Joe Conason: Edwards' insensitive move

[Adelante]

Edwards' insensitive move

While one can oppose the war and still support the troops, the presidential candidate's call for antiwar protests on Memorial Day is a bad idea.

By Joe Conason

-snip

Despite the shortcomings of the Legion, however, its anger over what Edwards is doing will resonate more broadly. His call to protest risks offending the sensibilities of everyone who believes the holiday should be solemnly commemorative rather than politically noisy. Even many vets who have come to despise the Bush administration believe that antiwar displays on that day are at best insensitive, reviving bad memories of the Vietnam era.

So while most of what Edwards proposes on his Web site is laudable, it is neither kind nor smart to wave protest signs on Memorial Day. (That may be why the broader antiwar movement seems to have quietly rejected the idea.) Such cultural blunders can only discourage the new generation of progressive veterans that is challenging right-wing orthodoxy in the military community. Last year's midterm elections, which featured victorious House and Senate campaigns by Democratic veterans and the stunning debut of Votevets.org, proved that the political direction of veterans and their families should no longer be taken for granted. A promising trend that began with the presidential candidacy of retired Gen. Wesley Clark in 2004 is gathering momentum.

The underlying reason, of course, is that the president and his advisors have so badly abused the trust usually vested by the military in Republican leadership. Over the past few years, retired generals and admirals have spoken out with increasing bluntness against Bush administration policies, which they believe have not only damaged American security and prestige but also disgraced and broken the services. Worse still, they have noticed that this government is more concerned with contractor super-profits than with the care of soldiers and veterans.

In short, Republicans have proved that they no longer deserve a monopoly on military loyalty (and in fact they never did). Whether Democrats and progressives can win back the respect -- and the votes -- of soldiers, veterans and their families is a critical question for the future of American politics. It will never happen if they believe that the left devalues or ignores their sacrifice.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2007/05/18/edwards_protest/

American Legion aside, I know how I feel about this gambit. Memorial Day is a day of remembrance, for visiting the graves of veterans, for paying honor to sacrifice. I don't like it when Bush uses the live troops politically and I don't like it that Edwards is using the dead troops politically.

But what of the politics of it? Is this move by the Edwards campaign smart or suicidal?

[Colobo]

1. I think it's not an intelligent move

It will please the most extreme elements of our party, but in general most people won't approve of this.

[edwardsdefender]

45. I think you believe everything you hear

[FrenchieCat]

69. I think that disparaging DUers who have opinions different from you

is not gonna do you much good.

State your opinion on the topic, not the person making the post. When you do that, you are making it personal.

On a Democratic board, the opinions one member have shouldn't make them the target for personal insults.

[edwardsdefender]

77. I think you are whining to try and silence my opinion. I'm actually giving DUers credit

by saying that if they actually went to John Edwards site and read what he was asking from the beginning, they wouldn't have been incorrectly describing what he's asking.

That's actually saying they are "honest" people if they have the information, which I consider to be a positive thing.

[FrenchieCat]

81. You are being disingenious at best......

Because what you posted in reply to poster's opinion was clear and personal; you stated that poster believed everything he hears. That's not a compliment by anyone's imagination.

You were implying naivete, which is not a positive virtue, in particular in the realm of politics.

But go on with your bad self, and don't let my "whining" get in your way!

[edwardsdefender]

83. The message behind what I was saying is if you go and read what Edwards said you will know the truth

Not doing so, is actually what's disingenuous.

But I guess your claims of "personal attacks" are subliminal messages to the moderators. The fact is, if something is so, it just is. If someone is repeating what some journalist said and it is incorrect because the journalist was incorrect, then that is believing what you heard.

[FrenchieCat]

88. The message behind your insult was fine, however, one is not here

to read the message BEHIND your post.....but the post itself.


I went to Edwards' website, and in fact posted portions of the text I found there with a link in one of my posts.

I happen to have my own opinion as to whether what John Edwards has encouraged is politically wise for his campaign and whether it will make a difference to the effort to stop the war.

Bottomline is that you are not the only one with a brain or researched opinion. Don't underestimate what others do so much.....just state your case backed up with some facts.

[edwardsdefender]

101. Thanks for saying what I thought you would, but it changes nothing. They were

believing what they heard, and no matter how much we go back and forth, the fact that they were is not going to change.

[H2O Man]

2. While I usualy agree

with Joe Conason, I think that his loyalties are with one democratic candidate. Hence, his articles on Edwards and others may lack objectivity.

[Adelante]

5. What do you think, H2O Man?

Is this a smart strategy or not?

[H2O Man]

11. Good question.

I have to admit that I am not totally objective. My views on this are influenced by the veterans that I know personally. And they are all strongly opposed to the Bush-Cheney war, and want the US troops brought home now.

I've wrote on DU in the past about a friend who, in 2004, tld me that he knew Kerry from the 1970s. And he had not liked him at all. He said he wouldn't vote for Kerry. A while later, another vet had brought his son to tell my friend the truth about Iraq. And my friend decided to support Kerry, because he knew that the soldiers were being used in a cruel and heartless way by this administration.

It may be that some veterans will be offended by Edwards' move. But I think that others will agree with him.

[Colobo]

15. Morally speaking, it's a very nice gesture... however,

politically speaking, it's a gamble... and the odds are against him...

[Adelante]

20. My reaction was pretty visceral to the overall concept

Maybe because of my family traditions. But in trying to think it through, this point of Conason's, keeps rolling around in my head.

"Such cultural blunders can only discourage the new generation of progressive veterans that is challenging right-wing orthodoxy in the military community."

It would be a shame if this were to come of it.

[KoKo]

44. He and Gene Lyons were Defenders of Clinton against the RW throughout

the second term of Clinton Presidency. Their posts on Salon were the first investigative reports about what the RW was doing to ATTACK the CLINTONS!

Sadly...I've moved on since then ...after stolen election and seeing how the Clintons should have fought back and not left it to Gene and Joe since then. I was never in favor of NAFTA but gave Clinton a pass and defended him to the VERY END...along with Hillary.

I give Joe Conason a pass for being (with Salon) the only place I could go to find solace and refuge against the Limbaugh's and RW Religious attacks on the Clintons during those "lean days" of the early Internet when only BuzzFlash, Media Whores Online, BartCop and Salon kept me going.

But...I don't have the loyalty to what I once did. I give Conason and Lyons (if he is defending the Clintons still) a BIG PASS...because they were there when I and thousands of othrs needed them to EXPOSE the UGLY BELLY OF THE REPUGS.

I've moved past my Hillary/Bill Defense...lost so many friends and learned so much since then. But, I give Joe a pass... Loyalty doesn't just belong to the Bushies...but "Blind Loyalty" always sucks. :shrug:

[bunkerbuster1]

133. Don't give Conason a pass.

He's being a classic concern troll. We need, to quote Jim Florio, more javelin throwers and fewer javelin catchers.

If Edwards wants to do something ballsy like promote antiwar protests on Memorial Day, good for him. Get in people's faces. Make some noise. Stir up some shit. It's about time.

The Right is right about one thing: We HAVE been "surrender monkeys." Only it isn't the "Terrorists" we've been surrendering to, but rather the fascists having their way with us in DC.

[madfloridian]

110. Thanks for saying that so I did not have to.

.

[Czolgosz]

116. If you read Conason over at Salon, then you know that Conason's nose smells a lot like Clark's ass

[H2O Man]

123. I think that

Wes Clark is the person being planned for VP is NY Senator Clinton gets the democratic nod. I have no problem with anyone advocating for Clark or Clinton, or supporting a Clinton-Clark ticket.

It can be difficult, if you support one ticket, to be objective when writing about others .... particularly if it involves someone like Edwards taking a strong position on the issue that your candidate may be weakest on. I assume that those who back Clinton must recognize that her position on Iraq is not winning her support among the growing ranks of anti-war democrats. Any bold move made by Edwards will certainly result in her supporters saying, "Bad move. It will cost us the support of people who are strong on defense."

When I hear the warnings about offending families of soldiers, I can't help but think that many of these young soldiers' parents are about my age. That means they should remember a candidate in 1968 that said he had a secret plan to end the American involvement in the Vietnam War, if elected. Of course, Nixon was a snake who would tell any lie to get elected. I have heard Senator Clinton say that if she is elected, she'll end US involvement in the Iraqi war. That isn't good enough for me. A US Senator should be working to end the war now. Today. And I think that is the urgency that has resulted in John Edwards' call for our citizens to think about the very real deaths of the soldiers who will lose their lives between now and someone else taking office in January, 2009.

[Czolgosz]

129. Back in 2003, Consaon was spinning for Clark harder than Clark's paid staff or even Clark himself.

I get the impression that there are two minds in the Hillary camp: (1) those who like Clark as the VP and (2) those who like Richardson, who has been a long time Clinton loyalist. I think Conason is very much in the Hillary/Clark camp.

[Adelante]

131. I always respect your conclusions, H2O Man

Because they are well-thought and fair. But I don't see how Clinton-Clark is any more predictable than Edwards-Clark or any number of 2008 candidates and Clark, if he remains out of the race. As in 2004, he has a lot to offer any ticket light on foreign policy and national security experience - this wasn't the case with Kerry, but with other of the primary candidates. I have seen no indication from Clark, however, that he has interest in being anybody's VP. I always sense that when his commitment to national service is called on by any president, he will respond, but I also think he recognizes that VP is not necessarily the best place for his talents. He has always deplored the power Dick Cheney has over Bush's direction in foreign affairs. Clark has said many times, many times, that it is not a proper or even workable situation. If not president, SoS or national security or emergency preparedness, just a few of many examples of where his abilities and experience might better fit than VP.

Further, I don't actually see how a Clark VP helps either Clinton or Edwards on the war, other than the obvious. Both of them disregarded his guidance in 2002 and voted the wrong way. Both would be pounded on that vote in the media and by the oppo. Both of them will have to face serious questions raised by prewar intelligence investigations in Congress, which Clark has been backing to the hilt since 2004. I seriously doubt either would consider Clark an asset when you consider how his own priorities of transparency and accountability on the war would jar the required campaign message.

I also want you to understand, as I am the OP, that I am in no way a Clinton supporter, not today, not tomorrow. I will vote the GE ticket, but I will not vote in the primaries for ANYONE who voted yes to the IWR. That goes double in intensity for Edwards who co-sponsored it while he was on the Intelligence Committee, but it doesn't give Hillary my support or my vote. So your speculations about any motivation for this thread being support of a Clinton-Clark ticket are far off base. Just so you know, friend.

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

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

[Czolgosz]

128. Just Google "conason clark" and you find plenty of links showing that Conason's a huge Clark fan,

which is not a bad thing. I like Clark, but I don't think Conason's best understood as a neutral party given how hard he pushed for Clark in 2003.

[NYCGirl]

130. In the first two pages of the search, many of those are Consason criticizing Clark

for his position on the flag burning amendment.

[Adelante]

134. "Conason is very much in the Hillary/Clark camp"

Anything to show for this in the present day?

In 2003, Joe Trippi was up the anti-war candidate's ass; today he's up the IWR co-sponsor's ass. :shrug:

[DemDem07]

158. Joe is a pro Clinton,

I hope he doesn't continue down this road, as I've always enjoyed him.

[AndyA]

3. What better way to honor the troops than to protest an illegal war

that has already taken the lives of over 3,000 of their brethren?

Honor their memory, honor their lives, and respect our current troops by protesting the illegal slaughter of our innocent and brave troops on Memorial Day. Show them we are thinking of them, we care, and we're trying to bring them home to safety and their families.

The war in Iraq is based on lies.

To not protest would be more disrespectful in my opinion.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. Sounds to me like yet another reason to support Edwards if Gore doesn't run.

Protesting this war -on any day- isn't "dishonoring the troops". What dishonors the troops is continually sending them off to be killed in a war for which the Administration has never even bothered to string together a coherent rationale.

[edwardsdefender]

49. John Edwards is asking for more than a protest. He wants to change the frame to support = bring

them home. You can best believe that all of these media heads lying on John Edwards have been to that website and seen Edwards message, and read the letter. They know that he is not talking about outright "protesting," but they all are presenting it that way. So ask yourselves why that is.

I don't know how obvious it can be that the media is leading an organized swiftboating effort to do all that they can to make sure that Edwards has zero chance of being nominated. It's a free ride for all of the other Democrats until the media succeed at bringing down the one guy the Republicans don't want to face...John Edwards.

That includes Hillary Clinton, and Barak "the best thing that ever happened to Hillary Clinton" Obama.

[Warren DeMontague]

65. Well, Cable "Newz" sucks ass. So I can't speak to what the media is doing.

I agree that the PTB may think Edwards poses the most threat, and I think they may be right.

But believe me, plenty of us are paying attention to what the guy has been saying the past month or so.
Solid.

Welcome to DU. :hi:

[edwardsdefender]

74. I agree :-)

[Proud2BAmurkin]

6. It's more of a tribute than what 99.9% of Americans will be doing that day

If we are going to criticize protesting we better criticize barbeques too

[Adelante]

7. My family visits the graves

And then has the barbecue. Isn't it what most people do?

[Colobo]

9. That's what most people do

[Inspired]

37. Wouldn't that be nice?

But no, my bet is that is NOT what most Americans do on Memorial Day. To most Americans it will be just another Monday holiday. Sad, but true.

I hope to have a BBQ with my One Corps chapter, at a public park, supporting our troops while handing out literature on John Edwards' plan to bring them home.

I really can't think of a more patriotic thing to do on this day. I'm surprised, at the DU of all places, to read anything negative about it by those who oppose this war.

[Xhanatos]

92. See, that's what

people should be doing on Memorial Day. It is a tragedy that so many people see it as just a day off from work.

[CarolNYC]

39. What I do

I go back to the small town I grew up in. I attend Memorial services on the cemetery with my family, services that honor first the war dead and then the rest buried on that land. We pay special tribute to the uncle I never met because he died a hero in WWII long before I was born.

Then we go to the parade the next town over, where we watch firetrucks and Little League teams and proud, dignified veterans parade down Main Street. My little nieces and nephews stand at attention and salute as best they can.

Later, I walk with my nieces and nephews past the local VFW and admire the flowers they've planted and the rows of little flags they display especially for this day....and we talk of the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to this country and how awful war is for all concerned.

Sometime during the afternoon, if the weather's nice enough, we barbeque and eat in the backyard. In any event, it's family time spent together.

I guess everyone doesn't spend that day the same way?

I don't know what those proud veterans, many of them quite old now but still up for a march in full uniform in the hot sun passing out little US flags to the kids on a day that honors them, think of this war. But I'd hate to think that the actions of any at that parade would offend them in any way on this, their day, whether they agree with me or not.

[amandabeech]

156. My small town has a parade to the cemetery where the memorial service is held.

It has been the same for at least 48 years, which is how long I can remember it.

In our town, the VFW and American Legion put little flags on the graves of all veterans. Years ago, my dad, a proud WWII vet, and his buddy Murray, who was the same, were in charge.

In the two weeks before Memorial Day, our house was filled to the gills with the little flags wrapped in brown paper, waiting to be put out. Dad and Murray spent every evening with decent weather driving around to all the little cemeteries so that no vet would be missed.

The VA can send out a record of all vets, from every war, who are buried in a certain county. My dad searched and searched for the graves of some, and found them all. His best find was that of a Native American who had been a scout for the Union forces in the Civil War. The area had been a reservation for a while in the late 1800s, and there were many abandoned Native American cemeteries around the county. Dad found the right one, but it was overrun with weeds and brambles. He thought that it was an unsuitable location for the flag. But being a native, he knew everybody. He got ahold of the local Native American leadership and informed them of the problem. He told them that if they mowed the cemetery, he would be more than happy to honor their warrior. The cemetery is cleaned up and every year, there's a flag for that brave soul.

I marched in the parade for six years as a member of the school band, including some of the Vietnam War years when my Dad and I were at odds over that bloody exercise in futility. However, I never would have thought to protest on that day in that parade or ceremony, no matter how much I disagreed with the war and despised Nixon. It would have marred a day meant to honor those who went, who served, even in dumb wars. It was about the soldiers, not the government.

I like John Edwards a lot. In fact, he's my favorite, although I think that we have a good lineup even if Al Gore isn't among them. John grew up in the south, and I'm told by southern friends that Memorial Day wasn't as popular there as it was in the North, because Memorial Day started as a day to honor the Union war dead, and the Union war dead specifically. Maybe he hasn't stood in a cemetery filled with flags and gone a little deaf from the 21-gun salute. If he wants to hand out literature or get people to stand on the side of the road while people drive to the mall, okay. But going to the memorial services that still exist doesn't inspire me unless it serves to get more dufuss Americans to understand that real people sacrificed to make this country what it is. Or at least they thought so.

I'll still like John, but this move will break my heart just a little.

[Cameron27]

163. Thanks amanda,

that's the point I was trying to make below. Memorial Day is the same for my family. My father's brother was killed in Korea, and when my dad was alive, it was a very difficult day for him, but we always went to the cemetary to remember my uncle and all of our family's friends who were killed in WWII, and Vietnam.

This is a tradition that we still honor today.

[amandabeech]

167. Thanks, and I hear you. n/t

[Adelante]

175. Interesting point about North and South

I grew up in New York, fwiw, the parades, the 21 gun salutes, the little flags, all of it. I admit I hadn't considered a possible geographical difference in viewpoint on Memorial Day.

[venable]

8. conason is flat wrong

this call for the soldiers to come home is not politicizing the day, it is celebrating and saving the lives of the soldiers.

it is calling for the same peace that the families want, that many soldiers want, that many vets want.

it is the right thing to do on a day of remembrance.

it is not political.

joe conason has a very specific agenda, and has for some time.

[Adelante]

10. How do you think families of the war dead will view it?

Do you think they will take that logic or feel hurt by it?

[FrenchieCat]

19. You say, "it is not political.".......yet Edwards is not a Veteran......

but he is running for President, and the protest information is on his "Edwards for President" website

....and so in essence, it is linked as a political directive no matter whether the politics of it is denied.

It's not like John Edwards suggested this prior to announcing his candidacy....like last Memorial day, or the one before that, and the one before that. :shrug:

[Adelante]

32. Who are the veteran candidates?

Dodd, right? Biden, I think. Gravel?

[FrenchieCat]

34. Here are the candidates who have served.....

1. John McCain
2. Chris Dodd
3. Mike Gravel
4. Duncan Hunter
5. Tommy Thompson
6. Jim Gilmore
7. Ron Paul

Biden is questionable, depending on who you talk to....as he was in the national guard. His son is in the national guards as well.

[Adelante]

35. Gravel's take would be interesting

Being both a veteran and anti-war.

[Adelante]

36. I couldn't see Kerry or Clark doing this

It's such a solemn, private matter for them. Webb, either.

[JI7]

106. Kerry is famous for his protests and gets a lot of criticism

for it still. but it hinkt he difference is that he was an active long term participant in the protests and had served in the war.

it is much different from a candidate who has no record of attending or supporting protests to suddenly come out with something like this during an election.

[Adelante]

142. Protests, yeah

Built around Memorial Day and during a campaign, I don't think so. It would be interesting to know how both Kerry and Clark, if asked, would feel about it, though.

[karynnj]

145. It's a totally different thing

Kerry did protest as a vet with vets. This is Edwards turning a holiday to honor war dead, to politics. As Wes Dem said, they wouldn't do this. They would quietly and solemnly do something with vets and their families.

This holiday is to honor and respect the families of those lost - some support the war some don't.

[struggle4progress]

89. "If you hold an event on Memorial Day itself, please make sure that everyone you gather knows it is

a day for honoring the fallen only."

http://www.supportthetroopsendthewar.com/

[venable]

94. yes, this is what Edwards said, however much the anti-forces wish is were not

Conasan is politicizing this. it is a sham insult, fabricated by those for whom Edwards can do nothing that's not evil.

shame on them. they are the ones politicizing the moment.

[Cameron27]

149. He's calling for people to

get vocal and bring posters to Memorial Day parades. It doesn't make a difference if it's not on the actual day, the sentiment is the same.

I'll be visiting the graves of family and friends who were killed in other wars, not Iraq, and so will thousands of other people who don't want this protest message in our faces on this holiday weekend.

Knock of the self-serving "anti-forces" BS. Edwards is a pro at this by now, and when he makes a mistake, he's going to get muddied just all the rest of them.

[ChiciB1]

178. Good To See I'm In GOOD Company Here Venable! n/t

[FrenchieCat]

12. Well it depends on what the campaign's goal is......

if the goal is to attempt to get more veterans and their family (who many still are conservative by nature and will buy into how the media chooses to report this move) to further understand how terrible this war is and to influence them to exert more pressure onto our congress without it being interpreted negatively as provocative and controversial.......it might defeat the purpose and be seen as devisive instead; in other words a possible controversy that could mar what should be an honorable goal.

If it is to get more antiwar Democrats to celebrate John Edwards as the antiwar candidate, this could work.

[AtomicKitten]

13. It's a crapshoot.

Is this move by the Edwards campaign smart or suicidal?

And only time will tell how this move goes for him.

[Adelante]

16. I expect the other candidates will be pressed on this by the media

And have to make a judgment about it. It's a real tricky one.

[Cameron27]

14. I don't think it's smart because

no matter what his intentions are, he's running for president, so it will be viewed as a political maneuver. (which is the one of the reasons that Wes Clark cited for why he hasn't declared his candidacy)

[MonkeyFunk]

38. Yep

that's exactly it.

Of course it will be political if a politician is leading it.

I think it's misguided.

[TygrBright]

17. I don't know about suicidal, but not smart, definitely.

Memorial Day has a lot of different meanings for a lot of people. Not the best day for a gesture like this.

Me, I'd think 7/4 would be a better day. We need something other than rah-rah-red-white-and-blue-and-fireworks that day.

But maybe that's not smart, either.

quizzically,
Bright

[calteacherguy]

18. Memorial day should not be political. It's just not what it's about. nt

[SaveElmer]

21. A spectacularly bad idea...

Memorial day is a day to honor dead veterans...not to protest modern wars...

Precisely the type of thing that has pushed veterans away from the Democratic Party for so many years.

Not a whole lot better than protesting a funeral!

[Colobo]

22. Agreed... I thought Edwards was a smarter politician

He is a good man, but he's not helping his cause at all...

[elizm]

23. Hey, Elmer...we agree!..how about that.... :) n/t

[SaveElmer]

29. Had to happen someday !

:-)

I suspect we agree on alot more than we disagree...

[elizm]

33. Was thinking the same thing....

...We probably agree on a lot more than we think! Nice to come to that understanding! :toast:

[Adelante]

25. Not a whole lot better than protesting a funeral!

That's the crux of it for me.

[FrenchieCat]

28. Well there are 365 days in a year.......

and so selecting this particular day and being not aware of the possible controversy that it could invite is impossible, and so this was done with forethought, I would assume....yet controversy should not be what a day of memorial invites.....and so controversy will deflect what the message of a protest should be about, "We should End this war".....

Instead the message will possibly generate a negative reaction from the actual folks who actually have a reason as to why they actually "Do" Memorial's day (as opposed to those who just see it as a legal holiday, but have no personal connection or a meaning to such a day).

Had it been Veteran's day, I think it would have made more sense.

Maybe I just don't believe in giving the enemy the match to light the fire beneath my feet. :shrug:

[Cameron27]

30. He should have talked with

these fine people before making his decision:

:patriot: :patriot: http://www.votevets.org/ :patriot: :patriot:

[Adelante]

54. We don't know

Maybe they could like the idea? I assume they wouldn't, but I could be wrong.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

195. how can you honor dead veterans...

and not protest modern wars?

It doesn't make sense.

[SLadd]

24. Good for Edwards, again

The best way to remember the dead soldiers is to make sure that there are less dead soldiers to remember, and protesting the war helps do that. The nonsense that we are supposed to bow our heads in deep mourning and say nothing about another day of war with soldiers being blown to smithereens is ludicrous, and wrong. Edwards has it right.

[Colobo]

26. And you think Americans will see the protesting on Memorial Day as patriotic?

[Inspired]

56. He said NOT to protest on Monday, Memorial Day. n/t

[Sparkly]

59. Was this in the original version on his site the whole time? nt

[edwardsdefender]

68. Yes, he was never asking for a "protest." As soon as the site launched people were arranging

prayer vigils and laying reefs on tombs and putting together care packages, and things like that. But that didn't stop the media from misleading the public about it.

Why call it a "protest"? The operative phrase is "speaking out." That can be done respectfully. People don't imagine "protesting" as being respectful, but speaking out can be, which is why the media never say "John Edwards is asking people to speak out." They say, "Edwards is asking people to protest."

Gee, I wonder why.

[H2O Man]

124. Thank you

for the most important message on this thread.

[Cameron27]

148. He's suggesting they bring posters

with "SUPPORT THE TROOPS-BRING THEM HOME" painted on them. That IS a protest message no matter how respectful and that's why the media's calling it that.

[Adelante]

27. What if he is right?

What if he is right and turns off a whole bunch of voters? The question was, is it smart, not is it right.

Welcome to DU :hi:

[dogman]

31. I already view him as a chickenhawk.

This won't change that view. While I am also opposed to the American Legion and VFW for turning their backs on Veterans, this does not gain him any credibility and will raise his overall negatives IMO.

[Edith Ann]

154. Chicken hawks

A chicken hawk, by definition, is someone who refused to fight in the war of their generation and yet have no problem supporting others going to war for them. They believe in war, they just believe others should fight in it. John Edwards may have been a little to young. He turned 18 about 1971. Remember, a chicken hawk believes in war and doesn't fight. Someone who doesn't believe in war and doesn't fight is a war protester.

[dogman]

169. That is one definition, not mine.

Wikipedia says:
Snip>Chickenhawk (also chicken hawk and chicken-hawk) is a political epithet used in the United States to criticize a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person is perceived to have actively avoided military service when of draft age.<snip

I don't require the especially part to use the term. Edwards' cheerleading for this war was understandable. Polls showed a majority of the voters in this country supported the war. Now polls show otherwise. A war protester is not featured on the Government website as a war supporter. Edwards was a leading Democratic advocate of this war until the winds of war changed.

[struggle4progress]

40. Here's what Edwards actually said:

... The irresistible power of America lies in your hands, in the hands of the American people.

"Each of us has a responsibility as Americans, a duty to our troops and to each other, to do all we can to support the troops and end this war. This Memorial Day weekend, that means more than just getting in your car, driving to the beach, or a parade, or a picnic and saying the words, "We support our troops."

"We must take responsibility and take action together - as citizens, as Americans, as patriots. To support the troops. To end the war.

"As citizens, we honor and support our troops for their service and sacrifice.

"As Americans, we are blessed by that sacrifice and support, which keeps us safe and keeps us strong.

"And as patriots, we call on our government to support our troops in the most important way it can - by ending this war and bringing them home.

"So today, I am calling on Americans to raise their voices this Memorial Day weekend in honor of all the brave men and women who have served in Iraq and all who have ever served America in uniform.

"If you and Americans across the country rise up and demand an end to this war, Congress will find the courage, and the president will find he has no choice.

"Support the troops. End the war ...

http://johnedwards.com/news/headlines/20070512-support-the-troops/

[FrenchieCat]

41. More specifically, John Edwards calls for various actions.....

(some which are not very controversial), but he also includes the following:

Get vocal. Buy a bunch of poster-board and markers. At a picnic or with family and friends, make signs that say “SUPPORT THE TROOPS - END THE WAR.” Bring them to your local Memorial Day parade. Many parades are held on Saturday or Sunday. If your parade is on Monday, however, we ask that you choose another action to honor the fallen. Then take a digital photo of yourself and your family or friends holding up the poster and tell us about it. We’ll include it in a “Democracy Photo Album” on our site.

Gather in public. On Memorial Day weekend, get your friends, kids, co-workers, neighbors, aunts, uncles, grandfathers, grandmothers, and anyone and everyone you know together to publicly support the troops and end the war. If you hold an event on Memorial Day itself, please make sure that everyone you gather knows it is a day for honoring the fallen only. Be sure to check with your local authority for any permits you need for public gatherings. Contact local media to publicize your event. Before you get started, please take a moment of silence to honor the fallen. And during your event, make sure you conduct yourself respectfully—both for those serving in Iraq and the memory of the brave servicemen and women that Memorial Day honors. Share your plans here.

Get local, get active, and get outdoors. Walk the streets of your neighborhood. Get everyone you know to sign a petition to your local government body—for instance, your town or city council or neighborhood association—to pass a resolution requesting that Congress use its funding authority to support our troops and end the war. Bring the petition to the next meeting. Share your plans here
http://www.supportthetroopsendthewar.com/

[Sparkly]

64. self-delete

I meant to post this to the whole thread as a reply to the OP....

[H2O Man]

125. Thank you.

Americans elected a candidate in 1968 who said he had a secret plan to end the war in Vietnam, once he took office. We can't afford to elect another person with Nixon-like ambitions.

I'm glad that Edwards is taking the position he is. End the war now.

[Inspired]

42. Have you read the website?

I don't see anything about having protest marches at cemetaries on Memorial Day. How is this going to dishonor veterans? What I read is to speak out on the days prior to Memorial Day and to spend Memorial Day honoring those who have sacrificed for our country.

To learn more, visit this website.

http://www.supportthetroopsendthewar.com/

I don't think this is going to hurt John Edwards at all.

[Sparkly]

53. Did someone reference "marches at cemeteries?"

I do see suggestions for signs and other "events," even for publicity for those events, with statements to "end the war."

[Inspired]

58. No, I was making a point

that his call for action isn't nearly as disrespectful as some make it out to be.

[edwardsdefender]

43. Can someone do me a favor?

Show me where John Edwards is calling for "antiwar protests" on Memorial Day.

Once again, the media are flat out lying on John Edwards just like they have about everything else, including the hair cuts, which Edwards did not "get." There is a difference between a hair cut that your campaign set up between campaign stops, and you going out on your own and "getting" a $400 hair cut.

This flack over Memorial Day is just one more misrepresentation of Edwards' position. It's lazy journalism, and the willingness on other people's part (like many on this thread) to just go along with the first thing they hear.

Here is what John Edwards is calling for on Memorial Day:

Get local, get active, and get outdoors. Walk the streets of your neighborhood. Get everyone you know to sign a petition to your local government body—for instance, your town or city council or neighborhood association—to pass a resolution requesting that Congress use its funding authority to support our troops and end the war. Bring the petition to the next meeting. Share your plans here.

Send our troops a taste of home. Go shopping with your kids, your friends, your neighbors, and buy a whole bunch of stuff that would make a soldier happy to receive (check for restrictions). Then go through a site like Anysoldier.com, OpGratitude.com, or TroopCarePackage.com to send your package to a soldier in Iraq. Take photos and tell us about it.

Gather in public. On Memorial Day weekend, get your friends, kids, co-workers, neighbors, aunts, uncles, grandfathers, grandmothers, and anyone and everyone you know together to publicly support the troops and end the war. If you hold an event on Memorial Day itself, please make sure that everyone you gather knows it is a day for honoring the fallen only. Be sure to check with your local authority for any permits you need for public gatherings. Contact local media to publicize your event. Before you get started, please take a moment of silence to honor the fallen. And during your event, make sure you conduct yourself respectfully—both for those serving in Iraq and the memory of the brave servicemen and women that Memorial Day honors. Share your plans here.

Pray. Organize a prayer vigil for our troops at your house of worship. Honor the fallen. Tell us about it.

Make your voice heard in Washington. Call President Bush at [phone] or email him at [e-mail]. Call your Representative and U.S. Senator and ask them to use their funding power to support our troops and end the war. Tell us about it.

Get vocal. Buy a bunch of poster-board and markers. At a picnic or with family and friends, make signs that say “SUPPORT THE TROOPS - END THE WAR.” Bring them to your local Memorial Day parade. Many parades are held on Saturday or Sunday. If your parade is on Monday, however, we ask that you choose another action to honor the fallen. Then take a digital photo of yourself and your family or friends holding up the poster and tell us about it. We’ll include it in a “Democracy Photo Album” on our site.

Greet a vet. Before Memorial Day Weekend gets started, get in touch with the Yellow Ribbon Fund and volunteer to provide welcome-back services and mentorships to injured soldiers returning home. Tell us about it.

Say thank you. Send a thank-you note to our troops through organizations like Let's Say Thanks or A Million Thanks. Better yet - gather folks together to write thank-you notes at a picnic. Tell us about it.

Help an injured vet. Before Memorial Day Weekend gets underway, contact your local VA Hospital and learn how you can volunteer. Tell us about it.

Light up the night. Get your friends and family together and organize a Memorial Day candlelight vigil to support our troops, end the war, and honor the fallen. Share your plans here.

http://www.supportthetroopsendthewar.com/

Whoa! How disrespectful of John Edwards. How dare he ask Americans to put together care packages for the troops. How dare he ask Americans to help injured veterans. How dare he ask Americans to proudly proclaim that the best way to support the troops is to end the war.

Think the corporate media want that mantra to sink in when they are making a financial killing from covering the fiasco in Iraq?

Once again, the media are lying on the one Democrat that they fear at all.

The next time you hear one of them railing on John Edwards for the two $400 hair cuts that his campaign set up for him, ask yourself why they aren't saying anything about the two $1,250 hairdos (that's $2,500 for two hairdos) that Hillary Clinton got last year.

It's because they'd rather have her and her 51% negatives as the Democratic nominee, than John Edwards. Do the Republicans a favor. Keep believing all of the lies that the media keep telling on John Edwards.

[Inspired]

47. Thank you and welcome to the DU!

:hi:

[Cameron27]

48. This is an anti-war protest by any definition:

"Get vocal. Buy a bunch of poster-board and markers. At a picnic or with family and friends, make signs that say “SUPPORT THE TROOPS - END THE WAR.” Bring them to your local Memorial Day parade. Many parades are held on Saturday or Sunday. If your parade is on Monday, however, we ask that you choose another action to honor the fallen. Then take a digital photo of yourself and your family or friends holding up the poster and tell us about it. We’ll include it in a “Democracy Photo Album” on our site."

[Inspired]

52. Oh the horrors! Edwards is asking us to protest the war!

And he is asking us NOT to do it MEMORIAL DAY.

What's the problem with this?

[SaveElmer]

61. Uh no...

He specifically says to do it on Memorial Day...that is the problem...

Joe Conason is a very good journalist...he did not get this wrong

[Inspired]

70. I don't give a damn what day it is on to be honest.

But the site says what it says. I don't have the time to go back and try to find fault in this.

I'm simply amazed to read this crap on the DU. Free Republic, yes, but not on the DU.

God, it is going to be a long election cycle and I hope I can get through it with my sanity intact.

[venable]

136. Joe Conason gets things wrong all the time

he is a way-too-self-satisfied propagandist who sometimes is right on the money, but often is just recycling platitudes. I used to be impressed with him, and the more I read him, the more I felt a growing disappointment and flatness with his work. Then it occurred to me that there simply is no there there. That opinion is corroborated, for me anyway, in this piece.

Once, in a room with 3 or 4 other progressive blogger-types, Joe was - it seemed to me - superior-acting and at the same time he was in way over his head. It was an odd combination of arrogance and dimwittedness.

I now see him as a shill for Hillary, and I'm not sure he is doing her any favors. This 'scandal' is almost absurd, at least to me.

My favorite Conason gaffe: way back when I remember coming across a piece about a month old in, must have been the Observer, and his article was about how the right kept traipsing out attacks on Clinton (this was certaintly true) and how this new attack was a classic shooting-with-blanks, and featured a name that Conason guaranteed that in spite of the rightwing glee, it would be forgotten within two days. The name: Monica Lewinsky.


(edited to say I - as usual - clumsily posted this as a reply to the wrong post, ie I didn't mean it as a reply to Inspired. By the way, Inspired, I worry about my own sanity if this stuff keeps up. It's a long road, and many real and important things to discuss, rather than this. I'm with ya.)

[Cameron27]

80. I was responding to edwardsdefender

/have to research the Memorial Day edit.

[edwardsdefender]

57. Oh, so that one "option" overshadows everything else that he asked for, even though he

said to be respectful in your behavior?

When people use the word "protest," they imply that Edwards is calling for shouting, yelling, getting arrested, throwing stones, etc. Edwards is not calling for anything like that. Not even in what you said.

Getting "vocal" does not necessarily mean "protesting." It means "speaking out," and that can be done respectfully, just like Edwards is asking people to do. By your definition, a bumper sticker is protesting. I say a bumber sticker is "endorsing" an idea, and that's what the signs would be doing.

Saying that "Supporting the Troops" = "Ending the disaster in Iraq and bringing them home."

HOw people can't see that the media freaking out and lying on John Edwards about this is because they don't want that message getting out there, is frankly amazing to me.

[Cameron27]

79. No, protesting doesn't

mean shouting, yelling, throwing stones, or getting arrested. I've protested enough to know what an anti-war protest means. I've even been respectful. It's an anti-war protest that his website edited to exclude Monday.

I don't know what you're trying to imply. If you think it's ok, then fine, but don't try to pick apart the meaning of protest.

[edwardsdefender]

86. "If you think"? I'm talking about what the media know that "most people think of" when they think

of "protest."

Do you know anything about Frank Luntz? Do you know about buzzwords? Do you know that 2 words can say more to people than 20 words can?

Okay, the media is intentionally using the word "protest" because it invokes certain images in the minds of most people who hear it. Protest is a loaded word, regardless of whether some educated person like yourself understands that you can "protest peacefully." Most people don't think "peace" when they think protest. They think "rowdy." That's why the media is using the word "protest" instead of "organizing" or "speaking out."

I won't play along with that word because it's loaded.

[venable]

137. thanks for joining the fray

you're much needed.

and get used to this, it's endless.

[Cameron27]

147. I think that Edwards is one

sophisticated and shrewd politician who should have known exactly what the media was going to write when he suggested that people get vocal and bring posters that say "SUPPORT THE TROOPS-END THE WAR" to Memorial Day parades and picnics.

Get over yourself, it's a damned protest no matter what negative connotations some people might attribute to the word.

Edwards could have shown true leadership if he'd called for people to parade with those same signs when the country was FOR the war, that would have meant something, but now when the majority of the country is ALREADY AGAINST the war what's his big point.

It's smacks of political opportunism to chose a national holiday of remembrance, especially for families of soldiers killed in other wars. I'll be putting a flag on the grave of someone very dear to me who was killed in Vietnam, and on the grave of an uncle who was killed in Korea, and I hope to God I don't see anyone flashing John Edwards' posters.

Save it for July 4th.

[venable]

173. your anger toward Edwards and Edwards signs is misplaced, IMO

but I wish you a consoling and peaceful Memorial Day as you honor those you love.

I will honor those fallen that I know, and those I don't, and I will write to my representatives with hopes that there will be fewer next year to mourn than I'm afraid will be the case.

Peace.

[Cameron27]

181. I'm not angry,

I'm saddened and disgusted with Edwards for pulling this political stunt on Memorial Day, and despite your condescending opinion, those emotions are not misplaced.

I don't need any consoling, but thank you for the thought.

[venable]

183. forgive what you take to be a condescending tone

it certainly was meant in exactly the opposite way.



The difference we take to this episode is that I don't think of it as a stunt, but as a way to honor. We are all, obviously, entitled to our own take on it.

[FrenchieCat]

60. I think you are missing the point to some degree.......

First Joe Conason, whatever some might say has consistently been a good journalist, not lazy far as I know. Sure some will throw stones at him cause he's writing something that is not ultra flattering to John Edwards, but Conason is pretty much recognized as a mainstream progressive journalist who's rather fair; not an extremist.

Sure, John Edwards recommends that folks take a moment of silence to honor the fallen prior to in essence protesting the war (when he encourages signs, people to gather to march, to get vocal, pass petitions and get permits, that what a protests requires)....but the problem is one of perception in that the entire day is meant to honor the fallen, not just a "moment" prior to beginning a protest. Further, John Edwards recommending that folks be "respectful" is no solace, as he has no real control as to how folks will act......and yet, in encouraging the activities to begin with, he could and will be held responsible for the behavior of his supporters, regardless of the directive he recommended.

The point that Joe Conason makes has little to do with whether what John Edwards is doing is "right" as much as whether it is politically wise...considering how many days there are in a year to have chosen from, the fact that this holiday pertains to a specific group, and that group is the one that will decide whether they are being offended.....not those who want to protest so much.

[edwardsdefender]

71. Joe Conason doesn't have a point. If he and the rest of the media were interested in being factual

then there might be a "few" people who are just too stupid to "get it" about what Edwards is asking, but if the people writing these stories actually listed all of the things that Edwards is asking, most people would not be offended by what John Edwards is asking. But since they all seem to have their marching orders from somewhere to paint the picture of Edwards calling for "protests," of course the perception is going to be off.

The fact remains, if the media did its job honestly, perception wouldn't be much of a problem. How many groups outside of Edwards' are going to be visiting veterans hospitals, visiting cemeteries, having prayer vigils, marching, and some even calling for an end to the Iraq debacle? A lot, but they aren't being misrepresented by a press that wants to taint the perception of Edwards' idea.

[madfloridian]

63. Welcome to DU and good luck taking up for Edwards at this forum

I do support him, but it does no good to defend him here.

This is attack central on Edwards this primary, just as it was on Dean during the previous primary.

Anything goes. It is sad, but that is how it is.

I could tell you why and who, but it ain't worth it.

It is getting worse every day here. Now watch everyone pile on my back and call me a martyr, or whatever. It happens every time.

Good luck.

[edwardsdefender]

72. Oh, it's easy. When people stop believing every lie they hear, it won't be an issue.

[Cameron27]

75. Where's the lie?

What lie are you defending Edwards from?

[edwardsdefender]

82. If you don't know by now...there are more ways to lie than to say that something blue is green

When the media, as probably 90% of the stories that I have seen about this issue, only cover what Edwards is doing from the angle that he is calling for protests, creating false impressions and images that John Edwards is with flaming breath calling for people to only use Memorial Day to "protest," then that is a lie.

The media don't have to "say" something false to be lying. They only have to create "false impressions," because that's what they have power to do. To shape perceptions, and that's exactly what they are trying to do in this case. To create false impressions because they don't want anyone equating "Supporting the troops" with "Ending the war."

It's the message they don't like, and John Edwards who they want to make sure never gains any traction.

[Cameron27]

85. This is what is on Edwards'

website now.

Edwards is calling for people to:

Get vocal

Buy a bunch of poster-board and markers.

Make signs that say "SUPPORT THE TROOPS-END THE WAR"

Bring the signs to Memorial Day parades.

There's no false impression in the story posted in the OP, and I don't think that Edwards' gets any victim award for being singled out by MSM. The're going after all of our candidates, but Edwards' has a lot of self-inflicted wounds.

[madfloridian]

84. It has nothing to do with a lie or truth.

It is about so much more than that. :shrug:

I say good for him for calling for those things.

But you can prove folks wrong here, and then you get the blame for doing that. Trust me.

[ChiciB1]

180. Hey, I Just Stated I HAD NOT Read Replies... Just Read This & Want

to Thank You for the clarification, even though personally I WOULD MARCH in a Demonstration myself! We have become far too timid and afraid of repercussions and I feel it's one reason "The Corrupt Ones" keep getting away with breaking laws at every turn of the SCREW!!

I don't "do" dissng of OUR candidates myself, each person should have a right to their views, but I must say that the vilification of John Edwards has only made me want to SUPPORT him even more. I am even seriously thinking about organizing an Edwards Hdqrs of sorts here where I live. Haven't completely made up my mind because we have my mother-in-law living with us and she has Severe Alzheimer's. She's been with us for 8 years now and her mind is seriously compromised. It really depends on how her condition progresses in the next several months.

It gets worse each day and is more and more time consuming as she will soon be 95. But I AM still supporting Edwards for now and think he has really gotten some bad raps.

AND YES, other candidates get attacked too, but I haven't checked in with DU as much as I used to because I find this stuff offensive. What I do now is check in to SEE what NEW attack is being hurled at Edwards and then simply stay away for days at a time again. I'm uncomfortable with all the in-fighting. Democrats used to be known for the Party of the Big Tent... now we have many tents and sometimes very little cohesion. IMO!

[WildEyedLiberal]

46. Politically I think it's extremely stupid

This will, as they say, "play in Peoria" like a scratchy Devo record. I think Edwards knows that his core constituency will be heartland, populist, blue collar Dems - people who are fed up with Bush, Republicans, and the war, who are distressed about the terrible economy and the health care, retirement, and living wage crises, and who want a change. However, those people are also patriotic Americans, many of whom have served, and will not look favorably upon an attempt to politicize a holiday for veterans. They don't like it when Bush does it and they won't like it if Edwards does it.

Just my two cents from a town about an hour away from Peoria. :D

[edwardsdefender]

50. Politically, I think you believe everything that you hear

[WildEyedLiberal]

55. Most people do.

I'm relaying exactly how the average voter, who gets his news from TV and the newspapers, is going to take this. Most primary voters aren't regulars on DU. Don't like it? Be proactive in engaging these people and convince them why you're right.

[edwardsdefender]

62. You don't need to be on the DU to visit that website and see for yourself what Edwards is asking for

To just take the media at its word is lazy and naive when they've proven over the years just how dishonest they are. It's amazing to me how many people in this country criticize the media, and believe everything that they say at the same time. And that's not just the "DU" I'm talking about either.

Republicans say "Liberal media bias," but that doesn't stop them from believing every lie about John Edwards.
Democrats say "corporate media that smears Democrats" and then turn around and believe every fabricated story about John Edwards.

Amazing.

[Cameron27]

73. The story isn't fabricated, and therefore isn't a smear.

I've read exactly what you did and have a different opinion.

[Adelante]

66. So you think it's a good political move for Edwards

Is that right? How does it work well for him politically?

[Name removed]

76. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Adelante]

51. Yeah

That's how I read it.

[Sparkly]

67. It looks like the site was edited...

I didn't see it before, but Conason quotes it without ellipses:

Specifically, the Edwards Web site urges protesters to "get vocal" by hoisting antiwar banners and signs at traditional holiday events. "Buy a bunch of posterboard and markers ... make signs that say SUPPORT THE TROOPS -- END THE WAR. Bring them to your local Memorial Day parade. Then take a digital photo of yourself or your family and friends holding up the poster and tell us about it."

From the site right now:

Get vocal. Buy a bunch of poster-board and markers. At a picnic or with family and friends, make signs that say “SUPPORT THE TROOPS - END THE WAR.” Bring them to your local Memorial Day parade. Many parades are held on Saturday or Sunday. If your parade is on Monday, however, we ask that you choose another action to honor the fallen. Then take a digital photo of yourself and your family or friends holding up the poster and tell us about it. We’ll include it in a “Democracy Photo Album” on our site.

I suggest the part in bold was added later.

[Cameron27]

78. I think you're right Sparkly

it looks edited.

[Adelante]

87. Now that's interesting

I've never known Conason to be the deceptive type. I can't imagine him deliberately cutting that out.

[Adelante]

91. I tried the Wayback Machine

We're sorry, access to http://www.johnedwards.com/supportthetroopsendthewar has been blocked by the site owner via robots.txt.

[madfloridian]

112. I don't believe you guys are doing this....accusing him of editing..

and then blocking the War Machine.

This is just like being in a universe of unreality.

[venable]

138. agreed

I'm constantly having to check that I've not fallen into a Swiftian alternate universe where down is up, and a concern for soldiers is insensitive on Memorial Day.

[Sparkly]

139. I sent him a message to ask.

I think it's a matter of opinion whether editing the site would be a bad thing (something one would "accuse" the campaign of) or a good thing (responding to criticism by correcting a mistake).

But if it matters, I wrote to Conason and hope he'll reply...

Dear Mr. Conason,

There's a controversy over at Democratic Underground about whether some text was added to Edwards' Memorial Day suggestions on his site, following criticism from you and others. The site now has language including: "Many parades are held on Saturday or Sunday. If your parade is on Monday, however, we ask that you choose another action to honor the fallen." And, "If you hold an event on Memorial Day itself, please make sure that everyone you gather knows it is a day for honoring the fallen only."

I think you'd have referenced this language if it had been there before you wrote your column. (You quoted the passage containing one of these sentences without ellipses.) Could you please clear up the confusion and let me know whether you remember seeing these statements before, or whether they seem to have been added later?

Many thanks,
(Sparkly)

Other people who frequent the site might know the answer, too. Again, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing if in fact the site was edited.

[Sparkly]

141. Wait a sec -- it was sent in an EMAIL early on... Anybody here get that email?

NEW YORK – Democrat John Edwards' call for voters to speak out against the Iraq war on Memorial Day has drawn criticism from a leader of the American Legion, who called the effort “revolting.”

In an e-mail message and on his Web site, Edwards asks supporters to honor and pray for the troops on Memorial Day and to send them care packages and treats. But the presidential candidate also urges supporters to use the holiday to denounce the war – an effort Paul Morin, national commander of the American Legion, decried as an attempt to “politicize” the day.

“Revolting is a kind word for it. It's as inappropriate as a political bumper sticker on an Arlington headstone,” Morin wrote on the Legion's Web site. “Edwards is hardly the first politician from either political party to exploit this day, a holiday that was consecrated with the blood of American heroes. But the e-mail makes me sick nonetheless.”
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20070515-1446-onthe2008trail.html

If anybody here got that email before May 15th, that could clear up whether or not it was edited. (NOT that I think it's a big deal or necessarily even a bad thing if it was edited.)

[1932]

152. Here is the email:

Dear Friend,

Memorial Day Weekend is a time to honor all the brave men and women throughout our history who have served in our armed forces, especially those who made the ultimate sacrifice to safeguard our freedom. I believe it is our duty to use that freedom to stand up for those now serving in the most meaningful way that we can—by thanking them, supporting them, and bringing them home to a hero’s welcome.

It's time to support the troops. For far too long, George Bush has abused the rhetoric of patriotism to silence his critics and paper over the devastating cost of his war to the country we love. Our troops have served bravely and sacrificed without hesitation. Yet they are now paying the price for Bush's stubborn pursuit of his failed strategy in Iraq. Our troops deserve far better, and we all have a responsibility to stand up for them.

So this Memorial Day Weekend, I'm asking every one of us to take a stand for the troops and against the war. Let's reclaim patriotism for all of us who love our country, support our troops and fiercely believe in our hearts that this war must end now.

There are many ways we can take action this Memorial Day. We've prepared 10 ideas to get you started, like sending care packages for the troops or holding public gathering to speak out for the troops and against the war. What matters most is that you take action in a way that honors our troops and feels right to you.

To sign up to take action or to see what actions others have planned near you, go to:

www.SupportTheTroopsEndTheWar.com

Thanks to your support, we were able to rush a full page ad to the Washington Post featuring most of the more than 115,000 names we've collected calling on Congress to end the war. But we have to do more. To stand up for our men and women in uniform and force this President to do the right thing, we must take extraordinary action.

For we are citizens. And as citizens, we must honor and support our troops for their service and sacrifice.

We are Americans. And as Americans, we give thanks for the blessing of their sacrifice and support, which keeps us safe and keeps us strong.

And we are patriots. And as patriots we must use our power and the responsibility that comes with it to push our government to support our troops in the most important way it can—by ending this war and bringing them home.

So this Memorial Day Weekend, let us gather as patriots. Wherever you are—with your family, with your friends, at a barbeque, at a parade, wherever you can be seen and be heard—first take a moment of silence to honor the fallen, and then let us raise our voices together and say:

We support our troops. End the war. Bring them home.

Because it is possible to stop a president who believes he can do no wrong—it just takes people with the courage to do what's right.

www.SupportTheTroopsEndTheWar.com

Thank you,

--John Edwards
Monday, May 14, 2007

[ChiciB1]

221. I Got The Email AND I Bought TWO Shirts! The Email I Got Did Not

seem to call for anything "radical" from what I see. I HAD NOT checked my mail because I was out of town and have only one computer. I did check it out today which is a bit late, but I did decide to order shirts.

Support The Troops... End The War! Would have been nice if the color was lighter, it's pretty hot wearing T-Shirts in summer here in Florida! I'll have to do some hacking, but it will be fine!

Thanks for posting the mail.

[FrenchieCat]

93. Yes.....in the Conason article, this sentence

Buy a bunch of posterboard and markers ... make signs
has the three dots, stating something is there but not included,

But the other part does not.

[Colobo]

103. Interesting!

[amandabeech]

157. I think that Edwards should fire the person who put out the earlier version.

Its a real vote loser.

I like Edwards, but the anti-Catholic thing and now this.

I don't think that Edwards is hiring people who are in tune with his constituency.

This smacks of more beltway idiocy.

John, get a clue.

See my earlier post about Memorial Day in my hometown.

[TwilightGardener]

90. Bad move, politicizing Memorial Day--no one should reap any kind

of political advantage from it, not EVEN a veteran candidate, so Edwards really shouldn't do it. This move is politically tone deaf and insensitive, and I hope he reconsiders (sounds like he's doing that).

[venable]

95. Conason is the one politicizing

as is everyone who wants to make anti-Edwards hay out of his reverential and honest approach to the day.

this whole scandal is a sham.

[TwilightGardener]

97. Sorry, but I smell the whiff of political opportunism here. Folks

shouldn't protest on Memorial Day, or whenever the parades are held (Monday or not). It's to remember the fallen--that's it. There's nothing reverential about carrying signs and chanting anti-Bush slogans. Anyone who's been to a protest-type gathering KNOWS the screwballs that turn up and the circus atmosphere that results. I would be annoyed at a non-candidate who suggested this--but a professional politician should CERTAINLY know better. I am afraid, too, that Dems in general are trying to grab too much naked political advantage from the war--this doesn't help, coming from a major candidate. The war really shouldn't be a political weapon for EITHER party.

[venable]

108. Edwards DID NOT ask for protests on that day

here's what he said, in spite of the falsehoods being spread here and elsewhere:




In the days leading up to Memorial Day, we will take action to support our troops, end the war, and bring them home to the heroes' welcome they deserve. And on Memorial Day, we will honor and remember all those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom.

Each of us has a responsibility to act, a duty to our troops and to each other. Support the troops. End the war.



There are many ways we can take action this Memorial Day weekend to support the troops and end the war. Start with one of the 10 ideas listed below -- ranging from care packages for the troops to public gatherings speaking out against the war. Or show your support in your own unique way. And on Memorial Day, take a action to remember and honor the fallen.

[madfloridian]

96. Supporters of 3 different candidates are jumping on Edwards...

for something that has no substance at all.

It is pretty obvious.

[Andrew_Lindsey]

98. Ya know what is obvious?

So when Edwards makes a mistake, which he did in this case IMO, and others call him on it, it's just a big conspiracy?

[Adelante]

99. You got that right

Edwards is never responsible for what he does, that's just how it is. I have no problem with the project itself, I think it's very good, just the timing sucks. Why go out of your way to be offensive on an extremely sensitive issue? Especially when you want people to vote for you. It's bizarre. Truly irrational.

[Colobo]

104. Exactly

His supporters get offended on people calling on Edwards for things HE does!

[madfloridian]

107. People are noticing who is doing the jumping.

Look, I feel your pain about Clark's delay on getting into the race, but you really need to not look like Edwards is the scapegoat.

When so many are doing this, it gets a little obvious.

I see nothing wrong with what Edwards suggested.

This is getting just so much like another time before now.

It is sort of sad to see it.

[Clark2008]

151. OK - I wasn't going to comment on this, but YOU are making

ASSUMPTIONS here. And you know what assumptions mean.

The OP is not expressing any "pain" about Clark's delay. When are you going to get it through your head that not everyone who likes Clark DISLIKES Edwards because of Clark? I would dislike Edwards whether Clark was on the landscape or not. One has NOTHING to do with the other. NOTHING.

I can't, of course, speak for the OP, but I feel fairly certain that the OP was not, in any way, lamenting Clark's arrival or lack of arrival into the fold of the 2008 campaign. The OP was pointing out another slip-up by the Edwards camp, of which there have been MANY.

Geesch.

[madfloridian]

109. That's pathetic. It's a big pile on. DU should not let this stuff keep on.

It would not matter who I support really. It is just supporters of 3 candidates teaming up.

We all know it is going on.

[IndianaGreen]

100. Such faux outrage! Memorial Day is a day of cookouts, beer guzzling, and car racing

Some people only love dead troops while doing nothing to prevent adding to their numbers by ending a wasteful war in Iraq.

[Colobo]

105. Some people honor their lost loved ones, you know...

[IndianaGreen]

113. You said it yourself: "THEIR lost loved ones." The rest of us are more concerned about the brats

on the grill. Why is that? The war only touches the military families. There is no conscription and we don't pay a tax to pay for the war. There is no pain outside the military family circle.

Every NASCAR race begins with an invocation in which Jay-Zeus name is mentioned, together with a reference to those serving in the military. One minute of remembrance is quickly replaced by hours of entertainment.

As long as the war remains a concern for the few directly impacted by it, and to those having a stake in ending it, the rest of the country remains largely untouched.

If the country really cared about our soldiers, it wouldn't be wasting time shedding crocodile tears on the fallen while keeping the living in Iraq. They would be storming the halls of Congress and the White House grounds demanding an immediate end to the war, as the Russians did in 1917 to end their participation in World War I.

Look at how unconcerned our politicians are about the daily number of names being added to a wall in a future Iraq War memorial. If they really cared about the living troops, they wouldn't be talking about benchmarks or some future date to withdraw troops, they would be defunding the war NOW!

I am sick and tired of those that shed tears with the graves of the fallen as a backdrop, and then do nothing to prevent anyone else to be added to their increasing numbers.

[Psephos]

160. I have no fallen soldiers in my family, but I still think about war dead not hotdogs on Memorial Day

I hate the politicization of a day set aside to honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice for people they didn't even know.

Not everyone is shedding crocodile tears. Not by a long shot.

[amandabeech]

161. I shed tears on the graves of the fallen on Memorial Day,

but I f*****g hate Iraq, I hated Vietnam, think that the Spanish-American war was just as phony and abhor all the little wars we've done since we became a world power in that last mentioned one.

My tears aren't crocodile even if I don't have any family member or friend in this Iraq mess. I have family members who served in the Civil War (Union), WWI, WWII and Korea. All but one are dead now, and when I go to that cemetery, I think of them--and I see the graves of two of the veterans.

My friends and relatives know how I feel about Vietnam and Iraq. They also know that I've been a Dem since I was 13. When I go to the services, I show people that it is possible to be furious at Iraq but honor the troops, and that members of our party love our country, too. If you're familiar with Christian terminology, which I unfortunately am, I am witnessing.

Hating Iraq and having feelings for those who went before, whether their lives were wasted or not, are NOT mutually exclusive.

I usually like what you write, but here, I have to take exception.

[JI7]

102. i thought Memorial Day was about Barbeques and picnics

but on a serious note, the reason this is a bad move is because he seems to be "using" the day for this for political reasons.

it would be different if he had been calling for protests or attending protests throughout before . has he attended protests before ? if he has then maybe my view owuld be different.

but if he has no record of it and then he suddenly comes out and calls for it on Memorial Day then i can't see it as being a good thing.

[amandabeech]

162. Read a little history. It might change your view of the day.

Or better yet, see if you can find some kind of a service.

There are a few WWII vets around. They'll probably be sitting down in civilian attire with vets' hats on, but many of the ones that are still around will be there.

They deserve your attention on their day.

[madfloridian]

111. Let me get this straight...Edwards is accused of editing...PLUS

hiding it from the Wayback Machine.

Good Lord, when does it end?

[Colobo]

115. Once the primary is over, I fear.

[madfloridian]

119. You seem proud.

.

[FrenchieCat]

120. He just seems realistic.

.

[Colobo]

121. Me? Proud? Come on, mad...

You wonder when all the hostility is going to be over, and I'm telling you all of this won't stop until the primary season is over. I hate to say it, but based on what I'm seeing, things will only get worse... people have forgotten about unity and they are simply in "competition mode"...

People over here are way too passionate about the whole primary thing. I wish everyone, me included, would chill a bit.

[illinoisprogressive]

114. It could be bad as people may take it as disrespect or posturing.

[sampsonblk]

117. Edwards can easily fix this one

One great speech on Memorial Day, and this will all be forgotten.

[Colobo]

118. Very good idea!

[applegreen]

122. Support the troops End the War

Hi, I'm a John Edwards supporter and I've been to the Supportthetroopsendthewar website which lists ten things to do. The website also lists the events people have planned: prayer vigils, sending packages to the troops, writing e-mails to Representatives about ending the war, etc. They are all meant to honor our troops and to work toward bringing them home safely.

[MH1]

132. You don't get it.

Memorial Day is for memorializing the fallen. People want to think happy thoughts about how brave and noble those fallen were in defending our country. They do NOT want to think about the politics of a current war.

I'm on the fence about the "rightness" of Edwards' call. I don't think opposing the war is EVER wrong. But if I try to look at just the crass political aspects, I think it's a bad move. I also think it may be divisive and turn off people who might have been just coming around to see this current war as needing to end.

Either way, it's a close enough call that with a fair media, this shouldn't hurt Edwards, at least not badly...but we don't have a fair media. And he'd better get used to that and figure out how to play his hand better in the future, I think. JMHO.

[venable]

135. I think I get it

and what I think I get is that Edwards has proposed an eloquent and appropriate way to celebrate the fallen soldiers, to memorialize them, to do all of the things that one ordinarily does on this day, and also to be aware that many more will need to be 'remembered' next year if we don't bring the soldiers home. It is appropriate and important and does not in any way take away from remembrance.

I also get that there are many people who love to find something wrong with every single thing the Edwards does, not SOME things, but every single thing, and a lot of this entire thread, and all of super smug Joe Conason's dimwitted and transparent attempt to make one of his canddate's opponents look bad, are the true POLITICIZING of Memorial Day.

[Inspired]

143. You DO get it!!! n/t

[MH1]

144. But can you get average Americans to agree with your view? n/t

[amandabeech]

165. IMHO, probably not. n/t

[amandabeech]

164. Edwards is my favorite, and he was my favorite in 2004.

I volunteered for Tom Harkin in '92.

The reasons that I like these are are the same: they're the only ones out there talking about middle and working class Americans' problems. Both of them started with not much and made it and neither of them forgot the people who weren't as talented for fortunate as they. In fact, a lot of the Harkin people I know are going Edwards--I get the fundraising letters.

Most of the folks that you see at Memorial Day parades and ceremonies are the people that John Edwards is talking about. A lot of them probably thought that the war was a good idea at the beginning, but most of them have changed their minds now.

Some of them show up at the parades for the entertainment value, but the folks who show up at the cemeteries, either on Memorial Day or before, and place flowers on the graves of veterans are unlikely to want any political placards anywhere around. I know I don't even though I thought that this war was a complete and utter mistake right from the get-go. I hated Vietnam, too, and have been a dem since I was 13 because of it.

See my post on my hometown Memorial Day in #156 and the post just before it for a taste of what I'm talking about.

Also, a lot of older people see Memorial Day as important. They vote early and often, and undoubtedly will not be happy.

Edwards got some bad advice on this one, I'm afraid, and it doesn't take his detractors to put that thought in my mind.

[Edith Ann]

126. AntiWar

Since when is saying a prayer for the troops, sending Care packages to the troops, or helping a soldier's family on Memorial Day a bad thing. John Edwards isn't asking for massive marches or a march on Washington, he's asking for kindness to others, remembrance of fallen soldier's and their families as well as prayers. He's asking us to recognize this War is wrong, support our soldier's, and support the fallen. If the American Legion really wanted to support the troops they'd get off of their collective behinds and start protesting Walter Reed, cuts in pay, long tours and no support for the families or the soldiers who have been wounded, instead of worrying about John Edwards wanting us to do more than eat hamburgers and cake on Memorial Day. PS. those who do choose to "march", that isn't what they were asked to do and my bet is that it will be to recognize the troops. I'm from the Vietnam era, If there had been no protests thousands more would have died. Nixon kept on killing our soldiers even though he acknowledged the war was lost. No one wins a war when you attack people in their homes. Those people will always fight back. That is human nature. The soldiers in Iraq are counting on the American people to bring them home. GB and Co. will never bring them home.

[Adelante]

140. Since Clark supporters have been doing those things, without the

PR campaign, and since the war began, I can assure you that nobody objects to acts of kindness toward troops and veterans. Since I demonstrated against the Vietnam War, the American Legion and Richard Nixon when John Edwards couldn't bring himself to take a side, I can assure you that nobody objects to antiwar protests. Since nobody believes GB and Co. will bring them home, why even mention it? The objection is not to the program Edwards is setting forth for his supporters. The objection is to the politicization of Memorial Day, no matter who is doing it. Edwards is running for president, so it would be difficult not to associate this effort with politics, and we'll have to see if voters can swallow it or not. The question, on this political discussion board, is was this smart politics or dumb politics?

[venable]

146. there's not a person on this board

who doesn't do the things you say are done by Clark supporters. I suspect we all here feel and act that way, and those old enough (like you and me) have been feeling and acting this way since Vietnam. We've had an unbroken string of American aggressions to protest, and our work is not near done.

You'll remember that there were many of our generation not protesting, that did other things and cared about other things...or at least didn't join us in the street. Edwards would be one of these people. Do we dismiss him now? I don't. I support him as I support every anti-war sentiment and action.

I think his call was lovely, impassioned, eloquent.

I think the politicizing is being done by others, not Edwards.

[Edith Ann]

153. Age

Edwards may have been 2-3 years too young to have really been involved in the Vietnam issues. It was the late 60's and early 70's when we were protesting, and we , at least I was college age. I don't think he was.

[venable]

159. he was born in 54 I think

which would have made him 15 or 16 during the secret Cambodia bombing protests made most famous by the four deaths at Kent State.

[amandabeech]

166. He was living in a small town in North Carolina.

I'm betting that it would have been a protest of one.

My little town in the Midwest was that way. Only three folks showed up at school with black armbands. Everybody else thought that we were weird. To a lot of people that age, the '60s only meant drugs, alcohol and birth control pills.

[Adelante]

184. I will be clearer for you, venable

First point: The spin throughout this thread that those who find offense in this misuse of a military holiday's traditions (yes, I know, that is not your view - it is mine ie "misuse") - are objecting to anti-war actions or pro-troop actions is really, really dishonest. The objection is to the exploitation of Memorial Day (including the weekend) in primary politics and the question is how smart is it to do it. We've had various reactions in this thread, including from veterans who see it one way or another. I expect the American voting public will be conflicted on this, as well, and so, it is not smart primary politics, and as Conason points out, not smart anti-war politics.

Second point: It is possible to do all of these things without tying a primary campaign to a national observance, which is where Clark supporters' less public activities came into my response; maybe not the best example. A different and more relevant example is Obama's canvass this past weekend in New Hampshire in a series of events against the war, including a petition drive pressuring two senators to end the war. Additionally, Obama has said he will observe Memorial Day in the traditional way. This is smart anti-war politics and smart primary politics.

Point three (added): Edwards was not "one of those people" who was anti-war but didn't go into the streets, if I'm understanding you, and as far as I know. I don't require John Edwards to have protested the Vietnam war or to have enlisted in it, but I will insist on a more honest portrayal of his (or any candidate's) life history than we get from his supporters on DU. His age, in a couple of posts, for example, tries to place him outside his times when he wasn't.

This was John Edwards to a close contemporary:

''John was very conservative,'' said his college roommate, Bill Garner, a textile company executive. ''I had long hair and a beard and was into the antiwar marches and stuff, but John never participated in that.''

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9807E6DD1530F931A25752C0A9629C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

Edwards’ college days were a time of great turmoil and social unrest. At NCSU, students organized antiwar marches and held “Dump Nixon” signs. The country was bitterly divided over the Watergate scandal.

But Edwards — focused on his studies, sports and girlfriends — seems to have floated above the political and cultural wars. Many young men at NCSU sported long hair and beards. But pictures of Edwards show him cleanshaven at NCSU and sporting a neat mustache and longish hair at Carolina. Edwards never served in the armed forces; the draft was abolished in 1973, when he was still in college.

-snip

“John and I used to debate the Nixon-McGovern election,” said Garner, his NCSU roommate. “I kind of went in the direction of protesting the war. John was more firmly seated in supporting our government. Part of that was the influence of his father.”

Garner remembers that Edwards was undecided about whether to vote in 1972 for President Richard Nixon or whether to vote for the Democratic challenger, Sen. George McGovern.

Edwards says he does not remember how he voted. But he says he might have first registered as an independent. He says he thinks he changed his registration to Democrat by 1976.

http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/politicians/edwards/eyeonedwards/story/1401790p-7371865c.html

Has John Edwards disputed these observations by his college roommate? Not that I've ever heard about and not that he should, if they are true. I don't expect him or any candidate not to have complexities in his early history. But let's us try to keep it real here on DU, shall we?

[madfloridian]

186. WesDem, why are you doing this?

When I was in college, I was much the same way as you describe Edwards. I was pretty quiet, introspective, and not prone to activism at all.
I see nothing wrong with being that way.

I often considered Republican candidates when I was younger. My family was mostly Republican, so why not?

Gee, I sound just like Edwards did in college.

[venable]

190. you are making something out of nothing

in several ways in my opinion.

First off, I don't believe that if the Conasons and the non-Edwards DUers didn't make a thing out of this, it would be no thing at all, other than a sincere wish that honoring the fallen be folded in with the wish that there be no more fallen. Some vets have a problem we are told. Fine. That's there right. Though I never served, I grew up in the military - it was the only world I knew until I went to college - so please don't lecture me about what vets feel.

I have spoken with vets about this, including a pol very famous as a highly decorated vet, one who speaks for vets (and because he's a politician I am not going to name him until he says that it's ok to have him weigh in on this, even on a site like this)...and this vet-to-the-core simply can not believe that I was even asking him about this. He thought it was absurd that anybody had a problem.

As for Edwards past, who cares? Really, who gives a flying whatever.

Nobody is trying to say he was a rebel or a Young Republican. It simply does not matter, and you know that.

I repeat MadFloridians question: What are you trying to do?

This outrage at Edwards politicizing of Memorial Day seems to me to be the far more egregious politicization.

As my kids say: Peace. Out.

[alarimer]

150. We absolutely SHOULD protest on Memorial Day and every other day

I don't give a shit what the warmongers think about this. The point is to be visible and vocal every day, including this one.

[riverdale]

155. Why I still dislike Edwards

Back when Edwards' voice really mattered, when he was a Senator that I had voted for, I e-mailed him a few times regarding how important the war vote was and how he should not pre-authorize Bush of all people to pre-emptively start a war for any or no reason. Edwards never responded to any e-mail that I, his constituent, sent him before or after this disastrous vote. How can we consider this opportunist presidential material when at the most critical juncture he made exactly the worst decision. At that time war was popular, and a vote against was considered presidential campaign suicide. All Edwards ever wanted to do was use the Senate as a platform to run for prez. All he could think of was political opportunism at the time when true leadership was needed.

[justinrr1]

168. Political Suicide

dont know what he was thinking on this one but it will definitely haunt him especially if he gets the nomination.

[Edith Ann]

170. suicide

It may depend on what he actually does on that day.

[Joe Conason]

171. Three quick points

As some readers may know, I try to respond to as much reader
mail as possible. If I responded to anonymous insults on
message boards, however, I would have time to do nothing else.
A few issues raised on this forum ought to be answered,
however:

1. If anyone cares, I want to make clear that I have no
favorite in the Democratic primary. Before it's over -- a year
from now -- I'm sure I'll criticize all of the frontrunners
and perhaps all of the also-rans too. That certainly applies
to Hillary Clinton, since I've criticized her already in the
New York Observer for her intellectually indefensible position
on the Iraq authorization. (See "Time for Hillary to Make
Amends," February 19, 2007). My "defense" of
the Clintons was in fact more of a critique of their
assailants, notably Ken Starr, the Arkansas Project, etc. I've
written both favorably and unfavorably about both Clintons, as
I have done with many, many other politicians.

2. It is simply a lie to claim that I supported Wesley Clark
for president in 2003. I've both praised and criticized him,
too, as any honest individual who Googled my name together
with his would know. (See, for example, my Salon post on his
support for the flag-burning amendment, "Clark Strikes A
Match," November 12, 2003, in which I compared him
unfavorably with Kerry, Lieberman, and Colin Powell, among
others. That post usually turns  up in the top three or four
items found when Googling "Conason" and
"Clark.") I don't know whether Clark hopes to be a
vice presidential candidate next year but I doubt it.

3. My concern about the Edwards Memorial Day site grew out of
discussions with several Iraq War veterans who brought it to
my attention -- and not from any animus against John Edwards,
whose candidacy highlights very important issues that his
rivals have neglected (and whose recommendations for
commemorating Memorial Day were otherwise admirable). After my
column appeared, the Edwards campaign changed the site's text
to emphasize respect for veterans and for the meaning of the
Monday holiday. I think that's commendable, not dishonest.
Every candidate makes mistakes. Smart candidates correct them.

Thanks (and kindly excuse me if I cannot respond to replies
here).

[MH1]

172. Welcome to DU!

If only to respond to attacks, but I am glad you stopped by.

Many here appreciate your work. Folks who support Edwards are understandably defensive; others see your point. I think how it plays out will depend on a lot of factors...but in 2003 who would have guessed that a genuine war hero would have been demonized with vets while a chickenhawk who used Daddy's influence to stay safe during Vietnam was made out to somehow be a "hero"?

Anyway, thanks for stopping by!

[Adelante]

174. Very nice of you, Joe

It's always difficult knowing if someone posting for the first time is who he says he his, so I'll get that out of the way.

But it sounds like you to me. So thanks for coming in and illuminating the facts of the controversy.

Welcome to DU, Joe Conason :hi:

[TwilightGardener]

176. Thanks for clarifiying, Joe! I'm a long-time Salon subscriber

and have been reading you for years--many of us here familiar with your work know it wasn't an unfair "hit piece", but it's nice to hear it from the source. I guess the article touched a lot of nerves on this forum, as well as the Edwards campaign itself. Glad to hear his camp reconsidered the message of his site, before too much damage was done.

[Cameron27]

182. Thanks for stepping in to add more clarification.

Your Salon piece was right on the mark and I appreciate it.

Thanks again Joe.:thumbsup:

[FrenchieCat]

185. Thank you Mr. Conason,

As one who respect real journalism, I certainly encourage you to continue in doing what you do; speaking your mind based on facts and not based on what public pressure dictates.

In terms of John Edwards and his quest to become President, his supporter need to understand that his campaign, like the others, will continue to make mistakes in the long run up we have, cause no one is perfect. It is a bigger turn off to have them "Cover" for him everytime he makes one of these campaign misjudgments, as they lose credibility and spend capital of good faith in their quest to rationalize every move he makes.

Once his supporters understand that "protecting and defending" John Edwards at all cost should not be their overarching goal, they will become a much greater force in their support of him and his goals.

If it wasn't for those who freely and honestly criticize some of the bonehead moves made by the campaign, no correctives would occur and John Edwards and his campaign would be the worse off for it.

Thanks again for your time and diligence. If we could have more like you, this entire country would be the wiser for it.

signed,
A Wes Clark supporter who corresponded with you during the 2003-04 campaign to inform you that both Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich had their own issues in reference to the Flag Burning Amendment, to which you researched and humbly acknowledged after your criticism of Gen. Clark...

I did not criticize your right to have stood against Clark on that issue at that time (since I wasn't supportive of Clark's stance on that issue either but understood why he thought as he did) and I certainly didn't write you off due to your opinion on that one issue.

[madfloridian]

187. Joe Conason, you fell for right wing talking points.

I very much respect your columns, but this time you were sucked in by the faux patriotism of others.

It was nice of you to post though.

[FrenchieCat]

188. MadFlo,

It sounds as if you are saying that those who disagreed with John Edwards on this are to be considered as "faux" patriots or suckers!

If so, then you share the exact same attributes as those "right wingers" that you so criticize.

[madfloridian]

189. It is a false premise, that he was dishonoring troops.

The whole thing was blown out of control. It was just the ammo needed for certain supporters of a candidate who has not yet announced needed to start a fresh blast at Edwards.

It is so obvious, that I really don't need to point it out anymore.

I think Mr.Conason got quite a few messages in the Salon comments, anyway.

This was an unfortunate thing to have started at Salon. There was no need for it.

It needs to stop.

[FrenchieCat]

194. To clarify,

It is YOUR opinion that this is a false premise. If this was really the case, then why did the Edwards campaign edit the directive on their website? Obviously they felt it was enough of an issue to address it, and to reshape the message in reference to what actions to take. Why don't you go a protest to them about their lack of conviction (although I consider it a "correction for the better") about this "false Premise"? If they were so right, shouldn't they have stood their ground? :shrug:

And anyways....how is this out of control, as you put it? ONE thread on DU makes the issue "out of control"? Guess the sky must be falling too! I think this thread probably helped in damage "control"....but that would be about it.

For you to imply of "knowing" as to the content of the messages received by Mr. Conason is neither here nor there....cause what is obvious is that the Edwards campaign got enough of a wide lens whiff as to why what they had called for was questionable is the fact that they edited their site.

[madfloridian]

198. The comments are openly posted at Salon.

Read them. The majority are just as irate as I am.

You need to do some searching here at DU. Then get back to me.

[Adelante]

191. You should thank Joe

Edwards had the alert to adjust his website in time.

[madfloridian]

196. Adjust for what? What did Edwards do wrong? And why are you doing this?

I guess Joe Conason did not realize that his column gave some folks all the stuff they needed to start a campaign against Edwards at the place that is becoming battleground central against him.

This whole thread is wrong-headed, starting with the premise that Edwards did something wrong.

Did you read the Salon comments? I'm way with the majority on this one.

[Adelante]

199. Did you miss this point?

After my column appeared, the Edwards campaign changed the site's
text to emphasize respect for veterans and for the meaning of
the Monday holiday. I think that's commendable, not dishonest.
Every candidate makes mistakes. Smart candidates correct them.

I think it was correct for Edwards to adjust his tune and the only politically smart thing about this.

Guess what? IT'S MY OPINION.

[madfloridian]

201. Conason just wrote that Edwards did not support veterans.

And that he changed it when good old Joe pointed out that he was not being reverent enough to veterans' memories.

Why doesn't that bother you? That a Salon column writer called Edwards insensitive to troops.

It bothers me a whole lot.

It bothers me that certain people here are after Edwards so obviously.

I find it rather scary.

[Adelante]

202. It's all a plot, a conspiracy!!

Even Joe Conason's in on it :eyes:

[Clark2008]

203. Your complete defense of Edwards - all the damn time - sounds

just like the 30 percenters who would still support Shrubbie even if found with a live boy or a dead girl.

Why are you doing this?

Edwards DID do something, if not wrong, then stupid. Very stupid. And he was called on it and corrected it.

Duh.

[madfloridian]

205. You are comparing me with the ones who support Bush? Oh, gosh.

Now that is just overkill, don't you think?

Hey Joe, see what you started by giving false ammo?

What did Edwards do wrong, Clark 2008? Please tell me in simple clear words.

[Clark2008]

209. He tried to turn a solemn day into a political occasion.

WRONG and/or STUPID.

You take your pick.

He had since changed his website to remove that wrong and/or stupid error.

There. Short sentences.

Simple enough for you?

[madfloridian]

211. Well, as you guys point out so often, I am not very bright...

But I never saw it that way at all. I never understood what Conason was trying to say either. Nor did most of the 65 commenters at Salon. So I am in good company in not understanding.

I hope all the Clark supporters are happy now, being out in force on this thread.

[venable]

193. the replies on Salon say it all

ie water-carrying for the right wingers who think you can't support the troops and be against the war.

I have some real problems with Joe's work, and some occassional deep admiration (especially in the past), but this column is just flat out wrong and very transparent no matter how lovely he writes above about Edwards, and I am tired of having to read anti-Edwards sentiments dressed up as moral outrage over what is, in most people's opinions, nothing at all.

[FrenchieCat]

200. Please......

this statement of yours.... "you can't support the troops and be against the war" is nothing more than "drama" without substance. :eyes:

That quote is a soundbyte, but it is not the issue.....

Further, what is it about Memorial Day that you don't understand?

If you believe this to be a great opportunity to support the troops and be against the war, then you should go for it. But stop attempting to make Right Wing BushBots out of those who believe that there are 364 days in the year that are more appropriate than this particular day.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

197. Do you support veterans?

If so, why aren't you out protesting the war?

[AtomicKitten]

220. Hey Joe!

Thanks for taking the time to respond to silly persons on a message board. Unfortunately grown people live and die by candidates and will adore you or kick you to the curb depending on which side you appear to come down on in what you write. Many could use a common sense filter in digesting information they read as opposed to insipid fawning adoration of candidates that precludes critical thinking.

That aside, I want to take this opportunity to express my admiration for your book "The Hunting of the President" that you co-authored with Gene Lyons, one of the most comprehensive accounting of the rightwing jihad perpetrated against the Clintons. I re-read it at intervals to remind myself of who we are dealing with. It is a sad state of affairs to report that that same jihad is perpetrated against the Clintons every day here by some at DU.

Best regards.

[ChiciB1]

177. I Generally Respect Almost All Of Joe C's Views, But THIS TIME...

I've become MORE & MORE Radical regarding my Anti-BFEE views! Democrats have simply "done" P.C. way too much! I'm for ALL the Activism that can be garnered whether "THEY" like it or not!

American Society as a whole sits idly by while bloggers take out their frustrations at the COMPUTER! THEY call us the same stuff REGARDLESS of whether there are demonstrations or not, or when there are demonstrations! Mostly DEMONSTRATIONS DON'T get that much coverage so WHY NOT make a BIG SPLASH by doing it on Memorial Day? I was just in D.C. for the last March when I froze my butt off in the snow, having come up from Sunny Florida!

Can I afford another visit at the end of the month? No, not really in any way, but would LOVE to see it happen. I might even consider being "foolish" enough to borrow money to DEMONSTRATE!

Democrats need to SHOW or at the very least DEMONSTRATE some TRUE Frustration and Cynicism... so sorry Joe, I'm not with you on this one. It may put the Kabash on the Edwards Campaign, but if he's willing to take the risk then more power to him.

Perhaps I should have read some of the replies to this OP, but I haven't, just jumped right in with all fours and will now have to deal with a flame or two!

WAKE UP NINNIES... It's REVOLUTION TIME!!!!

[TwilightGardener]

179. Leave Memorial Day alone. Respect the somber purpose of the day, and leave it alone.

Protest the day after, all you want.

[madfloridian]

192. This whole thing is false. It is fear of the right wing all over again.

I respect Conason's columns, but it is like some talking points went out from somewhere for someone to point out that perhaps Edwards was not being patriotic enough.

The fact that it was at Salon, the ones who are pushing it against Edwards here, the fact that it just keeps on and on and on...tells me so much about our party.

It is like the fringe activists meme in 2003. You know the one. How we were not good patriots if we were anti-war.

Salon did its share against certain candidates in 2003, and I had hoped it would not do so now.

[Cameron27]

204. This thread would have gone to about 30 posts IMO,

if you and the other Edwards supporters here, just had the decency to say that you respected other people's feelings, but that you didn't share Conason's opinion. That's it. No big deal. No conspiracy, (including conspiratorial past history that you're fond of bringing into conversations)just very different opinions about a campaign piece by John Edwards.

[madfloridian]

206. Now I don't respect other people's feelings?

This is amazing, seasonedblue.

I just got compared to Bush supporters as well.

It is all my fault now?

Thanks, Joe.

[Cameron27]

207. Do you?

Is calling an unfavorable opinion about your candidate RW smears, respect? Insinuating that posters are part of some group conspiracy that goes back years is respect?

[venable]

208. this refrain is heard too often and is disingenuous

You ask: why do Edwards supporters object when posters or columnists say something negative?

is the default response of Clark supporters (noting your avatar is why I bring it up) to criticisms of the General: "I disagree but I respect your opinion."

I think it's disingenuous to think this is the expected repsonse. Look at some of the things you have written in this thread. Do you think your insults to Edwards deserve to be ignored?

I posted what I thought was a peace offering to you, in PRECISELY the terms you recommended, and you replied by calling me 'condescending'.

The thin skin does not belong to Edwards supporters.

[Cameron27]

210. Yes, in fact Clarkies

say that often, "I disagree but respect your opinion." We've posted facts and links to try to persuade a change in opinion and that sometimes happens but when it doesn't, it's not worth the effort.

Outright lies are another thing. Those you fight tooth and nail.

About your peace offering that was basically nice, you wrote that my feelings were misdirected, so yes, I feel that's a bit condescending. My feelings were not anger, which you assumed, and they were directed at John Edwards where they were intended.

[Clark2008]

212. Oh, yes it does - I have NEVER on this board seen more thin

skins than I have out of Edwards supporters. Never. Not even during the Dean/Clark wars were there such thin skins. And those were some wars of merit.

You people can't even handle the smallest of criticisms of your candidate without yelling "conspiracy!" or try to make it sound as though every Clark supporter in the history of the world is "agin" you. There are some people here who support BOTH.

You DO sound like 30 percenters in your abject failure to understand that your candidate is not and never will be perfect. You do yourself no favors by defending the indefensible. Apparently, even Edwards' teams surmised that their comment about protesting at Memorial Day events was boneheaded and they corrected it.

At least Clark and Dean supporters would search the Blue Nowhere, far and wide, to find proof of their convictions (and still do) without just peeping about how "unfair" and boo-hooing about perceived rightwing tactics (yeah... like Joe Conason is SOOOO VERY right wing. :eyes: ) without offering ANY proof, what-so-ever, about why they believe as they do. Or they will concede that maybe their candidates position wasn't exactly spot-on (as Frenchie pointed out regarding Clark's position on flag burning).

For the record, I didn't always agree with Clark in 2004, but I agreed with him much more often than I disagreed with him (which, I believe was, twice). True and good criticisms make for better campaigns - corrections show a willingness to change (unless, of course, that's all a candidate does - speak to polling and try to erase their entire Senate history).

[madfloridian]

214. Comparing us to Bush supporters is very objectionable.

I am surprised this thread is just going right on and on.

When is Clark getting into the fray? Is he going to run?

[FrenchieCat]

215. Calling those who prefer that protesting the Iraq war is best done

on a day other than the day that all veterans are honored for their sacrifice in all wars "Faux Patriots" was objectionable as well.

The pot calling the kettle black does not make the pot anything other than black.

I say better late than never in joining the cause, but pointing fingers at those who were doing what one belately is now calling for is ridiculous! I protested starting in 2002......when it most counted, and was not the "IN" thing.

BTW, You don't give a hoot about Wes Clark, so I'm not sure why you are even asking. :eyes:

PS. I'm done with this topic. Don't want it to get out of "control".

[venable]

216. to be fair I was the one that brought Clark into this

simply to ask if Clark supporters would just turn the other cheek.

as for conspiracy - i've never thought there was one, just an inordinate amount of people on this site who despise Edwards. I don't think it's a conspiracy at all. I do think that the anti-Edwards sentiment here is out of proportion to other progressive sites, by quite a large margin. that's not a conspircay though, that's just numbers.

[Adelante]

217. Maybe if we stopped posting to the thread

It would sink :shrug:

Let's try that. Everything to be said has been said it would seem.

[Cameron27]

218. I agree, I'm done with this thread unless

provoked!

[Adelante]

219. I'm going shopping!

Maybe later it will be on the second page of GDP and I won't see it anymore :hi:

[FrenchieCat]

213. "The thin skin does not belong to Edwards supporters."

Yeah....OK.

TO summarize the events, You and a other Edwards supporters felt that John Edwards' idea of protesting the war on Memorial as a sign of support to the troops was a great idea! Good for you!

Joe Conason and others held a different opinion, and stated thus. This thread has posts from supporters as well as non supporters of Edwards who appear not to care for the Campaign idea....and so Conason is not alone.

It has been noted that the website edited the text to change the initial call of outward protest on Memorial week-end (which would have included Monday)to stressing NOT to do the outward protest specifically on Memorial day; Monday.......meaning the campaign got the message that inviting controversy on a day who's purpose is to memoralized those who fought in all wars was not the best idea. Good for them!

Currently some Edwards supporters believe that Conason and those who agreed with him to be "Right Wing Faux Patriots" who only want to propagandise and politicize against John Edwards.

This would lead me to conclude that these "supporters" must now believe the Edwards campaign to be cowards who stand for nothing as they ceded to the likes of "Right Wing Faux Patriots" who propagandise and politicized by "adjusting" what they were calling for originally, or so you would think! :shrug: