Edwards: Confederacy Dispute 'Dangerous'

[Khephra]

Edwards: Confederacy Dispute 'Dangerous'
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: November 9, 2003


Filed at 10:24 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- North Carolina Senator John Edwards says the recent Confederate flag flap ignited by presidential rival Howard Dean is ``dangerous'' to the Democratic Party.

Edwards told NBC's ``Meet the Press'' that Dean's comments were not just about the South or about a divisive symbol. ``I think it's even bigger than that,'' said Edwards.

more....short bit......

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Edwards-Confederate-Flag.html

[virtualobserver]

1. except that the flap wasn't ignited by Dean........

His Democratic "friends" were crowded around a Confederate flag with matches and lighter fluid trying to ignite it.

[Born Free]

22. Like it or not it is part of American heritage

Many people I know see the Confederate flag only as a symbol of American heritage. Many do feel the movement against the flag is a movement against America, as they believe the war was never about "freeing" the slaves, that was an add on. These people are not racist but believe democrats are trying to erase American Heritage that should not be forgotten. Interesting note, one republican I know recently asked about Dean, said he heard the flap and was glad to see Howard Dean stood up to the "PC" police.

There is an old saying, the best way to eliminate an enemy is to make him your friend. We can do much more by bringing these "flaggers" into the democratic tent and have them work side by side with others to become friends. The GOP likes to keep everyone fighting between their own groups, they feed on this hatred, by uniting we can in fact beat the GOP and start improving conditions in America. Hate is not the answer and that includes hating the poor whites, which need as much help as any other poor group in America. This is not to say we must neglect any group that needs help, but rather that we should not exclude any group because we don't like their beliefs.

[moondust]

23. Like the Nazi flag is part of "German heritage"?

The Germans wisely banned it after the war. Some things are best left for dead.

[Bandit]

37. I agree with a lot of what you say

The part about eliminating an enemy by making them a friend. I don't agree that we need to celibrate something just because it is part of our history. You can say heritage but the Confederacy is the heritage of treason. We also slaughtered the Indians. Should we fly the 7th Cav. flag to show our heritage of slaughtering the indians? Remember the South declared war on America not the other way around. However I do like the idea of including a lot of those who think it is cool to have a confederate flag on their car into the Democratic Party so they can become educated to just how the GOP uses them and relies on them and their ignorance to win elections. They are the ones who need the Democrats the most and don't know it yet. I think a large portion of them are really good intentioned people who have been brainwashed into believing what is good for the wealthiest is good for them even as they stay poor or get poorer.

[candy331]

2. Edwards is right it

is bigger than a divisive symbol. What I didn't hear him say is how to work towards the symbol being a non divisive issue.

[Eloriel]

5. Oh, but then what would he pummel Dean about the head and

shoulders over?

Goddamned hypocrite.

Oh, that's good. I just read his comment. He is accusing Dean of doing exactly OPPOSITE of what Dean is actually doing. Bastard. Goddamned hypocritic bastard.

Eloriel

[Classical_Liberal]

11. Damn right he is a hypocrite

He used a neoconfederate intimidation tactic to demogogue Dean on it too. How is saying "We don't want you(Yankees) coming down here to the South and telling us what to do", any different than the Rebel Flag in terms of it's association with Jim Crow.

[kayell]

24. The important words he spoke

``What voters in this country want is, they want us to treat them with respect, wherever they live, whatever part of the country, whatever their financial condition, who their family is,'' he said. ``It is enormously important for us as a party to not be elite, to not look down on people and talk down to them, but to give them the kind of respect that they're entitled to.

It is precisly the kind of thing our candidates need to hear if they want to win the South. Living here, I deeply desire the Dems to win the South, but I see people with the knee-jerk responce that all southerners are bigots or poor trash as cutting off any chance of that.

"We don't want you(Yankees) coming down here to the South and telling us what to do" isn't about Jim Crow, it's about northerners who move down and immediately start telling people how they would do it. You probably have a relative or acquantince who always tells you how you should manage your life better (by following their plan). Do you enjoy their company?

I've had (some) northerners make more assumptions about what I believe, simply because of my geography, than I can stand. I've had people ask me why we do everything so slow (it's the heat idiot), why we talk funny, why we're all bigots (we're not), why someone doesn't do something about saving the beaches right after they bought another new condo on the beach, why we are so poor (why don't we try harder) and endless more. It is incredibly irritating.

Edwards isn't my candidate, but his words should be listened to by our candidates, and by many people here at DU.


Edited because he evidently did make the yankees coming down south comment. I would like people to try the experiment of living as a southerner for a few weeks, and see how you feel about it. Believe me, nowadays this comment has nothing to do with racism, and everything to do with people who think that they are better than southerner, simply because they were born elsewhere. And yes, I have heard southern blacks make this remark also, often about northern blacks. A certain percentage of northerners are just incredibly condescending to us poor beknighted people.

[AP]

3. NYT gets right a fine point which NPR misrepresented...

"Defending his record on guns, Dean recently told a newspaper that he wanted to be ``the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks.'' He has since apologized."

NPR didn't point out that it was this quote that triggered the criticism. They pretended it was the months old stump speech, which is awkward, but reasonable.

Incidentally, this NYT report is based on Edwards's comment on Meet the Whores. This isn't based on any subsequent interview or information. It's just what we heard earlier today.

[Classical_Liberal]

12. Actually the NYT is misrepresenting rather than NPR

the NYT cut out the rest of the stump speech.

[AP]

29. Now, why would the NYT want to lie like NPR did by pretending

that it was the stump speech that triggered the criticism when it was actually the quote in the Iowa paper, which was in response to a question about the NRA?

I understand why Dean and his supporters need to mitigate the damage by pretending the more reasonable phrasing of the stump speech was the ONLY way he phrased the issue. That part I understand. By why should the media lie about it?

[Syrinx]

4. sheesh

It was Edwards and Sharpton and Kerry that were being divisive.

Don't get me wrong. I haven't committed to Dean, and will vote for the nominee, but this is getting silly. Move on already.

[Cloud]

6. I think Dean is being treated unfairly

What I think he meant was that we need to appeal to a broad range of people to win this election. Just the same way as FDR and Andrew Jackson won the election. They both appealed to the common man.

I think Dean is trying to get those so called "Good ole boys" to vote for their best interest. Universal Health Care and economic growth is in everyones best interest.

He was just using a stereotype that all good ole boys in the south have rebel flag decals on their pickup trucks.

Just remember, assuming the Dems carry the same states as Gore did in 2000 all we would need is to convert just one state that went for Bush.

[Maddy McCall]

7. He's right on this point:

``What voters in this country want is, they want us to treat them with respect, wherever they live, whatever part of the country, whatever their financial condition, who their family is,'' he said. ``It is enormously important for us as a party to not be elite, to not look down on people and talk down to them, but to give them the kind of respect that they're entitled to.''
***********


Anyone with a sense of cultural relativity would understand why he's right.

[loyalsister]

15. This is why

what Gep said sounded elitist. "I'm too good to accept the vote of a racist." Yes they are abhorant attitudes, but it must be remembered that the relationship between the culture a person is embedded in will influence the attitudes they develop and not everyone takes the initiative to educate themselves. This should not disqualify them from benefitting from what we as Democrats have to offer.
If we are inclined to help to improve the life circumstances for those on the lower rungs, there is going to be a diverse mix of attitudes. Not all of them pretty since the education level is pretty closely related to those circumstances in some cases. We are not about thought control. It is elitist to claim that any person who has a backward (for lack of better word) view of race is totally unworthy of any sort of attention from those who want to be our public servants. "They're dumb" or "they're morally inferior" why should a politician care what they think or want? Where have we heard that kind of rhetoric before?
If Edwards hadn't jumped on the bandwagon with Gep and Kerry, he would have some credibility here.

[drfemoe]

8. His bs gets weaker and weaker

every time he talks about it .. HE is the condescending one.

Is north carolina even going to have a dem primary? south carolina is trying to raise enough money to have one .. so far it has been cancelled .. they won't even have the chance to vote in a dem primary ..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3368141,00.html

[AP]

9. and his truth gets stronger and stronger. There's an inverse relationship.

[Classical_Liberal]

13. What about Edwards's gaff

saying "we don't want you(yankees} coming down here and telling us what to do!" (stirring up our black folks!) Time for Dean to do some payback. I would also do some lexxus nexxus research on Edwards claiming the flag was a frivolous culture war issue! He did that in just the last couple of months.

[Classical_Liberal]

10. I think his comments about

not wanting "you to come down here to the South and tell us what to do!" were equally as dangerous.

[Dubyawatchers]

14. The comment was dumb

Edwards has forgotten that several times troops have been
sent to the south to tell them what to do about civil rights.

[Maddy McCall]

16. That's a simplistic portrayal of Northerners in the South during

the Civil Rights Era. The whole purpose of northern youth coming to the south was to bring media attention to the plight of blacks, who were being ignored by the media. They were also being ignored by "liberal" elites in the North, and in Congress.

But when blond-haired, blue-eyed boys began to be pysically attacked, the media, elites, and Congress could not ignore it any longer. Media attention forced the legislative hand, and CRAs 1964 and 1965 were the result.

The North didn't come "tell them what to do." It was much more complex than that--a rather simple plan that was quite effective.

[Dubyawatchers]

17. I love DU

ROTFLMAO
Yelling "Give Me More Tinfoil Scotty!"

[Maddy McCall]

20. Educate yourself...

better to spend money on good history books than on tinfoil.

:wtf:

[JackSwift]

18. Edwards behavior is disgusting

I saw him at the most recent debate hectoring Dean on "don't tell us Southerners what to think". Well Dean wasn't telling anyone what to think, he was telling people what he thought. I have no use for Edwards, and since he isn't running for reelection in the Senate, I gather that his state doesn't either.

[candy331]

35. Edwards comments are

making an already divisive issue even more so. Rather than using his influence of being a Southerner to help heal the wounds for the good of the party he pours salt in it. Win at all cost seems to be his aim and the heck with the people who believe in the party still.If anyone is condescending it is him, when he needed to stand up in 2000 he stayed seated so now take a hint, sit down! Myself,(a first time voter) I am personally tired of all this hypocritical backbiting and I am sure it is turning a lot of potential voters off who want even bother coming to the polls to vote. We Dems need to do as the right wingers are doing and let all the candidates know if this doesn't stop they will loose our support. What the hell good is it to go out and work hard to convince people to come to our side to get them to the polls when they sit and bicker providing fodder for the news media, nulling our efforts. Truly I am fed up with it! If a candidate is not willing to speak for the good of the party and I might add the preservation of the country we need to let them know they will not get our support. The time they are spending on the news needs to be dedicated to issues outlining how they will help solve the nations problems and quit the bs.

"A person who fails to plan has no plan"

[Khephra]

19. Being fair, here is the

Transcript for Nov. 9

snip.......

MR. RUSSERT: Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont, made a decision yesterday that he’s going to opt out of the matching public funds for campaigns. In other words, he will simply raise as much money as he can through thousand-dollar or less contributions from Americans across the country, saying he needs that much money to take on George Bush. What do you think of what Governor Dean did, and will you imitate it?

SEN. EDWARDS: The answer to the second question is, “No, I will not. I will stay within the campaign finance system.” I think that it’s a mistake for Governor Dean to do this. He has said earlier this year, that he would—he felt very strongly about all the candidates staying within the campaign finance system. Now, that he’s apparently figured out and he thinks it’s advantageous to him not to do that, he’s choosing not to do it. It sends exactly the wrong signals to voters in this country. If it’s a matter of principle to operate within the campaign finance system, then we should stay within the campaign finance system, and not deviate from that because a particular candidate, in this case, Governor Dean, thinks it’s to his advantage.

MR. RUSSERT: What do you think of Governor Dean?

SEN. EDWARDS: I like him personally. He and I have had some run-ins over the last couple of weeks. I felt very strongly about his statement about the Confederate flag and pickup trucks in the South. And I’ve expressed that to him, not only publicly but in personal conversations, because my worry about that is- -and there’s already been a lot of discussion about this, but I’ll be brief—I think the Confederate flag is a very divisive symbol. It’s bad—it’s wrong to even suggest that we might in any way be embracing that. And secondly, to stereotype Southerners as pickup-truck, you know, Confederate flag voters, I think, is also a mistake. But I think it’s even bigger than that. I think it’s important for our party, and here’s why: Because it’s like saying to any group of voters, including voters in the South, “You know, you don’t know what’s best for you. We know what’s best for you. Even though you don’t understand that we’re better for you, we’re going to come and make sure you understand it. We’ll explain it to you.” There’s an elitism and a condescension associated with that attitude that’s enormously dangerous to us. I mean, what voters in this country want, is they want us to treat them with respect, wherever they live, whatever part of the country, whatever their financial condition, who their family is. They want to be treated with respect. It is enormously important for us as a party to not be elite, to not look down on people and talk down to them, but to give them the kind of respect that they’re entitled to.

MR. RUSSERT: As a son of the South, what does the Confederate flag represent to you?

SEN. EDWARDS: A divisive symbol.

MR. RUSSERT: Howard Dean also said that felons, convicted felons, should be given the right to vote. Do you agree with that?

SEN. EDWARDS: I do. I do agree with that.

MR. RUSSERT: Why?

SEN. EDWARDS: Well, because I think if we want to get—the whole notion is, if somebody’s coming out of prison, even if they’ve been convicted of a serious crime, which obviously a convicted felon has been, we want to get those folks back into the society. And one of the ways that we can show that is to allow them to vote. I—in my state of North Carolina, we allow convicted felons to vote. I think it makes sense.

more...............

http://www.msnbc.com/news/990963.asp?0dm=V219V

[Maddy McCall]

21. This needs its own thread...

it is substantial, contextually.

[kayell]

27. Thank you for posting that

It bears repeating this section again.

"I think it’s important for our party, and here’s why: Because it’s like saying to any group of voters, including voters in the South, “You know, you don’t know what’s best for you. We know what’s best for you. Even though you don’t understand that we’re better for you, we’re going to come and make sure you understand it. We’ll explain it to you.” There’s an elitism and a condescension associated with that attitude that’s enormously dangerous to us. I mean, what voters in this country want, is they want us to treat them with respect, wherever they live, whatever part of the country, whatever their financial condition, who their family is. They want to be treated with respect. It is enormously important for us as a party to not be elite, to not look down on people and talk down to them, but to give them the kind of respect that they’re entitled to."

Note that I am not an Edwards supporter. He is pretty far down my list of prefered candidates. But what he says makes sense, and it is very much what I have heard from other southerners. (and for those of you who don't get it, it ISN'T some kind of racist code message!)

If Dems as a party, could really take this message to heart, we could actually win the South.

[kayell]

25. Ironically, it's often the same people who

are quick to defend Islam and point out that most muslims are not wild eyed terrorist waving a Qu'uran in one hand and a bomb in the other, who seem to make the most horrifying generalizations about southerners. How about exhibiting a little sense and realizing that just as most muslims are normal people, so are most southerners. Speaking with a drawl doesn't make me a racist, ignorant, republican, or any of the other stereotypes. It seems like a lot of people still picture the South as something they saw on the tv of riot's circa 1963.

If we want to win the South (and I sure do, living here), we need to pay attention to what Edwards said - ``What voters in this country want is, they want us to treat them with respect, wherever they live, whatever part of the country, whatever their financial condition, who their family is,'' he said. ``It is enormously important for us as a party to not be elite, to not look down on people and talk down to them, but to give them the kind of respect that they're entitled to.''

[bleedingheart]

26. How have the lives of African Americans and Poor Whites in the South

changed due to the Democratic Party?

Has the Democratic Party done anything to make people's lives better in the South? I live in the North and I have seen my local Democratic Party do great things for my area. Unfortunately my state has been in a republican headlock for about 8 years prior...even now the Assembly is a majority repub.

What has Edwards done in his own state to heal the racial divide that still exists?

[AP]

30. You're kidding right?

Every time the Democrats fight a bad federal judge, or fight for legislation which helps the middle class accumulate and retain the fruits of their labor, they're helping southerners.

Generally, there has been a huge increase in the wealth and power and avarice of huge corporations, and the Democrats are playing defense. However, we'd be much farther down the road towards fascism if the Democrats hadn't been playing the defense they've played over the last 30 years.

Furthermore, one thing you can't deny is that the Democrats have had a great attitude towards race in America, exemplified by Democrats like Carter and Clinton (both of whom entered politics because of their shock over the treatment of blacks in the south), and by Johnson and (who passed great legislation) and by JFK (whose second Oxford speech to the nation set a brilliant framework for addressing race which inspired generations of democrats who followed him and which laid an intellectual framework for discussing race which stands today).

Look, the Republicans would have been happy to have a black underclass driving down black and white wage rates in the South and thus creating a huge pool of profit-margin increasing labor for Big Business. They wouldn't mind having an American south in the 21st centure which didn't look so different from the American south of the early 20th century. The only reason Republicans got interested in public education was because of the Russians, and the Republicans realized that the elite weren't going supply America with all the educated math and science geniuses we needed build a weapons program. They don't like progress unless their balls are to the wall. And it's the Democrats who've been driving forward progress every time the Republicans let their incredibly strong defenses down briefly.

The only reason America got the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act in 64 and 65 is because LBJ was the master of the senate. It took the full talents of the greatest shepard of legislation ever to get those bills passed. He was a Democrat.

[JNelson6563]

31. Good post AP

Well said.

Julie

[Mixxster]

28. I posted this in the Editorial forum

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/7223648.htm

<snip>

It should be obvious why the candidate's reasoning insults blacks. He suggests that the Democratic Party's most loyal constituents should be ready to share the aforementioned big tent with people who hate them.

But you know who else ought to be insulted? Poor white people. After all, they are, in Dean's inference, synonymous with racism and its symbols. Yes, there has historically been a vivid streak of bigotry in that stratum of society. But anyone who thinks bigotry is the exclusive province of poor white folk has obviously never heard of John Rocker. Or, for that matter, Louis Farrakhan.

The real tragedy of Dean's comments, though, is not the affront it gives, but the opportunity it misses. It's commendable -- even visionary -- that he seeks to champion the concerns of poor white people. As the media have made poverty evermore a synonym for black and brown, we have lost sight of the fact that the majority of America's underclass is white. Those folks have been marginalized and ignored for years, unless you count being enlisted as foot soldiers in the culture wars over gay rights and affirmative action. Meantime, their own needs have gone largely unaddressed.

[shawn703]

32. I'm sorry to say this

But all this stuff about the Confederate flag is just plain silly, and this is just one thing that keeps getting brought up to divide the Democratic party. If you say the flag is bad, and everyone who flies it is a racist, you alienate a large part of the South. If you say the flag isn't a big deal, you make the NAACP and other African-Americans upset. Like it or not, the Confederate flag is important to the South historically and culturally. You don't see people attacking symbols of the cross, and I can think of quite a few atrocities that were committed under that symbol. Sure, you may have some people out there that still think witch-burnings were a good thing to do, but I'd bet that a majority of Christians today do not. Let them have their flag, and just get this issue off the table.

[monobrau]

33. southern "sensitivity"

I'm from the south, and I'm getting sick of hearing how everyone has to be careful not to offend the south, and how easily bubba gets his little feelings hurt. White southerners were traitors who tried to destroy this nation, and lost a bloody war. No one owes the south anything except for equal protection from the constitution and representation in the law-making process. And that means ALL southerners, not just the whining white boys.

[kayell]

34. What southerners want is the same as what everyone else wants

Normal, polite respect. To be treated as individuals, rather than as a stereotype. And that what I hear Edwards talking about.

``What voters in this country want is, they want us to treat them with respect, wherever they live, whatever part of the country, whatever their financial condition, who their family is,'' he said. ``It is enormously important for us as a party to not be elite, to not look down on people and talk down to them, but to give them the kind of respect that they're entitled to."

Added: Some decent job opportunities, a living wage, and a decent education system would be pretty popular too. We need to emphasize what Dems can do for people rather than castigate them for what some of us perceive people in the South to be.

[Okole]

38. Amen to that.

Deans angle was pure arrogance and condescension.

[blindpig]

36. brave soul.......

a post like that, you must be a masochist. living as a carpetbagger in SC for 20+ yrs has made me an AUTHORITY on this topic.(HA!)
I don't think there was anything wrong with the sentiment of Dr Dean's statement. The actual wording was a big kick-me sign taped over his belt. the dems who took advantage of that sign should be condemded for the opportunistic dogs that they are. as for the meat of his statement, well sometimes i wonder. to be sure, Soc Sec, med insurance, jobs/trade & the environment are owned by our side, but i don't know if that is enough. assuming rationality in human behavior is tricky buisness(California!).i'm afraid that any points scored on economics would be countered by social concerns; abortion, guns, gays, religion etc. not the same concerns for any one voter but enough of a range of negatives to raise question as to the value of the effort.
On the other hand, of the 50% who don't vote possibly 2/3's are ours, if the democratic party stops fearing democracy.