0
   

I'm going To Switch My Support To John Edwards

 
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 12:16 pm
An Interesting (and I believe accurate) Perspective on John Edwards
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 12:28 pm
I tend to read Krauthammer skeptically, but the Feingold quote is a surprise.

I even went and found the original article to see if it was taken out of context or something, but nope, it's legit:

http://www.postcrescent.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080117/APC06/801170560/1036

Later on Feingold says he's struggling to decide between Obama and Hillary -- sure hope he chooses Obama. (I mean, obviously, but I think Feingold specifically would be a great endorsement.)
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 12:28 pm
Wow. Nimh?
0 Replies
 
nappyheadedhohoho
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 01:41 pm
Quote:
There's losing. There's losing honorably. And then there's John Edwards.


And there are two Americas: one in which John Edwards is a viable candidate, and one in which he is not. The first one appears to exist only in his mind.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 04:57 pm
sozobe wrote:
I tend to read Krauthammer skeptically, but the Feingold quote is a surprise.

I even went and found the original article to see if it was taken out of context or something, but nope, it's legit:

http://www.postcrescent.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080117/APC06/801170560/1036

Later on Feingold says he's struggling to decide between Obama and Hillary -- sure hope he chooses Obama. (I mean, obviously, but I think Feingold specifically would be a great endorsement.)


In my experience, Charles doesn't play fast and loose with facts. He's a bit snooty, but he's brilliant, and to my way of thinking usually on point.

Hoping for Feingold's endorsement. Just goes to show you how great the divide sometimes is. I just hope he doesn't decide to endore McCain. The NYT endorsement was bad enough.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 06:59 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
What would have been an acceptable answer to "Was Bill Clinton the first black president?", in your estimation?

"Of course not, for no other reason than he is, quite obviously, not black. I respect Bill Clinton and believe that he demonstrated concern for many of the issues that are important to a large segment of the Black Community, but I find the idea offensive, that there should be such a clearly defined template for The Black President, that a white man could conform to it and be crowned The First Black President. The First Black President will be a person who embraces being black as a racial and cultural identity, but who has the character, skills and ideas to lead America on a path that that ensures all of it's citizens the security and prosperity this great nation has always promised."

That's pretty good!
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 07:22 pm
Why Are We Kidding Ourselves? All of These Candidates Are Politicians

Quote:
When it comes to presidential politics, the stakes are enormous and the only people capable of even reaching the final group are extraordinary street fighters.


Kathleen Reardon ends with something much like something nimh said that I quite liked

Kathleen:

Quote:
It pays to step back once in a while to recognize the nature of the activity in which we're involved. Otherwise we're like sheep -- the lot of us. We despise those who disagree with us about a candidate even though we actually know little of that person. It's a form of ignorance -- the same kind that delivered George W. Bush into our lives twice.

So what should we do? We should observe and critique -- not like the many MSM "experts" whose lips move but nothing of substance comes out -- but as people who aren't voting for prom king or queen.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 07:26 pm
nimh wrote:
You're voting for President, not BBQ guest.


prom queen/BBQ guest

I think she's copying you, nimh.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2008 10:57 pm
They are, indeed all politicians. However, John Edwards leads the pack in outrageous hypocrisy. He, who accumulated millions as a sleazy malpractice tort lawyer, and who maintained a centrist (even right wing, by Democrat standards) voting record during six years in the Senate, is now preaching class warfare and "two Americas" in his campaign. He is at very best a contemporary Elmer Gantry, and hardly worth serious consideration by anyone.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 12:52 am
georgeob1 wrote:
They are, indeed all politicians. However, John Edwards leads the pack in outrageous hypocrisy.

More so than Mitt Romney, eh? Who's not just arguing against the very kind of health insurance program he set up himself as Governor of Massachusetts, but who's pretty much renounced every single of his former beliefs? The man is plastic fantastic!

More than John McCain, for that matter, the media-feted "truth teller" and "maverick" who now embraces the massive tax cuts he blasted a few years ago, who now praises Limbaugh and makes nice with Falwell-o-types he denounced as agents of intolerance before?

Well, I know I'm up against well-entrenched narratives when it comes to McCain, but it's hard to see any politician of this age being more outrageously hypocritical than Mitt Romney. All in the eye of the beholder, I guess...
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 04:34 pm
I won't argue your points about the variability of McCain, Romney - or any of the candidates of either party for that matter. Frankly I find a zealous consistency with respect to all positions taken a serious defect in politicians - who must deal with contentious issues and programs whose side effects too often outweigh their intended primary ones, and who often should adjust positions previously taken to reflect changed conditions or the evolution of the public issues themselves.

My point was simply that in this area Edwards is in a class by himself, and that the political theology & class warfare he is peddling now is both divisive and harmful on its own, and, almost without exception, directly contrary to the voting record he established during his term in the Senate. There is not even a consistent central tendency to be found in his public positions over the past seven years - something that cannot be said of the others.

I'll confess also to some bewilderment with respect to the attitudes of many conservative Republicans towards Mitt Romney. Last summer I heard an excellent analysis of the then forthcoming political campaign given by Pete Wilson, the former Republican governor of California, and himself once a presidential contender. He too expressed a degree of bitterness towards Romney's supposed inconsistency, suggesting he was doomed among real conservatives because of it. My reaction was bewilderment - Romney was then a very successful Governor of Massachusetts, and he had clearly done very well in advancing many conservative principles into the politics of that otherwise very left wing state. "What the hell did Wilson expect of him?" I thought. Frankly I see Romney's ability to connect with opposing viewpoints and find practical accomodation as a virtue, not a defect.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 05:08 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
My point was simply that in this area Edwards is in a class by himself, and that the political theology & class warfare he is peddling now is both divisive and harmful on its own, and, almost without exception, directly contrary to the voting record he established during his term in the Senate.

See, I see the role that John Edwards plays in consistently and passionately pulling the subjects of poverty, disadvantage, the concerns of struggling middle class people, the millions without health insurance, as an important one. There is noone else who emphasises these problems as consistently as he does, no other politician in the limelight who so often talks of these things. Even IF Edwards personally were a scumbag, that would still be a laudable and significant role.

georgeob1 wrote:
There is not even a consistent central tendency to be found in his public positions over the past seven years - something that cannot be said of the others.

That strikes me as an odd assertion since the very signature theme of Edwards' 2004 presidential campaign already was "the two Americas". And that's what he's focused on without pause for the last four years too. Seems to me like a pretty consistent focus to have.
0 Replies
 
nappyheadedhohoho
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 05:18 pm
nimh wrote:
Even IF Edwards personally were a scumbag, that would still be a laudable and significant role.


In Hungary maybe. Here, a scumbag is a scumbag.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 05:27 pm
I wish and hope that American voters( I mean legal voters without any 2000 voter manipulation) cross the street
and vote according to their moral, educational, ethical values.
I am of the opinion that USA has got a nice past history that has nothing to do democracy.
Ask any immigrants from india/Germany/Australia/IRAQ . Bring democracy at home without this bollywood or show nonsense.


Export not the product of DEMOCRACY of your vissions or missions.
.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 05:34 pm
What if our voting booths are located on the same side of the street as we are located?

If I take your advice and cross the street, I won't be able to vote.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 06:05 pm
Now there's an intriguing photo...

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/37/edwardssupportersig9.png
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 06:16 pm
The whole world
observe with high regard and critical views
about the outcome of this melodrama
and the next intellectual
who wish to uphold dignity, democracy, decency.
all the best
0 Replies
 
nappyheadedhohoho
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2008 06:58 pm
Clinton's anti-Edwards robo-call:

"Hello, This is the Hillary Clinton for President campaign. Before you vote on Saturday, you should know that John Edwards voted for permanent trade relations with China. That's right, John Edwards voted for the bill that cost thousands of jobs. Like the ones in the textile mills he talks about so much down here. You should also know that John Edwards made nearly a half a million dollars working for a Wall Street investment fund. A fund that's been profiting on foreclosing on the homes of families; including 100 homes right here in South Carolina. . . . Can you trust John Edwards? This call is paid for by the Hillary Clinton for President Campaign."
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Jan, 2008 05:33 pm
Butrflynet
What if our voting booths are located on the same side of the street as we are located?

If I take your advice and cross the street, I won't be able to vote.

I bet one thing of which I am quite sure.
USA's eligible, counted voters will never make a history by standing in a long never-ending Q to make use of their legitimate right to cast their votes.
Compare other democratic countries around the globe.
American voters are not that much vivid and active.
I wish that USA should pass a simple law
to make all the approved legal voters
to make use of their rights .
Change your electoral system which is anything to do other than DEMOCRACY
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Jan, 2008 05:43 pm
Ramafuchs wrote:
I bet one thing of which I am quite sure.
USA's eligible, counted voters will never make a history by standing in a long never-ending Q to make use of their legitimate right to cast their votes.



Quote:
Polling station hours likely to be extended

Wednesday November 3, 2004

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2004/11/02/ohioqueue3.jpg

Polling station opening hours looked set to be extended across the US today as people turned out in record numbers to vote in the bitterly contested presidential contest.

Observers said that as many as 121 million people were expected to cast their ballots, easily surpassing the 106 million record of four years ago.

Reports suggested the high turnout could force election officials to extend the voting deadline at polling stations in key states such as Florida and Ohio, where voters were said to be queuing for up to six hours.


How much do you want to bet, Ramafuchs?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/30/2024 at 02:27:33