being effective. He let the enemy thrash him with his own words - a classic amateur mistake.

[saracat]

18. Exactly right.We shouldn't have to guess

or reframe itinto what we thought he should have said!

[PassingFair]

75. Anyone, at any time, can be taken out of context.

They continue to take Howard, or anyone they disagree with out of context. Good. Hopefully, they'll bring Howard on to "explain himself" and we'll see an ass whooping like Dean gave to Blitzer and Woodruff.
Maybe you're not too thrilled that Dean intends to shake up the primary scene, big time.....

[Iowa]

83. Excuses., excuses...

A good communicator simply doesn't make it so easy to take his words out of context. You don't just hand your opponent an opportunity like that. When you drop a bomb, you need to do it right so you maximize the damage and minimize the blow-back. It requires judgment and forethought.

And no, you're completely wrong about my motives. I tend to agree with Dean on the primary shake-up. Iowa should not go first for several reasons, IMO.

[Adelante]

38. good "hot-button" comments

Maybe something on the war and its costs. I would have liked either one of these Democratic leaders to make a peep at that conference about national security/foreign policy, the "memo" maybe, how veterans are getting royally screwed, anything.

However, on this statement by Dean, I thought he did a good job with Blitzer in explaining he was talking about Republican leadership, not Republican voters.

But it does raise the question of who is supposed to be speaking for the party and giving its message.

For example, is it a coincidence neither Dean nor Edwards talked about the biggest issue confronting the country and the biggest weapon we have to use against the Republicans? Not to mention, the reason we lost in 2004.

If it's not a coincidence, if it is decision-based, who makes the decision of what the Dem message is to be as it goes out to the public?

I would have thought it was the Dem leadership in Congress, since we don't have a president in office, who would be feeding the policy message to the Congress and the DNC. Yet it doesn't seem so, since only a week before the conference Harry Reid announced the Dem agenda and way up front was national security/defense/foreign policy, and at the conference both Dean and Edwards ignored it. Only Arianna Huffington "got it," and she's not even a Dem leader.

Is there a committee possibly who coordinates the party's message? Who is responsible?

I realize this is not the point of the thread, but it's an important point, because unless our leaders are giving out a comprehensive, comprehensible Democratic message, we sound like we don't know what we're doing.

[leesa]

42. Yes. The mealy mouth whipped dog approach has worked so well.

[Iowa]

72. No, you don't get what I'm saying...

You seem to be saying that there are only two approaches - a whipped dog approach or the approach Dean took - lashing out without thinking it through first. There's a third and much more effective and powerful option: think it through and then attack.

What Dean did here was as bad, or worse, than the whipped dog approach. He made a sloppy, off-the-top-of-the-head, inflammatory comment which created an opening for the enemy to whip him like a dog (to use your analogy), and then he tried to dig out and explain what he "really meant". A skilled fighter NEVER places himself in a position where he must explain away his comments. He also made another classic amateur mistake. He attacked a group - not a person.

Look, there is an abundance of raw meat here and Dean should take a highly incendiary approach, IMHO. But if he's going to do that, he needs to know what the hell he's doing and how to create maximum damage. Evil is very difficult to subdue. This is not a game for sissies or amateurs.

[XemaSab]

86. The problem with your reasoning

is that he was also attacked by Dems for saying that Tom Delay needs to go back to Texas to serve out his jail sentance. He attacked a person, not a group, and was roasted for that too.

[Iowa]

89. No, there's more to it than that...

It's usually more effective to attack a person instead of a group, but WHO you choose to attack, WHAT you say, and HOW you say it is crucial too (IOW, there are many things to get right, not just one).

On the Delay comment Dean did get one thing right - he focused on an individual. But he botched the rest. He employed hyperbole (there is actually no jail sentence to serve) which is almost always tantamount to handing the enemy a stick to beat you over the head with. Dean does this repeatedly. And he comes off as a lightweight in the sense that the tenor of his words practically beg not to be taken seriously. Furthermore, I question his choice of Delay as a target. Why? Because it's too easy and too expected. It's best to keep the enemy off-balance and that requires a lot more forethought and creativity than we're seeing here.

Dean strikes me as a guy who wants to injure the evil empire with his words. I truly don't think he knows how. Both of the comments referenced here (Republicans not making an honest living and the Delay comment) were rife with amateur mistakes and far too weak. We've had enough weakness. Weak doesn't work.

[XemaSab]

93. Who do you think

is speaking out in a strong manner?

[OzarkDem]

51. Agree

I love Howard Dean dearly and hope he continues to speak out this way, he just has to fine-tune the content a little. No big deal.

[Total Disaster]

59. I disagree. n/t

[nightfox02]

20. thats fine because the public has decided for him...answer is a big NO

edwards doesnt have it...sorry

He is about as exciting as watching grass grow...and frankly doesnt have the record to run...

Conyers would be a damn good pick for 2008 or Pelosi or Clinton....

Those are the frontrunners imho...Anybody else have names in mind?

[lwin]

23. yeah right

Conyers, Pelosi and Hillary will be ripped to shreds if they run for President. While they are all true blue Dems, they are also extremely polarizing figures. Maybe we can sell Boxer as VP. Even that is iffy.

Edwards has "IT" in spades. He'll be President of this country someday.

[nightfox02]

24. And W'04 was not polarizing? Are you kidding me?

Let's run the best candidate not the most Vanilla MIDDLE candidate...

That attitude is why we are so weak as a party. Edwards did SNL CHRIS FARLEY JACK SQUAT...for Kerry

Edwards has little chance of becoming viable in 2008 maybe someday but not by '08...

Boxer would be an addition to my list...

We dont need a god damn centrist we need a man/woman of the people to energize our base and bring them out in droves to vote. You are advocating we stick to the same formula lose rinse and repeat.

[lwin]

25. Newsflash..and I'm not kidding you

Edwards is a man of the people. Whether you believe it or not, he has inspired a lot of people to become activists and to get involved. He speaks for many of us who are dedicated to getting Dems elected.

I was an apathetic "ticket voter", who contributed a few Dem bucks here and there, until he arrived on the scene. He's inspired me to get more involved. My Dem Club, in a heavily GOP area, has been out in the community doing voter reg, fundraising, supporting Boxer, Pelosi, Kerry and Conyers since December. That's right, we picked ourselves up right after the defeat in November, and have been kicking ass. I got myself elected to not only the local Dem club, but also as a Delegate to our Assembly District in California.

We're working it every day to get rid of Arnold here in California and to defeat his initiatives. We protest and contribute money to defeat the Chimp whenever we get a chance.

Edwards Democrats...working to change and save this country. Don't you dare infer otherwise.

[dad]

99. He didn't speak for us in NC

He's been running for Prez since he took office as Senator. Pissed off a lot of people, including his former supporters.
I'm tired of his shit. I wish him luck in his private life.
We need another centrist like a hole in the head.
I'd love to see the Dems nominate as big an extremist on the left as GWB is on the right.

[PeaceProgProsp]

32. I think there's enough evidence that people do like him.

Including the Marist poll I mentioned below.

[Total Disaster]

60. Pelosi. n/t

[anarchy1999]

22. Don't discount Edwards, he was at the 2004 Bilderberg meeting.

It speaks volumes. We've not seen the last of him. And heck, be damned and take off my tin foil or maybe I should leave it on..

I like the man.

[DaDeacon]

27. You aren't alone

man i've been tell my friends that little tid bit of info! That group's members "do things " edwards was an invited guest of the group NOT Kerry ! Just remember you saw it here first. edwards & clinton 08'

[Democat]

26. Edwards has no chance of winning and he shouldn't kiss Republican ass

Sorry, he can't win in 2008 or ever.

He should also stop trying to undermine Dean.

[PeaceProgProsp]

31. Of him Kerry and HRC, he's the only one who beats Jeb and Rudy and he

did the best vs McCain (within the margin of error) according to the early May Marist poll.

So, he actually has the best chance of winning of the three most popular Dems against the three most popular Republicans.

Most polls had him doing the best agains Bush of all the primary candidates, so there's obviously something about him people like -- including moderates, of whom Dean's comment about Republicans doesn't help Democrats get the votes

[XemaSab]

87. Yeah, but 2 years

before the 2004 election Joementum had the most support.

Early polls mean squat.

[PurityOfEssence]

63. He's the only one whose standings improved during the primaries

Starting right after Iowa, he is the ONLY one of the primary candidates who picked up momentum. Kerry HAD the momentum and held on to it, but he didn't IMPROVE his standings. All others lost ground except Edwards. The New York Times did an interesting piece on this, and it's interesting to speculate how things would have gone in a longer primary season, or one without a direct demographic competitor like Clark.

He beat Kerry three times (won SC by over 15%, won NC after he'd dropped out, took second in OK) and got edged out in some heartbreakers: Lieberman took second from him in Delaware by 26 votes, and Clark beat him in NH and OK by less than four tenths of a percent. Nobody gave him a chance at the beginning, but after Iowa, people started to see the possibilities.

The guy's a winner. He's a true progressive and built his campaign around championing the rights of the little guy. He was the one making a big deal about predatory lending, even though he comes from a state with the second biggest banking industry in the country. Along with Kucinich (a close personal friend) and Sharpton, he was fighting an economic-based campaign and getting through to people.

He can win. He can get crossover southern votes without having to slither to the right; he's someone southerners can look up to and look eye-to-eye with.

This comment wasn't the kissing of Republican ass. What he should have said is something more lawyerly like: "I wish he hadn't said that" or "well, I don't agree with that and I don't have anything to say about it."

This is classic Dean, shooting off his mouth and making a derisive broad statement. Had he said something to the effect that some of the privileged hereditary wealthy just don't know how the world works for those less fortunate. There are many ways he could have pointed out that those who want to shift the tax burden away from passive wealth to wage earners are those who've never had to make their way in the world. Personally, I'm fine with Dean in his current position: he can provoke and inflame along the way, and I don't think it hurts us all that much. People like a bit of recklessness in their leaders sometimes.

Dean's statement was foolish, and Edwards shouldn't have said so much, but had he agreed with an insult that great numbers of Republicans were privileged, lazy bums (even though that's TRUE) is supremely impolitic, and the business here is POLITICS. He wants to reach out, but he's not doing it by betraying core beliefs.

This is a tempest in a teapot.

[RelativelyJones]

28. The deal is:

1. Edwards is probably in negotiations with Clinton people for a hot-spot, whether veep or not.

2. Kerry is viewed as spent by all parties involved (Clintonites, Dean+left, DLCers and Edwards himself)

3. There's going to be a showdown between those who want a Clinton restoration which, in order to happen, will entail a "forgive-and forget" policy toward Republican abuses of power and those who believe the last five years have been anathema, for whom Dean is the spokesman. Edwards is trying to decide where to place his bets.

[bklyncowgirl]

34. Interesting take, you may be right.

The sides do seem to be forming up that way.

[depakid]

30. It's a little early to be talking 2008

and he's right- his wife is ill- and that should be his first priority.

In addition to that is of course the fact that he can't even carry his own state and he's clearly not ready to stand up to the Republicans yet....

[JNelson6563]

35. Oh heavens! The Thugs might be offended!

The DLC way don't work Johnny. And your speech the other day tells a different story than your attempt at "disassembling" here. ;-)

Julie

[liberalnurse]

39. I'm disappointed by the

statement from Edwards......it encourages party division.

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

He could keep it closer to the vest....I say this because I look forward to working on his grassroots Presidential Campaign if that occurs and which I predict. Dean and Edwards need to go out and share some bar-b-que, relax and bond. They will need each other in the near future.

[PeaceProgProsp]

48. Check out this pretty good summary of this issue:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1829484&mesg_id=1829621&page=

[Adelante]

53. Oh, please

Another Great Clark Wing Conspiracy post :tinfoilhat:

Pathetic.

[PeaceProgProsp]

68. "Conspiracy"? Whith motivations so obvious, "conspiracy" is overstatement.

[Adelante]

73. Wrong

There are probably 8 or 9 threads on this topic, they weren't all started by Clark supporters. Clark supporters have been saying the same things hundreds of other people are saying in these threads -- varying opinions, not all in lock step.

I personally have said several times that Dean did a great smackdown on Wolfie over this, I corrected several people on their impression that Dean had been talking about Republican voters and not Republican leadership, and I said John Edwards had a right to his own opinion. Even the espionage results posted from the Clark blog do NOT indicate any such conspiracy. You're all the fuck carried away.

Frankly, this victimhood banner you guys are waving is getting b-o-r-i-n-g!!

Howard Dean is the Chair of the Party -- he is not the King of the Democrats. Anybody can question his judgment if they have a concern, same as McAuliffe was questioned.

The constant drumbeat of censorship is disgusting.

I'm pissed at both Dean and Edwards because they left the war and foreign policy out of their speeches at the progressive conference. I think it's a serious failing for Dem leaders not to be challenging the idea that Republicans have a lock on national security. That's my OPINION. I pay my dues to the DNC and I pay my dues to DU, and I have a right to express my opinions without being accused of treason.

[PeaceProgProsp]

77. You're entitled to express your opinions.

But your not entitled to express them in a vacuum without other people expressing their contradictory opinions.

[PeaceProgProsp]

49. Check out this pretty good summary of this issue:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1829484&mesg_id=1829621&page=

[OzarkDem]

52. Agree

Maybe they're just feeling each other out. Its a tempest in a teapot, no big deal.

Also, Edwards is under a lot of pressure with his wife's health right now. Its like having a bomb set off in the middle of your life, both personal and professional and very stressful to deal with.
OTOH, as a doctor, I'm sure Dean understands.

[Justitia]

40. I'll NEVER trust Edwards, & his slamming of Dean doesn't help him

He was my senator when I lived in NC, and I found him incredibly unimpressive. It was a fluke he got in, and he never would have made it in a second run.

I knew my instincts about him were right on when I saw him launch his very PERSONAL attack against Dean in the primaries ("Down here in the SOUTH, we don't need people like YOU telling us what to do!!!" - Edwards to Dean on TV)

Then the backroom ultra-sleazy deal w/Kucinich in Iowa (Dennis being so anti-war and all, giving all his votes to pro-war, DLC Edwards - ya right) cemented in my mind exactly what these two were all about - destroying Dean.

As far as the Edwards "electibility" meme (where have I heard THAT before?) - Edwards did not even carry his OWN state as the VP candidate. Remember that Dean handily won his state of VT in the primaries AFTER he had WITHDRAWN.

Sorry, Edwards is a huge no-go to me and it makes me sick to see the DLC already grooming him for this crap again by using his attacks against Dean as a litmus test.

If he can't win on his own merits, he should not have to resort to saying something along the lines of "I'll be friendlier to the Republicans than our Chairman, Howard Dean".

I really dislike criticizing fellow Dems in such a manner, but this stuff about Edwards needs to be nipped in the bud. He has a lot of bad blood with some of us. I need to mention, I like his wife ELIZABETH very much and I thought she outshone her husband in many ways. I would vote for HER in a heartbeat.

[saracat]

44. Oh Please. .It isn't an attack to disagree with Dean. And they ALLL

attacked one another during the primaries.That is what primaries are for.Sheesh, there were nine of them running if you recall and they had to differentiate themselves somehow!

[nightfox02]

64. Edwards did not even carry his own state

Exactly, that is what I am talking about. People raising Edwards up as the next Bobby Kennedy are living in fantasy land here. He has no chance in 2008...

He is OVERRATED! BIG TIME!

People in our party just see a young candidate with mediocre skills and cling to him hoping he will be a Kennedy. Guess what folks ...he isnt even close...

It is PATHETIC if your VP cannot even bring you his home state in a national election....

[PeaceProgProsp]

69. I bet he will twice in 2008.

[nightfox02]

79. haha that is the funniest joke of the night

You have got to be kidding me....

Why would people vote for him suddenly in 2008 if they found him distasteful in 2004? Will he don a red cape and leap tall buildings?

There is a name for this....Wishful thinking....

Both Kerry and Edwards are done. They had their chance and the party is not going to make the same mistake twice....

[PeaceProgProsp]

80. Because I remember the Raleigh N and O polls on Edwards.

Just as he has done since 98, the more people think about him the better he does.

He went up in the News and Observer polls every month of the campaign.

Edwards's trajectory is always up.

[dad]

100. He didn't run for re-election in the Senate because he would have LOST

He'll never win any office in NC again - he'll never take the state as part of a presidential ticket - those are the facts. In this state his political career is over.
Looks like he's going for the presidential candidate Joementum now, 2008 version.

[pie]

97. 'whichever way the wind blows' Edwards: no thanks

[leesa]

41. Screw him. We don't need this type anymore.

[ElectroPrincess]

45. I'm with you Leesa. Screw Edward's punk REP-lite butt into obscurity :P

[PeaceProgProsp]

47. Yeah, we don't need a progressive who will shift power back to workers

and who can win elections.

Don't need that at all.

Let's nominate someone like Joe Biden, who wants to keep corporations powerful and could never win a national election.

[ckramer]

43. Something I can say only after the election:

Edwards is a republican light.

[PeaceProgProsp]

46. By what measure?

[hopein08]

61. Damn, I hate it when I completely disagree with John Edwards.

Maybe for his next podcast I'll submit this question...

"You said, 'the chairman of the DNC is not the spokesman for the party. He's a voice.' If Chairman Howard Dean is not the spokesman, who is? Who should be? Is that person(s) doing a good job in your opinion? What would you describe Dean's job as?"

Granted of course, Edwards runs on the politics of nice, but this is ridiculous.

[AmericanDream]

94. Check out his statement at his blog on this issue...

[phasev]

62. I agree with Edwards

Both sides have been using straw-man arguments too much and it's time that we actually tell it the way it is. There are some good republicans and there are some bad democrats and vice versa.

[last1standing]

65. It's just a shame he chose to use a Democrat as an example......

instead of a republican. I wonder why?

[nightfox02]

66. Dean is the VOICE of the party hence his title...

Edwards is seriously drinking the Kool-Aid. McCain and McEdwards should
hold hands and make a run in 2008.

Edwards is a hack.

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

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

[last1standing]

74. I'm not ready to call Edwards a hack....

but I am interested to know why he chooses to attack the DNC chair versus the RNC chair who has said much more extreme things about various Democrats. Off hand I just can't think of any reason that I would accept as valid.

[anarchy1999]

91. Look to the "Bilderburg".

Do some research.

[high density]

67. OK, Care about your wife and enjoy your money

But for the love of God, please stop with the political stuff because it's clear you have no clue. We're all suffering with another 3.5 years of bullshit to go under Bush thanks in part to your ineptitude and massive ego.

[nightfox02]

70. Bravo!

Edwards should be taking notes from Dean not criticizing him.

Dean owns Edwards and actually has a clue on how to be a Dem. The amount of energy and enthusiasm that Dean has manufactured DWARFS any thing Edwards has put out..even within this own blog community...

Think about that...

[Carolab]

78. WRONG, JOHN. He IS the spokesman for the party.

It's his JOB. And he's right. They ARE a bunch of crooks and liars--say, wait, didn't we overhear John Kerry say that during his campaign?

John Edwards is a freaking opportunist. I really resented it here in Minnesota when they told us to vote for him instead of Dean in the caucus because they "thought Dean wouldn't get the 15% threshold", so people just caved in (except for me and my fiance and 5 others in our precinct!) I think Edwards needs to apologize to Dean. If you think so too, here is the link to Edwards' "blog":

http://www.oneamericacommittee.com/

[Rainscents]

82. I agree with you! Also, if it wasn't for all the new base Howard Dean

created before the primary... Dean asked all his supporters to support Kerry/Edwards ticket. Yes, Edwards do owe Dean gratitudes and apology as far as I'm concern. If it wasn't for Dean and his base, Kerry/Edwards base would not had been as strong.

[AmericanDream]

95. He said that Dean is a voice... and there are other voices too....

Hopefully you'll go to his blog and read his clarifying statement and save the anger for the republicans!

[roguevalley]

84. I'm sick of woosie dems. This really pisses me off:

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

No Edwards for me. Ever.

[boohootwo]

85. Edwards is saying that some Republicans have made

an honest living. So what. He's never been a mudslinger. That's part of his appeal.

[stlsaxman]

90. Edwards bores me anymore, I pray Elizabeth all the best...

But John should shut up if he's gonna bash another Dem- especially the chairman.

Personally- I want Gore to run in '08.

[boohootwo]

92. Look how everyone is falling into the trap set by the media.

This incident is nonsense and we're letting the media use it to build divisions within the party. Why can't we just brush it aside as both Dean and Edwards have apparently done? How easily we have been manipulated.

[Norquist Nemesis]

96. Great question!

It's further evidence of who control the spin, isn't it? No doubt, the media will once again be conducting internal investigations of themselves to measure their impact and 'correctness' just as they did with the scream.

[Stuckinthebush]

101. I don't know if I want Edwards

If he can't get mean like Dean.

We've had enough of spineless Dems, let's get some fighters in there!

[chalky]

103. Guess What? John Edwards agrees with Howard! Go figure!

Oh, fer Crissake, people!

You know, I took issue with John Edwards criticizing Dean, too. But instead of trusting some bullshit corporate media release ( from The Associated Press, no less) I did a little more digging. And you know what I found?:

John Edwards: We Agree: Working Americans Let Down by the Republican Party

"What a flap has arisen over a disagreement about the way something is said! I was in Nashville over the weekend, thanking the good people of Tennessee who supported the Democratic presidential ticket this year, when I was asked whether I thought that it was fair to say that people who were Republican hadn’t done a good day’s work. Of course, I didn’t think so, and I said that. I don’t think our DNC chair, Howard Dean, would put it that way again if asked either. I disagreed with him, and I said so. And, I want to be clear, I would have to say so again if I were asked again. I said a lot of good things about Howard’s outreach program and invigoration of the internet as a communication and fundraising tool, but no one wrote about that. Instead the headlines blared that I disagreed with Howard. And then the flap arose: A chasm! A split! A revolt!

"Instead, how about: Nonsense!
"We are both talking about the Republicans and their failure to address the needs of working people. We both agree with this basic truth: This Republican president and this Republican majority are not doing what they should be doing for working people in this country. That’s a core belief we need to fight for. And what’s more, we agree that we - all Democrats and all working people - should be complaining, criticizing, and generally speaking out about this critical failure of the Republican party and offering our positive vision for America. And we have.

"Howard and I have been saying the same thing about this for years. Hear that? The same thing. For years. Have I ever put it some way that Howard wouldn't agree with? Probably. And he put it in a way, once, just the other day, that I can’t agree with, since I come from a place where hard-working people, who are better served by the agenda and passion of the Democrats, somehow still vote Republican. But Howard and I are committed to a 50-state strategy that will reach out to those voters, in North Carolina, and in Kansas, and in Tennessee, across this country and tell the truth about what is happening in this country to their jobs, to their health care, to their forests and streams, to their vision of what this country is and should be....."

Just in case you give a rat's ass, you can find the rest of his statement here.

Now, while I love Howard Dean and all and even put up a post or two aimed at DINOs in general for attacking Howie, I can't help but cringe at the CONSTANT BARRAGE of posts criticizing every other democrat known to man for criticizing any other democrat. All while we rail and piss and moan and gnash our teeth about the lack of unity in the party. Anyone get just a tiny whiff of hypocrisy off that?

So here's a couple of simple requests:
1) If you see a "press release" from the CMW ( aka "corporate media whores") DON'T BELIEVE IT TELLS YOU THE ENTIRE TRUTH. Do some damn digging. You might find that some of the story is left out. Newsflash: it happens.

2) If you've done your digging and still don't have your answers, GO STRAIGHT TO THE HORSES' MOUTH.
Demand an answer from THEM. Now if their answer to you is a polite non-answer or a Cheney-like "Fuck off", please feel free to report that and fire away with the attacks. But it took me FIVE DAMN MINUTES to find the above statement from a man I've seen called everything but a child of god on this thread. In the meantime Rove is cackling like a crazed scientist at our ongoing tizzy.

God Almighty--if I'd wanted to endure this kind of "you're either with us or against us" lock-step mentality bullshit, I'd have joined the fucking Republicans.

[struggle4progress]

104. Thank you! eom

[chalky]

105. Great, now the link has dried up

and God forbid we don't have instant access to the proof I offered or the hounds will be released again.
Click here or go to blog.oneamericacommittee.com and scroll down for John Edwards statement on Howard Dean.