****New Orleans blogger: John Edwards used New orleans as a Photo-Op****

[rhombus]

It is a very sad and somber post. Please read the whole thing.

Some excerpts:

As of today, the phrases “New Orleans,” “Gulf Coast,” and “Katrina” do not appear once on his campaign’s issue page, blog, or homepage. As a result, Googling "John Edwards New Orleans" brings up a number of news stories and blogs, but nothing official from the Edwards camp. In a speech last week here at Dartmouth, Edwards barely mentioned New Orleans – it only got a passing half sentence while he discussed the broader issue of poverty. In his reply to the President’s State of the Union address, he does not criticize the President for failing to mention hurricane recovery, and in fact does not even mention the region himself. In post-SOU interviews, Edwards only talked about New Orleans when CNN's Anderson Cooper directly asked him about it - the issue didn't come up with CNN's Larry King or MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough. And most recently, a front-page article in yesterday's New York Times about Edwards' campaign gives no mention to New Orleans, probably because it just didn't come up in the reporter's time with Edwards (though the article does have some nice coverage of the Dartmouth event!). For a man who brought hundreds of student volunteers to the city last spring, this neglect was shocking, unexpected, and depressing.


If you watch his campaign announcement, which I’ve included at the end of this post, you’ll see that while he does highlight the issue of New Orleans recovery, he does not discuss specifics or give solutions. Katrina is merely his backdrop and photo-op.


One comes to expect this level of neglect from some politicians, but from John Edwards, the populist champion of the poor? Through his volunteer push and campaign announcement, Edwards pretends to focus on New Orleans, but when he has the chance to actually do something about it, he passes the chance right up.

http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/02/truth-about-john-edwards-and-new.html





Very sad commentary on a supposedly working man's politician. I'm getting the sense that Edwards is not authentic, the new John Edwards seems to be trying too hard to be different from the real John Edwards. The message and the messenger should always mesh. I'm not getting that from John Edwards. And I think its shows the level to which some politicans would pander to get our votes.

[haymark]

1. I'm disappointed

I thought Edwards was the real deal and now it looks like he is just another political reptile.

[wryter2000]

3. What a coinkydink

You and the OP have the same number of posts. 127

[Cassandra]

11. And 127 posts over nearly a year...

does not a major contributor to the dialogue make.
At this point I am just suspicious of any poster, even high count ones, going out of their way to dig up dirt on a Dem and showcase it.

[snowbear]

26. Very strange....

The first guy posts the negative "blogger" story..

Then the second guy comes running like a bat out of hell to agree with it.

I think you have something there.



Huh.

[madfloridian]

29. You call it tag-teaming. I am very familiar with the tactic.

.

[JNelson6563]

84. Such efforts usually involve these guys

The usual suspects...



;-)

[wryter2000]

2. What's worse...

I hear he has a HOUSE. HOUSEHOUSEHOUSEHOUSEHOUSE

[PresidentObama]

4. Not surprising.

It was clear it was an photo-op from the moment I saw the footage. I have nothing against John Edwards, he is one of the better candidates in the Democratic field. And to me, it at least promoted his OneCorps organization and brought the issue of Katrina to the forefront as one of Bush's big blunders. Maybe the Edwards campaign could have and should have done more with the issue, but such is life. Possibly just a missed opportunity of his campaign!

[Buzz Clik]

5. Earthshattering. A politician acting like a politician.

[katsy]

6. oh puhleeese.

This is nothing but a shameless hit piece.

I'm holding out for a Gore/Clark ticket but I really like Obama and Edwards also. I'm not an Edwards groupie but I could vote for him without "holding my nose" and without regret. He'd make a fine President and the above is nothing but a stupid hit piece.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

43. Not a hit piece

It's not a hit piece - it's issue-orienged factually correct. You could call the post I made on Free Dartmouth about him a hit piece, but any political posts on Wayward focus only on a candidate's stance on New Orleans. I don't like Obama, but made a positive post about his traveling to NOLA for Committee hearings. I love Dodd, he's one of my top three personal choices for the nomination, but I criticized him very heavily for what he told me about New Orleans. I'm a Biden supporter, and I'll post about his comments next month - if I like them, I'll say so, but if I don't like them, I'll say that too even though I support him.

Wayward Episcopalian: Nathan in New Orleans is an issue-driven blog, not a candidate-driven one.

[katsy]

81. Yes it is a hit piece.

Did the students he bought to NO do anything except pose for the camera? Do you address the positive of his visit at all?

I have no problem with him doing a photo op to bring attention to conditions in NO.

[KoKo]

7. Dunno about this...The Blogger has link to "Joe Biden for Pres." on his Site

which might mean some loyalty there to another candidate who might like to spread some disinfo about Edwards. :shrug:

[Wayward Episcopalian]

44. You're Right

You're right, I am a Biden supporter, but Wayward is an issue-blog, not a candidate-blog, so I removed the link. It was innapropriate to put it up in the first place, thanks for highlighting that.

I wrote this in response to another comment above:

"Political posts on Wayward focus only on a candidate's stance on New Orleans. I don't like Obama, but made a positive post about his traveling to NOLA for Committee hearings. I love Dodd, he's one of my top three personal choices for the nomination, but I criticized him very heavily for what he told me about New Orleans. I'm a Biden supporter, and I'll post about his comments next month - if I like them, I'll say so, but if I don't like them, I'll say that too."

BTW, I would never spread disinfo. Facts are facts - and if the facts about your candidate and about the others aren't enough to justify your decision, why did you make it in the first place? No, look at what's being said, not who's saying it. And what was said in my blog is all factually accurate.

[mzmolly]

68. Where is your critique of the administration/party responsible for this mess?!

Welcome :hi:

[Wayward Episcopalian]

71. Read my blog

It's not in this post. But my blog is made up of almost 70 posts so far with more to come, so I don't need to cram it all into this one post.

My blog could have more criticism of Bush, to be fair, but that's for two specific reasons:
1) The biggest direct Bush mistakes were in the immediate wake of the storm, way before my blog started. Mistakes since then are his responsibility because his people made them, but he himself didn't make them directly (FEMA, HUD, Corps).
2) I certainly criticize those specific mistakes - I had one a couple days ago about the Road Home program (LA-adminsitered, HUD funded). I could mention Bush more often with those criticisms, and maybe I should, but I don't want Wayward to seem like a partisan blog. I'm trying to push a specific issue, and the broader my audience the better.

[mzmolly]

72. I searched for "Bush" and came up empty. I did browse the blog.

No luck.

As for Bush not making mistakes, you're wrong. Did you see the video of Mike Brown briefing the idiot? Bush is ultimately responsible because he's incompetent and uncaring, and there is ample evidence that a different President would have merited a different result. Further, it was recently announced that Bush withheld "help" for the people of NO for political reasons.

As for your attempt to appear nonpartisan, you're not doing very well. You reserve criticism for Democrats, who were not in a position to do anything until a few weeks ago.

I have a sneaking suspicion that you're a late comer to the "Democrat" Party?

[Wayward Episcopalian]

75. Bush

Don't know why you had no luck, look here: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/01/bush-new-orleans-not-worth-mentioning.html
Then there's this: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/02/louisiana-health-care-news.html
This criticizes Powell, Bush's Katrina czar: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/01/senate-committee-holds-hearings-in-new.html
Copied Herbert's column here: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/01/new-orleans-in-nyt.html
"Government incompetence" tag: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/search/label/government%20incompetence

There'd be more, but the blog started in September. And in regards to this discussion, I didn't say he didn't make any mistakes - I said the bulk of his direct mistakes were made in the immediate aftermath (which was any dealings with Brownie would have happened). And I said that since then, his responsibility for mistakes has been indirect, as they've been made by underlings. He's still responsible, but my criticism has been directed at those underlings since he's so damn detached from it all.

Nope. First of all, I'd be one to complain about the "ic" being left off. :) Big Dean supporter starting in '02. Volunteered for the NHDP in '05 city elections in Manchester. Worked on campaigns in Spokane, WA for Goldmark, Cantwell, and local races, in LA for Karen Carter, and in NH for Hodes and Lynch in '06. Hoping to work on the NH primary, then in the general on the campaign to defeat Sununu. Am with Biden now, as other posters have observed. (Can't go back much farther than that, since I'm such a youngin'.)

[noamnety]

82. This is a philosophical difference between us

"Political posts on Wayward focus only on a candidate's stance on New Orleans" <-- I don't think you can separate the issues out as if they aren't all connected.

As long as our tax dollars are going to fund the war, no amount of rhetoric or policy changes (whether it's on the front page of a blog, the issues page, or anywhere else) is going to solve the problems on the gulf coast. What's required is a big shift in the attitudes toward class warfare, imperialistic warfare, corporate warfare, etc.

That's where my problem with Edwards comes from - not that he didn't talk about Katrina in his 5 most recent blog posts, or that his posts are or aren't being indexed by google. The problem is that he's talking the same way about Iran that he did about Iraq, as if there is no connection between homeless people here, and people we are making homeless over there. He's actively promoting the idea of making yet another gulf coast disaster for another country.

Until we cut off our economic reliance on the military industrial complex as a nation, anything we do in the gulf coast is at best a band-aid slapped on the symptom of what's really a much larger infection. We got our own gulf coast here in Detroit, and it's been going on for years. FEMA and BushCo screwed up the Katrina relief effort in a massive way, there's no denying that, but the problems that remain in that area now - racism and exterminism - aren't unique to that area, and they get to something much deeper that nobody's dealing with.

[madfloridian]

8. Unfair hit piece. I know....no more Dems should go to New Orleans.

When Howard Dean and the DNC committee spent hours of community work there in the spring...when they had photos taken in the lower 9th...they were accused of a photo op.

That's the solution...no more Dems to NOLA.

[madfloridian]

9. Hey...you want photo op pictures....here you go. That's a hit piece.

http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?q=new%20orleans&w=48849913%40N00&m=pool

[Cha]

35. They should throw that "photo op"

business right back in their collective slacker face.

Dean, Edwards, and Pitt-Jolie, ect are bringing attention and focus on New Orleans because they need HELP!

The Minister from the local Unitarian Universalist Church here in town is going down in two weeks on her kids winter break to help build houses in anyway she can!

[Wayward Episcopalian]

56. Going to NOLA

I'm thrilled he's gone to NOLA and highlighted the issue, but that's the role of a cultural leader. A political leader can be a cultural leader too, but must also propose policy and have substance. On NOLA, Edwards hasn't done that.

[mzmolly]

73. Uhm, Edwards isn't in office. BUSH and the REPUBLICANS who you don't mention

are/were.

[Virginia Dare]

10. I'm getting the sense that you're trashing John Edwards..

Every politician panders for votes, even the one that has successfully pandered for yours whoever that might be.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

45. Sure

But I want them to pander with substance and policy proposals, not empty platitudes and fancy rhetoric.

[mzmolly]

74. Where is Biden's substance and policy proposal on New Orleans?

I'm looking for it on his website, to no avail?

[Wayward Episcopalian]

76. Biden on NOLA

You won't find Richardson, either, who I also like, or HRC and Kucinich, who I don't. Why? Just give me time. I've only so far done Edwards, Dodd, and to a lesser extent Obama, but that's because I just started, all three were in the last week or two. Since I'm in NH, I like to meet or at least see the candidate before writing. I'll make a post about Biden later this month, after I've actually talked to the Senator on the 27th. Just give me time.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

77. And

And if it's not on his website when I research my post, I'll mention it and complain about it, the same way I did Edwards.

[madfloridian]

12. If one person posts a useless hit piece....then others start.

You really should edit it or something.

[Adelante]

13. It isn't a New Orleans blogger from the profile

He spent time in NOLA volunteering in 2006, but seems to live in Idaho and would appear to be a Biden supporter.

[saltpoint]

14. Give this a try. Edwards' announcement in the 9th ward intended to

and succeeded in exposing the Bush administration's disconnection from its proper role as servants of the people.

Government is not an agency that Michael Brown runs. It is of, for and by the people, ALL the people, even ones who do not benefit from Mr. Bush's vulgar tax breaks for the wealthy few.

Edwards chose that venue well, his words were to the point, and his campaign will continue to inspire, despite this New Orleans blogger, whose intent serves no one and seeks to divide many.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

57. Highlighting

As I said on an above comment just now, "I'm thrilled he's gone to NOLA and highlighted the issue, but that's the role of a cultural leader. A political leader can be a cultural leader too, but must also propose policy and have substance. On NOLA, Edwards hasn't done that."

My intent is to post and show what all the candidates really have to say about NOLA. I've done it on Dodd and Edwards so far, and to a lesser extent on Obama. My own candidate is Biden, and once I've talked to him about NOLA (I'm in NH so will do so), I'll post what he has to say, even if I don't like it. Edwards has done more than any other candidate in highlighting it, but he hasn't actually said anything substantive. (Of course, my posts on Dodd et all haven't/won't get the same attention as my Edwards post, because the netroots flock to anything labeled "John Edwards.")

[saltpoint]

83. I don't divide the political world any more than necessary between

"policy" and "campaigning," nor do I refuse to divide them when they overlap.

The distinction being made, whether it would accrue this or that specific component for a potential Edwards White House, must be made by public figures when someone like George Bush has so flagrantly failed to respond to the needs of American citizens. Not coincidentally, the NOLA citizens he turned his back on were predominantly Afro-American, and also not coincidentally, a similarly large percentage of that group of people are not the beneficiaries of Mr. Bush's tax cuts.

Edwards' words in New Orleans spoke to this disparity and called it immoral. I stand with Edwards.

[Bethany Rockafella]

15. Thank you for parading this on DU with all the *******************

:eyes:

[madfloridian]

17. Hey, well it got 3 recommends already...how about that?

What a hit piece.

[Bethany Rockafella]

19. Trolls can recommend threads too.

In case you didn't know.

[madfloridian]

28. Yeh, I know. But there are no rules anymore. Anything goes.

So I recommended it also to let people see what is going on here.

[gratuitous]

16. Let's see, Edwards is not in office

He made his announcement for a run in New Orleans, which of course is always a photo op sort of thing. But he brought a crew of volunteers to the area last spring, and did some hands-on work in the area.

Weighing the totality of the events, I'd have to say that Edwards, a private citizen, appears to have done more for New Orleans than the President of the United States. Not sure what the beef is here.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

47. The Beef

As a citizen, Edwards has done wonders. As a cultural leader, he's amazing - but he's not a cultural leader, he's a political leader. No, he doesn't have office, but he's asking us to give him one, and he hasn't told us what he would actually DO on this issue if we gave him that office.

Yes, he's done more than the President or any other politician - which is like saying the U.S. isn't as bad as Saddam so what's the problem with Abu Ghraib? Being #1 isn't always enough. You musn't look at what others have done; you must look at what you can do alone.

[jilln]

18. seems to me Edwards has done more for the area than the POTUS and many of its residents...

It's not the only issue out there. He doesnt' have to be focused on it 100%.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

49. Of course not

No, he doesn't. But I would like it to at least be on his issues page. And the fact is, at least in his Dartmouth speech (which was on CSPAN three times and in the NYT), he gave India's caste system more attention than he did NOLA. And in none of his high-profile SOTU interviews?

It's not that he gives it no attention, it's just that it's not high-profile attention. And when he does talk about it, nothing he says has substance or addresses the real policy issues - Road Home/HUD money, FEMA mistakes and bad FEMA policy, Corps failure, discrepencies between federal responses to MS and LA, etc.

And as I said above, yeah, he's done more than the President or any other candidate, but the US isn't as bad as Saddam - did that make Abu Ghraib ok? Of course not. You don't measure a man by comparing him to the rest of the current crop; you look at what he's done versus what he says he's done and what he could do.

[Beaverhausen]

20. So it's Edward's fault what topics he is asked about on news shows?

This is just ridiculous.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

48. No, but...

He can spin his answers, frame them, etc.

And if you watch the interviews, you'll see Cooper asked if it surprised him that Bush didn't mention NOLA. Edwards said yes. Then King asked him if anything in the speech surprised him - Edwards said no. That would have been the perfect opportunity to take the issue and run with it.

[madfloridian]

21. If you ignore a hit piece thread, does it go away? No, it doesn't.

I wish the rules would not allow an obvious hit piece like this, but the rules here have changed here. That makes me sad, it means anyone can just make up stuff and post it.

I thought we were better than that.

If we put a thread like this on ignore....it is still on the greatest page for people to see.

[izzybeans]

22. I don't know about this story but that pic certainly leaves a whole lot to be desired

If this story is an exaggeration the author sure picked a convincing picture.

At best Edwards looks pompous. You'd think these politicians would wise up to the public not being so gullible and at least get his jeans dirty and misplace a hair follicle or too. In fact, if your media guru doesn't insist that you get a little dirty during such a photo-op I suggest firing the manager.

But somehow I find this story a bit hard to believe.

[jberryhill]

23. The real laugh line here is:

"For a man who brought hundreds of student volunteers to the city last spring, this neglect was shocking, unexpected, and depressing."

It sounds like the "what did the Romans ever do for us" gag from Life of Brian.

[madfloridian]

24. So if I just make up crap against a candidate, can I get recommends...

and get on the greatest page? Just wondering.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

50. Oh, wait...

Did I make that stuff up about his SOTU interviews, his campaign announcement, his webpage, and his latest big speech? If you read the statement, watch the interviews, watch the announcement, scour the prominent parts of his page that I mentioned, and watch the speech on CSPAN, will I be proven wrong? Did I make up that "crap"?

[JohnLocke]

25. Wow. You're really desperate now (nt).

[madfloridian]

27. Recommending this so that more can see how hateful people here are...

I think that is important. It is important to see it, to show it. The election process is just getting started. The right wing Christians, I hesitate to call them Christians....are out after Edwards.

People are coming here like in droves to attack him.

I have decided to defend him against this hatred.

[snowbear]

31. Well.. the good news is the Mods "tombstoned" Haymark !!

Kudos to our Moderators ~~

[madfloridian]

32. Good, if the durn thread could just go away.

:hi:

[Wayward Episcopalian]

42. "Right wing Christians"

I'm a Christian, but am hardly right wing. I'm a western Democrat in the mold of Schweitzer and Tester. I write for my school's liberal biweekly newspaper, funded by Campus Progress. I've campaigned hard for a number of Democrats, most recently Karen Carter in New Orleans. I'll be voting in the NH Democratic primary. After Jesus, RFK is my biggest hero. My blog was not a hit piece, as I'll blog about all candidates equally (including the one I've decided to support), and it was certainly not drive by right wing views.

[Strawman]

30. I think he is sincere on the issue of poverty/economic opportunity

Other issues, I'm less sure about his thinking, but I don't question his sincerity there.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

51. Sincerity

His sincerity, no. His substance, yes.

[Strawman]

59. Actually I think his substance is fine too. His capacity is questionable

The guy has assembled on center on these issues, consulted with experts and come up with some interesting proposals. The substance is as good as anyone else's on this issue. Probably better than most.

The question in my mind isn't his substance on these issues. It's his capacity to make it happen in office. What kind of leverage would President Edwards have compared to President Hillary Clinton? Is he actually going to be able to deliver something more tangible than beautiful promises and smart proposals.

What kind of base of power does he have?

[Wayward Episcopalian]

60. Good Point

Good questions as well, thanks for raising them.

Not to question you, but do you have a link to any substantive proposals of Edwards' on New Orleans, beyond "let's have a national dialogue about this," "volunteer," and "Bush hasn't done enough"?

He does have substance on poverty, but I've yet to see any other rebuilding the Gulf Coast. If I see some, I'll certainly (partially) amend my criticisms. I'm not here to bash Edwards for the sake of bashing Edwards, I'm here to push the Gulf Coast, so if you have a link I'd love to see it.

[Strawman]

61. His campaign site seems short on details, but

I would imagine the specific anti-poverty policy ideas would come from the work done at the center he recently headed at UNC.

Here is some of their work:
http://law.unc.edu/Centers/details.aspx?ID=425&Q=3

I do not know all of the specific details of his anti-poverty proposals or his specific ideas on New Orleans. It's more of a sense that I have based on what I have read about him being very enagaged with the academic discussion of this issue.

That's all well and good, but I have less confidence in his ability to actually implement these ideas as President Edwards.

And if my criteria for voting in the primaries is to support a candidate's ideas and try to help give them a hearing, Dennis Kucinch's ideas are simply closer to my own. John Edwards has some good ideas on poverty, but so does Dennis. And Dennis' ideas about our relationship to the rest of the world are important, whereas John Edwards' are really not all that unique or helpful in moving our conversation on these issues in a more progressive direction.

But I do think, to his credit, that Edwards is trying to change the national conversation on poverty and economic issuesand move it in a direction away from the neo-liberal, free trade, anti-government, Wall Street dominated talk of Reagan Republicans and Bob Rubin, DLC Democrats. Hopefully that can provide a foundation that will allow (and even compel) a future Democratic president to govern that way.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

64. Agreed

"But I do think, to his credit, that Edwards is trying to change the national conversation on poverty and economic issuesand move it in a direction away from the neo-liberal, free trade, anti-government, Wall Street dominated talk of Reagan Republicans and Bob Rubin, DLC Democrats."

I agree, thanks for saying that. I am so thrilled Edwards is out there attempting to change the discourse, which is why I'm so dissapointed in his lack of substance on many issues, including the Gulf Coast (though no longer general poverty, he does have proposals from that, regardless of their source). I feel changing the discourse is something we need in a political leader, but it's not the only thing we need, and he doesn't offer the rest.

[Strawman]

65. Right

I just kind of feel that given his rhetorical talents on talking about fundamental issues of fairness, that by being so ambiguous lately and trying to sound hawkish on Iran and stuff like that, he's kind of really let me down and he's not doing his job. And he needs to be a bit more cosmopolitan in his notions of fairness.

If he morphs into something more like Hillary to get elected, what do we get with John Edwards? A less effective pol than Hillary trapped inside the box of DLC talk. Someone who won't even be able to deliver those incrementially beneficial changes as effectively as Hillary could. Might as well just have Hillary.

John Edwards needs to try and get elected being John Edwards. Same with Obama. If you get elected by being like Hillary, you're going to have to govern by being like Hillary. Put your own vision out there and find out if the country is ready for you. If they are, you'll win and you'll be able to govern your way (at least to the extent that is possible for any President).

If I could say anything to Edwards it would be this: think through your ideas about fairness, bring them to the table and fight for them, goddamn it! But what do I know? Conventional wisdom says gauge your rhetoric to the polls and that's what he seems to be doing.

[huskerlaw]

33. OH JEEBUS.

This statement says it all:
For a man who brought hundreds of student volunteers to the city last spring, this neglect was shocking, unexpected, and depressing.


Yes, that's right. He brought hundreds of volunteers. Unless they only picked up a hammer when a camera was on them, that's not a photo op. That's actually helping out.

And now the blogger, and the OP, want to smear him because he doesn't TALK about Katrina?

That's just plain stupid.

Which is better? A politician who talks about it all the time, in an attempt to win votes, or a politician who actually DOES SOMETHING, but doesn't force it into a conversation every time there's a camera in his face?

Frankly, if he did the latter, he'd be accused of using it for his personal gain. Kinda like Bush and 9/11. So really, damned if he does, damned if he doesn't, isn't he?

PS: Find me a candidate who's done more to help Katrina victims than Edwards has. I dare you. In the meantime, STFU.

[madfloridian]

34. That's the problem when people can post just anything...

Maybe just calling attention to the fact it's a hit piece is the best we can do under the new rules here. I am not going to put threads on ignore, especially when they are on greatest page. I want to see what is going on.

This is a ridiculous hit piece.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

52. Hit Piece

I wrote this in response to a different comment, just want to make sure you see it too:

"It's not a hit piece - it's issue-orienged factually correct. You could call the post I made on Free Dartmouth about him a hit piece, but any political posts on Wayward focus only on a candidate's stance on New Orleans. I don't like Obama, but made a positive post about his traveling to NOLA for Committee hearings. I love Dodd, he's one of my top three personal choices for the nomination, but I criticized him very heavily for what he told me about New Orleans. I'm a Biden supporter, and I'll post about his comments next month - if I like them, I'll say so, but if I don't like them, I'll say that too even though I support him.

Wayward Episcopalian: Nathan in New Orleans is an issue-driven blog, not a candidate-driven one."

[Wayward Episcopalian]

58. Re: OH

I just posted this in reply to a different comment: "I'm thrilled he's gone to NOLA and highlighted the issue, but that's the role of a cultural leader. A political leader can be a cultural leader too, but must also propose policy and have substance. On NOLA, Edwards hasn't done that."

He's done something, but that something isn't the roll of a presidential candidate. And you're right, no other candidate has done more than he has - but that's like saying we're not as bad as Saddam, so there's nothing wrong with Abu Ghraib or Gitmo. That's not the right comparison to make. Don't say he's number one on the issue, so it's ok. Compare what he does to what he says he does and to what he could be doing. (There are, btw, plenty who have done more for NOLA than Edwards - they're just not politicians.)

"In the meantime, STFU."
No.

[tishaLA]

36. This post is almost as bad

as when a poster pretended that Sen. Obama supported privatizing social security! LOL! And used the word of a right-wing think tank to support that pretense!

[ClassWarrior]

37. One of JE's five key goals is...

Eliminating Poverty
Every day, 37 million Americans wake in poverty. Our response to that reality says everything about the character of America. John Edwards has called for a national goal of eliminating poverty within 30 years, with policies rooted in the core American values of opportunity for everyone and responsibility from everyone. We can reach that goal by creating and rewarding work, strengthening families, helping workers save and get ahead, transforming our schools, expanding access to college, breaking up areas of concentrated poverty, reaching overlooked rural areas, and expecting people to help themselves by working whenever they are able.

http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/

I assume the Gulf Coast is included in that.

NGU.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

53. Gulf Coast

There's so much more to the Gulf Coast than poverty issues. It needs specific substance and policy proposals that address Katrina recovery-specific problems: the diastrous Road Home program/HUD money, FEMA's bad policies, FEMA's incompetence and mistakes in implementing its good policies, discrepencies between how LA and MS are treated, the Corps' failure to protect the levees, etc.

[Clarkie1]

38. Every day reveals more of what a phony this Edwards character really is. K&R. nt

[venable]

46. oh please, read the thread before you come in with this silly stuff

the OP has been clearly revealed as a smear, unfactual, and planted.

your drive by hits don't work.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

54. No it hasn't

Which of the things I said were unfactual?

Is New Orleans on his home page, issues page, or blog?
Was it in his high-profile SOTU interviews?
Was it in his personal, written SOTU response?
Was it in his latest high-profile stump speech?
Did his campaign announcement actually have substance and policy proposals?

None of this was smear or unfactual, and I'm not sure what you mean by planted.

[noamnety]

39. The first sentence of the OP is factually incorrect

"As of today, the phrases “New Orleans,” “Gulf Coast,” and “Katrina” do not appear once on his campaign’s issue page, blog, or homepage."

Anyone who actually DOES the search on his website will discover that's a lie.

http://johnedwards.com/search/?mode=perform_search&keywords=orleans&x=15&y=10
http://johnedwards.com/news/newsletter/katrina/

There are things I like and don't like about various candidates, but flat out lying about the candidates is stupid.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

40. I Am Not A Liar

I didn't have a DU account, and was not going to set one up just to comment about my blog, until this gentleman called me a liar.

I didn't say there's nothing about New Orleans anywhere on Edwards' site. I said there's nothing about it on the particular pages of the site people would visit to learn more about his campaign, the prominent pages - the homepage, the issues page, and the blog. I might add it's also not on the "About John" page (though I won't begrudge him that one). The links you provide are not to any of the pages I said have no New Orleans information, nor do they show up in the first ten pages of Google results for "John Edwards New Orleans."

Nothing I said was a lie, I did not flat out lie about the candidates, you are slandering my name unjustly. Feel free to disagree with me, but do NOT mischaracterize me.

[1932]

41. Just curious: are you a paid blogger?

[Wayward Episcopalian]

55. No

No. Not at all. Never. Not a dime. I care passionately about Katrina issues, that's all.

[noamnety]

62. Your blog post appears to be "truth impaired"

"As of today, the phrases “New Orleans,” “Gulf Coast,” and “Katrina” do not appear once on his campaign’s issue page, blog, or homepage."

http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2006/3/20/125019/366#99
http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2006/3/15/123217/672

"As a result, Googling "John Edwards New Orleans" brings up a number of news stories and blogs, but nothing official from the Edwards camp."

I just googled "John Edwards" "New Orleans" site:johnedwards.com and got 669 results.
http://johnedwards.com/news/newsletter/katrina/ for example.

In addition addressing the needed corrections on your blog post, you should consider examining your own sexist assumptions about people, and the way you use language.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

63. I'm right on Google, You're Partially Right on Blog

1) If you're a woman, I apologize for calling you a gentleman, but I'm no sexist, and I'm not going to listen to you tell me I am.

2) I did not say Google site specific "John Edwards" "New Orleans" site:johnedwards.com". I said google "John Edwards" and "New Orleans." My point is not that if you search his site you won't find NOLA. My point was that someone Googling to find out what he says about NOLA won't find anything official. No correction is needed here.

3) Thanks for unearthing those blog posts. I will amend my blog and MyDD/DailyKos diaries to read the blog frontpage and its many links and headlines - not the full blog. Good catch.

[noamnety]

67. I "unearthed" them

by googling: "John Edwards" "New Orleans" site:blog.johnedwards.com - 617 results, by the way.

If I'm searching to see if something appears on a particular site, I add the site to the search terms. Common sense, no? I hold politicians, including Edwards, responsible for a lot of offenses, but google rankings of his site isn't one of them.

If you assume everyone else you interact with is white - unless they provide you with a "marker" of some sort to clue you in that they aren't, you might have some white supremacy issues to deal with. If you automatically assume others you interact with are male unless they provide you with a marker, you might have some male supremacy issues to deal with.

I was taught to see racism only in individual acts of meanness, not in invisible systems conferring dominance on my group - Peggy McIntosh (Unpacking the Invisible Backpack)

What you've done, without realizing it, is internalized the message that "maleness" is the norm. I'm suggesting you might want to examine where that comes from in yourself.

[Wayward Episcopalian]

70. Of course

Perfectly common sense. But I'm not talking about people searching for info from a particular site. I'm talking about people searching for info, period, and in a generic search for info, you find nothing official, which makes me wonder if there IS anything official of substance. As for me, I wasn't searching his entire site, just its high points, the things a casual searcher - since most voters are casual about their info seeking - would find.

Valid points, all. But it doesn't come from myself, it comes from our common language - mankind, God as a He, "yes sir, yes sir, three bags full," etc. And I fall into the traps of that language commonly, and use male-dominated language when I shouldn't. So, as I said, if you are a female, I apologize, and you're right, I should do a better job watching it - but I don't believe myself a sexist.

[mzmolly]

66. Is the "Wayward Episcopalian" blog now a credible source?

He also maligns Chris Dodd.

"Presidential Candidate Sen. Chris Dodd Disappoints on New Orleans"

Yet there is no critique of the "commander in chief" or The Republican Party, who was in charge until WEEKS agon.

:eyes: Good gawd we're scratching bottom now ey?

[Wayward Episcopalian]

78. There is too Bush

Don't know why your search turned up nothing: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/search/label/jim%20webb
Then there's this: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/02/louisiana-health-care-news.html
This criticizes Powell, Bush's Katrina czar: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/01/senate-committee-holds-hearings-in-new.html
Copied Herbert's column here: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2007/01/new-orleans-in-nyt.html
"Government incompetence" tag: http://waywardepiscopalian.blogspot.com/search/label/government%20incompetence

There'd be more on Bush, but the blog started in September. The bulk of his direct mistakes were made in the immediate aftermath (which was any dealings with Brownie would have happened). Since then, his responsibility for mistakes has been indirect, as they've been made by underlings. He's still responsible, but my criticism has been directed at those underlings since he's so damn detached from it all.

[mzmolly]

80. Thanks for all the info.

Again welcome. I did question you because I'd only seen critique of Democrats on the blog.

Peace and again, thanks for the response. :hi:

[Wayward Episcopalian]

79. Ivins

BTW, love your pic. I just about cried when I heard she died. Don't know why you questioned whether or not I'm really in the same big tent party as she is: http://www.freedartmouth.blogspot.com/2007/01/molly-ivins-62-rip.html#links

[PATRICK]

69. What constitutes the modern troll?

is it someone sympathetic to becoming an unwitting pistol easily lured into becoming the more common hitman we have become accustomed to? Speculation aside, when certain elements of style, substance and demeanor freep- I mean creep- into newcomers it raises the disconcerting specters of witch hunts and tombstones.

And thus we know election time is already stirring. Edwards at this point is a long range threat, mainly to the GOP. Hence the house- not his ideas on the Middle East- and the photo op story which must be tongue in cheek to the Bush GOP to get any Dem considering it seriously. To consider the meatier issue of the ME statements and interviews raises extremely uncomfortable issues the GOP does not want you to even talk about. One might suspect that these attacks on ludicrous "populist" issues, as Swifty as they would be in any serious GOP smear campaign, are coming now to mute any and all attention on Iran.

And how odd to so distract DU from more serious questions about a candidate. It can't be striking while the iron is hot because even a glance at the Iran controversy is apparently taboo in the "image" tease fluff we are supposed to take more seriously than its shoddy presentation.

The more I think about Edwards the more interesting it becomes. Like Gore, his populism is not wildly left, not completely satisfying but a most solid and honest pledge to start. And fully ready to upgrade if a charismatic leader helps sweep a democratic legislature in with greater numbers. With Hillary we know we are getting a dampening and tamping down of potential progress or restoration. With edwards we are starting at a populist middle and going up as far as the people want to vote coattails for.

And I am not afraid to link all the intangibles in the separate "issues". In talking to the Israelis, there is an absolute need to assure them of the world's interest for their security and the NATO membership is a great step. The violent Cold War path they have been mired in with dinosaurs there and here is a calamity not a solution. Simply NOT attacking Iran is not enough. Israel might need to be pulled back with a friendly hand from the brink.

So is it falling short or stepping into the progressive center? Is it avoiding and thus enabling Bush?
I remember the Dean campaign when it was a big problem and a natural one for which no blame can be attached as to how a non-sitting governor can criticize foreign policy when the Congressional party was split. God bless him for hammering the winds of war and hitting the soul of the party.

Things are happening faster now, though the repetition- should the news media ever notice it- and the changed circumstances can make action and choice swifter. There is no anti-Iran war protest in the street. Even the vulnerability of the now unpopular President is a bizarre distraction. The mania and actors are already engaged- over there.

There is a time of vast opportunism here to shake awake the nation to the war that lacks only the twitch of a finger, the phone call from the Oval Office. I wish Edwards WOULD be opportunistic. His caution is no more at this point than Dean's of old while Congress chews ways to actively DO something. What is different now is that great voices need to wake people up now, a people close to revolt and already turned against the proto-type war that is modeling Bush's current act of defiance.
For that one service I would have Edwards move from within his fertile growth in the progressive center. But there is no MoveOn to demand it of him, no crowds, no Senate podium, and no necessary strategic "opportunistic" move as a candidate. Just a personal risk for peace.

And while more important things are happening- even in the preliminary handicapping and moves of very fine candidates- apparently war and the deaths ticking off like a taxi meter idling in a jam- have to vie with the silly season and sillier judgment and either silly or malicious posting maneouvers. The season of glass jaws, glass houses and the only stones displayed being the ones used to shatter.

[Clark2008]

85. And?

He did.

Either you know that or you don't.

I don't understand the big deal.

P.S. I have well more than 1,000 posts and I KNOW Edwards used it for a photo-op. Look at the clean shirt and jeans and the phone clip, for Pete's sake.