"Obama repeatedly poaching John Edward's themes, language, and even jokes"

[bigtree]

Obama borrows from Edwards

January 5, 2008 01:19 PM

By Sasha Issenberg, Globe Staff

NASHUA, N.H. -- After beating John Edwards in Iowa on Thursday, Barack Obama has decided to join him -- repeatedly poaching his opponent's themes, language, and even jokes.

"We shouldn't just be respecting wealth in this country -- we should be respecting work," Obama told an overflow crowd in a high-school gym today.

Edwards's 2004 presidential campaign was centered around the idea that the Bush administration had launched a "war on work" through tax cuts that offer incentives for investment over labor. "Hard work should be valued in this country, so we're going to reward work, not just wealth," Edwards said in accepting his party’s vice-presidential nomination at the Democratic’ convention in Boston. In this campaign, he has sharpened his populist rhetoric, railing against greedy corporate CEOs who are waging war on working people and the middle class.

Since arriving in New Hampshire Friday, Obama has borrowed Edwards's favorite verb by bragging that he had "fought" as a community organizer and civil rights lawyer, and conceding that "insurance companies and drug companies will not give up their profits" -- which Edwards asserts repeatedly to ridicule Obama's talk of conciliation. Obama repeatedly invoked those interests, as well as "big oil and big insurance," common villains in Edwards speeches.

For months, Obama has been telling crowds, "I know I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change."

Edwards gave a similar spin to his short political resume when he announced his candidacy in September 2003, declaring, "I haven't spent most of my life in politics, but I've spent enough time in Washington to know how much we need to change it."

Even a new Obama laugh line -- joking about pharmaceutical ads that "have all these people running around in the fields and stuff" -- evokes an anecdotal staple of Edwards's 2004 "Two Americas" stump speech used to ridicule the marketing budgets of pharmaceutical companies.

"I love the ads," Edwards said then. "Buy their medicine, take it and the next day you and your spouse will be skipping through the fields . . ."

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/obama_borrows_f.html


earlier post:

Obama's 'Big Tent' Message in NH Borrows from Edwards and McCain Alike
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2598666&mesg_id=2598666

[Buzz Clik]

1. Sure he is. No doubt he's also stealing his children and his hairstyle.

Shameless horse shit.

[bigtree]

2. standard campaign tactics

he's been caught. deal with it.

[Kurovski]

95. It's true, I guess.

I vaguely recall some talk of Kerry assuming some of Dean's manner in '04.

[avaistheone1]

164. Edwards is the real deal. Accept no imitators.

That's because Edwards is both the centrist and the progressive in this campaign.

That's right -- even though most of Edwards ideas are progressive, they are in line with the vision America sees for itself, on the war, health care,energy policy, health care etc.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

4. Obama with Edwards' hair!

Someone do a photoshop! NOW!

[Buzz Clik]

5. But let's make it Edwards 2004, not 2008.

[Pastiche423]

45. Here you go...

[maddezmom]

61. LOL

thanks for doing it, he looks pretty good. :D

[Pastiche423]

63. I was surprised myself

Obama does look good w/Breck hair! Because I was trying to manipulate the images quickly, I din't have the time to search for the surfer, pretty boy hair that I wanted to use.

[Kurovski]

96. Hmmm...I think I saw him on Halsted near Broadway in Chicago around 1997.

Hmmm...:D

[LittleClarkie]

94. It's a tad "Howdy Doody" though

Heh.

[DaLittle Kitty]

197. KoolAid Drinkers... Name ONR, Yes ONE Original Concept ObeyWanKenobi has come up

with since the inception of this campaign... NADA, ZERO, ZIPPO ZILCH! Both the HilMeister anddd Obama have been "FOLLOWING"Edwards o EVERY issue ... since DAY ONE of this campaign... They are both in need of at least ONE Original idea... :think:

[jgraz]

3. Better he steals from Edwards than Hillary

He's finally copying a winner.

[K Gardner]

8. LOL, true that :-) It did make his speech quite riveting !

[KittyWampus]

32. Edwards has a pretty crappy record when it comes to winning politically.

[avaistheone1]

39. Obama's record as far as winning is less than spectacular. He lost

In 2000, he made an unsuccessful Democratic primary run for the U.S. House of Representatives seat held by four-term incumbent candidate Bobby Rush.

And when Obama ran for U.S. Senate he ran against Alan Keyes - whom no one could take seriously as a contender for the seat.

[Divine Discontent]

67. why no response to the points the DUer made about Obama's record in campaigns?

see, this is the kind of stuff we DON'T need to saying about each others candidates. If you're going to point out something, point out an idea they have, or plan, or conviction, or action as being bad - not something silly like this. They both have been elected to the senate once, nuf said.

[rodeodance]

6. Seems Obama has realized he needs some substance to his glitter.

[aquart]

10. No, he needs that near 30% that Edwards took.

It's still just words. Like a gentleman caller you're not at home to, coming back in a mask.

[emilyg]

14. Hope and change will not go far.

[DaLittle Kitty]

199. That'sWhy The INSIDERS ar Pushing so Hard w/ MSM to Eject Edwards...

Its all about Obama on his own and then screwing up and default candidate will be HillBill... Like the Reagan Lust? Well there's plenty more o' that a little futher on up the road.... :think:

[Skwmom]

255. Do you really think Edwards canned rhetoric gives him any

depth or substance?

[K Gardner]

7. I noticed that in his speech last night and again today. Almost the same lines and points,

word for word. It was just a bit upsetting, because I really do like Obama.

What was even worse was that after his rally today, a NH voter formerly for Edwards, said she was now going for Obama because "Edwards is too entrenched in Washington." Now, that is disgusting.

[aquart]

9. Nearly 40 percent went Obama in Iowa.

That means 60, a majority, didn't. On the assumption that voters chose Edwards as an anti-Hillary, Obama needs to position himself as the rightful heir to Edwards' votes. That would give HIM the majority. So he's cranking out the concern.

I'm sure you're all swooning with his wonderfulness.

[scarletwoman]

11. "The Audacity of Hype".

Saw that in another thread and it totally cracks me up.

[bigtree]

12. .

:rofl:

[mnhtnbb]

15. LOL. Precisely.

[Donnachaidh]

20. ...

:spray: :rofl: :rofl:

[SammyWinstonJack]

29. ...

:spray:

[2hip]

13. Add a new one

Obama's speaking at a rally being covered on CNN...talking about health care....."this is personal" he said.

The exact same words and sentiment Edwards expressed on Olbermann yesterday!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x80969

Plagiarism in any form just pisses me off! Obama, I'm liking you less and less and less!



  Edwards '08 tees!

[amandabeech]

18. Obama's running to plagiarism, almost.

Somehow, it doesn't sound right second-hand.

[DaLittle Kitty]

198. Must not be any monitors at Harvard? Probably copied all his papers! (sic)

:puke:

[frazzled]

16. He stole that "just like I imagined it when I talked to my Kindergarten teacher"!

That was Edwards's line, his joke. How dare he.

Jeebus people: get a grip. Obama did actually fight for people on the South Side of Chicago as a community organizer. Which is more than one can say of the big fight-talker.

[bigtree]

17. Edwards has done his part in organizing and enabling individuals in his community

No longer representing North Carolina in the U.S. Senate, Edwards directed the Center on Poverty, Work, and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and chaired the Center for Promise and Opportunity (http://law.unc.edu/Centers/details.aspx?ID=425&Q=3 ), a nonprofit organization dedicated to studying and alleviating poverty.

Edwards toured ten major universities in order to promote "Opportunity Rocks!", a program aimed at getting youth involved to fight poverty.

Edwards and his wife began the Wade Edwards Foundation in their son's memory; the purpose of the nonprofit organization is "to reward, encourage, and inspire young people in the pursuit of excellence." The Foundation funded the Wade Edwards Learning Lab at Wade's high school, Broughton High School in Raleigh, along with scholarship competitions and essay awards.

During the summer and fall of 2005, he visited homeless shelters and job training centers and spoke at events organized by ACORN, the NAACP and the SEIU. He spoke in favor of an expansion of the earned income tax credit, a crackdown on predatory lending, an increase in the capital gains tax rate, housing vouchers for minorities (to integrate upper-income neighborhoods), and a program modeled on the Works Progress Administration to rehabilitate the Gulf Coast following Hurricane Katrina. In Greene County, North Carolina he unveiled the pilot program for College for Everyone, an educational measure he promised during his presidential campaign, in which prospective college students will receive a scholarship for their first year in exchange for ten hours of work a week.

[Yael]

19. He had to get some substance from somewhere

He is a great orator, but when he is done, I am left wondering if 'there' was there.

[Ninga]

48. Why don't you just ask the people (average Joe's) he fought for and won in their behalf.

He has more "there" there, than most pols who just love the power and the status.

He has a 20 year history of fighting and winning for the little guy. If you knew that, then perhaps you would "hear" him when he speaks.

[Milo_Bloom]

21. LMAO!!!

This stuff gets funnier and funnier.

First there is the claim of the big media conspiracy to ignore the candidate who lost.

Now, all the other good candidates are stealing Edwards' message, which no one wants to admit Edwards stole from real progressives when he decided to abandon his entire career and re-invent himself to make a second run for president.



Of course then we have reality shine the ugly light of truth.

The reason no one is talking about Edwards is because not enough people CARE. That is why he raised less money, that is why he is behind in the polls and that is why the media isn't wasting air time on him.

The second thing is just plain silly. All politicians hit similar themes and often use similar language. You can take virtually any two politicians and find similariest in parts of their speeches.

[Inspired]

22. Obama cares enough to plagarize parts of Edwards speeches. n/t

[scarletwoman]

24. Edwards has less money because he's not taking gigantic bundled contributions from lobbyists. (nt)

[Milo_Bloom]

25. He has taken $18,900 so far, but has lied about not taking any.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Milo_Bloom]

28. Oh yeah, the "second place win", right???

Does the amazing amount of spin it takes to try and stretch Edwards getting trounced by 8 points into some story of victory make you dizzy?

Or maybe I should ask what makes you dizzier, trying to turn the rejection of John Edwards' duplicity into a story OR trying explain why Clinton not winning shouldn't be a story?

[Jim Sagle]

31. Let me go at again until you get the point.

Obama won.

Clinton placed second.

Hillary placed third.

The coverage went to Obama, then Hillary, then Obama vs. Hillary. Hardly any coverage to Edwards.

Glad to help you with your learning disability.

[Milo_Bloom]

33. Okay, now lets go to the real world.

Obama was originaly expected to lose and won. That is a story.

Clinton was originaly expected to win and lost. THAT is a story.

Edwards was expected to lose and lost. That is NOT a story.

When the expected result happens, it simply isn't news and doesn't deserve coverage.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nonconformist]

36. Yeah... IOWA SPOKE dammit... we should all just shut up now

It's over, the bussed in Obama supporters have SPOKEN!

[Milo_Bloom]

38. As far as Edwards is concerned.

He's done. He spent 6 years pratically living there, shaking every hand, making his case to everyone.

They rejected him, the same way the majority of America has in every poll and in fundraising.

[Jim Sagle]

53. He finished second, not third, Ace.

That's not rejection, it's second place. Rejection is the 2% showing that the remainders got.

Do you even understand plain English?

[Milo_Bloom]

54. He got CRUSHED, Tinny.

He was completely rejected by the people he had spent the last 6 years trying to convince he was worth voting for.

That is why the media isn't wasting air time on him. No one but a limited few actually care.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim Sagle]

57. 2nd is not crushed, Milo. But hey, you knew that.

[Milo_Bloom]

58. So Mitt Romney WON second place. LMAO!

[Jim Sagle]

59. I don't follow Republicans much. But thanks for informing us.

:boring:

[Milo_Bloom]

62. What the conspiracy doesn't apply anymore?!

You know they are done when all they have left are the emoticons.

[Jim Sagle]

64. Romney GROSSLY outspent his opponents and only placed 2nd.

Edwards was grossly outspent BY his opponents and STILL placed 2nd.

Congrats - your lobotomy worked.

[Milo_Bloom]

66. Which goes to prove my point.

Thanks for playing.

The consolation prize will be delivered at a later date.

[Jim Sagle]

69. You never HAD a point.

But thank you for sucking.

It's who you are, it's what you do.

[Milo_Bloom]

71. The point is there is no conspriacy.

Which you have proven now several times.

[Jim Sagle]

72. Of course there's conspiracies every day.

The rich conspire to keep themselves that way. And when they own the media, they use it make sure it stays that way.

This is not hard. I know you can face it if you try.

[Milo_Bloom]

73. LOL!!! Do you have a dollar sign on the top of your tin foil hat?

Does it keep the rich from getting to your thoughts?

No wonder Edwards is so far behind, with supporters like you, who needs attacks from other campaigns.

[Jim Sagle]

75. Your comedy is as good as your political analysis.

I.e., sucko.

:boring:

[Milo_Bloom]

76. From a tin foiler, I will take it as a compliment.

Afterall, you probably believe Edwards is a progressive too.

Some people are so gullible.

[Jim Sagle]

77. At least he talks like one. So there's a chance he is one.

The others tell progressives to fuck off.

Much as you're doing in this lame subthread.

[Milo_Bloom]

78. Talking one and being one are two different things, which is why he has no real support.

He is, afterall, campaiging against his own record.


But, no, THE CONSPIRACY is why he hasn't caught on... it has nothing to do with his duplicity.

[Jim Sagle]

79. His duplicity is all in your mind. Like all the other shit you post.

[Milo_Bloom]

80. Naaaaahhh, he isn't running against his own record at all... LMAO!!!!!

[Jim Sagle]

81. I love it when someone laughs at his own gags.

Especially when everyone else is going :wtf:

[Milo_Bloom]

83. Sorry it went over your head... but then you believe in wacky conspiracies

so what else could we expect.

[Jim Sagle]

84. There IS a conspiracy, and everybody goddamn well KNOWS it.

[Milo_Bloom]

86. I have already proven there is no conspiracy on this issue.

Edwards' is not interesting enough of a candidate or popular enough to warrant the coverage you expect.

[Jim Sagle]

87. You didn't prove a thing. Hasn't the nurse brought your pudding yet?

[Milo_Bloom]

88. 17% in NH proves the point. There was no conspiracy. Just not enough interest

in the candidate.

Case closed.

[Jim Sagle]

90. Hogwash!

[Milo_Bloom]

91. Whatever you want to believe it or not... it is now a fact.

[Jim Sagle]

92. Factoid is more like it. That's like a hemorrhoid, only smellier.

[Milo_Bloom]

97. You lost, get over it. The wacky conspiracy theory is dead.

[Jim Sagle]

98. YOU'RE lost. You don't know winning from losing. Sad, really.

[Milo_Bloom]

99. I know when a wacky conspiracy theory is completely debunked.

You got beat, your candidate got beat.


Get over it.


He and the silly conspiracy theories will be a footnote on a trivia pursuit card someday.

[Jim Sagle]

100. My candidate lost 1 caucus & 1 primary. He can still clean house on the empty suit and the empty

pantsuit.

[Milo_Bloom]

101. LMAO!!!!!! suuuuuuuuuuuuuure he can.

I'll file that pipe dream along with your conspiracy theories.

Any other fairy tales you want to report?

[Jim Sagle]

104. As if you had a clue.

[Milo_Bloom]

105. Why don't you tell the one about how the big conspiracy made

John Kerry endorse Obama instead of Edwards?

Is he being controlled by the evil alien conspirators?

[Jim Sagle]

106. No, Kerry's just an all-around Wrong Way Corrigan.

[Milo_Bloom]

109. What no alien conspiracy? Big media isn't in control of his thoughts and mind?

Are you finally giving up your silly little conspiracy theories and going to live in the real world?

[Jim Sagle]

110. In the real world, 6 or 7 corporations control the media. Bozo.

[Milo_Bloom]

112. And I find it so cute that you think they are working together to keep down your little candidate.

Its so adorable to watch you try and squirm away from the obvious.

Did the big, bad, media use their alien waves on Ned Lamont too?

[Jim Sagle]

113. I'll spell it out. Edwards is a populist. Populism is a BIG threat to big business.

Is it FINALLY dawning on you?

[Milo_Bloom]

115. I'll spell it out. Your "populist" isn't "popular"

which is why he isn't getting significant coverage, endorsements, money or interest.

No conspiracy.

Just a an unpopular "populist".

Is reality finally dawning on YOU?

[Jim Sagle]

116. Cut the bullshit. There isn't even a chemical trace of truth in anything you've posted on this

subthread.

He leads just about every other Dem in head to head matchups with just about any Republican.

[Milo_Bloom]

118. 100% Truth. Backed by 100% FACTS.

If he had any popularity, he would have standing in the polls, money in the bank and his old allies would be in his corner.

Now that your silly little conspiracy theory has been dismantled, all that is left is reality.

Your "populist" isn't POPULAR.

[Jim Sagle]

119. MAN are you a tiresome phony. Read this and educate yerself.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2660631#2663979

[Milo_Bloom]

121. A thread to a debunked conspiracy theory?

The theory has been debunked.

[Jim Sagle]

122. No it hasn't. Every single word is true.

[Milo_Bloom]

123. Except for the ones about the silly conspiracy theory.

See, tinny, it is obvious.


With 0 media coverage, and 0 name recognition AND a populist message was Howard Dean able to outraise all others in the primary process and rise to the top of the polls.

With 0 media coverage and 0 name recognition was Ron Paul able to make a huge splash with his fundraising.

However, Edwards, with some media coverage and lots of name recognition and has been entirely outraised and has never placed higher than 3rd in any national poll and has been so far outraised that he has to switch to public funding.


The conspiracy theory is debunked and your "populist" candidate is proved UNPOPULAR.

[Jim Sagle]

124. Go back to sleep, Milo. Or at least insert yer dentures so I can make out what yer babbling.

[Milo_Bloom]

125. See how upset it gets when it can't dispute the facts.

Conspiracy theorists are so easy.

[Jim Sagle]

126. You didn't PROVIDE any facts.

[Milo_Bloom]

127. And then it resorts to lying, when it gets called out.

FACT: Howard Dean was able to rise to the top of the polls and fundraising with a populist message and 0 media coverage.

FACT: Ron Paul was able to outraise many of his rivals, despite 0 media coverage.


Fact #1 and #2 prove that 0 media coverage (the supposed conspiracy purpoted by tinny) does not keep a candidate down.


The facts prove that John Edwards and his "populist" message isn't popular and thus, doesn't deserve media coverage, which is why it isn't getting any. Thus, silly conspiracy theory proven wrong.

Ultimate result... Tinny flips his little noggin and types in ALL CAPS TO MAKE HIMSELF SEEM MORE IMPORTANT.

[Jim Sagle]

128. FACT: Howard Dean got chopped down when the media decided to chop him down.

FACT: Ron Paul tapped into a standby pool of Nazi filth looking for someone putrid enough to peddle their poison.

Your facts aren't facts, they're assertions. It's called proof by assertion, and it isn't proof at all.

[Milo_Bloom]

129. And then it squirms and lies to try to ignore the facts.

The fact is that Howard Dean easily overcame 0 media coverage to become the #1 fundraiser and the #1 in the polls.


Thus, proving that the silly little conspiracy you tried to peddle is debunked.

[Jim Sagle]

130. You left out the last part: the part where they media took his "scream",

filtered out the crowd noise, and played it 700 times in four days. No conspiracy? Bull fucking shit.

[Milo_Bloom]

132. And then it falls right into the trap.

Fact 1: 0 media coverage did NOT hurt Dean or Paul in their fundraising efforts

Fact 2: 0 media coverage also did NOT hurt Howard Dean as he rose to the top of the polls.

Fact 3: It was too much media coverage that tinny claims sank Howard Dean's campaign.

What Tinny is trying to claim is that lack of media coverage is what is causing the majority of democrats to reject John Edwards.

However, facts 1 and 2 prove that lack of media coverage doesn't in and of itself keep a candidate down.

Fact 3, according to tinny, shows that if the media actually fears a candidate they will ACTIVELY attack that candidate.

Thus, proving, lack of coverage on Edwards has nothing to do with fear of Edwards, but instead lack of interest, due to unpopularity.

[Jim Sagle]

133. You're just babbling to yourself.

What I'm saying is the obvious truth: Big media is an arm of big business and will act in the interest of suppressing people, facts, and events it doesn't like. If you don't believe THAT, you might as well believe in the tooth fairy.

[Milo_Bloom]

134. And then it changes its story to save face.

Whether or not media is an arm of big business has nothing to do with the particular issue you have been desperately trying to squirm away from.

The fact is there is/was no media conspiracy to ignore John Edwards. They don't cover him, because he isn't popular or interesting enough to warrant coverage.

[Jim Sagle]

135. What idiotic rubbish.

[Milo_Bloom]

136. And then he dismisses the facts.

[Jim Sagle]

137. Milo, look around DU. You're the one dismissing facts.

[Milo_Bloom]

138. And then he tries to lie about it.

[Jim Sagle]

139. Yes, Milo lies.

[Milo_Bloom]

140. And having lost it completely, he just tries to minic his master.

[Jim Sagle]

141. Bartender! Please cut this man off.

[Milo_Bloom]

142. Still trying to save face and cover up losing the debate, he continues to try to dance.

[Jim Sagle]

143. There was no debate, just you spewing forth a buncha shit and me patiently explaining why it was

just a buncha shit.

[Milo_Bloom]

144. And he continues to get upset over his inability to disprove the obvious facts.

[Jim Sagle]

145. Milo needs his diaper changed. Any volunteers?

[Milo_Bloom]

146. Having lost the debate, he continues to attempt personal attacks.

[Jim Sagle]

147. Folks, click on

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x83465

and decide for yourselves.

[Milo_Bloom]

148. With no way to disprove the facts, he goes for propaganda.

[Jim Sagle]

149. Let's score that last exchange:

1 - Substance Jim
0 - Hogwash Milo

[Milo_Bloom]

150. Desperately trying to save face, he continues to try personal insults.

But still is unable to dispute the cold, hard facts.

[Jim Sagle]

152. Round 2:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/13/17270/4391/58/436245

[Milo_Bloom]

153. With no way to disprove the facts, he goes for propaganda.

[Jim Sagle]

154. The scorecard after Round 2:

2 - Factual Jim
0 - Flapdoodley Milo

[Milo_Bloom]

155. Desperately trying to save face, he continues to try personal insults.

But poor tinny is still unable to provide an actual fact to defend his position or debate the facts that prove his conspiracy theory false.

[Jim Sagle]

157. If you ever had any facts, I'd refute them with no sweat.

[Milo_Bloom]

158. And then he lies some more.

Facts have all been stated in previous posts and you just flail widley trying to ignore them.

[Jim Sagle]

161. Your grasp on reality is no better than your spelling.

[Milo_Bloom]

162. Unable to dispute the facts, he tries desperately to shift the focus.

[Jim Sagle]

163. Can't dispute what was never presented.

[Milo_Bloom]

165. Flailing in his shareful display, he tries more desperate lies...

...so easily disproved by looking upthread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2600441&mesg_id=2669646

[Jim Sagle]

166. In all your vacuous posts, that's the only link you ever presented.

And it turns out to be just a link to one of your vacuous posts.

[Milo_Bloom]

167. Still unable to deal with the facts, he denies they exist.

One must wonder if he still thinks the world is flat.

[Jim Sagle]

169. Once again, s---l---o---w---l---y:

Opionions. Are. Not. Facts.

[Milo_Bloom]

170. Still unable to dispute the facts, he denies they exist.

The world according to Tinny:


It is only opinion that Howard Dean outraised other democrats in 2004 despite no media coverage.
It is only opinion that Edwards has attracted nearly 1/3 the contributors of Obama and less than even McCain.
It is also only opinion that 2+2=4
And only opinion that the world is flat.

Tinny lives in a silly world, but he is happy there, because in his world his unpopular populist isn't unpopular.

[Jim Sagle]

171. Assertions. Are. Not. Facts.

[Milo_Bloom]

172. Unable to dispute the facts, Tinny hides safely in his world.

Where assertions and facts are mutualy exclusive.

What a silly little place he lives in.

[Jim Sagle]

173. Assertions. Are. Not. Facts.

[Milo_Bloom]

175. Having lost it completely, tinny is stuck in fantasy land.

[Jim Sagle]

176. Past your bedtime. Isn't your mommy home yet?

[Milo_Bloom]

177. Unable to dispute the facts, he still tries personal insults.

[Jim Sagle]

179. You never presented any facts.

[Milo_Bloom]

180. And then he lies some more.

Several facts presented above.

[Jim Sagle]

181. Not by you.

[Milo_Bloom]

182. Tinny continues to live in his fantasy world

It must be safe in there, since he doesn't like to come out of it into reality.

[Jim Sagle]

183. This from a cartoon character.

:rofl:

[Milo_Bloom]

185. Having lost the debate, he tries to deflect from his inability to dispute the facts.

[Jim Sagle]

186. You're a cartoon character. No wonder yer arguments ain't shit.

[Milo_Bloom]

189. Having lost the debate, he continues to attempt personal attacks.

[Jim Sagle]

190. All over this board, and indeed all over America, folks are noticing the Edwards blackout.

So sorry to see you lost in your own cartoon thoughts.

[Milo_Bloom]

191. Having lost the debate, Tinny tries to pitch the debunked conspiracy theory.

[Jim Sagle]

192. Debunked by nuthin' but yer mouth. And that ain't nuthin'.

[Milo_Bloom]

193. Tinny, still is unable to dispute the facts, flails wildly.

[Jim Sagle]

195. Milo, unable to move quickly enough to avoid disaster, shits the bed.

[Milo_Bloom]

201. Tinny, still is unable to dispute the facts, and prove his silly theory, attempts more attacks.

[Jim Sagle]

202. Milo, like a broken old-style record-player stylus, gets stuck in the groove.

[Milo_Bloom]

203. Still unable to dispute the facts, the 4%er copies his master.

[Jim Sagle]

204. Having been ejected from the public library for his stench,

Milo donates blood and uses the proceeds to rent computer time at Kinko's.

[Milo_Bloom]

205. Still trying to save face and cover up losing the debate, he continues to try personal attacks.

[Jim Sagle]

209. Having invested too much time to quit, Milo keeps on keepin' on.

All aboard his Hogwash Express!

[Milo_Bloom]

210. The 4%er is still unable to disprove the facts or prove his silly theory.

[Jim Sagle]

211. Milo again elides the fact that he never presented any facts. And that's a fact, Jacque.

[Milo_Bloom]

213. The 4%er, in desperation and despair, lies again. Facts are easily found by anyone upthread.

[Jim Sagle]

214. None were posted by you. Too bad, so sad. Boring, too.

[Milo_Bloom]

215. The 4%, desperate and in despair over having his silly theory debunked, lies again.

[Jim Sagle]

217. The cartoon character just doesn't know when it's time to let go.

[Milo_Bloom]

218. The 4%er, so upset at having his theory debunked, keeps trying to save face.

All while continuing to ignore all the facts.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

219. Funniest Fucking Subthread Ever.

I couldn't believe it when I saw this thread still alive. I HAD to come in and see what the heck was keepin it going? So I just spent the last 15 minutes reading every single post of this subthread. The whole thing is too damn funny!

I gotta give ya props though Milo. You have handled yourself amazingly well in this battle and you all sorts of dismantled the opposing arguments. You literally have ripped him to shreds a million times over in this subthread, and you won the debate by leaps and bounds. Some of it has totally cracked me up though LOL!

Too funny. Got a bit tiring at the end (like holy cow, how much longer can it possibly keep going?), but still was crackin me up a little.

Only reason I'm replying is cause you probably were thinking that you and he were the only two even reading any of this anymore. But I wanted you to know that at least one person just read every reply, and that you totally kicked the shit out of your opponent here. Slaughtered him. Completely. Logic and facts win out every time agaist personal attack and denial. :toast:

[Jim Sagle]

220. He didn't do shit. Guess that's why you lap it up.

Not a single link to back up his facts.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

221. With All Innocent Due Respect, You Were Handily Slaughtered.

You might not know it or want to believe it, but trust me; you were. It's not the end of the world though :)

[Jim Sagle]

224. No, just the end of yer fantasy world. Snap out of it.

[Milo_Bloom]

223. Trying to save face, the 4%er tries to ignore the facts by denying their existence.

[Milo_Bloom]

222. Someone has made Milo very happy!

One, because you have an awesome screenname (one of my favorite albums of all times).

Two, because you are enjoying the thread.

Thanks, I have actually gotten PM's from a few people telling me how much they were enjoying it :)


And well, I love watching people try to squirm their way out of crazy conspiracy theories anyway, so I would probably still be playing with Tinny, even without the encouragement, but it is always good to have!

Thanks!

[Jim Sagle]

225. Now yer reading imaginary messages.

They don't call it the Internut for nothing.

[Milo_Bloom]

226. Unable to cope with the facts, The 4%er has descended into madness.

[Jim Sagle]

227. Project much?

[Milo_Bloom]

229. Unable to prove his case, the conspiracy or disprove the cold hard facts, the 4%er

tries the "I am rubber you are glue" defense.

[Jim Sagle]

230. Having presented no case, the cartoon guy punts as usual.

[Milo_Bloom]

231. The poor 4%er lies some more, in a desperate attempt to cover his dispair.

Unfortunately his silly little media conspiracy theory is proven wrong by the following facts.

Howard Dean outraising all democrats in 2004 despite no media coverage
Ron Paul able to break single day fundraising records despite no media coverage.

Worse, the 4%er destroyed his own position when he laughingly claimed that the reason Dean lost was TOO MUCH media coverage, but blames his 4% candidate's failures on a media conspiracy to not give sufficient coverage.

Poor little Tin Foil Hat 4%er. It must be a scary world when everyone is out to get you.

[Jim Sagle]

232. Howard Dean was electronically assassinated by the media, and everybody goddamn well knows it.

When you proclaim otherwise, you proclaim yourself as a goddamn liar.

[Milo_Bloom]

233. Unable to dispute the facts, the 4%er tries to ignore them. This is why he lost this debate.

[Jim Sagle]

234. There was no debate, just me telling the truth and you l ying.

[Milo_Bloom]

235. Unable to dispute the facts, the 4%er continues to ignore their existence.

[Jim Sagle]

236. Unable to stop lying, Cartoon Guy sucks out loud.

[Milo_Bloom]

237. Still unable to deal with the facts presented, the 4%er cries for attention.

[Jim Sagle]

238. DUzy of the week, if unintentional DUzies count.

[Milo_Bloom]

239. Unable to dispute the facts, he tries desperately to shift the focus.

[Jim Sagle]

240. Cartoon guy rises once again to the challenge of posting without saying anything.

[Milo_Bloom]

242. The 4%er, still ignores the facts presented and cries out for attention.

[Jim Sagle]

243. So says Cartoon Guy. Ya gotta love it.

[Milo_Bloom]

244. Unable to cope with the facts, The 4%er continues to deny their existence.

[Jim Sagle]

245. Searching for his empty thought balloon, Cartoon Guy gives up, pops open a beer,

and tunes in to Rush.

[Milo_Bloom]

270. Unable to dispute the facts, the 4%er still tries personal insults.

[NMMNG]

42. Sheeeit man. We should all go back to bed then.

No need for a GE. Welcome your new overlord.

[smoogatz]

23. Good.

So now we've got two front-runners talking the progressive talk. Sounds like maybe they care about getting our votes, at least.

[bvar22]

26. I agree.

At least Obama has enough savvy to look around and start imitating Edwards.
And, of course, Edwards stole his spiel from Kucinich.

We should cut out all the imitators and plagiarists and just vote for the REAL thing...Kucinich!

The good news is that at least some Democrats are talking about doing something for Americans who Work for a Living.


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[Dr Fate]

52. My first thought was "good" as well.

So Obama wants to be seen as similar to Edwards (allegedly)?

Hey- fine by me.

[maxanne]

30. pure comedy gold

especially considering that Edwards has stolen liberally from the Kucinich platform.

[EFerrari]

35. *I* wrote that skipping through the fields thing -- five years ago.

:rofl:

[Avalux]

37. So that's why Edwards sided with and defended Obama in the debate tonite.

I can look at it a different way - they cut a deal and joined forces.

[XemaSab]

40. Wrong. Both of them are plagiarizing Howard Dean.

:P

[Rosemary2205]

50. LOL

and when Dean was running it sounded so much like every other liberal Democrat that I've heard on the stump all my life.

Not dissing Dean -- there's just something perennial about "change", "hope", "cleaning up Washington" etc. :)

[NMMNG]

41. Obama might as well just say "what he said"

every time Edwards finishes speaking. That's basically the theme at the debate.

[2hip]

43. LOL - you nailed it!

Obama couldn't jump on the Edwards' bandwagon fast enough... "Me, too...me, too...me, too..."



              Edwards '08 tees!

[LooseWilly]

44. Political... originality?

Ok, I just don't get it. People just looking for an excuse to bash Obama? Looking to justify previous support of Edwards?

What's up with this thread people?

Obama's stealing message from Edwards? Well, yeah, sort of. Did you expect him to ignore the topics Edwards is bringing up? Is there some sort of unspoken rule that, once a presidential candidate has chosen an essay topic, then all the other candidates have to not respond to the given essay topic?

Is it maybe possible that the two of them are really not that different in their points of view? Is that maybe a crime?
It sounded to me like Obama was the voice of cerebral populism and by extension trying to listen to what he manages to hear of the "voice" of the people, while Edwards was the voice of the heart of populism, and by extension eager to fight for what he's already heard and seen of the "voice" of the people.
The difference is subtle and nuanced, and so... yes, Obama does sound like he's plagiarizing from Edwards... unless you notice that he's really responding to the same issues from a slightly different point of view. And what the hell's my point? My point is that what he seemed to be trying to highlight was that he has a slightly different approach/perspective on the issues.
The fact that they seem to have very similar ideas on the solutions to the issues does indeed make them seem to be saying the same things, and, since Edwards has been talking about the same issues for a bit longer, can easily make it seem like Obama is plagiarizing.

In my opinion they're both right. In my opinion a primary vote should be cast for whichever one of them sounds 'righter' to you. If you're feeling more inclusive and coalition building and cerebral, Obama's right. If you're feeling more combative and hard-line, then Edwards is right.
In the end, they're both right.

Although, 9/11, neither one, Ronald Reagan, has ever been a chief executive. To paraphrase Giuliani, Romney, and to some extent Richardson.

[earth mom]

46. It's getting more & more obvious that Obama doesn't have an original idea or thought.

Maybe Oprah can get one of her authors from her book club to write up a few ideas & thoughts for him. James Frey has been known to write some good tall yarns that might do. :eyes:

[laureloak]

65. Obama stole Edwards material from 2004 as well as Carter's.

[donkeyotay]

47. One thing that does seem obvious is that Obama has pissed off the base.

Not that what DU thinks makes any difference. Maybe our concerns will go mainstream this time. Maybe.

[Divine Discontent]

68. exactly... we're not exactly mainstream, but we're getting there over time.

and yes, it's pretty obvious that the Obama camp is glad to use John's themes to get Barack elected. Can't blame them, it's a pretty good set of themes. Maybe he'll actually follow them if he gets in the White House.

[Bishop Rook]

49. In other news...

Barack Obama recently began to use the conjunctions "and" and "but" as well as the verb "to be" with shocking frequency. Evidence shows that John Edwards was using these words up to seven years before Obama was even born.

Honestly though. All of this language you're citing is very generic. The only one that's really suspiciously similar is the "...companies will not give up their profits" line, because that's definitely more Edwards' style than Obama's. It seems likely they're both intentionally trying to mesh their rhetoric together, though, at least since last night's debate.

[Dr Fate]

51. I like Edwards and Obama.

Even if there is merit to all of this-for people like me, this doesnt really matter much.

Since I like them both, if Edwards and Obama are similar, then all the better for me should one of them win.

I dont see this mattering unless Edwards wants to point it out.

[depakid]

60. I noticed that, too

and frankly, it's disingenuous.

Or would be if people bothered to compare his recent actions with his words.

[Honeycombe8]

70. They all poach from each other. Even all the Repubs are claiming "change" now.

It's politics.

[DaLittle Kitty]

200. Need a new word other than "Change" It's Been Bastardized by So Much use my by Phonies!

Kind of like when every politician started calling themselves... errr "progressive"... What a joke... Hillary, Richardson, Jeb Bush... errr Progressive? It's enough to make you... :puke:

[Hoof Hearted]

74. He also poached his pants.

And his eggs. He poached them too.

[Gloria]

82. Hell, Bill ran as the guy from "HOPE" ...now we've got Obama HOPE

ICKY!!!

[WinkyDink]

85. Wait until he says, "Mill."

[anitar1]

89. Listening to Obama's concession speech tonight,

I was surprised to hear him echoing Edwards words. Very surprised. Is he so bereft of speeches that he needs to lift Edwards words? Great speech writers behind him ? Or not so great. Makes me disrespect him.

[dorkulon]

93. "Edwards repeatedly stealing Nader's themes..."

Nobody owns the issues.

[AzDar]

102. Obama just does not seems up to the job (yet).

[Annces]

103. You really have stamina

Every time I log in to DU, I see you posting something negative about Hillary or Obama.

[Political Heretic]

107. That is a good thing. It means that Edwards has an important effect on the race.

Pulling candidates more towards populism is a good thing.

[ProSense]

108. Obama is borrowing from Kerry

Edwards: here and here.

Kerry: here and here.

Kerry is the real deal!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

111. God This Is Getting Silly.

All the supporting evidence there is laughable. They're all cliches that I'd expect almost ANY Democratic candidate to say. Hey! Did you get that? Democratic candidate? Why's that matter? Ohhhhhhh, well maybe cause, ya know, like they're all DEMOCRATS, and therefore hold many common ideals and concepts, of which could come out similarly while campaigning?

GASP!!!!!! No way!!! Edwards 4 years ago said hard work should be valued, and now 4 years later Obama said we should respect work? OH MY GOD! CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!! DON'TCHA KNOW THAT ONLY EDWARDS CAN TALK ABOUT HARD WORK????? GRRRRR Obama... How DARE you speak of hard work. And no fucking way!!!! You had the NERVE to say that Washington must change? Don't you know that 5 years ago Edwards said that Washington needs to change, and now forever and always no Democratic candidate can ever speak such cliche again (though dozens have, repeatedly)????? How DARE you not know that OBAMA. GET A CLUE!!!!

And ughhhhh, you had the GALL to say the word 'fought'???? Don'tcha know that's John's favorite verb goddammit!!!! God Obama, you're just SOOOOOOOOO not ready yet, using the verb fought for god's sake. Sheesh...


What a silly fuckin thread LOL

[iamthebandfanman]

114. youre a silly thread! n/t

[Hoof Hearted]

120. did I hear a "niner" in there?

[jpgray]

117. Much as I like Edwards, these populist/outsider platitudes are as old as politics

I don't think any candidate could reasonably lay claim to them. And if Obama adds more populist, anti-corporate rhetoric, that's all to the good in my view.

[Didereaux]

131. well 'Si se Puede' is a trademark OWNED by the United Farm workers. Obama is a common plagiarist

After AeroMexico, a Mexican airline, had filed a trademark application for "Sí se puede" with the US Trademark Office, lawyers for the United Farm Workers defended the phrase as the intellectual property of the UFW. After litigation, AeroMexico agreed not to use the phrase and abandoned its trademark application.<1>


1.Arturo S. Rodriguez (1998-03-31). Statement from Arturo S. Rodriguez, President, United Farm Workers of America, Celebrating Cesar Chavez's Birthday 3/31/98-La Paz, Keene, Cal

----------------------------------------------------

Yes, all you little privates and corporals in the Kiddy Army, the phase is coopyrighted, no it does not matter that others have used it in the past. If Obama the great legal mind actually respected the laws of this country and the tenets of his profession he would co the courteous thing and ask permission of the UFW for it's use. But maybe you do reflect him more closely than some of us had HOPED for.

[stravu9]

151. Imitation Is The Sincerest Form Of Flattery!

OR so I've heard.
A SHAME he can't come up with his own material though!

[ihavenobias]

156. Clearly Edwards populist message is rubbing off

on Hillary and Obama, which is a good thing overall but annoying in the short run as an Edwards supporter, especially since most of the MSM isn't reporting it.

Even during Hillary's emotional moment the other day notice she said "this is personal for me, it's not political..." *directly* ripping off a line that Edwards said that same week during a debate.

I can only hope that if Edwards doesn't win his message still has some impact.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-real-case-against-hil_b_81248.html

[Radical Activist]

159. They've both had a similar message for a long time.

Even before this Presidential election started. Its one reason I think they would make a much better ticket together than Kerry-Edwards.

[Freddie Stubbs]

160. I suppose if they aren't working for Edwards someone ought ot put them to good use

[Kingofalldems]

168. DU member who attacks Democrats on a daily basis

Obama in GDP and Edwards in GD.

[casus belli]

174. Is there any such thing as an original stump speech?

I mean, to be fair all of the typical stump speeches rehash themes that have been used time and time again. Change. Hope. Helping the middle class. Yada yada yada. There's really no such thing as an original idea when it comes to American politics. And if you're too original, they hand you a tin foil hat and crucify you in the media.

edit: for failure to post without spell-checking.

[snooper2]

178. So this is why Edwards keeps saying,

"And I agree with what Barack just said" in all the debates?







just say NO!

Bush
Bush
Bush
Bush
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Bush
Bush
Bush
Bush
Bush
Bush
Bush
Bush
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton

[McCamy Taylor]

184. Edwards is the John the Baptist of this election cycle. Everyone is getting their material from him.

[balantz]

194. I've noticed. Have they no originality? How shameful. How thieving of them.

Are they really that shallow? What a scary thought. If either O. or C. is elected POTUS will they let their presidency be filled with others' words and thoughts and directions? Are they just cardboard props? Edwards has no speech writers. He is original, and the real deal.

[dchill]

187. I've noticed...

Hillary's doing it, too.

K & R.

[deacon]

188. The Gipper Obama is now crossed off my list. n/t

[David Zephyr]

196. More importantly, Hillary stole his entire health care proposal.

Cut and paste.

[B Calm]

206. I've lost all respect for Obama when he praised Reagan, but stealing

Edwards lines is even below that! This guy is a damn phony!

[Jed Dilligan]

207. Good. Edwards' themes in a viable candidate

is the best case scenario for this election.

[stravu9]

208. I Noticed

:-(
Does he have any original ideas?

[jlake]

212. Typical and expected.

[girl gone mad]

216. Glad someone else noticed it.

I watched a speech Edwards gave where he was talking about Warren Buffet's challenge to CEOs to prove they they payed taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries. The very next day, Obama copied this anecdote almost word for word during the Nevada debate. It couldn't have been a mere coincidence.

[GlendaleMan2007]

228. You people have a very short memory.

Ralph Nader said the exact same things that Edwards is saying now. Do you honestly think Edwards is being "original" here. The CEO's are waging war against working folk - WHOA! Now that's an original idea!

[depakid]

241. That's because he has a paucity of ideas of his own

but the man can give damn fine speech....

[Radical Activist]

246. These are common populist themes Obama has used for years.

Even back when Edwards was still a conservative Southern Democrat in the Senate.

[jackson_dem]

247. Another Obamite promoting the Big Lie about Edwards populist record

Tip of my hat to PurityOfEssence for his great job researching Edwards' record.

PurityOfEssence (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 Sun Jan-06-08 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. Repost of Edwards' Senate Record notes

Much has been said about Edwards’ supposedly conservative term in the Senate. Like much “common wisdom”, this is largely unfounded.

When remembering that he came as a neophyte from a rather red state, it’s quite surprising to see just how populist he was on many key social issues. (Well, it’s not surprising to many of us, but to those of you who’ve been poisoned with the endless snideness about the “new” Edwards and the “old” Edwards, it should be an eye-opener.)

He only sponsored two bills, but he co-sponsored a whopping 203 in his six-year term. This is a partial list of them (yes, I omitted the Patriot Act and IWR; much has already been said about them) and bears a quick skimming. They’re in chronological order, so details can be found fairly easily. The two bills he sponsored were for research into the “fragile x” chromosome associated with mental retardation, and the “Spyware Control and Privacy Act”, an important early bulwark against attempts to compromise our computer privacy. This last one is a true civil-rights issue, taking on corporations and attempting to secure the rights of individuals, and it’s visionary stuff.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SN03180:@@ ...

Russ Feingold said he was a “terrific asset” in getting campaign finance reform through. He was the person who deposed Lewinsky and Jordan in the impeachment trial; quite an important task to entrust to a newcomer in literally his first year in office. His opposition to Ashcroft in the confirmation hearings was vigorous and mesmerizing, even if it didn’t work. This is also the guy who tirelessly fought to keep the sunset provisions from being stripped out of the Patriot Act. His votes on labor and trade are solidly leftist, although he did vote for the China Trade Bill. Then again, since this was something Bill Clinton was solidly for, he was voting with his party. (Funny how Hillary supporters take him to task for this vote…) He also (along with Dodd and Biden) voted against the free trade bills with Singapore and Chile, unlike Senator Clinton, who voted for them.

Here’s a guy who constantly brought up the issue of “predatory lending” even though he hailed from a state with a huge banking and financial services industry. If you listen to or read his stump speeches from late ’02 and early ’03, you’ll wonder what the hell his detractors are talking about when they say that his populism is a new tack; his platform was economic and worker-oriented from the beginning, telling of how the Bush Administration was systematically shifting the burden of taxation from wealth to wages.

So here’s that partial list of the bills he co-sponsored. This is not a list of his votes, just those bills he actively got behind and worked to get passed. This is hardly the stuff of a closet conservative or an opportunist, as he’s been tarred, nor is it the record of someone who was just phoning it in. I would request, in interest of fairness, that the deriders among you at least skim through this VERY long list; it’s all pure fact.

When taking all this in context, it’s interesting to reflect on Kerry’s sneering that he probably couldn’t win re-election had he decided to run. Kerry may have been right on this point, but if so, it’s because of Edwards’ populism and social decency.

Details can be found here; each phrase separated by a comma is a particular bill, and in most cases attempt to use the bill’s title to lessen confusion and give the sense of the legislation.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d107&querybd ... (FLD004+@4((@1(Sen+Edwards++John))+01573)):

Sense of the Senate for funding lifestyle research for preventative medicine, Sense of the Senate honoring National Science Foundation, Sense of the Senate to preserve six day mail delivery, designating “biotechnology week”, Children’s Internet Safety Month, Joint Resolution against excessive campaign donations, to protect the civil rights of all Americans, Bi-partisan Campaign Reform, Restrict access to personal health and financial information, Establish a Center for National Social Work Research, provide more effective remedies for victims of sex discrimination in work, provide incentive for fair access to the internet for everyone, require fair availability of birth control, increase the minimum wage (’01), protect consumers in managed care programs, emergency relief for energy costs to small businesses, prohibit use of genetic information to discriminate on health coverage and employment, provide families with disabled children to buy into Medicaid, eliminate the loophole for interstate transporting of birds for fighting, provide funding to clean up contaminated land, informing veterans of available programs, Designating part of ANWR as wilderness, establish a digital network technology program, reduce the risk that innocent people be executed, restore funding for Social Security Block Grants, provide for equal coverage for mental health in insurance policies, amend Clean Air Act to reduce emissions from power plants, establish uniform election technology (sponsored by Dodd), extend modifications to funding for Medicare and Medicaid, Federal Funding to local governments to prosecute hate crimes, reinstate certain Social Security earnings exemptions for the blind, overhaul RR retirement plan to increase benefits, Establish a Nurse recruitment and retention program, amend FDA to provide greater access to affordable pharmaceuticals, Establish African American Museum within the Smithsonian, Federal funding for research of environmental factors in Breast Cancer, Increase hospital benefits under Medicare, Establish Tariff Quotas on milk protein imports, Federal funding for mental health community education, protect patients in managed care plans (again), establish Office on Women’s Health in HHS, increase the minimum wage, allow media coverage of trials, prohibit racial profiling, improve health care in rural areas, protect consumers in managed care plans, prohibiting trade of bear viscera, provide greater fairness in arbitration of motor vehicle franchises, provide adequate insurance coverage for immunosuppressive drugs, provide financial assistance for trade-affected communities, acquisition and improvement of child-care facilities, prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, establish programs to deal with nurse shortage, establish a National Cyber Defense Team to protect the internet’s infrastructure, provide services to prevent family violence, require criminal prosecution for securities fraud, reissuance of a rule on ergonomics, ensure safe pregnancy for all U.S. women, improve investigation and prosecution of rape cases with DNA evidence, improve national drought preparedness, increase the minimum wage (yet again), assistance in containing HIV/AIDS in foreign countries, emergency assistance for small-businesses affected by drought, child care and developmental block grants, provide economic security for America’s workers, enhance security for transporting nuclear waste, FEMA hazard mitigation grants, increase mental health benefits in health insurance, criminal prosecution for people who destroy evidence in securities fraud cases.

Is this the record of a corporate appeaser? Is this the record of someone just loafing about and collecting a paycheck?

Funny what you find when you read a little, isn’t it?

(end of post)

The Bush Cartel is Shivering In Its Boots About John Edwards: This is An Actual North Carolina GOP Alert Sent to a BuzzFlash Reader

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

Below is a copy of an actual GOP alert sent out by the North Carolina Republican Party.

It illustrates how frightened the GOP is of Edwards spoiling the Neo-Confederacy "Southern Strategy" that the Grand Hypocrisy Party (GHP) depends upon to win presidential elections.

Sincerely,

Buzz

* * *

Dear XXXX,

Senator John Edwards' (D-NC) latest effort to package himself as a "mainstream North Carolinian" is entirely contradicted by a four-year voting record that consistently puts ultra-liberal special interests ahead of the people he represents.

CNN's Candy Crowley: "I want to ask you, lastly, about the political spectrum and where you are on it. You are often described as having a liberal voting record. The liberal groups tend to give you high ratings. The conservative groups give you low ratings. Are you a liberal Democrat?

John Edwards: "I'm a mainstream North Carolinian. I think my views and my values represent the values of most people in this country." (CNN's Inside Politics, January 2, 2003)

Bill Cobey, Chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party had the following response: "Senator Edwards, your voting record does not lie. 'Mainstream North Carolinians' don't vote like Georgetown Liberals."

Edwards made similar assertions in 1998 when he promised the people of North Carolina that he would be a moderate voice in the U.S. Senate. Edwards' record, however, reveals the liberal truth:

Edwards' Voting Record Matches Those Of Senators Ted Kennedy And Hillary Clinton

From 1999-2002, Edwards Voted With Senator Ted Kennedy 90% Of The Time. (CQ Vote Comparison, CQ Online Website, www.oncongresscq.com, 106th and 107th Congresses)

From 2001-2002, Edwards Voted With Senator Hillary Clinton 89% Of The Time. (CQ Vote Comparison, CQ Online Website, www.oncongresscq.com, 107th Congress)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Business/Job Growth

Edwards Received A 0% Rating From The Small Business Survival Committee For His Voting Record In 2001. (Small Business Survival Committee Website, www.sbsc.org, accessed Dec.1, 2002)

Edwards Received A 17% Rating From The National Federation Of Independent Business For His Voting Record In 2001. (National Federation Of Independent Business, www.nfib.com, accessed Dec. 1, 2002)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Education

Edwards Voted Against The Creation Of A Demonstration Public School Choice Voucher Program For Disadvantaged Children. (Amendment to S. 1, Roll Call #179: Rejected 41-58: R 38-11; D 3-46; I 0-1, June 12, 2001)

In 2000, Edwards Voted Against The Creation Of Tax-Free Education Savings Accounts For Children To Be Used In The Payment Of Public Or Private School Tuition. (S. 1134, Roll Call #33: Passed 61-37: R 52-2; D 9-35, March 2, 2000)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Abortion

In June Of 2000, Edwards Voted Against Tabling An Amendment That Would Have Repealed The Ban On Privately Funded Abortions At Overseas Military Facilities. (Amendment to S. 2549, Roll Call #134: Passed 50-49: R 48-6; D 2-43, June 20, 2000)

In October Of 1999, Edwards Voted Against Passage Of A Bill To Ban Partial-Birth Abortions. (S. 1692, Roll Call #340: Passed 63-34: R 48-3; D 14-31; I 1-0, October 21, 1999)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Health Care And Social Issues

Edwards Called For A Federal Prescription-Drug Benefit And Lamented Over The Lack Of Universal Health Insurance For Children. "Moving to health care, Edwards - his words being recorded by a National Public Radio reporter sitting near his feet - again called for a federal prescription-drug benefit and decried the lack of universal insurance coverage for children. 'In America,' he intoned, 'that's wrong, and we need to do something about it.'" (Eric Dyer, "Testing The Waters?" News & Record, June 23, 2002)

In 2001, Edwards Voted To Table An Amendment That Would Have Prohibited The Use Of Public Funds For Needle Exchange Programs In The District Of Columbia. (Amendment to H.R. 2994, Roll Call #328: Motion To Table Passed 53-47: R 5-44; D 47-3; I 1-0, November 7, 2001)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Taxes/Fiscal Responsibility

Edwards Voted Against President Bush's Bipartisan Tax Relief Package. (H.R. 1836, Roll Call #170: Passed 58-33: R 46-2; D 12-31, May 26, 2001)

Edwards Voted Against Permanent Repeal Of The Estate Tax. (H.R. 8, Roll Call #151: Failed 54-44: R 45-2; D 9-42, June 12, 2002)

In 2001, Edwards Voted Against A Capital Gains Tax Rate Reduction. (Amendment To H.R. 1836, Roll Call #115: Failed 47-51: R 40-8; D 7-43, May 21, 2001)

In 2000, Edwards Voted Against A Bill That Would Have Reduced Taxes On Married Couples. (H.R. 4810, Roll Call #215: Adopted 61-38: R 53-1; D 8-37, July 18, 2000)

In 2000, Edwards Voted Against A Temporary Suspension Of The Gasoline Tax. (S. 2285, Roll Call #80: Failed 43-56: R 43-12; D 0-44, April 11, 2000)

Edwards' Liberal Record On The Environment

Edwards Argued That President Bush's New Source Review Plan "Defies Common Sense." 'It defies common sense to me,' said Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C." (Karen Masterson, "Port Arthur Activist Testifies Against Easing Clean Air Laws," The Houston Chronicle, July 17, 2002)

AT ODDS WITH FELLOW DEMOCRATS

On Trade Promotion Authority

Edwards Disagrees With Kerry, Daschle And Lieberman On Trade Promotion Authority. Edwards voted against trade promotion authority, but Kerry, Daschle and Lieberman voted for it. (H.R. 3009, Roll Call #207: Passed 64-34: R 43-5; D 20-29; I 1-0, August 1, 2002)

On Common Sense Tort Reform

Edwards Disagrees With Lieberman On Tort Reform. Unlike his Senate colleague Lieberman, Edwards adamantly opposes liability limits and civil justice reform. (Jill Zuckman, "Medical Bill," Chicago Tribune, June 24, 2001; Senator Lieberman, Press Conference, July 15, 1999)

When Asked By Bob Novak, Edwards Could Not Recall A Single Conservative Position That He Has Taken On An Issue As Senator. "'I could give you an answer to that question if you give me a little time to think about it.' - Democratic presidential aspirant Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, asked by columnist Robert D. Novak in...the American Spectator to recall any conservative position he's taken in the U.S. Senate ." (John McCaslin, "Dependably Liberal," The Washington Times, October 15, 2002)

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/03/01/14_Edwards.html

PurityOfEssence (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 Sun Dec-30-07 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #15
24. I agree; the repeated "fact" that he wasn't a populist to start with is simply wrong

If one looks at his record, one sees populism as a very clear through-line.

People wave the bloody shirt of Stephanopoulos' grilling of him as some kind of proof of his calumny, when those same people seem to forget that little Georgie's a Clinton operative of the first rank. His leap to prominence came from being a key member of Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, and he's a friend as well as a rooter. He has no more journalistic objectivity than James Carville does, and it's a form of deception to not have it tattooed on his forehead as he masquerades as a reporter.

Edwards is a classic Southern populist: pro-affirmative action, constantly trying to raise the minimum wage, for civil rights, for healthcare for the poor, pro-union and on and on. His Senate record is actually quite good, and I've posted to that effect. Anyone who has issues with this should look up the 203 bills he co-sponsored as a Senator.

It's all very convenient to say that he was a hawkish Democrat who changed his ways, but you'll note that the media NEVER tries to foist off the lie that he was a corporatist or anything of the sort. Except for this series of bills--which are hardly clear-cut, as I point out above--his record has been solidly for the little guy from the beginning. He voted for the China Bill, but that was Bill Clinton's pet and he was voting with his party. He voted AGAINST free trade with Singapore and Chile, and he's consistently voted for worker's rights, union rights, ergonomic rules, environmental protections and the usual "little guy" concerns. It's simply a chickenshit lie that he's only now become some kind of populist; his record shows that he has been all along.

Lest we forget, voting against tax cuts isn't that much of a personal risk for a John Kerry from Massachusetts, but it sure as hell is for a first-termer from North Carolina.

People constantly try to make complex situations simple, but they fall into one of the most despicable and self-congratulatory traps of human hypocrisy: flatly dismissing others as mere caricatures while demanding that they and their champions be given break after break and accorded the elaborate complexity of the gods. It's human nature, and it's the sucky part of human nature.

As for your primary point about admitting one's mistakes, I fully agree: the macho, blockheaded, uber-male approach of most politicians (regardless of gender) is tiresome, and to them, admitting a mistake is tantamount to admitting sheer worthlessness or admitting that they might occasionally pull over and ask for directions. Many people decry the inability of people to admit a mistake, but when someone actually does it, he/she gets pounced upon and torn limb from limb. It's vulgar and immature.

Why I shied away from addressing this first is that letting the conversation veer that way tacitly reinforces the big ugly stupid black-and-white lie that he's truly changed. He hasn't. He was good then and he's good now. Yes, he got suckered with the IWR, but Tenet looked him right in the eyes and lied to him. Others did too. Can you trust a man who changes his mind? Hey, at least you know he HAS one. He's done something truly courageous, and deserves a point or two for it. He also deserves points for addressing the issue of poverty; it's a sure vote-loser, but it's THE RIGHT THING TO DO and it's been his cause from the beginning.

Things aren't black or white, and those who insist they are are either fools or skunks. The very way bills are characterized is a good illustration of this, and it's important to try to see things in their totality and in their historical context.

Oh, and welcome to the board. I'm in LA; where are you?

(end of post)

Edwards's Record as A Freshman Senator
Lawmaker Labored on Issues Such as Health Care, Intelligence and Trade

-snip-

Edwards has little in the way of concrete legislative achievements, but he gained attention on issues ranging from health care to intelligence to environmental protection.

While aspiring to build a national profile, Edwards also labored on issues important to his home state, such as proposing amendments to help textile workers who were losing their jobs to lower-wage workers in other nations. In recent weeks, he increasingly has raised trade issues in trying to differentiate himself from Kerry.

-snip-

He voted to support abortion rights, authorize the war in Iraq, require criminal background checks on buyers at gun shows, block the confirmation of some of President Bush's most conservative judicial nominees, and prohibit oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

-snip-

But it was the patients' bill of rights, which Edwards had championed in his 1998 Senate campaign, that proved to be his biggest accomplishment -- and disappointment.

-snip-

Edwards voted against trade pacts with Chile, Singapore and Africa, which Kerry supported. But he voted in 2000 to grant most-favored-nation trading status to China, as did Kerry and most other senators. "I think it's clear that Senator Kerry and I have very different records on trade," Edwards recently told reporters. On the same day, Kerry declared: "We have the same policy on trade -- exactly the same policy."

In discussing trade, Edwards focuses on the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement, which was enacted with Kerry's support five years before Edwards entered the Senate. While his campaign statements assert that "Edwards has consistently opposed NAFTA," the North Carolina senator recently told New York Times editors that NAFTA "is an important part of our global economy," although he wants tougher protections for the environment and worker conditions.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15414-20 ...

Clinton Defense Leader in Impeachment Trial

Kennedy-Edwards-McCain Patients' Bill of Rights

Kennedy-Edwards Minimum Wage Raise Laws

Vote Against Bush's First Taxgiveaway

Vote Against Bush's Second Taxgiveaway

Vote Against $87 Billion "I support Bush's War Bill"

Wrote Bill that allowed individuals to buy prescription drugs from Canada

Wrote and Sponsored Bill that would make sexual orientation a legally protected category in job discrimination

Wrote Sunset Provision into Patriot Act

Floor leader for Feingold-McCain Campaign Finance Reform.

Voted against the Chilean trade agreement, against the Caribbean trade agreement, against the Singapore trade agreement, against final passage of fast track for this president.

Actually defeated a Republican incumbent in a Red State who had the Helms Machine with him.

[Radical Activist]

248. 59% career rating with the League of Conservation voters

Similarly poor rating with the ACLU. Voted for the war in Iraq. I know what his record is.
Conservative may be harsh. Maybe it was merely moderate. It was nothing like his progressive rhetoric of today.

[jackson_dem]

249. 100% ratings from labor groups and 97% from the NAACP

I posted his overall record. You did the classic Obamite and Obama game of flyspecking a few votes out of thousands and presenting it in the worst possible light. This is exactly what Obama was crying about last night when it was finally done to him. :eyes:

Edwards has always been an economic populist. That is what we are talking about. You then switched to talking about the environment, war, and ACLU. No one has ever said he was a social issues crusader in the Senate.

[Radical Activist]

254. No, that's not what I did at all.

I didn't pick out a few votes. I listed ratings from two groups that measured many votes over his entire career. That's part of his overall record. I'm sure you can cherrypick from any Democrats record to make him/her appear progressive if you don't include the bad votes. Hillary and Lieberman can do that too.

You can limit your discussion to populism if you want but my comment was about him being more conservative to moderate then than he is now. There are conservative populists too. You really have to be a blind follower to not see that he has changed dramatically.

[jackson_dem]

257. What does the ACLU and LCV have to do with Edwards' long record of economic populism?

He has changed on issues, like every other politician does over time. At the core he is what he always was: an economic populist.

Politicians have issues they emphasize. Edwards' has always been focused on the interest of working folk.

You just did it again with Hillary. Hillary's record is just like Obama's. Yet, you Obamites make St. Obama into the reincarnation of Paul Wellstone and make Hillary out to be another Lieberman when they have the same voting record and same interest group ratings.

[Radical Activist]

260. You don't get to decide what I'm writing about.

I wrote about Edwards being more conservative to moderate as a Senator, and I'm allowed to keep writing about that even if you don't enjoy hearing the truth. You don't get to limit the discussion to populism just because it benefits your candidate to ignore certain realities.

Obama has the most consistent progressive record throughout his career of any candidate other than Kucinich. I'm sorry to see that you've bought the bogus spin about Obama being just like Hillary. I hope someday that you'll learn about the real Obama rather than the fictional character I've seen so many hack job blog posts about. Obama's record for over ten years is far more progressive than Edwards' record.

[jackson_dem]

262. Obama has shifted to the right as the voters he seeks become more conservative

As Obama moves up the political ladder.

Obama and Hillary have the same record. They vote together 90% of the time. They get similar ratings. How can you say one is a progressive and the other a right-winger? There isn't a fictional Obama in the Senate; there is a fictional conservative Hillary.

[ProSense]

250. Who are you trying to

kid?

[jackson_dem]

252. Who are YOU trying to kid? St. Obama has never changed positions?

Your hero Kerry hasn't? :rofl:

Obama's record was finally put on the table last night. It has as many warts as anyone else's. He is not the Saint his flock "believe" and "hope" he is.

[ProSense]

258. No, Kerry hasn't change his positions to pander.

Remember he did vote for on version of the $87 billion bill before he voted against a version that was they stripped of a key provision.That's smart and principled, despite the RW flip flop meme.

Edwards on the other hand stripped his anti corporate platform from Kerry, and still didn't go far enough.

[jackson_dem]

261. lol. Kerry before an Arab group: against the Israeli barrier

Kerry before a Jewish group: for it.

Kerry: for the IWR, then against it.
Kerry: for the Patriot Act, then against it.
Kerry: for every free trade bill that comes down the pike, then runs on fair trade
Kerry: for No Child Left Behind, then against it.

In short, I just off the top of my head listed the very same three of the four or five bills out of thousands Obamites and Obama have used to swiftboat Edwards for a year.

Kerry's top 10 flip flops: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/29/politics/main646435.shtml

[ProSense]

263. Ah, the old RW flip flop meme

all wrong, for example Kerry led this effort.

It's hard to vote smart and principled, first you have to know the issues inside and out. It's easy to pander and run on a track without a record.




edited wrong word

[jackson_dem]

264. Exactly the meme Obamites now use against Edwards

[ProSense]

265. No, Edwards used it against Edwards.

The meme is made up by the media. The video is Edwards in his own words on his changing positions.

[jackson_dem]

266. You think there isn't video of St. Obama doing the same or Kerry?

There is a video in the video forum right now documenting one of several Obama's changes of position.

[ProSense]

267. No, there isn't. n/t

[jackson_dem]

269. Talk about blind faith

[Skwmom]

251. Oh please, like Like Edwards coined these phrases? Plus if your opponent constantly

talks about how he's walked the picket lines, etc. (leaving out the fact that he only became Johnny populist after running for President - sorry John supporters a personal injury attorney does not a populist make), why would you not point out your own activist history - history that occurred PRIOR to running for President.

Read your history. Read what others have said. Do you think any of Edwards themes or statements are original?

[jackson_dem]

253. Another Obamite promoting the Big Lie about Edwards populist record

Tip of my hat to PurityOfEssence for his great job researching Edwards' record.

PurityOfEssence (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 Sun Jan-06-08 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. Repost of Edwards' Senate Record notes

Much has been said about Edwards’ supposedly conservative term in the Senate. Like much “common wisdom”, this is largely unfounded.

When remembering that he came as a neophyte from a rather red state, it’s quite surprising to see just how populist he was on many key social issues. (Well, it’s not surprising to many of us, but to those of you who’ve been poisoned with the endless snideness about the “new” Edwards and the “old” Edwards, it should be an eye-opener.)

He only sponsored two bills, but he co-sponsored a whopping 203 in his six-year term. This is a partial list of them (yes, I omitted the Patriot Act and IWR; much has already been said about them) and bears a quick skimming. They’re in chronological order, so details can be found fairly easily. The two bills he sponsored were for research into the “fragile x” chromosome associated with mental retardation, and the “Spyware Control and Privacy Act”, an important early bulwark against attempts to compromise our computer privacy. This last one is a true civil-rights issue, taking on corporations and attempting to secure the rights of individuals, and it’s visionary stuff.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SN03180:@@ ...

Russ Feingold said he was a “terrific asset” in getting campaign finance reform through. He was the person who deposed Lewinsky and Jordan in the impeachment trial; quite an important task to entrust to a newcomer in literally his first year in office. His opposition to Ashcroft in the confirmation hearings was vigorous and mesmerizing, even if it didn’t work. This is also the guy who tirelessly fought to keep the sunset provisions from being stripped out of the Patriot Act. His votes on labor and trade are solidly leftist, although he did vote for the China Trade Bill. Then again, since this was something Bill Clinton was solidly for, he was voting with his party. (Funny how Hillary supporters take him to task for this vote…) He also (along with Dodd and Biden) voted against the free trade bills with Singapore and Chile, unlike Senator Clinton, who voted for them.

Here’s a guy who constantly brought up the issue of “predatory lending” even though he hailed from a state with a huge banking and financial services industry. If you listen to or read his stump speeches from late ’02 and early ’03, you’ll wonder what the hell his detractors are talking about when they say that his populism is a new tack; his platform was economic and worker-oriented from the beginning, telling of how the Bush Administration was systematically shifting the burden of taxation from wealth to wages.

So here’s that partial list of the bills he co-sponsored. This is not a list of his votes, just those bills he actively got behind and worked to get passed. This is hardly the stuff of a closet conservative or an opportunist, as he’s been tarred, nor is it the record of someone who was just phoning it in. I would request, in interest of fairness, that the deriders among you at least skim through this VERY long list; it’s all pure fact.

When taking all this in context, it’s interesting to reflect on Kerry’s sneering that he probably couldn’t win re-election had he decided to run. Kerry may have been right on this point, but if so, it’s because of Edwards’ populism and social decency.

Details can be found here; each phrase separated by a comma is a particular bill, and in most cases attempt to use the bill’s title to lessen confusion and give the sense of the legislation.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d107&querybd ... (FLD004+@4((@1(Sen+Edwards++John))+01573)):

Sense of the Senate for funding lifestyle research for preventative medicine, Sense of the Senate honoring National Science Foundation, Sense of the Senate to preserve six day mail delivery, designating “biotechnology week”, Children’s Internet Safety Month, Joint Resolution against excessive campaign donations, to protect the civil rights of all Americans, Bi-partisan Campaign Reform, Restrict access to personal health and financial information, Establish a Center for National Social Work Research, provide more effective remedies for victims of sex discrimination in work, provide incentive for fair access to the internet for everyone, require fair availability of birth control, increase the minimum wage (’01), protect consumers in managed care programs, emergency relief for energy costs to small businesses, prohibit use of genetic information to discriminate on health coverage and employment, provide families with disabled children to buy into Medicaid, eliminate the loophole for interstate transporting of birds for fighting, provide funding to clean up contaminated land, informing veterans of available programs, Designating part of ANWR as wilderness, establish a digital network technology program, reduce the risk that innocent people be executed, restore funding for Social Security Block Grants, provide for equal coverage for mental health in insurance policies, amend Clean Air Act to reduce emissions from power plants, establish uniform election technology (sponsored by Dodd), extend modifications to funding for Medicare and Medicaid, Federal Funding to local governments to prosecute hate crimes, reinstate certain Social Security earnings exemptions for the blind, overhaul RR retirement plan to increase benefits, Establish a Nurse recruitment and retention program, amend FDA to provide greater access to affordable pharmaceuticals, Establish African American Museum within the Smithsonian, Federal funding for research of environmental factors in Breast Cancer, Increase hospital benefits under Medicare, Establish Tariff Quotas on milk protein imports, Federal funding for mental health community education, protect patients in managed care plans (again), establish Office on Women’s Health in HHS, increase the minimum wage, allow media coverage of trials, prohibit racial profiling, improve health care in rural areas, protect consumers in managed care plans, prohibiting trade of bear viscera, provide greater fairness in arbitration of motor vehicle franchises, provide adequate insurance coverage for immunosuppressive drugs, provide financial assistance for trade-affected communities, acquisition and improvement of child-care facilities, prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, establish programs to deal with nurse shortage, establish a National Cyber Defense Team to protect the internet’s infrastructure, provide services to prevent family violence, require criminal prosecution for securities fraud, reissuance of a rule on ergonomics, ensure safe pregnancy for all U.S. women, improve investigation and prosecution of rape cases with DNA evidence, improve national drought preparedness, increase the minimum wage (yet again), assistance in containing HIV/AIDS in foreign countries, emergency assistance for small-businesses affected by drought, child care and developmental block grants, provide economic security for America’s workers, enhance security for transporting nuclear waste, FEMA hazard mitigation grants, increase mental health benefits in health insurance, criminal prosecution for people who destroy evidence in securities fraud cases.

Is this the record of a corporate appeaser? Is this the record of someone just loafing about and collecting a paycheck?

Funny what you find when you read a little, isn’t it?

(end of post)

The Bush Cartel is Shivering In Its Boots About John Edwards: This is An Actual North Carolina GOP Alert Sent to a BuzzFlash Reader

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

Below is a copy of an actual GOP alert sent out by the North Carolina Republican Party.

It illustrates how frightened the GOP is of Edwards spoiling the Neo-Confederacy "Southern Strategy" that the Grand Hypocrisy Party (GHP) depends upon to win presidential elections.

Sincerely,

Buzz

* * *

Dear XXXX,

Senator John Edwards' (D-NC) latest effort to package himself as a "mainstream North Carolinian" is entirely contradicted by a four-year voting record that consistently puts ultra-liberal special interests ahead of the people he represents.

CNN's Candy Crowley: "I want to ask you, lastly, about the political spectrum and where you are on it. You are often described as having a liberal voting record. The liberal groups tend to give you high ratings. The conservative groups give you low ratings. Are you a liberal Democrat?

John Edwards: "I'm a mainstream North Carolinian. I think my views and my values represent the values of most people in this country." (CNN's Inside Politics, January 2, 2003)

Bill Cobey, Chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party had the following response: "Senator Edwards, your voting record does not lie. 'Mainstream North Carolinians' don't vote like Georgetown Liberals."

Edwards made similar assertions in 1998 when he promised the people of North Carolina that he would be a moderate voice in the U.S. Senate. Edwards' record, however, reveals the liberal truth:

Edwards' Voting Record Matches Those Of Senators Ted Kennedy And Hillary Clinton

From 1999-2002, Edwards Voted With Senator Ted Kennedy 90% Of The Time. (CQ Vote Comparison, CQ Online Website, www.oncongresscq.com, 106th and 107th Congresses)

From 2001-2002, Edwards Voted With Senator Hillary Clinton 89% Of The Time. (CQ Vote Comparison, CQ Online Website, www.oncongresscq.com, 107th Congress)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Business/Job Growth

Edwards Received A 0% Rating From The Small Business Survival Committee For His Voting Record In 2001. (Small Business Survival Committee Website, www.sbsc.org, accessed Dec.1, 2002)

Edwards Received A 17% Rating From The National Federation Of Independent Business For His Voting Record In 2001. (National Federation Of Independent Business, www.nfib.com, accessed Dec. 1, 2002)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Education

Edwards Voted Against The Creation Of A Demonstration Public School Choice Voucher Program For Disadvantaged Children. (Amendment to S. 1, Roll Call #179: Rejected 41-58: R 38-11; D 3-46; I 0-1, June 12, 2001)

In 2000, Edwards Voted Against The Creation Of Tax-Free Education Savings Accounts For Children To Be Used In The Payment Of Public Or Private School Tuition. (S. 1134, Roll Call #33: Passed 61-37: R 52-2; D 9-35, March 2, 2000)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Abortion

In June Of 2000, Edwards Voted Against Tabling An Amendment That Would Have Repealed The Ban On Privately Funded Abortions At Overseas Military Facilities. (Amendment to S. 2549, Roll Call #134: Passed 50-49: R 48-6; D 2-43, June 20, 2000)

In October Of 1999, Edwards Voted Against Passage Of A Bill To Ban Partial-Birth Abortions. (S. 1692, Roll Call #340: Passed 63-34: R 48-3; D 14-31; I 1-0, October 21, 1999)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Health Care And Social Issues

Edwards Called For A Federal Prescription-Drug Benefit And Lamented Over The Lack Of Universal Health Insurance For Children. "Moving to health care, Edwards - his words being recorded by a National Public Radio reporter sitting near his feet - again called for a federal prescription-drug benefit and decried the lack of universal insurance coverage for children. 'In America,' he intoned, 'that's wrong, and we need to do something about it.'" (Eric Dyer, "Testing The Waters?" News & Record, June 23, 2002)

In 2001, Edwards Voted To Table An Amendment That Would Have Prohibited The Use Of Public Funds For Needle Exchange Programs In The District Of Columbia. (Amendment to H.R. 2994, Roll Call #328: Motion To Table Passed 53-47: R 5-44; D 47-3; I 1-0, November 7, 2001)

Edwards' Liberal Record On Taxes/Fiscal Responsibility

Edwards Voted Against President Bush's Bipartisan Tax Relief Package. (H.R. 1836, Roll Call #170: Passed 58-33: R 46-2; D 12-31, May 26, 2001)

Edwards Voted Against Permanent Repeal Of The Estate Tax. (H.R. 8, Roll Call #151: Failed 54-44: R 45-2; D 9-42, June 12, 2002)

In 2001, Edwards Voted Against A Capital Gains Tax Rate Reduction. (Amendment To H.R. 1836, Roll Call #115: Failed 47-51: R 40-8; D 7-43, May 21, 2001)

In 2000, Edwards Voted Against A Bill That Would Have Reduced Taxes On Married Couples. (H.R. 4810, Roll Call #215: Adopted 61-38: R 53-1; D 8-37, July 18, 2000)

In 2000, Edwards Voted Against A Temporary Suspension Of The Gasoline Tax. (S. 2285, Roll Call #80: Failed 43-56: R 43-12; D 0-44, April 11, 2000)

Edwards' Liberal Record On The Environment

Edwards Argued That President Bush's New Source Review Plan "Defies Common Sense." 'It defies common sense to me,' said Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C." (Karen Masterson, "Port Arthur Activist Testifies Against Easing Clean Air Laws," The Houston Chronicle, July 17, 2002)

AT ODDS WITH FELLOW DEMOCRATS

On Trade Promotion Authority

Edwards Disagrees With Kerry, Daschle And Lieberman On Trade Promotion Authority. Edwards voted against trade promotion authority, but Kerry, Daschle and Lieberman voted for it. (H.R. 3009, Roll Call #207: Passed 64-34: R 43-5; D 20-29; I 1-0, August 1, 2002)

On Common Sense Tort Reform

Edwards Disagrees With Lieberman On Tort Reform. Unlike his Senate colleague Lieberman, Edwards adamantly opposes liability limits and civil justice reform. (Jill Zuckman, "Medical Bill," Chicago Tribune, June 24, 2001; Senator Lieberman, Press Conference, July 15, 1999)

When Asked By Bob Novak, Edwards Could Not Recall A Single Conservative Position That He Has Taken On An Issue As Senator. "'I could give you an answer to that question if you give me a little time to think about it.' - Democratic presidential aspirant Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, asked by columnist Robert D. Novak in...the American Spectator to recall any conservative position he's taken in the U.S. Senate ." (John McCaslin, "Dependably Liberal," The Washington Times, October 15, 2002)

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/03/01/14_Edwards.html

PurityOfEssence (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 Sun Dec-30-07 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #15
24. I agree; the repeated "fact" that he wasn't a populist to start with is simply wrong

If one looks at his record, one sees populism as a very clear through-line.

People wave the bloody shirt of Stephanopoulos' grilling of him as some kind of proof of his calumny, when those same people seem to forget that little Georgie's a Clinton operative of the first rank. His leap to prominence came from being a key member of Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, and he's a friend as well as a rooter. He has no more journalistic objectivity than James Carville does, and it's a form of deception to not have it tattooed on his forehead as he masquerades as a reporter.

Edwards is a classic Southern populist: pro-affirmative action, constantly trying to raise the minimum wage, for civil rights, for healthcare for the poor, pro-union and on and on. His Senate record is actually quite good, and I've posted to that effect. Anyone who has issues with this should look up the 203 bills he co-sponsored as a Senator.

It's all very convenient to say that he was a hawkish Democrat who changed his ways, but you'll note that the media NEVER tries to foist off the lie that he was a corporatist or anything of the sort. Except for this series of bills--which are hardly clear-cut, as I point out above--his record has been solidly for the little guy from the beginning. He voted for the China Bill, but that was Bill Clinton's pet and he was voting with his party. He voted AGAINST free trade with Singapore and Chile, and he's consistently voted for worker's rights, union rights, ergonomic rules, environmental protections and the usual "little guy" concerns. It's simply a chickenshit lie that he's only now become some kind of populist; his record shows that he has been all along.

Lest we forget, voting against tax cuts isn't that much of a personal risk for a John Kerry from Massachusetts, but it sure as hell is for a first-termer from North Carolina.

People constantly try to make complex situations simple, but they fall into one of the most despicable and self-congratulatory traps of human hypocrisy: flatly dismissing others as mere caricatures while demanding that they and their champions be given break after break and accorded the elaborate complexity of the gods. It's human nature, and it's the sucky part of human nature.

As for your primary point about admitting one's mistakes, I fully agree: the macho, blockheaded, uber-male approach of most politicians (regardless of gender) is tiresome, and to them, admitting a mistake is tantamount to admitting sheer worthlessness or admitting that they might occasionally pull over and ask for directions. Many people decry the inability of people to admit a mistake, but when someone actually does it, he/she gets pounced upon and torn limb from limb. It's vulgar and immature.

Why I shied away from addressing this first is that letting the conversation veer that way tacitly reinforces the big ugly stupid black-and-white lie that he's truly changed. He hasn't. He was good then and he's good now. Yes, he got suckered with the IWR, but Tenet looked him right in the eyes and lied to him. Others did too. Can you trust a man who changes his mind? Hey, at least you know he HAS one. He's done something truly courageous, and deserves a point or two for it. He also deserves points for addressing the issue of poverty; it's a sure vote-loser, but it's THE RIGHT THING TO DO and it's been his cause from the beginning.

Things aren't black or white, and those who insist they are are either fools or skunks. The very way bills are characterized is a good illustration of this, and it's important to try to see things in their totality and in their historical context.

Oh, and welcome to the board. I'm in LA; where are you?

(end of post)

Edwards's Record as A Freshman Senator
Lawmaker Labored on Issues Such as Health Care, Intelligence and Trade

-snip-

Edwards has little in the way of concrete legislative achievements, but he gained attention on issues ranging from health care to intelligence to environmental protection.

While aspiring to build a national profile, Edwards also labored on issues important to his home state, such as proposing amendments to help textile workers who were losing their jobs to lower-wage workers in other nations. In recent weeks, he increasingly has raised trade issues in trying to differentiate himself from Kerry.

-snip-

He voted to support abortion rights, authorize the war in Iraq, require criminal background checks on buyers at gun shows, block the confirmation of some of President Bush's most conservative judicial nominees, and prohibit oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

-snip-

But it was the patients' bill of rights, which Edwards had championed in his 1998 Senate campaign, that proved to be his biggest accomplishment -- and disappointment.

-snip-

Edwards voted against trade pacts with Chile, Singapore and Africa, which Kerry supported. But he voted in 2000 to grant most-favored-nation trading status to China, as did Kerry and most other senators. "I think it's clear that Senator Kerry and I have very different records on trade," Edwards recently told reporters. On the same day, Kerry declared: "We have the same policy on trade -- exactly the same policy."

In discussing trade, Edwards focuses on the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement, which was enacted with Kerry's support five years before Edwards entered the Senate. While his campaign statements assert that "Edwards has consistently opposed NAFTA," the North Carolina senator recently told New York Times editors that NAFTA "is an important part of our global economy," although he wants tougher protections for the environment and worker conditions.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15414-20 ...

Clinton Defense Leader in Impeachment Trial

Kennedy-Edwards-McCain Patients' Bill of Rights

Kennedy-Edwards Minimum Wage Raise Laws

Vote Against Bush's First Taxgiveaway

Vote Against Bush's Second Taxgiveaway

Vote Against $87 Billion "I support Bush's War Bill"

Wrote Bill that allowed individuals to buy prescription drugs from Canada

Wrote and Sponsored Bill that would make sexual orientation a legally protected category in job discrimination

Wrote Sunset Provision into Patriot Act

Floor leader for Feingold-McCain Campaign Finance Reform.

Voted against the Chilean trade agreement, against the Caribbean trade agreement, against the Singapore trade agreement, against final passage of fast track for this president.

Actually defeated a Republican incumbent in a Red State who had the Helms Machine with him.
"We've cast hundreds and hundreds of votes. What you're criticizing her for, by the way, you've done to us, which is you pick this vote and that vote out of the hundreds that we've cast." Edwards calling Obama out for his hypocrisy in the CNN debate

jackson_dem (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Tue Jan-22-08 02:33 PM
Original message
The truth: Edwards' voting record on trade is like Ted Kennedy's

Edwards

Date Bill Title Vote
07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 N
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill N
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill N

Edwards also opposed South Korea trade, Peru trade, and CAFTA since leaving the Senate. I don't know if he commented on Oman but he presumably would have also voted against that.

Kennedy

07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 N
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill N
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill NV

[Skwmom]

256. Please. I've felt like this about Edwards ever since he started running for President

in the 2004 election. As Feingold said "Edwards is running on my record."

[jackson_dem]

259. Feingold picked out four votes out of thousands

What did St. Obama say about that yesterday? One of those votes passed 98-1, the other was a bipartisan bill that looked reasonable at the time and was written by Ted Kennedy (did Feingold tell you it passed 87-10?). He cited China trade. He didn't mention it passed 83-15, was pushed by a Democratic president, why it was enacted, and that no less a progressive and champion of working folk than Ted Kennedy voted for it. That leaves one that I don't remember. Anyway, what about the remaining thousands of votes Feingold didn't bother to mention?

[Dr Fate]

268. Better than cribbing from Hill. n/t

n/t