Is Obama trying to be Edwards lite?

[rndmprsn]

no dis-respect to the junior sen from IL, but it seems that almost every position edwards takes, focus on poverty, no money for lobbyists, universal health care, etc etc...obama will come out a couple days later with almost the exact position rhetorically, but not substantively...

IE, no money for lobbyists...but i will give them a seat at the table
focus on urban poverty...without calling for money to fix it (raise taxes)
universal health care...that isn't really universal, etc...

edwards takes the hard stances...then obama steals the thunder as he has more media attention.

is it just me or has anybody else noticed this?

(preparing top get flamed!)

[msongs]

1. watch out - YOU MUST TRUST OBAMA - say the obama lovers

YOU MUST!

[Buzz Clik]

2. Edwards lite? Is that possible?

Reminds me of an early critique of Zima (that clear, odd "malt alternative"): "Zima is for people who think lite beer isn't lite enough."

No, Obama is not Edwards lite.

[rndmprsn]

3. off topic, but...

funny, i do remember zima and that marketing campaign.

[book_worm]

4. On one key issue Edwards is trying to follow Obama's lead--the war

In 2002 Obama opposed the war resolution while Edwards, then focusing on his first run for president, and putting his finger in the air to see what public opinion is, decided to vote for the resolution. Now that the country is so against the war he's moved the other way. I haven't decided on a candidate as yet, but Edwards has always impressed me as a political opportunist.

[rndmprsn]

6. this is true...

and i do hold both of them responsible for funding the war as well...kucinich is really the ONLY canidate who has clean hands in this regards

[BeyondGeography]

5. LOL...A few position papers written by other people later, and JRE is The Heftmeister

Who could possibly measure up intellectually to His Edwards? Now if he could just remember not to list expensive haircuts in FEC filings and understand how half of his fortune is being invested, he'd be in great shape.

[Blackhatjack]

8. If you think those are the important issues(ie haircuts) why not asking HRC and BO about theirs?

You are disingenuous in your criticism of Edwards.

Try being consistent in your actions, and people might give your comments a second thought.

BTW if you believe any of the top 3 candidates write their own position papers themselves without the help of others, then that tells us all we need to know about your grasp of reality.

[BeyondGeography]

11. The so-called candidate of substance makes impossibly dumb mistakes

if you don't think this is a problem, I can't help you.

[Blackhatjack]

17. Ah... the inability to answer the question asked tells us all we need to know about your theory...

I guess you had trouble understanding the question, or certainly you would have answered it rather than toss out another general insult.

[rndmprsn]

10. please try to positively build up your (presume) candidate...

and not tear the other dems down with cheap insults, thanks

[BeyondGeography]

12. Cheap insult = Calling Obama Edwards Lite

[rndmprsn]

16. oh for christ sake...asking if obama

is edwards lite on a public forum and backing it up with facts is not an insult, repeating the same talking points than comedian ann coulter uses without substantively answering a direct question is...you do the math, but your avatar pretty much gives yourloyalties away anyhow thanks.

[BeyondGeography]

20. Your "facts" are wanting, see post #14

[rndmprsn]

23. all right then, i will find some "news" that supports my position

then i guess we can argue even more...

but i thought obama was about bringing in a new kind of politics...looks like the same old politics to me as espoused by you for him.

you obviously do not agree with my observation, you have said so...i am ready to hear from other people now, thanks

[Donnachaidh]

15. wow -- wasn't it the repukes that were trashed for whinging on about haircuts?

Seems to be a favorite of Obama supporters -- but I guess that makes it OKAY, huh? :sarcasm:

[BeyondGeography]

18. It's not the haircut, it's the stupidity of listing it in an FEC filing

and gift-wrapping an issue that could be used against him that should bother anyone who cares about winning an election next November.

[Blackhatjack]

27. You might want to stop now, before you show even more ignorance....

A few truths you may not be aware of:

IF there is an expenditure by the political candidate's campaign, even if it is a mistake and has been reversed, it is the law that you must disclose it on your FEC filings. To listing of the payments was NOT A CHOICE, it was complying with the law.

Once it was identified as a mistake, it was reversed and paid out of Edwards' own personal funds.

FEC compliance is not subjective. It is the law. And Edwards did the right thing to report it AND to reverse it.

But of course those with no other positive comments to raise about their own candidate will continue to talk about Edwards' 'haircut' issue --as if obeying the law disqualifies him from being the Democratic Nominee.

[BeyondGeography]

28. Pay for it yourself and it's not a campaign expense

Sheesh...don't you think they would have done it all differently if they had to do it all over again? Do you expect that kind of expense to appear on an FEC filing from Edwards ever again after the pounding they took? He can pay $5,000 for his hair and I wouldn't give a shit, just keep it quiet.

[Blackhatjack]

30. You support Obama. Want to bet that Obama has not made a mistake in his expenditures?

There is not one chance in a million that Obama's campaign has not made a mistake in his campaign's expenditures which required reversal and disclosure in his FEC filings. If his FEC filings do not indicate that, you can bet REpubs are pouring over them to show he failed to comply with the FEC law on campaign filings.

It is totally wrong to insinuate that Edwards should "just keep it quiet."

[BeyondGeography]

31. Whatever...keep getting reimbursed for those ultra-expensive beauty treatments, John

Just tell the media BlackHatJack said it was OK.

Fortunately, he's not taking your advice. The campaign said Edwards will pay for those expenses out of his own pocket from now on. In other words, they're keeping it quiet.

[Blackhatjack]

32. Repubs project lies and call them the truth. Do you really want to copy them?

"...keep getting reimbursed for those ultra-expensive beauty treatments, John"

Do you also write campaign material for Huckabee?

[Donnachaidh]

29. but you *still* whinge on about it.

what does that say about YOU? :shrug:

[Blackhatjack]

7. I do see Obama's strategists adopting many of Edward's positions without the details to implement ..

I think Obama and Clinton are perfectly happy to allow Edwards to raise issues in this environment, and if the issue appears to gain any traction they then join in with their 'plan' which is high on platitude and low on details. They are willing to do this because Edwards is not getting the major MSM attention and they can use the Edwards announcements as a 'test' of the political marketplace before they weigh in.

Edwards has put out the most detailed plans for addressing problems of any candidate.

[rndmprsn]

9. thanks...i was hoping that at least one other person

saw this and obviously you put some thought into it too

[TornadoTN]

13. I trust Obama and couldn't care less who came up with the ideas

Don't get me wrong, I like Edwards, but prefer Obama as my candidate of choice. The fact that Edwards raises issues and then Obama (or whoever) announces a similar plan doesn't bother me in the least. If this is such a problem to Edward's and his people, perhaps he should release his statements later or after someone else does. Obama is merely using the media buzz to his advantage to bring issues to the forefront, which by the way, Edwards would do as well if the tables were turned.

This happens in every election cycle. Candidates raise issues and others follow along, its the way of the political world. In either case, both candidates are intelligent, compassionate and capable men who would make great presidents. It's a win/win either way.

[rndmprsn]

19. thanks for an intelligent answer...

i guess if you are for the progressive ideas than everyone wins...if your loyalties are with a specific person (or cult of personality) than only that person you support wins, i for one am for everybody winning...but anyhow, thanks for noticing this too.

[BeyondGeography]

14. On campaign finance, ethics and lobbying reform, Edwards is, at best, Obama Lite

From yesterday's WP:

Edwards was part of the legislative team working to pass the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, but lobbying and campaign reform were nowhere near the top of his agenda in the Senate.

During the 2004 campaign, Edwards gave a useful speech outlining his plan to limit lobbyists' influence. But, unlike the other Democratic candidates, he refused requests to reveal the identities of his big fundraisers. This time around, after considerable prodding, Edwards agreed to release the names of fundraisers -- all his fundraisers, with no specifics about how much they had collected. His campaign argues vehemently that it should be praised for this avalanche of information, not faulted. But the candidate knows who has reeled in $1,000 and who raised $100,000. Why shouldn't voters?

Clinton has shown no zeal for or even particular interest in the issue in the Senate; nor did she while in the White House. Indeed, as her handling of the health-care task force and Whitewater documents illustrate, Clinton's instinct is for secrecy, and her default position is to disclose only the minimum legally required. She consented to reveal her major fundraisers only after repeated editorial hammering -- and only after all the other leading Democratic contenders had agreed.

On this issue, Obama leads the pack -- I'd say PAC, but he (and Edwards) don't take their checks, either. He helped pass a far-reaching ethics and campaign finance bill in the Illinois state Senate and made the issue a priority on arriving in Washington. Much to the displeasure of his colleagues, Obama promoted an outside commission to handle Senate ethics complaints. He co-authored the lobbying reform bill awaiting President Bush's signature and pushed -- again to the dismay of some colleagues -- to include a provision requiring lawmakers to report the names of their lobbyist-bundlers.

He has co-sponsored bills to overhaul the presidential public financing system and public financing of Senate campaigns. It's nice to hear Clinton talk about how "we've got to move toward public financing" -- Edwards backs it, too -- but I don't see her name on those measures.

Obama readily agreed to identify his bundlers. Unlike Clinton and Edwards, he has released his income tax returns. Perhaps most important, Obama has pledged to take public financing for the general election if he is the Democratic nominee and his Republican opponent will do the same.

Any Democratic candidate wanting to "get the money out of American politics" (Clinton) or demonstrate that "the Democratic Party is the party of the people" (Edwards) ought to leap at this chance. The candidates' silence on Obama's public financing proposal -- they'll "consider" it -- has been more telling than anything they have actually said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/21/AR2007082101420.html

[Blackhatjack]

21. This piece is wrong in its depiction of Edwards in so many ways...

It would be too much to ask that the WaPo do a little real research before putting out inaccurate information.

Of course if you have taken the WaPo statements at face value, I guess that would explain the position you have taken.

Take some wise advice and question what the WaPo publishes until you can verify it is true.

[BeyondGeography]

22. Right, go back to the glorious non-event that was John Edwards' Senate term and refute the above

You can't.

[rndmprsn]

24. my my...hit a nerve did we?

[BeyondGeography]

25. Actually, you hit nothing but air

Swing and a miss.

[rndmprsn]

26. your constant insistant argumenative replies belie

that i have...