The Nation: Candidate Edwards: Version 2.008

[marmar]

Candidate Edwards: Version 2.008

The John Edwards who today announces his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination is a very different contender from the fresh-faced young senator who in 2004 bid for the party nod--and eventually secured a place on the ticket as the vice presidential nominee.

By any measure, he has a lot more to offer progressives than he did in 2004. That potential to appeal to the party's left flank is essential for Edwards, who will need an ideological base as he struggles for attention in a race where New York Senator Hillary Clinton and Illinois Senator Barack Obama have been sucking most of the air out of the contest.

Edwards struggled to craft a message in 2004. After stumbling frequently and, many assumed, fatally in 2003, he finally developed the "two Americas" stump speech that identified him as a candidate who was serious about broadening the national debate to include a serious discussion of the dangerous gap between rich and poor in America.

Even as he improved as a speaker and debater, however, Edwards remained a vague and frequently ill-defined candidate. He condemned President Bush's management of the war in Iraq, and was particularly critical of the war profiteering that had been allowed--if not encouraged--by the White House. But Edwards took no clear stand on the war.

Edwards talked tough about the need to protect American farmers. But he developed a "farm plan" that seemed more sympathetic to agribusiness than to working farmers.

Edwards tried to portray himself as a champion of labor. But he never really developed a coherent, let alone effective, message on the central issue for unions and their members: trade policies that favor multinational corporations and Wall Street over working Americans and Main Street.

Despite his flaws, Edwards did well enough in 2004 to merit another look in 2008. And he has given progressives reason to be impressed. Many migrated to the Edwards camp late in the 2004 race in hopes of blocking the candidacy of an even more flawed contender, John Kerry. .....(more)

The rest is at: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=151739

[Strawman]

1. Yep. John Nichols is great

Spot on.

[snowbear]

4. WOw.. the comments on that thread are crazy...

Whole lotta BICKERING (like 3 or 4 pages worth) by a group of guys who sound more like Rush Limpball fans. All except for one of them..

Why do wingnuts take over EVERY single progressive forum, website or chat?? Is it because their own message boards are too restrictive, or do they seriously think they're going to change minds if they hang around long enough??

[Skwmom]

8. So if you don't support Edwards or believe every word of his

paid PR political spin team you are a Rush Limpball fan? I must be missing the logic in that analysis. I wonder if Republicans who didn't support Bush in 2000 were accused of being fans of progressives or closet progressives? Well I really don't wonder - I'd bet money on it.

[Strawman]

10. Their blog is poorly moderated

Lots of trolls on the Nation's blogs. I've noticed that before. Lots of comments from right wingers who are obviously not liberal at all. I understand your point that there ought to be a presumption against labeling people who voice a differing opinion as trolls, but in my opinion, alot of obvious RW trolling goes on at that blog. That's why it's not much of a meeting place or useful discussion forum. It's an online magazine and the blog posts are merely daily articles. It's useful in that respect, but I don't even bother to read the comments.

[JNelson6563]

14. Didja READ the comments?

I did after reading your post. Plenty of dead-giveaways that there are some wingers posting there. McCain supporters and people who call lawyers "ambulance chasers", yep, thems some wingers alright.

Julie

[renie408]

19. Why bother to go over there? You could stay right here and listen to people

snipe and make obnoxious, pointless comments.

The thoughtful objections don't bother me. And wingers jumping Dems is just par for the course. Its Democrats ripping apart other Democrats that I can't stand.

[Clark2008]

26. Hi Skwmom!

I've missed my North Carolina neighbor.

:hug: :hi:

[DemDogs]

2. Edwards impressing progressives

This is exactly right. Just watched his Iowa town hall streaming live on his website. Wow.

[Skwmom]

7. So all it takes to impress progressives is tell them what they want to hear?

But then again Bush did the same thing for the conservative Republicans when he was running and that seemed to work.

[Skwmom]

3. The DLC does need to keep the left flank in line if they hope

to win in 2008.

If I was a member of the DLC, how could I keep the left flank in line? Hmmm, maybe I'd make sure that I had a "DLC created progressive" candidate in the 08 line-up. To paint my guy as progressive, among other things, I'd pay posters to constantly mention my "DLC created progressive" candidate in the same sentence with true progressives like Gore, Feingold, and Clark (the old progressive by association trick). Furthermore, I'd placate the Democrats disillusioned with the Clintons by pairing Clinton with the "DLC created progressive" candidate.

"And he has given progressives reason to be impressed..." I know many have ridiculed people for falling for the GOP created Bush image. Could Democrats be as easily fooled?

[FrenchieCat]

5. Of course Democrats could be as easily fooled......

and a pretty face could do the "trick".

We are all looking for a JFK, and folks find it wherever they want to.

Didn't take a stand on the war my ass! :eyes:

[Skwmom]

6. What has happened to critical thinking in America?

We've become a bunch of easily manipulated idiots.

[cali]

18. I like Edwards. I'm hardly easily fooled.

Unlike some folks here (yes, I'm including you in that group) I haven't become so fixated on a candidate that it obfuscates my ability to look long and hard at all who are running or are potential candidates. Quite bluntly, many of the Clark supporters here sound like they're chewing an awful lot of sour grapes when it comes to Edwards, and accusing people who support Edwards of being duped by a pretty face (much the same as accusing them of being fools) hardly generates good will for your candidate. If I were you, I'd consider cooling it; you're lousy ambassadors for General Clark.

[Skwmom]

27. The old "sour grapes" argument. The 08

election is about the future of OUR country not about being an ambassador for General Clark. Not liking Edwards has nothing to do with liking Clark. I plan on taking a long and hard look at who is running in 08 but I've already taken a hard look at Edwards in 04 and ended up concluding that I could never support Edwards (and understanding why the media has for the most part been his cheerleader).

[cali]

32. Let me ask you something

if Edwards gets the nomination will you vote for him? I'll certainly vote for Clark if he wins the nomination.

[marmar]

9. Maybe I'm wrong, but I've never thought of Wesley Clark as a progressive...

:shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

11. Even more strange that I never did see how John Edwards was so progressive

even in the votes he made in the Senate.

as far as Clark's progressive bonafides?
His '04 tax proposals; his stance on singlepayer health care; his education benefit proposals for lower and higher education ($6,000 for first two years of college to those of families making under $150,000 and universal pre-school system--not tax credits)proposals; his renewal energy stance and work on Global Warming, his '04 primary endorsement by various gay and minority groups, his public calls for the fairness doctrine to be reinstated; his work on fair and secure election via his podcast programs; his fight for Affirmative Action via written support via Supreme Court case; his Aids program proposal touted by Jesse Jackson; his work on Rwanda, Kosovo and Darfur against Genocide; his stance against going into Iraq starting in 2002; his public claim to the word "Liberal" on national teevee, his televised defense of Michael Moore via the right to Free Speech when no one else would; his public discussions and denouncements of PNAC/Neocons in print and electronic media; his tireless work for Democrats in the 2004 and 2006 elections; his making it known that military budgetary items would be "on the table" for cutting if he were to be elected as President; his announcing we should be working to install a counterprevailing institution to the Military Industrial Complex via a similar organization as Kucinich's Peace Department and that we should resign ourselve to "buying" our oil at the going rate as opposed to attempting to manipulate the world markets; his public calls that we talk to Iran not Bomb them (before anyone else did); his supporting fair trade not free trade; his innovative ideas on Labor Unions and how they can return to the power they once were in our economic system--all actions and words that clearly defines General Clark as more liberal than most-- But yes, Gen. Clark is actually a stealth liberal who is perceived as a moderate based on his 37 years of military service; which makes his progressiveness that much more powerful and effective.

Taxes- http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2004/02/18/opinion/myers.html
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2004/01/07/003/58645
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/11/17/192456/21

Health Care - http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/1/30/17455/5250
http://www.muhajabah.com/clarkblog/2006/01/clark_supports_singlepayer_hea.php

War - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/general-wesley-clark-take_b_22672.html
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/01/31/wes_clark_raised_the_bar.php

Education -
http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/107th/edr/impaid110801/clark.htm
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/clark.interview.pdf

Environment -
http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/74
http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw_marcher.asp?2724
http://energybulletin.net/15587.html
http://www.clark04.com/press/release/167 /

Science
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2006/jun/10/566627991.html
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/May05/Commencement/Clark_speech.html
http://www.greenspeed.us/wesley_clark.htm

Affirmative Action & Human Rights-
http://www.texasforclark.com/affirmative.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-01-05-clark-women_x.htm
http://www.clark04.com/articles/010/
http://news.uns.purdue.edu/html3month/2006/060105.Ingrao.Sears.html
http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2005/05-007.html

Mark Kleiman – http://www.samefacts.com/archives/cat_wesley_clark.html

Endorsement by the Washington Blade (largest Gay Newspaper) - http://www.aegis.com/news/wb/2004/WB040109.html

Endorsement by the Native American Times (largest American Indian Publication) http://www.nativetimes.com/index.asp?action=displayarticle&article_id=3440

http://usliberals.about.com/od/peopleinthenews/p/Wesley...

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040202/lawton

Endorse Wesley Clark by Samantha Powers to Armenian American Community RE-Genocide
http://www.anca.org/press_releases/press_releases.php?prid=503

Opinions of Clark
Col. Hackworth’s change of heart on the Perfumed Prince - http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34738
Esquire/The General
http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_1.html

Waiting for the General -
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16795

The Unappreciated General/written in 2000 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A51403-2000May1

Boy from Little Rock chooses military path
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/clark/articles/2003/11/16/boy_from_little_rock_chooses_military_path/

Debating http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/clark/articles/2003/12/10/clark_makes_the_most_of_the_moment/

The Deserter comment from MM and Clark’s bad press on it - http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2004/01/waldman-p-01-26.html

Attacks on Wesley Clark are laughable at best - http://aggressive-voice.com/zz585.html

Saddam’s capture doesn’t sway Clark - http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/clark/articles/2003/12/17/capture_doesnt_sway_clark/

Endorsement by Ambassador at the Arab American Institute -
http://www.aaiusa.org/gabriel.htm

African Americans for Democratic Leadership http://www.democrats.us/editorial/aadl092203.shtml

Muslim Albanian introduction http://www.kiddingonthesquare.com/2004/01/account_from_a_.html

Other newslinks - http://www.texasforclark.com/hot.htm
http://www.hilltoptimes.com/story.asp?edition=274&storyid=7419
http://wesleyclark.h1.ru/profile.htm
Listing of Awards -
http://wesleyclark.h1.ru/awards.htm

WESLEY CLARK SLAMS MEDIA CONSOLIDATION

"I don't think it is in the American public interest to further consolidate the media." Answering this reporter's question, the candidate said media consolidation "is damaging to putting out diverse opinions and fostering public dialogue. ... We need to distribute the ownership in media. We need to have the fairness in broadcasting rules put back in place."
http://www.fradical.com/Presidential_candidate_slams_media_violence.htm

Election Reform Pocast Series:
August 28, 2006
ClarkCast 023 - Election Integrity Summary
(Click to listen or download)
In this edition of the ClarkCast, we summarize the highlights of this months discussion of election integrity in the US. General Clark and our noted experts point out the problems with the current election system, look to potential future problems, and remind us of the importance of free and fair elections to a modern democracy. We hope these interviews and discussions have helped motivate you take action in your state to protect the security of our elections. Listen, then share your thoughts with the Clark Community at http://securingamerica.com/ccn.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 20, 2006
ClarkCast 022 - The Security Of Our Elections, Part II
(Click to listen or download)
In this edition of the ClarkCast, we finish our two-part series on the importance of election security. In a roundtable format, Clark supporter MSinLA probes deeper into the current state of US elections with Dr. David Dill, Mark Crispin Miller, and California State Senator Debra Bowen -- candidate for California Secretary of State. Listen, then share your thoughts with the Clark Community at http://securingamerica.com/ccn.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 15, 2006
ClarkCast 021 - The Security Of Our Elections
(Click to listen or download)
In the first of a two-part series, Clark supporter MSinLA interviews noted experts on the topic of elections and election security. In discussing a broad range of potential voting inaccuracies, these interviews tell us much about our current system and how it might be subverted.


With the 2006 mid-term elections less than three months away, the integrity of our voting process is a crucial matter. We hope these interviews will motivate you to take action in your state to protect the integrity of our election system. Listen, then share your thoughts with the Clark Community at http://securingamerica.com/ccn.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 8, 2006
ClarkCast 020 - Election Integrity
(Click to listen or download)
On the heels of the Connecticut Democratic Primary, General Clark brings the issues of the 2006 elections into sharp focus. He talks about the value of voting and, most importantly, how critical it will be to assure that these elections are conducted with integrity. Listen, then share your thoughts with the Clark Community at http://securingamerica.com/ccn.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

July 31, 2006
ClarkCast 019 - Election Summary
(Click to listen or download)
In this edition of The ClarkCast, we summarize our discussion of the importance of the 2006 mid-term elections, putting into perspective the many voices we've heard this month. Listen, then share your thoughts with the Clark Community at http://securingamerica.com/ccn.

http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/22

[Skwmom]

12. But he has a heck of a Two Americas speech so he must be progressive...

or at least his speech writer might be.

[renie408]

21. LOL...Ok, that was funny.

Listen, nobody thinks that anybody but John Edwards writes most of his speeches, including the people who hate him the most here. He was famous for his compelling closing arguments when he was a lawyer. Go ahead and hate him. For the life of me, I can't understand hating ANY of these candidates, but if that's what you need to do, fine. But at least TRY to know something about them other than you like somebody else.

[Skwmom]

22. So people don't support or like Edwards b/c they like or support another

candidate. Hmmm... there is nothing quite like political logic (or should I say lack thereof). As far as knowing something about Edwards, when I get the time I will compose a thorough analysis of why I do not support Edwards. Thanks for the idea!

[renie408]

24. Any time :)

Thorough is good. I understand supporting another candidate. But do you have to HATE one guy to LIKE another one? I currently like Edwards the most of the people most likely to run in '08. But that doesn't mean I HATE Obama or Clark or Hillary. It doesn't mean that I can't see the GOOD of them. I read your posts and its as if you can find NO merit in Edwards at all. That does not seem balanced or open minded to me.

[NCarolinawoman]

33. Actually, I read that Bob Shrum coined the phrase "Two Americas" for Edwards's Senatorial bid.

I don't know about the rest of the speeches. Hopefully Shrum won't be working for any candidate anymore in a Presidential election. He seems to have done better in the lower-echelon elections.

[renie408]

20. How do you DO that?

Seriously. I am not kidding here. I don't think I have ever seen that many links in a single post. I couldn't even begin to wade through all that crap. Can you give me a synopsis? Is 'Edwards = Bad, Clark = Good' close?

[Skwmom]

23. Isn't that what the Bush PR team relied on? One line rhetoric with no one

really taking a hard look at Bush.

[renie408]

25. Why do you do THAT?

What does Bush have to do with us here? Why is your stock answer to everything "that's what Bush did"? If you want to say that I am no better than a Bush supporter, go ahead. I can take it. But could you back that up? I was kidding Frenchie. We disagree on many things, but have managed to do it so far for the most part with a sense of humor and respect. I am honestly impressed with how much information she can spit out at the drop of a hat. And I really DO want to know how she does it.

[Skwmom]

28. Why bring up Bush? Because the analogy is oh so appropriate.

Bush was a Rove/PR created myth that the conservative base bought into. Edwards is the Democratic equivalent. For years, posters have bemoaned how people could be so stupid to buy into the "myth of Bush" the compassionate conservative while the facts seemed to scream the opposite. Talk is cheap, facts are what counts.

[renie408]

29. Do you have ANYTHING other than vitriolic rhetoric to back that up?

Give me some facts. Save the one about voting for the IWR, though, cause we have beat that sucker to death on about ten other threads. Or, actually, if you have something new to say about it that might be compelling and isn't based on your personal opinion, I would be glad to hear it.

[Skwmom]

30. Edwards was a co-sponsor of the IWR - he didn't just vote for it.

As stated above, I will be sitting down and putting together a lengthy analysis of why I do not support Edwards and consider him nothing more than a PR created myth. In fact, I will begin composing it tonight.

[renie408]

31. Good. I will look forward to it. Thanks for putting in the effort.

I hear a lot of people running Edwards down, but really, the only real point is the IWR. Just like the 'China' comments that were posted earlier and turned out to be false. I am really not stuck to Edwards. He just makes the most sense to me of the people currently available.

[Jai4WKC08]

13. Yep, you would be wrong

http://headstrong-america.blogspot.com/2005/12/graph-rates-2008-hopefuls-on-issues.html

[marmar]

16. Thanks for the graph. Smarmy headline ignored.

n/t

[JNelson6563]

15. Oh look! An Edwards thread dominated by Clarkies!

What a surprise.

Not.

:puke:

[Jai4WKC08]

17. Oh look. Julie sitting in judgment of Clarkies

What a surprise that is.

But I won't puke over it.