2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Tresspassers Will
At this point I don't remember all the restrictions of the bill. And frankly I am disinclined to look them up. However, it was supposed to restrict the flow of soft money. At the time I remember there were articles related to the circumventing of the restrictions and the politicians knew every one of them.
As for the need for these last minute attack adds if that is what the public needs to decide who to vote for shame on them. That is why we have all the shysters sitting in the halls of congress. I won't even comment on the administration.

0 Replies

Quote:

South Carolina's flag controversy unfurls
By Patrik Jonsson | Special to The Christian Science Monitor
NIXONS CROSSROADS, S.C. - As the first presidential candidate to honor a boycott of South Carolina over its flying of the Confederate flag, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina made a key concession in his bid for the Palmetto State: Call it the spare-bedroom gambit.

While other candidates such as Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, and Missouri Rep. Richard Gephardt, say they have no practical choice but to breach the three-year-old boycott by rooming in hotels while campaigning in the state, Mr. Edwards, a personal-injury lawyer born in Seneca, S.C., has promised to "personally honor" the state's NAACP's tourism boycott - aimed at having the Confederate flag removed from State House grounds - by staying at a friend's house on a visit to Charleston last weekend.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0212/p03s02-uspo.htm

0 Replies

Hmmm.. Interesting story there Mapleleaf! I wonder if his friend will be providing rooms for the 60 or so people in his entourage too...

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

Tresspassers Will
At this point I don't remember all the restrictions of the bill. And frankly I am disinclined to look them up. However, it was supposed to restrict the flow of soft money. At the time I remember there were articles related to the circumventing of the restrictions and the politicians knew every one of them.
As for the need for these last minute attack adds if that is what the public needs to decide who to vote for shame on them. That is why we have all the shysters sitting in the halls of congress. I won't even comment on the administration.

Interesting that where I wrote of issue ads, you write of attack ads. Question

Of course, whether within 6 weeks or 6 years of an election, political speech is supposed to be protected speech, isn't it?

0 Replies

fishin', is Senator Edwards positioning himself for the (conservative) southern vote?

0 Replies

Mapleleaf wrote:

Quote:
South Carolina's flag controversy unfurls
By Patrik Jonsson | Special to The Christian Science Monitor
NIXONS CROSSROADS, S.C. - As the first presidential candidate to honor a boycott of South Carolina over its flying of the Confederate flag, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina made a key concession in his bid for the Palmetto State: Call it the spare-bedroom gambit.

While other candidates such as Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, and Missouri Rep. Richard Gephardt, say they have no practical choice but to breach the three-year-old boycott by rooming in hotels while campaigning in the state, Mr. Edwards, a personal-injury lawyer born in Seneca, S.C., has promised to "personally honor" the state's NAACP's tourism boycott - aimed at having the Confederate flag removed from State House grounds - by staying at a friend's house on a visit to Charleston last weekend.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0212/p03s02-uspo.htm

Of course he is doing this after having just getting himself embroiled in controversy over his visit to the Aiken House in SC. I don't really think this is a big deal, but I'm pretty sure that if he'd been a Republican, it would have been treated as one.

0 Replies

Quote:

Aiken House in SC.

I'm hazy on the above, what happened?

0 Replies

Mapleleaf wrote:

fishin', is Senator Edwards positioning himself for the (conservative) southern vote?

I have no idea what he's doing other than it seems he's playing to the tune who "How can I offend the fewest number of people?" (Not a bad strategy for a politician either!).

I just think it is funny in a way. He's going to stay with a friend. Fine. But what about his campaign staff? He won't be using a hotel room in support of the NAACP boycot but his 60+ staffers will be! If he stays in the state overnight so will they and I doubt his friend has rooms for them all.

He may win symbolic points for solidarity with the NAACP boycott but the candidate that doesn't actually stay in the state overnight will actually be supporting the boycott.. Which has the greater effect?

0 Replies

Maple - Edwards attended a function at Aiken House recently. The house is a historical landmark that happens to have been the home of the largest slave owner in SC. I heard about it the day it happened, including lots of suggestions that this would be a big problem for him, but lo and behold (!) once again a Democrat gets a pass in the media for something for which a Republican would have been crucified.

Had Trent Lott set foot in that building, liberals would be pointing to that fact as proof of his bigotry for years.

Of course, I'm inclined to think it is a non-issue regardless of party, I just know that it wouldn't be treated that way if the roles were reversed. The racist history of Democrats is explained away while Republicans we are told never change their stripes. A poor choice of words uttered by a Democrat is just a harmless slip of the tongue, but let a Republican say anything that can be twisted to seem racist, and "we have us a racist, boys!"

Anyhow, if you do a search on John Edwards and Aiken House you may come up with a link or two. Frankly most of the mainstream media haven't bothered to report it.

0 Replies

Here's a little grab-bag of updates:

U.S. Sen. Bob Graham -- recovering quietly from heart surgery at his daughter's suburban Virginia home -- is expected to know by the end of this month whether he will seek the Democratic nomination for the presidency, a close associate said Tuesday. LINK

"It wasn't too long ago that Dean was the Rodney Dangerfield of the Democratic race, the long-shot candidate from a minuscule state who didn't get much respect. But all that is changing fast, largely because of Democratic doubts about war. As Iowa party Chairman Gordon Fischer, who is neutral in the presidential race, put it Monday: 'I can see Dean winning the Iowa caucuses. He's as much a player here as anybody.'" LINK

Democrats must "break the bubble" of public support President Bush enjoys on foreign policy if they hope to win in 2004, and Sen. John Kerry has the best chance of doing that, says the AFL-CIO's political chairman, Gerald McEntee. LINK

Democrats say former NATO commander Wesley Clark has expressed interest in running for president and the AFL-CIO's political chairman says he expects Clark to announce he's in the Democratic race in about three weeks.

But Clark restated his position Wednesday that he has nothing planned.

LINK

0 Replies

The obvious difference between the two men you mentioned "setting foot" into such a landmark is this: If a microphone was stuck into one man's face, he would praise the confederacy, and sidestep any suggestions that his visit maight have divisive connotations. Stick a mike into the other fellow's face, and he would make a point of clearly confronting what would be on everyone's mind - whether this was an implicit approval of the notions that still fuel arguments over whether the confederate flag should be flown on government property. I know this, because I've seen Lott and Edwards react exactly as I just proposed they would.

On every occasion (at least every occasion until he stepped in it so bad he had almost had to end up almost denying he even remembered who HE was) Trent Lott could, he lauded the confederacy, and clearly courted the support of people for whom "old times are not forgotten" still. When Edwards is asked pointedly about his stand on the confederate flag, or like issues, he has very clearly stated that he holds the view that flying it on state property is abhorrent, and a slap in the face of black Americans.

I only use these two men because they are the two that TW mentioned. But that horse that those on the right keep beating, about there being equal doses of racial animus toward blacks in both sides of the House, is ludicrous. It is by no miscalculation or accident that blacks vote 95% democratic. In TW's post, there was allusion to liberal media bias, and the hypocrisy of the democrats on race. Well... maybe - but Edwards visiting the site of a slaveowner, and the media not jumping on it - well that one didn't make your case.

0 Replies

PD, thanks for the links.

0 Replies

Carol Moseley-Braun announces:

ABCNews.com

Dennis Kucinich announces:

ABCNews.com

0 Replies

snood, It would seem to this observer that Lott has absolutely no chance running for the highest office of the land, whereas, Edwards has a 'fighting' chance. c.i.

0 Replies

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark said today he's thinking about challenging President Bush in 2004 because he's concerned about the direction the administration is taking on international affairs.

"Well, I have thought about it," the former NATO supreme commander said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "And a lot of people have asked me to think about it."

Houston Chronicle

Saw him today on 'Meet The Press'.

Sure hope he runs.

0 Replies

I'd vote for anybody except GWBush in 2004. This country has suffered more in his two years in office than any president serving his full term. c.i.

0 Replies

Dean Speech to Critique Plans for War on Iraq

Quote:

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 17, 2003; Page A24

Former Vermont governor Howard Dean will offer a broad and blistering critique of President Bush's policy toward Iraq today -- and sharp criticism as well of his rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination -- in a speech asserting that Bush has not made the case for war and calling for United Nations weapons inspections to continue "as long as there is progress" toward disarmament.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18611-2003Feb16.html

0 Replies

It was also mentioned in today's newspaper that Greenspan criticized GWBush's tax cuts - at the risk of losing his reappointment. Doesn't seem GWBush doing well on the war front or our economy. This guy looks pretty destructive to me, but I'm an independent (thinker). c.i.

0 Replies

Granted, CI - I'm sure Lott can't run for president. But I'm not sure what that has to do with my saying that it's bogus to compare Edwards and Lott visiting a Civil War era site, and claiming media bias is the important distinction between the two.

0 Replies

2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know