Edward won't mention Halliburton until Cheney does

[Ducks In A Row]

Edward knows that Cheney will just call it a personal attack, if Halliburton is brought up. He knows that Cheney will use if to attack Edwards supposed "lack" of experience. It was be Cheney's game if Halliburton is mentioned by Edwards first.


Now, Cheney brings up the contractors in Iraq, Edwards can use Halliburton to show the Cheney has mis-managed the whole war. Then it's an issue of what kind of experience Cheney is bringing and how we can't afford it.



(oh, and I'm nervous, and wishing it was over).

[MajorFlaw]

1. Wanna bet?

n/t

[Eric J in MN]

2. Cheney using our tax dollars for war profiteering is a public

issue, not a private matter.

[Ducks In A Row]

8. doesn't matter, the pundit will spin it otherwise

edwards should be smart enough not to fall into that trap

[Rowdyboy]

3. I hope you're right

That would be the best approach by far

[dogtag]

4. Edwards needs to avoid getting too 'inside baseball' and I

think he will. It won't do any good to 'get' Crashcart if the audience doesn't understand it.

[TrueAmerican]

5. I hope Edwards attacks Bush's record

That's where the debate will be won.

[DrWeird]

6. I doubt it. At least I hope not.

Halliburton is a serious issue. And there's no way Cheney would bring it up.

[snippy]

7. Edwards should attack Bush, not Cheney. Bush is the target.

Make Cheney try and defend Bush. It's hard work being wrong and too stubborn to admit it.

[cliss]

9. Methinks

John Edwards is not worrying about "who goes first". He'll bring up the issue of Halliburton without being asked.

I read the transcript of the Kerry-Bush debate last week. Kerry kept hammering away, bringing up one embarrassing issue after another. He certainly didn't worry about "irritating" Bush.

Instead, he went for the jugular and BeetleBrain folded. Why not? What does Edwards have to fear?

This entire debate is about Bush's 4 years in office. It's a report card. How did he do? For this reason, Bush and Cheney are automatically on the defensive because it's THEIR record that's being critiqued.

What can Bush and Cheney say about Kerry-Edwards? That they're lousy? They have no record to run on, so it's just speculation on their part. "Well, he flip-flops". "He's lacking experience".

ALL they can do is grasp at straws, and try to convince people they'll be lousy leaders. Bush and Cheney, on the other hand, are PROVEN failures.