Edward's Rants

[cawacko]

Edwards is doing himself no favors. Who the hell is "they" that he keeps referring to? "The Man"? His rhetoric sounds like more a long shot candidate than a serious Presidential contender.



My DD* flags an intense minute and a half from John Edwards in Creston, Iowa, yesterday in which he heatedly tells an audience that the attention to trivia (I assume the reference here is to his haircuts) is "not an accident" and that "they want to shut me up" to silence his message about ending the war and universalizing health care.

He warns, in the video segment posted by his campaign, that if we don't beat back these unnamed oligarchs, "They're going to control the media. They're going to control what's being said."

He doesn't go into detail about who "they" are, other than a reference to people who make $100 million a year, and compares them to the (actual well-funded, conservative) operation that put the Swift Boat ads on air. He also doesn't explain exactly how this corporate-media collaboration works, but his audience seems to be rapt.

Here's from his remarks:

This stuff's not an accident. Nobody in this room should think this is an accident. You know, I'm out there speaking up for universal healthcare, ending this war in Iraq, speaking up for the poor. They want to shut me up. That's what this is about. "Let's distract from people who don't have health care coverage. Let's distract from people who can't feed their children.... Let's talk about this silly frivolous nothing stuff so that America won't pay attention."

They will never silence me. Never.

If we don't stand up to these people, if we don't fight em, if we don't beat them, they're going to continue to control this country. Thye're going to control the media. They're going to control what's being said. They do not want to hear us talking about health care for everybody.

*UPDATE: The person who posted the video to MyDD, Tracy Joan Russo, is actually an Edwards staffer who does blogger outreach. So the campaign must think this is a winning message. Also: A reader points out that there's a boom microphone in the shot; again, this is a message being delivered, not an inadvertently-captured departure.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0707/Edwards_They_want_to_shut_me_up.html

 

[Cypress]

cawacko,
I might be wrong.

But, even though Edwards is merely considered the third-place Dem candidate, he could still beat Romney, McCain, Gulliani, Thompson, or Newt.

I don't think haircuts, or talking about him using the word "they" is going to be enough, to get a GOPer elected. Or to shoot down Edwards, if he gets nominated.

 

[Cancel7]

Cawacko, this is what I think.

Hillary is the front runner, when you hear her talk, she's not talking to the base. Hillary knows this; if she gets the nomination, enough of the base is going to get behind her, because we will do anything to avoid another republican. She's talking to the general electorate, and even to republican-leaning independents, with her eye to the general election.

Edwards is running in a primary, not in the general. He's speaking to the base. I'm the base. I see nothing in here that bothers me in the least, and I think that "they" is the corporate-owned media, among others.

If he won the primary, that's when you'd see him moving to the center in the general. This is nothing new, it's what bush did when he was running. Played to his base in the primary, then pretended he was a centrist in the general. His base knew what he really was, just as we will know about Edwards.

 

[cawacko]

cawacko,
I might be wrong.

But, even though Edwards is merely considered the third-place Dem candidate, he could still beat Romney, McCain, Gulliani, Thompson, or Newt.

I don't think haircuts, or talking about him using the word "they" is going to be enough, to get a GOPer elected. Or to shoot down Edwards, if he gets nominated.

This is just my opinion of course but Edwards is not winning the Democrat Primary. He MIGHT win Iowa but that would be it.

Talking hypothetical if he did win his raising taxes is a loser in the national election. Not that this board speaks for the entire country but there are three people on here I believe who will be voting for a Democrat candidate who say they disagree with his tax stand. Independents are not going to like it any more.

The Republicans are in trouble but Edwards plays right into their wheelhouse.

 

[Cypress]

This is just my opinion of course but Edwards is not winning the Democrat Primary. He MIGHT win Iowa but that would be it.

Talking hypothetical if he did win his raising taxes is a loser in the national election. Not that this board speaks for the entire country but there are three people on here I believe who will be voting for a Democrat candidate who say they disagree with his tax stand. Independents are not going to like it any more.

The Republicans are in trouble but Edwards plays right into their wheelhouse.

I don't see it that way.

Kerry, a totally weak candidate who was reputed to be "the number one liberal in the senate", almost beat an incumbent war president, on a plan to roll back tax cuts for the rich.

Edwards is way more charismatic than Kerry. And I don't see Romeny or Gulliani being a very strong GOP candidate.

Clinton won in 1992, with a plan to roll back reagans tax cuts for the wealthy.

 

[cawacko]

I don't see it that way.

Kerry, a totally weak candidate who was reputed to be "the number one liberal in the senate", almost beat an incumbent war president, on a plan to roll back tax cuts for the rich.

Edwards is way more charismatic than Kerry. And I don't see Romeny or Gulliani being a very strong GOP candidate.

Clinton won in 1992, with a plan to roll back reagans tax cuts for the wealthy.

While I don't agree with most of his positions I'm really impressed by Obama. He exudes leadership to me. I don't see Edwards in that manner.

And Darla I agree with you that candidates play to the base and then move to the middle during the general election I just think Edwards tax increase proposal will not fly.

 

[Cypress]

While I don't agree with most of his positions I'm really impressed by Obama. He exudes leadership to me. I don't see Edwards in that manner.

snip

Cawacko, I'm a little leery about your judgements about who can exude leadership qualities. Afterall, aren't you the guy who voted for the bumbling, jokey, incoherent Bush in 2000?

BTW: I actually do agree with you that Edwards sometimes doesn't strike me as a serious, and experienced statesman. He's sometimes seems a littel raw and inexperienced. I've got to give it to Hillary, in this area. She is sharp. She always has all the facts at her fingertips, and can cite them. And you can't ever catch her with her guard down - she always has a good answer, to everything. Man, she is sharp.

 

[doniston]

i have no Idea who will get the nod, it is much too early, but of the present crop, the only one which I think could be a good president is Richardson. Obama is too green, Clinton is too arrogant, etc.

 

[cawacko]

Cawacko, I'm a little leery about your judgements about who can exude leadership qualities. Afterall, aren't you the guy who voted for the bumbling, jokey, incoherent Bush in 2000?

That's like questioning my taste in woman when the only two options I have are a 3 and a 2.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Edwards is doing himself no favors. Who the hell is "they" that he keeps referring to? "The Man"? His rhetoric sounds like more a long shot candidate than a serious Presidential contender.



My DD* flags an intense minute and a half from John Edwards in Creston, Iowa, yesterday in which he heatedly tells an audience that the attention to trivia (I assume the reference here is to his haircuts) is "not an accident" and that "they want to shut me up" to silence his message about ending the war and universalizing health care.

He warns, in the video segment posted by his campaign, that if we don't beat back these unnamed oligarchs, "They're going to control the media. They're going to control what's being said."

He doesn't go into detail about who "they" are, other than a reference to people who make $100 million a year, and compares them to the (actual well-funded, conservative) operation that put the Swift Boat ads on air. He also doesn't explain exactly how this corporate-media collaboration works, but his audience seems to be rapt.

Here's from his remarks:

This stuff's not an accident. Nobody in this room should think this is an accident. You know, I'm out there speaking up for universal healthcare, ending this war in Iraq, speaking up for the poor. They want to shut me up. That's what this is about. "Let's distract from people who don't have health care coverage. Let's distract from people who can't feed their children.... Let's talk about this silly frivolous nothing stuff so that America won't pay attention."

They will never silence me. Never.

If we don't stand up to these people, if we don't fight em, if we don't beat them, they're going to continue to control this country. Thye're going to control the media. They're going to control what's being said. They do not want to hear us talking about health care for everybody.

*UPDATE: The person who posted the video to MyDD, Tracy Joan Russo, is actually an Edwards staffer who does blogger outreach. So the campaign must think this is a winning message. Also: A reader points out that there's a boom microphone in the shot; again, this is a message being delivered, not an inadvertently-captured departure.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0707/Edwards_They_want_to_shut_me_up.html

Sounds too much like another Huey Long demagogue for my liking. There's no candidate with more slime on him in the race than Edwards.

 

[Topspin]

bullshit Kerry looked straight into the camera and said no raise on taxes for those under $250,000 in income and he still lost be 3,000,000 votes.
Edwards is doing all he can as an extreem long shot, pander to the far lefties.