John Edwards could stand to learn a lesson or two about LOYALTY

[mtnsnake]

Imagine if Edwards is one of the quarterbacks fighting for top spot on a football team, and he ends up losing the starting position to the other guy. Lets say the coach then asks Edwards if he's still going to fight as hard for the team, even though he has to play second string. If Edwards doesn't reply positively to take it on the chin for the team, he'd be shown the door to the parking lot so friggin fast that he wouldn't have time to clean out his locker.

For his own good and the good of our party, he should wake up when it comes to being loyal.

[HardWorkingDem]

1. Where does this come from?

From what I saw the other night Edwards made it clear he will support the nominee regardless of who it is.

[mtnsnake]

3. lmao what else COULD he say at that point? The damage was already done

[skipos]

8. Maybe the poster is confusing Edwards with Kucinich? nt

[mtnsnake]

12. No one has to question Kucinich's loyalty ever. Pouty, OTOH, should get some lessons

in the art of being loyal instead of throwing tantrums at the sheer thought of someone else beating himself out. How spoiled can he act. Oh wait, I forgot he's the son of a mill worker, lol.

[skipos]

17. Uh, sure. Everyone loves Dennis. He is perfect.

:sarcasm:

[Andromeda]

19. Dennis is honest...

and speaks his mind. He's not my candidate but I agree with a lot of things he says.

Nobody is perfect but Dennis is a great human being and deserves respect.

[mtnsnake]

36. Amen on that. nt

[skipos]

66. "He's not my candidate" amen on THAT. nt

[Guaranteed]

2. And that goes for the rest of the non-Hillary candidates, as well!

They should all just drop out!

[mia]

6. uh-huh

:sarcasm:

[itsrobert]

7. Yes. They should all just give up before even one pratice game down has been played

Player:, "Coach, I want to be the QB, but I'll let the other guy have it"
Coach: "I see you don't have what it takes, you are a quitter. Clean out your locker and here's your bus ticket home."

[oasis]

4. John Edwards IS loyal.

To John Edwards.

[NewHampster]

13. Be nice

I think he's loyal to Liz and the kids too.

[dugggy]

29. You always look out for numero uno

n/t

[emilyg]

45. Yes.!

[onehandle]

5. You're saying this at so called "Democratic" Underground?

You must have been asleep for the last couple of years or so.

[mtnsnake]

9. Speaking of sleep deprivation, Rip Van Edwards needs to wake up!

Especially when it comes to being loyal. The guy acted like a spoiled little snob when he let it be known that he only support our Party's nominee depending who it is.

[NewHampster]

10. I'm a Democrat and I'm Underground

In my basement.

Edwards is a basically nice guy who drank too much Presidential cool aid.

He is running because he needs to be President so bad. Probably cries to liz every night that people are picking on him because of his nice hair when all he ever wanted to do was be President and fly in Air Force One.

[tkmorris]

42. Dude, what are you, 12 years old?

Treat the candidates with SOME respect at least, there is no call for this childish, snide, silliness. And no, I don't want to hear how everyone talks about Hillary that way, because not everyone does, and it doesn't make it right to do so in any case.

You are part of the "DU Primary Problem". Do us all a favor and knock it off huh?

[NewHampster]

51. Actually I'm a little over 16

[durrrty libby]

57. Lol you nailed it NH

:rofl:

[gmudem]

71. LMAO

You're saying this as a CLINTON supporter? I don't think I've ever seen irony literally drip out of my computer before.

[Silence Dogood]

74. Edwards belongs in Hollywood-

Tom Cruise, move over-

[JDPriestly]

80. Have you actually listened to Edwards ever?

Get out of your basement and into the real world. Or better yet, go to Edwards' website, listen to a few of his videos and then come back and let us know if you still hold this opinion. You are wildly out of touch with reality.

[Andromeda]

84. Lol..

That's very funny!

[blm]

11. Can you name Dems who have shown consistent defense of other Dems over the years

and what Dems can you name who HAVE NOT stuck their necks out to defend other Dems under attack or smear?

I'd like to see who you would place in the two categories.

I know which Dems I have noticed are consistently defending other Dems and which ones side with the attackers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

But then, that is the difference between good character and bad character. Not all Dems are of good character.

[mtnsnake]

14. No comment, because I know exactly where that is leading to

This thread is about Edwards and loyalty...his lack of it. It is not about Bill Clinton and Poppy Bush.

[HardWorkingDem]

15. Again, where is this coming from?

What is your point and where do you get the idea that Edwards is not a loyal Democrat?

[NewHampster]

20. It's about Dems not slitting each others throat to save the repugs the work

They love Edwards on the attack saying what they want to say in the general. They would never say those things about each other because the prime directive of the Repugs is not to attack each other.

Let the repugs attack Hillary and she'll be able to fight back but she will not openly attack a fellow dem.

[mtnsnake]

22. uhhh, when he refused to support Hillary last week if she got the nod for our party?

and when he made those vicious personal attacks upon her saying how she would be just another corrupt extension of Bush if she became president.

That's where it's coming from. When it comes to politics, John Edwards is only loyal to one person, himself.

[HardWorkingDem]

27. Um......did he lie?

Come now. Vicious personal attacks involve different things than pointing out who she takes money from. And frankly, he is right about the machine in Washington. Now, I don't recall him claiming Hillary was "corrupt." But I guess one could take an extreme implication of that by pointing out she takes money from the same sorts of Washington insiders.

And I don't recall him stating he would not support Hillary if she won the nomination. The only one I recall is Kucinich.

[tkmorris]

48. He didn't "refuse to support Hillary", and you know it

He said he wasn't going to talk about that at this point. Not the most "political" thing he could have said but it damned sure isn't a refusal to support anyone. It's time for ALL sides to stop these childish attacks on other candidates.

[mtnsnake]

50. yeah, maybe in your little world he didn't. nt

[JDPriestly]

81. Edwards did not refuse to support Hillary if she got the nomination.

The Edwards statement you are referring to asked him if he would support Hillary for president. That is a trick question. None of the candidates would answer it positively about another candidate at this time. Edwards is running himself at this time. He is not supporting Hillary at this time. Likewise, Hillary is running herself at this time. She is not supporting Edwards at this time. If Edwards is the candidate, Hillary will support him. The same goes for Edwards. When asked whether he will support the Democratic candidate for president, Edwards said he would. Your post is silly. Get real.

[mtnsnake]

88. We're talking about the OTHER time, not when he got asked at the debate. Gheesh

You can spin it any way you want, and make like you believe yourself, but it just doesn't matter because Edwads was already caught a week before the debate refusing to give his support to the Democratic nominee if it was Hillary when he was asked by the reporter. Only at the debate did he say he'd support her if she got the nod, and only in your dreams did he support her before that.

[JDPriestly]

98. Please provide a link for a quote of his words.

I don't want to read an MSM version of it? I want to know precisely what he was asked and how he responded. It is my understanding that he was asked whether he supported Hillary. That is a stupid question because if he supported Hillary at this time he would not be running himself. I heard that he answered "No." He gave the right answer to a stupid question. At the debate he was asked whether he would support the Democratic nominee in the general election. That is a fair question, and he answered "yes." You are making something of nothing. Edwards is a loyal Democrat.

In contrast, as I recall, the Clintons gave very little support to Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. There was some confusion about whether that was because their support was not wanted or because they were trying to pave the way for Hillary in 2008. Do you know anything about this?

[blm]

16. It's about which Dems ARE loyal to other Dems and which are NOT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg


Which Dems are people of GOOD character and which Dems are people of BAD character.

[NOVA_Dem]

70. When she stabbed Kerry in the back that's when I decided

she was a power-hungry opportunist.

[Silence Dogood]

75. I thought Kerry gave Clinton an endorsement

what do I know. The ElecCo is supposed to turn off my electricity tomorrow, if I don't pay my balance. I hope Obama wins after I gave him part of my electric bill money last month. Going to the Dollar Store tomorrow. They are having a sale on candles 5/$1.

[karynnj]

92. Kerry has endorsed NO ONE

He has each time asked made a very nice comment (related to what ever issue the earlier conversation was on - Iraq, Global Warming) that ALL the Democrats, inspite of policy differences are closer to each other than they are to any of the Republicans. That the difference on all the major issues is night and day between the Republicans and Democrats.

Senator Bob KerrEy is supposed to endorse Clinton today per the NYT.

[blm]

91. Evidently the backstabbing against Kerry in 2006 was nothing new -

Historian Douglas Brinkley in April 2004:
http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Woodward's observations on election night at the WH:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

[CherokeeDem]

23. Hey...

Wasn't it Kucinich who said he would support the nominee only if they supported withdrawing the troops immediately? I believe I remember Edwards answering a simply yes to the question.

My question to all of you...will you do the same after all of the flame baiting and name calling that is going on? I have very serious discussions with my friends and family regarding the candidates and many of us disagree but we respect each other. There a little lack of respect around DU for our fellow Democrats. I am an Edwards supporter with serious questions about Hillary Clinton but you know what, when November 08 comes around...I'll be voting Dem regardless of who it is. How about you? Let's not lose sight of the prize here people...we need to take this country back.

[blm]

25. Do we need to take this country back to STOP the continuing protection of secrecy and privilege

or do we take this country back in name only while the protection of BushInc, its agenda, and its secrecy and privilege is continued?

[CherokeeDem]

33. What Do You Think?

Honestly. I want this nation to stand for what it once stood for...human rights, protection of the poor and needy, health care for everyone, rights to privacy, being a friend to the world not a provocateur and protection of our environment. I am not and never have been for the support of corporate greed and corporate control of our lives. From your remarks...I am not certain at all what you are for or if you were questioning my loyalty. Seems to be a theme tonight.

[blm]

44. I'm an anti-corruption, open government Democrat and I am against those

who would continue the protection of BushInc because it has already come back to hurt this nation and our democracy.


http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

Who wants to pretend that we can afford this protection to continue?

[mtnsnake]

46. Well said

I don't disagree with most of what your saying, but when Ewards said yes the other night, it was already a week after his initial damage had been done when he showed everyone how disloyal he could be if he wanted to. It was a week before the debate when he refused to support Hillary if she got the nod and he went even further by describing her as just another corrupt extension of George Bush. No matter what he thinks of another candidate, you just don't go saying that kind of disloyal crap about a fellow Democratic candidate.

[Nutmegger]

18. Hogwash

Do you lay awake at night thinking up this nonsense?

[NewHampster]

21. so is Nutmeg grown in CT or is it the grinder thingies?

[mtnsnake]

24. no

It just comes to me, usually during the day, sometimes late at night, though.

[durrrty libby]

58. No need to "make it up" Lately JE makes pond scum look like

it has integrity

[blm]

93. Heh - you nailed it.

.

[NewHampster]

26. Not only disloyal but basically a coniving SOB

It’s true that for a few years as a young man Edwards’ father worked on the floor of a Roger Milliken textile mill. But Edwards père (a lifelong Republican, like his reactionary boss) quickly climbed upward, becoming a monitor of worker productivity as a “time-study” man — which any labor organizer in the South will tell you is a polite term for a stoolie who spies on the proletarian mill hands to get them to speed up production for the same low wages. Daddy Edwards’ grassing got him promoted to supervisor, then to plant manager — and he finally resigned to start his own business as a consultant to the textile industry. As a Boston Globe profile of Edwards put it last year, the senator never “notes that his father was part of management . . . ‘John was more middle class than most of us,’” says Bill Garner, a high school friend and college roommate.

The real truth about the Mill worker dad http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/a-populist-make-over/2034/

[mtnsnake]

35. Thank you for that article. That says it all. Looks like John inherited the art of disloyalty

from what that article says. Wow!

[NewHampster]

38. His father was what we called a Fink

a management spy

[durrrty libby]

62. AKA Dirty Rat Fink...

Wow he's slimier than I thought. Never knew the truth about his dad.

Man he tells that phony poor church mouse story so well

:eyes:

[mtnsnake]

63. I guess there's a reason he always pushes the son of a millworker routine all the time

Ever notice when someone pushes something about themselves ALL THE FRIGGIN TIME that they're just covering up the fact that they're really nothing like that? It's like some of the overzealous religious nuts who push it all the time how religious they are, hoping people won't really find out about all the skeletons they have in their closet. It's all a coverup. Same with someone like Edwards and his son of a millworker routine. He's trying to make his sheep think that he grew up in abject poverty or something, when all he does by pushing it so often is make everyone realize he's just covering up for the way he really is.

[durrrty libby]

68. Yep, pretty pathetic and disgusting. He thinks we are all chumps

[emilyg]

49. My ex and I were talking about this today. Thanks.

[pauldg0]

64. To Edwards supporters-don't let this Clinton implant discourage you.....

I am now A true John Edwards supporter used to support Hillary, but not now!!!! Check out her labor record with Indian Corporations in New York.

. I was a Republican and now a Democrat.
. I was a Industrial Engineer.
. And I am without my job, but not because I was an Industrial Engineer.
. We were taught in our trade to find faster, effective and efficient ways to utilize workers and machinery to be efficient to save time and money to compete.
. That is, compete so we do not lose our jobs and our company standing in the market place.
. If we replaced humans with machinery, it was for safety first, then efficiency second.....which resulted in a profit and the ability to compete and not close down.
. IF MACHINERY REPLACED MANPOWER, then those machines were in turn built by GOOD OLD AMERICAN COMPANIES like Ingersoll, Lamb and others...this is progress in America not China or India.
. Then what happens? Lobbyists bought out politicians and Corporate Executives to allow machines (low cost machines) from China, Japan, Germany, Korea and India. The results..the closure of our machinery manufacturers, etc., a domino effect....NOW WHO ALLOWED THAT!!!????

Your wrong "stupid ass" and you are a "stupid ass"....read your history books on labor & management in this country.

. John Edwards dad taught his son that if you work hard you can work your way to the top in this country.
. John Edwards wants AMERICANS TO COMPETE WITH AMERICANS TO RUN EFFICIENT COMPANIES IN AMERICA, not foreigners to take our jobs away because BIG SHOT CROOKS in Washington want their cut from lobbyists.


PLEASE VOTE FOR JOHN EDWARDS AND BRING BACK THE AMERICAN WORKER!!!!! I used to support HILLARY until I started listening to some of his speeches. He is genuine.


JOHN EDWARDS for PRESIDENT 2008

[mtnsnake]

65. 5 posts and you're already calling someone a Clinton transplant?

Welcome to DU! :evilgrin:

[pauldg0]

72. Thank you.

I didn't think it was that bad either. Thanks again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JOHN EDWARDS 08

[pauldg0]

73. Oh yes!!

I think this site seems the most objective for Democrats......

EDWARDS will ROCK YOU!!!

[Adelante]

96. Oy

You are a quick one :D

[pauldg0]

67. Sorry....Nobody is a stupid ass!!

John Edwards rocks......

Bring American workers back John!!!

Don't give them to India.

[JDPriestly]

82. Great post. You are absolutely right. Edwards stands for

American workers. And whoever stands for American workers stands for us all and stands for America. There is no America without the American workers and American industry. We cannot live without an industrial base, without work. If Hillary has her way, Americans will be reduced to slave wages.

[HardWorkingDem]

77. So then, you are saying we all must have...

the bad qualities of our father just because they are our father?

[dugggy]

28. This is the PRIMARY season for crying out loud...

Every person out there is trying to WIN!
Loyalty etc comes in AFTER the nomination. YOu don't wish
to annoit anyone this early do you?

[NewHampster]

31. Loyalty to the party not Hillary

Be loyal to the party by not tearing each other apart and giving the rethugs amo.

[dugggy]

59. How is stating "facts" tearing apart?

Why should everyone be required to "hide" facts in the name
of not hurting party? The republiks will bring them out later
anyway. By bringing the facts out sooner blunts the effect later
in general election.

[Reno.Muse]

30. this is one fecked up angry post. I just came from seeing JE in Reno today

and he opened with how lucky the Democrats are to have a great field of candidates to pick from compared to the Repugs.

So ...I must ask, are you a Hillary supporter?

[mtnsnake]

34. nice try

[rwheeler31]

32. Some of us want a democrtic party, not another corporate

party. He is doing the the right thing.

[1932]

37. Maybe his loyalty is to the fans and not to the team owners?

[NewHampster]

39. We are the owners

[1932]

41. Where do you live? Venezuela? US probably has a smaller percentage of employee-owned corporations

than the NFL has fan-owned teams, and I don't think any of the companies running america are employee-owned.

[NewHampster]

47. Small business rules America and always has

All big businesses started small.

But I meant we own the party. At least I do. I spent my Saturday at a NH DP planning event for the 2008 cycle. I'm just a voter who never ran for anything yet I am an owner of this party.

[1932]

52. First thing Bush did in office: cut funding for SBA. Big business controls America.

I don't think the people have owned the Democratic Party since FDR, and, possibly, Kennedy.

I really think Democrats like Larry Summers and Robert Rubin really own the party, and I don't think they're anything like George Ball, who got physically ill after having dinner with Adlai Stevenson and discovering how big-business friendly he was.

[mark414]

56. small businesses rule America?

ha!

[mtnsnake]

40. hmmm

I don't agree he's loyal even to the fans because if his past record means anything, he will probably make a huge shift back to center once he gets the nod (which he won't get, but for sake of speculation), for sake of the general election, so the people who think he's this progressive new guy on the block are only getting schmoozed over for a rude awakening to come.

I do like the premise of your subject line though! Well said!

:toast:

[1932]

43. He has set his agenda and it's clearly going to be his mandate if he wins--shift power to the people

The only reason I wouldn't want him to win is if I believed that shifting power to the people was bad.

His loyalty is clearly going to be to the fans, and he's obviously going to do what's right by the fans if he gets elected.

It's the rest of them I'm worried about. What do you think Hillary or Barack's mandate is going to be if they get elected?

[Mutineer]

53. Politicans don't serve people anymore

just the corporations who funnel the millions into their fat bank accounts.

[1932]

54. Which is at least one thing you and John Edwards agree on.

[tired_old_fireman]

55. You might need a lesson about LOYALTY as well.

Incessantly posting negative things about a democratic presidential candidate doesn't make you a loyal democrat.

[rwheeler31]

60. This was a good smart fight .

Can any of you get on the stupid TV??

[mtnsnake]

61. Yeah sure. Next?

[mmonk]

69. In other words, if Hillary wins, he should be humble and bow and recognize

she is the democratic party and holds the only democratic views, correct?

[madrchsod]

76. no ---we--should be humble

and bow to her.one must not question the leadership of the party.

[Forkboy]

78. C'mon dude, this is just bashing for the sake of bashing.

I could waste my time calling out a thousand posters here, but you're one of the ones I feel genuinely does care about where we are in this world. Please don't sink to the level that so many have decided is acceptable.Our party is, or should be, bigger than that. :shrug:

Peace.

[mtnsnake]

85. No way, Forky. It's constructive criticism for a candidate who could use some

Loyalty has always been a big issue for me, especially when it comes to friends and family. When it comes to politicians, the ones who don't have it stand out like a sore thumb. Thanks for your post, though. :)

[Forkboy]

95. Curses!!!! Foiled again!!

And it would have worked if it wasn't for those pesky kids and their dog!!! :)

[JDPriestly]

79. Actually, it's Hillary who needs to learn team play.

She seems to think she is the whole team. She doesn't seem to want anybody else to play. I have to say, the more I see of Hillary, the less I like her. She is greedy for power and success. She seems to hold her own interests above those of the party or of the country. I am shocked by her conduct.

[mtnsnake]

86. Oh really? It's Hillary who is setting the good example in this. She should be coach!

I don't see Hillary runnng around saying she will only support Democratic candidates she likes, nor did she go after any of the others by making two-bit personal attacks upon their character or saying they were an extension of Bush corruption, so enough with any nonsense that it's her who needs to learn team play. Gheeesh.

[JDPriestly]

97. I don't see Edwards saying he will only support Democrats

he likes. Do you have a link or citation to support your innuendo about Edwards? And what two-bit personal attacks on character are you talking about? Edwards is arguing generally that we should diminish the corporate influence in D.C.? Are you suggesting you disagree with that? Are you suggesting that Hillary disagrees with that? The fact is that Hillary among others is taking money from corporate lobbyists. Edwards is not taking money from corporate lobbyists. If Hillary thinks that telling the truth about her donors is a personal attack on her character, then that is her problem.

This corporate money issue is central to the corruption issue. And corruption is our best issue against the Republicans. We need clean government. Americans are sick of the dirty corporate dominated corruption in D.C. Edwards speaks to the American disgust with the corporate tools in D.C. If Hillary feels she is one such corporate tool, that is too bad. We need someone to go to D.C. on behalf of us the people, not on behalf of the big corporations. Edwards is promising to represent us and not the corporations. It is not a personal attack on Hillary to say you want to stop the corrupting influence of corporate lobbyists in D.C. It is standing up for Democratic principles.

So, I ask you one additional question? Do you like the fact that Hillary is accepting donations and funding from corporate lobbyists? If you do, then why do you care that Edwards does not like that fact. It's a difference, not a personal attack. He is not talking about Hillary's hair or her diamonds or pearls or Bill's philandering or anything personal about Hillary. He is talking about an issue of substance: taking doantions from corporate lobbyists and what that means about who you work for.

[last_texas_dem]

83. The Party Is Always Right.

Now is the time for all good men to shut up for the good of the party. Hillary Clinton is the frontrunner. Hillary Clinton has always been the frontrunner. The party is at war with Eastasia. The party has always been at war with Eastasia.

ON EDIT: Oh, I almost forgot! :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[MaineDem]

87. Lovely, a football analogy

I'm always so excited to pay attention to football analogies.

:eyes:

[mtnsnake]

89. Would you like a hockey one?

Maine is known for its fine hockey teams, especially UMaine. What if two goalies were fighting for the number one spot, and.....ahhhh, never mind :)

[Fierce]

90. Sheesh...I wish football teams were run like that.

I might actually watch football again.

[Life Long Dem]

94. Yes John, show loyalty and bow down to Bush.

You know, like the rest of the dems in congress do.