Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The American people deserve to know their presidency is not for sale" John Edwards!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 03:54 PM
Original message
The American people deserve to know their presidency is not for sale" John Edwards!
, "The American people deserve to know that their presidency is not for sale, the Lincoln Bedroom is not for rent, and lobbyist money can no longer influence policy in the House or the Senate."

This is a courageous and 100% correct statement that all concerned citizens should support! Thank you John for speaking the truth!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great statement!
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. That's probably why it isn't liked.Too positive! And factual.
Edited on Thu Aug-23-07 04:18 PM by saracat
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. Why are people taking this comment as a direct slam on Hillary?
It seems pretty self-explanatory as such rhetoric goes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. because he 'dared ' to include the Lincoln Bedroom , which is viewed as a slam at the Clinton Admin.
The fact that Bush "rented" out the Lincoln Bedroom to supporters isn't even considered or the fact that both admins were "wrong" to do so! Whatever. This is just a pathetic response by the "haters' looking for scraps!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. Too bad he doesn't practice what he preahes. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. You again?
Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted NO on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Voted YES on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES to Increase subsidies for women-owned non-profit business. (Mar 2004)
Rated 15% by the US COC, indicating an anti-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on $1.15 billion per year to continue the COPS program. (May 1999)
Voted NO on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999)
Rated B- by VOTE-HEMP, indicating a pro-hemp voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction. (Apr 2001)
Rated 83% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
Voted NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)
Voted NO on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
Voted NO on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior. (Jan 2001)
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-family voting record.
Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on establishing free trade between US & Singapore. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on establishing free trade between the US and Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Voted NO on expanding fee trade to the third world. (May 2000)
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. (Dec 2002) THIS WAS LOWEST CATO RATING FOR ANYONE RUNNING IN '04
Voted YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
Voted NO on require photo ID (not just signature) for voter registration. (Feb 2002)
Voted YES on funding for National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES to require health insurance for every child. (Aug 2003)
Voted NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Jun 2003)
Voted YES on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted YES on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
Voted NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted YES to let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations. (May 2003)
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES to end government propaganda on Medicare bill. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on adopting the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on military pay raise of 4.8%. (Feb 1999)
Voted YES to federalize aviation security. (Nov 2001)
Voted YES to hiding sources made post-9-11 analysis impossible. (Jul 2004)
Voted YES to CIA depends too heavily on defectors & not enough on HUMINT. (Jul 2004)
Voted YES to administration did not pressure CIA on WMD conclusions. (Jul 2004)
Voted NO on repealing Clinton's ergonomic rules on repetitive stress. (Mar 2001)
Voted NO on killing an increase in the minimum wage. (Nov 1999)
Rated 100% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted NO on using the Social Security Surplus to fund tax reductions. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999)
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on More tax cuts and tax credits for 98% of Americans. (Jul 2004)
Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Voted YES on increasing tax deductions for college tuition. (May 2001)
Voted NO on phasing out the estate tax ("death tax"). (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Rated 22% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. So he gets a cookie for doing what he is supposed to do?
And a pass for errors that negatively effect the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.

Its nice to know people are so easily fooled by political rhetoric.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. And what have you done for us? Seems like Edwrds has done a lot right AND admitted
he was wrong when he was wrong! More than some candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I wasn't hired to do a job.. and then failed miserably doing it. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. That wasn't what I asked but whatever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Sure it is, John Edwards IS for sale.. just not for cash.
But he will alter his principles wherever the votes are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. You seem incapable of answering a direct question.Oh well. Bye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. You didn't ask one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. So doing the right thing with a few admitted mistakes
isn't good enough?

I just countered your whole "his voting record SUCKS" rhetoric from last night and that's all you have to say?

Lame. Worse than lame.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Not even close.
You either do what you are hired to do or you don't.

Doing what you are SUPPOSED to do most of the time, isn't even close to good enough.

Missing the mark on the major votes = a bad voting record.

That's just reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. However do you live with yourself as perfect as you must be?
There is NO candidate on earth that could meet your criteria of perfection.I think you just have "issues " with Edwards and it may be jealousy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. I do my job properly.
If I made the type of mistakes Edwards made, my company would go under. It doesn't, because I am far more thoughtful and careful than Edwards.

I also don't sell out my principles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #19
28. I know I wouldn't want to work for you...
You'd suck as a boss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 03:41 AM
Response to Reply #28
31. Don't worry, anyone who falls for Edwards' BS couldn't get hired. (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 03:47 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. As if I'd WANT the job.
I've worked for enough assholes in my life already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 03:49 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. I can tell by the politicians you apologize for (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. As an old girlfriend used to say
"If you can't say something meaningful, say something surreal."

That last comment was right out of her playbook. Nice job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 03:56 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. You really couldn't figure that out? Wow... that's powerful stupid (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 04:02 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. Yep, that's me. Powerful stupid.
That's how I end up on the Greatest page just about every day. And how I became a published author. I'm powerful stupid.

It's almost a super power.

Now go away, kid. You bother me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. LMAO!!!
You know you are scraping the bottom of the barrel when you have to stand behind "published author" and the "greatest page".

I guess that explains why you shill for Edwards... real critical thinking passed you by.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AdHocSolver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 02:51 AM
Response to Reply #19
30. You remind me of the pharmacist who refused to fill a customer's prescription for estrogen...
because his "principles" told him that women shouldn't be allowed to have any medicine that could serve as "birth control".

Moreover, I not only would never want to have you as a "boss", I wouldn't want to do any business with you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. Guess we are lucky we have politicians with no principles, eh?
Who would want them to get in the way... we might end up with less people killed in Iraq that way.

As I said to the other Edwards apologist, you coulnd't get hired if you tried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
8. I guess he just sells his principles for votes, instead of cash. (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Pfft.You just hate EdwardsI
:9 :9 :9 :9 :9
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Because he sold out his principles... seems like a good reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AdHocSolver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #8
29. This is how a representaive in a representative form of government should act.
A representative is supposed to act in the interests of their constituents, which means the people who provide the most votes. The problem that we have faced in the last several years is the repesentatives acting in the interests of those who pay the most cash, which happens often to be contrary to the interests of those who have provided the most votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #29
35. So majority always rules, eh?
Whatever the whim of the population is, so should blow the politician.

Anti-black is okay by you, as long as the majority goes for it, right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
9. Will one of you kind-hearted Edwards supporters please come to this thread
Edited on Thu Aug-23-07 04:55 PM by Totally Committed
and answer the question posed in this post? I am absolutely honestly sincere about wanting to know, and only one of you can answer this for me!

Here's the post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3471103#3471347

Thanks!

TC




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
17. I so agree with Edwards on this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
21. I think it's awful, a horrible thing to say about the Clintons
I think perpetuating this kind of hateful politics is part of what's wrong with this country - and I think perpetuating the sorriest of right wing myths is always wrong.

Edwards needs to fire Trippi because that's why he's losing - same reason Dean lost. Too crazed, too far left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Nonsense. It was bad when Bush Sr,did it, and Bush did it and bad when Clinton did it.Why should t
they get a pass? Hillary wants to run on Bill's record, she has to accept responsibility for the bad as well as the good. Lest we forget , Edwerads is running against her.What should he do, send her flowers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-23-07 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. They were nothing like Bush
I don't like their economic policies, I think they favor the upper 50% and don't care about anybody else. But I don't think they had oil companies writing energy laws, or pushed mountain top coal mining, or would have let these Chinese toxic products in the country, or would have thrown kids off SCHIP, or a whole host of things the Bush's have done. I think we can do better, but I know we can also do a whole lot worse. Edwards is making the same mistake Dean did, too radical, too far left. He needs to fire Trippi and hire, actually Will Pitt would do a better job than Trippi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. I'didn't say they were"like " Bush but the Lincoln bedroom was doled out by all those admins!
Edited on Fri Aug-24-07 01:09 AM by saracat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrokenBeyondRepair Donating Member (642 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 01:58 AM
Response to Original message
27. not for sale anymore.. new owner plans to keep for a while
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 24th 2024, 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC