Small nitpick with Edwards from "Face the Nation"

[bhunt70]

Edwards was asked about the 1.5 billion bush plan and family values and he said that he disagreed with other democrats who said that if Bush brought up values then they should change the subject to healthcare, jobs etc. He thought it was important to tackle Bush head on with the values issue.

He was then asked in the next breath "Do you support Gay Marriage" to which he said no but he does support other plans to move the country forward (fix dont ask dont tell and other issues dealing with equality) but then he said that yes, GWB does have a plan for marriages and values but where is his healthcare plan, where is his job creation plan.

If I had a transcript I'd put it up because maybe I interpreted it wrong but it seems that Edwards was doing exactly what he said he didn't want to do.


for the record, I think Edwards is a great guy and would vote for him in a heartbeat, but this just kinda stuck out at me. Did anyone else see it?

[jenk]

1. I wasn't really paying attention at the tail end of the interview but...

...let's face it, most Americans don't support gay marriage, but I think Edwards said he did support certain partnership rights that GW does not.

it's not much of an issue anyway

[bhunt70]

3. I agree...

I think there should be gay marriages but thats another point. I was just saying that I thought it was odd. It's a non issue.

[AP]

2. It's important to understand the state of debate on gay marriage in US

It's totally oriented along a conservative axis. The debate should be over the idea that opposite sex couples and same sex couples should have the civil union option and that the government shouldn't be looking to religion to tell Americans what they can and can't do. Ie, we shouldn't require the ceremony part of the marriage, JP or religious, for people to have the legal rights married people enjoy now -- this is what JRE implied at the Commonwealth Club speach -- same sex couples should get all the benefits of marriage, but leave marriage to the churches.

Instead of having THAT debate about RIGHTS, people like Andrew Sullivan (with the help of the media like face the nation, and even popular culture) channel the debate into one that is along the axis of whether gays should have access to one of the most conservative institutions in America -- marriage -- or not. Just framing the debate within that axis is allowing conservatives to win no matter what.

When Edwards says he wants to have a values debate with Bush, he means over the ethics of greed.

Clearly the RW is going to try to channel that values debate into an axis they dominate -- marriage. I can guarantee you that Edwards will be able to channel that debate back to one about money and greed. He alwasy does.

[spooky3]

4. I think you have a point but here are my thoughts.

1) I think JE thought he had answered the question (specifically as you noted). Then, as any good politician does, he kept talking on themes he wanted to get across in his short time on FTN. This is a little different from ducking the question and changing the subject.

2) Bush was not sitting across from him. So that is not the time to bring out the big guns. I think what JE was saying was if he gets the chance to debate this and GWB starts in with it, he'll point out how GWB has hardly been a paragon of morals and values, with specifics.

3) This is more speculative, and maybe more my opinion than JE's, but I'm not sure that "family values" or gay marriage is a winning theme for either party. It's not that these should not be discussed, but even the Gallup poll shows these issues as being WAY down the list of things that Americans believe are the most important in this campaign.

[JI7]

5. he sees it as a losing issue

in a national election. so he puts the focus on winning issues. this has been his strategy all along.

[KittyWampus]

6. Correction- He Puts The Focus On HIS Supposedly Winning Issues

and completely ignores National Security and Foreign Policy.

Since the PNAC crowd are gunning for an Imperial America...
And since 9/11 has brought the Reality of Terrorism home...

I think Edwards better plan on finding a message other than changing the topic.

[spooky3]

7. sounds as if you could use a visit to

Edwards' website. He addresses all of these issues.

[KittyWampus]

8. Since Relatively Very Few Voters Check Candidates' Websites

I'd say Edwards needs to step up to the plate in his PUBLIC APPEARANCES.

[DjTj]

10. In his stump speech...

...he talks about reengagement with our allies and a greater focus on real homeland security; something better than the colored alerts. It is all at his web site so he is able to answer any questions and incorporate it into his speech if he wants.

It will definitely come up more in later primaries and especially in the GE, but I think in Iowa he has found that his working class outsider message is working the best.

[Blue_Roses]

9. Here's the transcript

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/ftn/main3460.shtml

[bhunt70]

11. page 8 in the pdf file is the part I was talking about...