DU, are you making something out of nothing with this Edwards/Clinton thing?

[PresidentObama]

I mean that seriously. I know how DU loves to attack Hillary Clinton and John Edwards seems to be the new favorite target. Don't you guys have anything better to do than rip apart our Democratic field? This election is too important for your conspiracy theories about Hillary and Edwards. And I think Kucinich really is desperately using this for any media attention he can get. It's borderline nuts how Dennis will use ANYTHING just as long as he can get attention.

[bahrbearian]

1. Ya thats the ticket , Its all Kucinichs doing

[PresidentObama]

4. Hmmm putting words in my mouth.

The only DK mention from me was he loves attention. And well, he does.

[Moochy]

18. DK is such an attention monger

The rest of the democratic field of candidates fucking HATES attention!!!

I saw Edwards fleeing the cameras the other day, and Clinton was being plagued by paparazzi!

Won't the press leave these fine people alone???

:eyes:

[PresidentObama]

20. The first sentence was about right.

The rest was childish mocking.

Forgot...can't say anything about DU's darling. It's one of the unwritten rules of DU.

[Moochy]

28. one person's

childish mocking is another's salient point.

You single out DK for wanting to grab attention...

I'm just trying to say its silly to single him out.. see dodd's comments. I think that the bigger issue is definitely the silly debate formats, but it still smells a bit of a shifting explanation.

They are all trying to get attention, and some get it very easy, others have to work
harder because of their position in the polls.

For the record I've contributed to Edwards and think he has the best chance to reflect my values of the top 3.

[madrchsod]

10. kucinich? well i heard from a reliable source

that he he was a card carry member of the stalinist wing of the democratic party

[draft_mario_cuomo]

25. You don't see Gravel, Biden, Dodd, or Richardson grandstanding on this... nt

[madrchsod]

2. no- hillary is offering edwards the vice presidency

as soon as obama decides he has`t a chance to win the primary.

[PresidentObama]

6. I doubt Edwards want VP.

That's crazy talk and speculation with NO base at all.

[madrchsod]

14. ahhh ...i was being sarcastic

i think edwards has a better grasp of the common folk than hillary,so it`s a toss up between edwards and obama

[PresidentObama]

15. To be honest, I think the nominee will be Obama or Edwards.

At least that's my hope. If it's Hillary, I'll still be voting Democratic!

[madrchsod]

22. i feel your pain!

[connecticut yankee]

23. I'm still waiting

for Al Gore to be dragged, kicking and screaming.

[madrchsod]

24. i don`t think he wants it

but it would be very interesting would`t it....maybe we could save our country and the planet with al in the whitehouse

[PresidentObama]

27. Amen. I'd drop my support for Edwards in no time if Gore got in.

[David Dunham]

3. Kuchinich has ZERO chance of winning.

[Alamom]

5. 15 minutes and no takers on my question....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3377729

[PresidentObama]

9. DU is too busy getting off on bashing Edwards and Clinton

The truth doesn't matter. Trashing them both is all that counts.

[bahrbearian]

13. I thought you heard me when I was talking to my Monitor.

[rodeodance]

7. i agree with you (except last line-although he did have a bee in his bonnet

over this event)

[rubberducky]

8. Thier conversation was............Dissappointing to say the least.

At least to me.

[Alamom]

11. I'll ask again. What was the conversation?

[PresidentObama]

12. If candidates talk, they're obviously cooking up some conspiracy.

Don't you know that?

:sarcasm:

[rubberducky]

26. Heard the conversation this morning on MSNBC.

I`m sorry if you haven`t heard it yet, but it was on msm. They filtered out the backround. I do not remember the exact words, but I was dissappointed. There really is no need to get youself so upset. It`s nothing that anybody expected, but remember how we loved bush`s open mike? Same thing. Lots of blushes.

[illinoisprogressive]

16. I'm not. I don't think it is a very big or passionate issue.

I think many candidates go thru this thinking. Unless action was taken to freeze out those not in the top it is not that big. Talking sh** is just that.
I believe all have the right to debate but, it was probably more talk of frustration than anything.
airing greivances.
I felt this issue would blow out of control but, alot is due to a slow time right now in news.

[cboy4]

17. The people who are making "something out of nothing" are those

who are calling DK names, rather than discussing like adults why he's wrong for feeling insulted.

I haven't decided who I'm voting for, but I don't appreciate the way I notice DK is being treated here.

Particularly in this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3376818

[PresidentObama]

19. It's not like I called him a "Meany head"

I just pointed out he desperately likes attention. Which....well...he does.

And the same people who are making "something out of nothing" are the same people spreading this baseless speculation about Edwards and Hillary, attack both of them at every opportunity with a lot of falsehoods and distorted information, and use the same kind of name calling you're talking about to describe Edwards and Clinton.

I forgot....you can attack Hillary or Edwards...hell even Obama...but don't touch DU's darling.

[cboy4]

21. Listen, whether it's true or not that certain DK supporters are

doing what you're accusing them of doing is true or not, is irrelevant.

You don't just turn around and do what you criticize others of doing.

I don't approve of the attacking of Democratic candidates, period.

I like aspects of every candidate in the race, and it makes me uncomfortable to read the subtle and not so subtle verbal attacks of anyone.

But that's just me.

on edit--typo

[Catchawave]

29. Me too....

and it seems to be the same people over and over and over and over....probably time to put some of them back in "time out" :D

I love all our Dem candidates.

[napi21]

30. I think the DUers making a big deal out of this have fallen for the

media hype. The TV media LOVE this kind of story, and they'll play it for all they can.

Look, none of us REALLY KNOW what exactly was meant or said in that conversation, but to me it at least SOUNDS like what EVERY NDIDATE WANTS...a smaller feld so they can have more time! I don't care which candidate you ask, that's what they ALL would like!

I don't blame Dennis for trying to get some face time out of it either! All the candidates want that too!

[Alexander]

31. It's one big evil Obama-Dodd-Kucinich CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!11

:rofl:

[PresidentObama]

32. I guess you're laughing at yourself.

I surely didn't suggest any conspiracy. Quite the opposite.

And I didn't even mention Obama. What the hell does he have to do with anything?

[KoKo]

33. It's NOT DU...the Cables have been on it...and it's out there. Just like with "Swift Boat"

attacks..both Hillary and Edwards should have issued IMMEDIATE REBUTTALS of that "talk" that was caught with open Mikes.

:shrug: Haven't heard them rebut it yet...but I've been in and out away from cables so far this weekend...

[DemBones DemBones]

35. It's not like Swift Boat at all. Clinton & Edwards said those things of their own volition.

Swift Boat involved allegations made against Kerry's military record, not a video of him arguing that he shouldn't have to debate all the other candidates.

If you watch the YouTube video, you can hear it very clearly. CNN is using a video with poor audio quality.
and I read ABC is as well. They must be copies of the original from FOX.

[KoKo]

49. I heard what you heard.....I was just saying that if they didn't say what they said then they

should have rebutted it immediately. Some DU'ers thought they meant limiting number of debates...but what I heard seemed to say they meant limiting candidates. :shrug:

[zulchzulu]

38. No comparison. The Swift Boast asswipes were LIARS. Edwards and Clinton were chatting...

Next thing you know, we'll hear that it was all made up in the editing room with special Fox software...

:crazy:

[PresidentObama]

43. GASP, candidates chat?

That's it....Edwards and Clinton are disqualified as candidates.

[zulchzulu]

46. That's not what I said...

Forgive me for pointing out the truth.

[paulk]

34. of course

it's what this place does, "rip Democrats apart".

[PresidentObama]

36. Sometimes we rip Democrats apart worse than Republicans.

It's enough to make this Democrat scream.

[zulchzulu]

39. Edwards and Clinton WERE trying to rip apart fellow Democrats...

If they weren't, why did they want to exclude voices in the dialogue?

Face it.

Edwards and Clinton got busted. They will have to ride this out. They did it. They said it. They wanted to talk about it in front of the other candidates. They didn't plan on telling Obama about it.

[PresidentObama]

44. They didn't rip apart anyone.

They suggest smaller debates because in the current format the major candidate, who have a snowballs chance, aren't getting the time needed to talk about their visions for the future. If that's ripping apart Democrats, then candidates chatting with one another is ripping others apart. Plus Kucinich and others were around when the two were chatting, and many of them even came up to Clinton and Edwards. It's not like some secret they were trying to hide. Such a private setting, huh?

[zulchzulu]

47. Why wasn't Obama included in their little chat?

Are just Clinton and Edwards running? Maybe I missed the memo...

[paulk]

40. I think it's important to note, as far as DU is concerned,

that the "we" doesn't necessarily refer to Democrats. Many members of this site are not Democrats, and their motives for attacking Democrats and the Democratic Party should always be questioned.

OTOH, it is sort of a pastime for Democrats to eat their own. It's unfortunate, because, for that part of the voting populace that doesn't pay much attention, it helps paint the Democrats as a bunch of weak, prevaricating backstabbers. The Republicans are seen as standing by their party, wrong or right. This makes them appear, to that group of people at least, resolute and strong.

It's unfortunate.

[zulchzulu]

37. I don't support either Edwards or Clinton and this confirmed why

Did Fox News force them to talk about how to drop some of the candidates in the debates? Are they not media saavy enough to know that microphones are on? Are they that stupid?

Why didn't Clinton and Edwards want to talk to Obama about their scheme when he walked up to them? Is it because he didn't need to know what the Edwards people were going to talk to the Clinton people about? All Clinton did was cluck "Hi Barack..." like some old hen...why not sharey-poo, Mrs. Clinton? Why the half-stare at Obama, Mr. Edwards?

Their arrogance showed through clearly to me. I'm glad they got busted for it. They deserve all the grief they will get for this and they can't seem to spin their way out of a paper bag.

Why shouldn't Kucinich, Biden, Richardson, Gravel or Dodd not be heard six goddamn months before any votes are cast? What are Edwards and Clinton afraid of?

[paulk]

41. if that is, in fact, what they were discussing

which is far from settled in my mind -

Edwards did say something about the "fall". That doesn't put things 6 months out, it's closer to 3 or 4. I don't have any problem, and outside of fringe places like DU I doubt that most Democrats would have a problem, with narrowing the debate field to candidates who are serious about getting elected President.

That, to me at least, means getting rid of Kucinich and Gravel and giving more time to the other candidates, especially the legitimate 2nd tier ones, to have their say.

[PresidentObama]

45. This is why you don't support them? Because they had a conversation....

With all the other candidates mingling all around. So sneaky, huh? In the middle of all the other candidates, with them coming up to Hillary and Edwards randomly, they had a private conversation to single out the other candidates. So damn sneaky.

This isn't why you don't support Edwards or Clinton. You don't support them because you support Obama, silly ;)

DU will make something out of nothing. This just proves it!

[zulchzulu]

48. Um...no...there are other reasons I don't support Clinton or Edwards

This event just solidified my judgment.

The main reason for not supporting Clinton is that she would be the greatest mobilizing force for Republicans to get out their vote in large numbers. She is divisive within her own party. There are other reasons as well.

The main reason for not supporting Edwards is that he knew that the intelligence reports were bogus while on the Senate Intelligence Committee, yet he thought it would be politically expedient to co-sponsor the Iraq War Resolution with Joe Lieberman. I also thought he was a lousy VP candidate in 2004 and question his sincerity on his issues.

[lynne]

42. Frankly, I think its more bothersome for some of us -

- because we're disappointed that this occurred. I doubt that it will be an issue later in the campaign but it is very disappointing and disheartening right now.