John Edwards: "I can promise you this: I will never use Ronald Reagan as an example for change."

[jsamuel]

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/17/politics/fromtheroad/entry3724550.shtml

"When you think about what Ronald Reagan did to the American people, to the middle class to the working people," said Edwards.

"He was openly – openly – intolerant of unions and the right to organize. He openly fought against the union and the organized labor movement in this country. He openly did extraordinary damage to the middle class and working people, created a tax structure that favored the very wealthiest Americans and caused the middle class and working people to struggle every single day. The destruction of the environment, you know, eliminating regulation of companies that were polluting and doing extraordinary damage to the environment."

"I can promise you this: this president will never use Ronald Reagan as an example for change."

[TwilightZone]

1. Time to pile on John Edwards. I guess he just doesn't understand.

:sarcasm:

[MH1]

85. Too bad that's not what he said a few months ago. But changing positions is nothing new for him.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4096330

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86502/john-edwards/reengaging-with-the-world.html

[grantcart]

100. Here is the quote in context and the article in context

We need a new path, one that will lead to re engagement with the world and restoration of the United States' moral authority in the community of nations. President Harry Truman once said, "No one nation alone can bring peace. Together, nations can build a strong defense against aggression and combine the energy of free men everywhere in building a better future for all." For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us.

unquote

The clear point of the sentence is that up until Bush there has been basically bipartisan approach to multi lateral-ism that ended with George Bush and his messianic unilateralism.

At no point in the article (and thank you for bringing it to my attention it is very good) does he single Reagan out has having provided any particular Reagan leadership qualities that should be admired except those that were exactly the same as all of the other presidents.

Cherry picking quotes out of context usually is the playing ground of Clinton supporters not Obama.

You did fail to mention that John Edwards goes on at length in citing the one President who should be emulated for his particular leadership

quote
We need to return to President Kennedy's vision. He said in 1961 that the American system was fragmented, awkward, and slow and that improvement was necessary because "the nation's interest and the cause of political freedom require it." Kennedy reformed the American foreign-aid system, and we need a similar fundamental restructuring today. As president, I will create a new cabinet-level position to coordinate global development policies across the government. I will also replace Kennedy's Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 with a Global Development Act to modernize and consolidate development assistance, and I will ask Congress to improve its oversight and revamp its committee structure so that it can be a more effective partner in this effort. With measures like these, we can reclaim our historic role as a moral leader of the world while at the same time making the world safer and more secure for the United States

unquote

[adnelson60087]

110. That is excellent. Why do so many try to twist clear words and meanings?

It's just pathetic...a GOP tactic not worthy of any Democrat.

[Patriot Abroad]

216. Well responded, Grantcart! (nt)

[neutron]

234. kudos to Edwards

from a Hillary supporter.

Ronald was a joke.

[stickernation]

138. just to stress this changing positions theme

it would seem that OBAMA is the one changing positions with more "strategic intent", AND HE IS VEERING SHARPLY RIGHT.

any number of recent OBAMA quotes would indicate this - and even more telling his silence upon being challenged by Edwards on troop withdrawal, nuclear plants, the environment and the economy during the last debate.

It comes down to this:

Where Edwards has shifted postions, he has consistently shifted LEFT, towards KUCINICH.
Where Obama has shifted positions, he has consistently shifted RIGHT, towards CLINTON.

If you stand in the middle of the road, you might get run over. Choose whatever dynamic or pole you wish, as we all want a very large Democratic tent covering whatever position you wish. Just rest assured that the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party was out in force today at Edwards' speech today at the SEIU, and I think they are prepared to work VERY HARD to push Edwards over the vile and super-OBVIOUS media blackout.

Opponents of Edwards are sounding more desultory and desperate, but I hope there is good news in your camp too, whatever it might be. If you are interested in a superior experience we would welcome you to the Edwards camp. Or you can keep trying to debunk the coming Edwards revolution, and basically miss out on the best party the progressives have thrown since WTO. YOUR PICK !!

-s

[IsItJustMe]

146. Hell, i'm with you. Lets party.

[Yael]

149. Cheers

Lemme buy this round.

:toast:

[jackson_dem]

163. Very astute. Obama has changed as much as Edwards but Obama has veered right

Compare Obama a decade ago to Obama today and that is clear. Few people have noticed it, though. No one in the mainstream media has ever brought it up.

[DaLittle Kitty]

230. Precisely! As Rudy Says... "Change Can Be Good... or BADDD! OBAMA/Change IS BAD Change!

Wake Up Democrats... and "Followers" There are More "ObamaFumbles" yet to come... which WILL Give us Hillary....

Time to :think:... IS NOW!

[Clark2008]

197. I started to comment, but bow to your wonderful links.

:hi:

[redqueen]

2. I like it.

:)

[Cameron27]

3. Excellent

[DURHAM D]

4. A big OUCH on Obama. n/t

[bdamomma]

5. right on, and Reagan did not give two shits about HIV either.

[chaplainM]

26. And cozy with nun-killing dictators n/t

[IsItJustMe]

147. And if Regan had his way, South Africa would still be under Apartheid.

[jackson_dem]

164. Very true. I hate the rewriting of history. Reagan is painted as a "champion of freedom"

He didn't give a flip about freedom outside the Soviet bloc, as his veto on behalf of the apartheid regime proved.

[southern_belle]

6. Thank you, Senator!

:patriot:

[sandnsea]

7. But he will tell you he's the only one to win the south

and all those Reagan Democrats, for whatever reason.

[jsamuel]

10. you know, winning elections are useless if you have to kiss up to Reagan to do it

[sandnsea]

31. Changing the trajectory Reagan put us on

is not kissing up to him. Appealing to his voters by saying they won't vote for a black man, as has been said daily on this board, well gee, funny how that was okay.

[cascadiance]

29. Yup, those "Reagan Democrats' that were looking to Reagan for less taxes

will realize that someone like Edwards will do more to bridge the wealth gap with the upper class as a champion for the middle class than Reagan's "less taxes" line of crap!

[sandnsea]

34. But the south won't vote for a black man or woman

Are we going to deny that's been said on a daily basis around here?

[2rth2pwr]

8. I knew Edwards had some redeeming qualities. nt

[BootinUp]

13. heh.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. props to Eddwards for calling a spade a spade.

[Clarkansas]

9. Gotta disagree with him on this

If Obama said "I can promise you this: I will never get a $400 haircut or live in a 25,000 sq ft house" I would think it was lame as hell.
Twisting Obama's word like this is just as lame.

[jsamuel]

14. Obama did use Reagan as an example for change.

That is exactly what he did.

[sandnsea]

28. Change for the worse

which is why Obama believes we need transformational change now.

[John Q. Citizen]

94. Are you claiming the Reagan years didn't have a massive impact on the country?

They called it the Reagan revolution for a reason.

It changed things for the worse, and it changed them dramatically.

Anyone who would deny that is dreaming.

[DaLittle Kitty]

229. Read David Kay Johnston's Book... "Free Lunch"... Then You'll Understand The Reagan Legacy!

Givaways To The Most Affluent Among Us since 1980 and Obama Is LAUDING REAGAN... Explain that please... those who are following blindly the "messiah."

That singular commentary should eliminate BO on the spot... That is a Progressive Mindset? Which is Worse? Hillary and NAFTA? OR... BARACK OBAMA and his worship of Ronald "Fire All Air Traffic Controllers + Eliminate ALL Taxes for the Rich" Reagan???


Please Explain... :think:

[John Q. Citizen]

233. Do you have a link to Obama saying he approves and endorses the major changes

that the Reagan Presidency created?

All I've seen is him saying that major changes occured. I know they did because I lived through those years, I also lived in CA during Reagan's two terms in office as Governor. You younger folks may need to read a book about it to understand, but I was there, I saw it live.

Hillary and NAFTA was a continuation of the Reagan realignment. So was so called Welfare Reform, the Telecommunications Act, and all the other deregulation championed by the Clintons.

So give me a link to Obabma's words where you claim he "worships" Reagan.

Explain please.

[Patchuli]

137. Other candidates are mentioning

Saint Ronnie :puke: as well. I don't see Edwards directing this strictly at Obama. How many times did Stephanie Miller's show say that the GOPer debaters mentioned Reagan? It was like 33 times or something. And * got mentioned only once! Think they've kicked him to the curb? hehehee

[More Than A Feeling]

15. If Obama said that, he would be lying.

He would do both as president.

[LostinVA]

18. I couldn't care else about the haircut or house

Using those against Edwards is as ridiculous as the DU posters mentioning the "blue dress."

Good for Edwards.

[pamela]

43. Thanks for those words, LostinVa!

It sickens me when Repubs rewrite history to make Reagan out to be this great guy. But when a Dem does it, I am beyond sickened. Good for John!

[Catchawave]

36. Obama would quote Rush Limbaugh?

That's just silly.

[robbedvoter]

52. Wow! You use different words! Where are the 1000 threads being irrelevant?

[we can do it]

60. ?

:eyes:

[TwilightZone]

75. You're not really comparing one of the most destructive presidents in our history to a haircut...

are you?

Do you really think the statements would be equivalent?

[Luminous Animal]

79. Edwards did not get a $400.00 haircut.

He was running late. Edwards paid the stylist for the money he lost while holding open the appointment for him.

By the way, did you hear that Gore invented the internet?

[stickernation]

141. DUDE !!! SOURCE THIS !!!

it wasn't a $400 haircut after all ?!?!?!??

THANK YOU please source this for me !!!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

stoked to hear about this information.

today Edwards pledged to raise the minimum wage to $9.50 !!!!!!!!!!! i just got back - have to post some vids to YouTube :)

-s

[jackson_dem]

165. The haircut itself never cost $400

I don't have a link but I can back up what was said. The cost was high to make up for the time, and hence customers, the barber lost flying to wherever Edwards was.

[Moochy]

170. Kick and a Rec, and a DONATE

:kick: :thumbsup: :party:

[AlertLurker]

193. Counting airfare, Edwards ACTUALLY paid $1250 for the haircut!

Edwqards had to fly the poor ba$tard from California to Atlanta!

I just could never see this as a bright move, no matter how pretty Johniie-Boy thinks he has to look for the sheeple...

He can never be seriously considered to be an anti-poverty candidate when he continues to be this wasteful.

[redqueen]

214. Wow, you do it as skillfully as the repukes do. Nice job. (nt)

[Yael]

151. I would like a source on this as well

Thanks!

[stickernation]

188. You know it is SO IRONIC this revelation be on THIS thread.

This thread has many OBAMA supporters carping "oh, he took OBAMA out of context, he wasn't REALLY praising REAGAN, etc..."

LOOK at the frame they have put John in.

Out of context doesn't even come close to describing it.

They have made so much fun of that $400 haircut, yes they have.

And the whole deal was essentially one of DECENCY - John's schedule put the barber out, so he made up for it.

THIS IS JOHN EDWARDS BEING FRAMED, PROBABLY BY RUPERT MURDOCH OR THE SCUM AT THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER.

I wonder about the origins of the $400 haircut meme. WHO DID IT?

You'd be getting nearer the ninth circle if you found out.

I have a very bad feeling Karl Rove is behind this.

I think it has to do with a rebellion in the CFR. This is super weird, the $400 haircut meme I had thought was "built to last" and now suddenly it rests on a foundation of lies. It was a well-designed meme - a PROFESSIONALLY CRAFTED meme, that is to say - and it is a LIE. Hm. IT IS A MYSTERY AND IT IS SCARY. It makes me want to be VERY CAREFUL who JRE selects as a running mate, as these people he's up against have SPIES!!!! to have crafted such a persistent and itchy meme.

Compared to the $400 haircut attack meme we have just learned was FOISTED upon Edwards, the OBAMA-praises-Reagan story seems totally on target. OBAMA supporters are finessing. We know what a real lie is - and that's a $400 haircut lie. Calling out OBAMA for talking up Reagan on the radio, when he just talked up Reagan as if he was a cool guy (of all the "idols" to give a shout out?!), well that is not a lie. That is good politics - if OBAMA veers RIGHT, you need to TELL HIM NOT TO DO SO.

And it should fall to OBAMA SUPPORTERS to do that, not John Edwards. We are ready to take on REPUGNICANS - we consider the primary season to be just beginning, and we intend to fight AGAINST repugnicans if not FOR john edwards should he not win. The point is that we are a FIERCE FORCE FOR FREEDOM and we are SICK of the LIES and the FINESSE. You can't go "oh well Reagan, what a transformer!" That is a little like saying "wow, Pol Pot! big CHANGES for cambodia! yeah!"

We don't WANT to be re-educating Obama on the Reagan legacy. We want YOU to start MANAGING YOUR CANDIDATE before his lobbyists manage him into hypocritical unelectability. Since Edwards is refusing lobbyist money, and is actually run a campaign that obsessively listens to his community of supporters, our job is a lot easier than yours!!! Sadly, nobody else did it - Edwards HAD to point out the obvious to OBAMA - the emperor Reagan had no clothes. DUH. How can Democrats support someone who speaks of Reagan as if he were someone to admire - WITHOUT SAYING ANYTHING AT ALL? We can't. Edwards speaks for us.

Your candidate praised Reagan; our candidate did NOT get a $400 haircut, and yet has been lambasted and mocked for MONTHS based on this distortion. Your candidate COULD HAVE CHOSEN ANYONE. He chose to invoke Reagan. Like an ugly demon in the middle of the Advanced Dungeons And Dragons Fiend Folio accidentally invoked by an apprentice magician, the Demon Reagan (in the guise of mitt romney?) threatens once again to stalk the land. Only Edwards' comment could banish the demon back to the land of dead dictators where he belongs.

Think about all the money he is forsaking by not suing the bastards behind this. He is obviously on a higher plane at this point. A rebellion in the CFR - it is a cosmic battle being fought in the Democratic primaries, and I for one am glad I started supporting Edwards (behind Kucinich back then) in 2004 !!!

[AlertLurker]

195. You are right - it was a $1250 haircut, NOT $400.

And it wasn't just ONE haircut, it was SEVERAL - this wasn't the first time that Pretty Johnnie flew his stylist out for a couple of days...


He's not suing people because it is a FACT.


Here, John - go sue CBS News!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/05/politics/main3019277.shtml

"(CBS/AP) Beverly Hills stylist Joseph Torrenueva tells the Washington Post that one of his haircuts for Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards cost $1,250 because Torrenueva had to fly to Atlanta and missed two days of work as a result.

"He has nice hair," Torrenueva told the newspaper. "I try to make the man handsome, strong, more mature and these are the things, as an expert, that's what we do."

Torrenueva, a Democrat, said he began cutting Edwards' hair for free but wound up charging him $300 to $500 per haircut, plus the cost of airfare and hotel stays. That's because Torrenueva was often forced to meet Edwards on the campaign trail to shear his locks."

[jaybeat]

103. How is it twisting

Here's the quote, referring to Reagan:

He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.

The country was "ready" for Reagan's "fundamentally different path," in contrast to "the excesses of the 60s and the 70s" where "that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship" was "missing."

I'm sorry, but :wtf:

I don't see how ANYONE can claim that Edwards is "twisting Obama's word(s)". He said it.

[earth mom]

122. Excuse me Mr. Obama, but what about that unchecked GREED we've had for over 20 years?

Guess that's not "entrepreneurial" enough for you. Give me a fucking break. :puke:

You know, this is about the most disgusting thing I've heard yet coming from someone who calls themselves a Democrat.

And people around here get insulted and furious when Obama is called a corporatist DINO! :wtf:

[jaybeat]

124. No kidding! (nt)

[donkeyotay]

198. Yep, it's not out of context.

What "excesses of the 60s and the 70s" is he referring to? Things like public television and the EPA? He says "we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing" - the clarity was rule by slogans and hate radio, the optimism was an empty suit giving empty speeches that distracted from the pillaging and plundering behind the scenes. If by dynamism he means one-party corporate rule, and by entrepreneurship he means globalization - well, that isn't change; it's stay the course. Funny how this round of "unity" once again leaves out those who opposed these policies.

[ooglymoogly]

117. and what great red herrings those are

[TankLV]

178. Yeah - the TRUTH hurst - the obama

haircuts versus to pander to repukes who GOT US INTO THIS MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE...

I'll take edwards, thankyouverymuch...

[bjobotts]

183. Don't be petty. You're repeating repub talking points.

[AlbertCat]

231. Apples and oranges

"If Obama said "I can promise you this: I will never get a $400 haircut or live in a 25,000 sq ft house" I would think it was lame as hell."

Interjecting GOP talking points won't help. Hair cuts and the house one lives in is not politics or policy. (Besides, do you know how much Obama's hair cut cost, or the size of his house? Does anyone care???) Comparing this to an entire dreadful presidency and the dreadful consequences of its dreadful policies is just plain lame.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

11. so i guess its not just the hillary fans who are upset about this.

i agree. he could have picked JFK/roosevelt/carter, didnt have to go with reagan

[redqueen]

21. FAR from it.

I'm sure there are many who haven't yet picked a candidate who were stung by the remark.

[killbotfactory]

23. He did use JFK as an example

Reagan was an influential president, that is undeniable. That's not to say it was a good influence, but his presidency had a lasting effect on our politics. Recognizing that shouldn't be controversial.

[stickernation]

144. rock against reagan

now THAT was INFLUENTIAL. fuck reagan, he was worse than * (better than cheney).

Ian MacKaye would make an interesting politician.

Also - Reagan was a Labor Organizer in Hollywood (where I live).

This was before Joe McCarthy's Anti-Communist Witch Hunts.

Reagan Was Probably Inducted Into The Communist Party During This Time.

Chosen by the Communists as a perfect sleeper agent, Reagan was carefully cultivated by KGB agents inside the USA in Hollywood, Washington, and Sacramento, into the Governor, Candidate, and President that He Became.

He was a COMMUNIST SPY. This is why he clashed so much with Bush Senior - A Nazi.

JOE MCCARTHY'S WITCH HUNT WAS CREATED TO COVER UP THEIR TRACKS - THERE *WAS* COMMUNIST RECRUITMENT IN HOLLYWOOD.

The Screen Actors' Guild Is The Most Successful Labor Union Of All Time.

And Notice How Scientology Is BASED In Hollywood. THIS TOWN LOVES TO CULT IT UP, AND THE COMMUNISTS WERE HERE FIRST.

The Left Leanings Of Charlie Chaplin Were Fantastic, But Left And Communist Segued, Which Was The Stalinist Lie.

Joe McCarthy "knew enough" but was restrained until after Reagan's tracks were covered up.

That way, the KGB let him bark a bunch, ruin a few inconsequential careers, and make the country think he went too far. As a result, nobody looked twice at Reagan, who had reinvented himself very suspiciously into a creator of war propaganda films during the Cold War - as anti-Communist as you can get. This was because anti-Communists and Communists were deeply in league - the key being that due to militarism an increasingly large portion of both nations' GNP be chewed up by destructive military expenditures.

But the KGB won as soon as Reagan won.

Nancy was a Truman Show wife, just like Babs Bush and most definitely LAURA, who killed her boyfriend in cold blood when she was 17 in a clearly premeditated auto accident, and OWED HER FREEDOM TO TEXAS LAW EVER SINCE. she was deployed as * was developed as the proxy for 9-11 and other Cheney schemes.

However, the true victors of WWII were the COMMUNISTS and the SECRET AMERICAN NAZIS.

The Mass of the American Public has been under Totalitarian Mind Control and Conspiracy Political Entrapment ever since, with some strong fighters for freedom such as Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd allowed to remain as sops to those of us who remember how things once were in this Land of the Still Free We Hope.

All of this is exposed in the science fiction novels of Philip K Dick, particularly Valis, Radio Free Albemuth and Flow My Tears, The Policeman Says.

* is Similarly Artificially Created by Nefarious Intelligence Agencies From Foreign Nations (Saudi Arabia, Israel). HIGH TREASON IS THE ONLY RATIONAL EXPLANATION FOR THE LAST EIGHT (TWENTY?) YEARS, IS MY ASSERTION. TREASON IS THE NATURAL RESULT OF THE APPLICATION OF OCCAM'S RAZOR TO THE CURRENT SITUATION.

Schwarzeneggar is the next Repugnican one. Remember these forces are strong within the Democratic Party as well. The working masses are manipulated.

-s

[robbedvoter]

54. Nope. I think some Obama fans older than 18 are secretly upset as well

If you lived under Reagan and looked around you - you're upset!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

58. if you are gay, now you are twice upset.

[SIMPLYB1980]

90. Well said.

[OneGrassRoot]

116. I'm wondering about the age group reaction to this myself. n/t

[gaiilonfong]

12. Edwards getting desperate again

It won't work John.

[LostinVA]

22. Desperate? It just made me respect him more

[Laurab]

83. It made me respect him less.

I was going to donate to him tomorrow, because I feel the media has been unfair to him, and I wanted him to have a fighting chance. I didn't expect a cheap shot from Edwards, who is certainly smart enough to understand what Obama said, and the context he said it in. I'm also surprised by his supporters who usually aren't so quick to jump on the faux outrage of the day. I expect it from Hillary supporters, not so much Edwards.

Edwards just lost a donation. It wouldn't have been much, but it would have been given wholeheartedly, and with hopes that he would get a fair shake. After seeing this cheap political shot, I can't do it.

[brentspeak]

102. Anyone? Raise your hand if you're dumb enough to believe...

the above poster actually intended to "donate to (Edwards) tomorrow".

[Laurab]

109. Do a search on my posts in the Edwards thread from a couple days ago

The "above poster" posted in at least 2 threads about donating to Edwards on Friday because I don't think the media has been fair to him, I don't want Hillary to win, he is, or was my 2nd choice, and I don't believe the media should pick our candidates.

You're quite cynical - I like Edwards - It was difficult at one time for me to choose between him and Obama. I finally decided on Obama, for many reasons, but the main one being he has the best chance of beating Hillary.

HOWEVER, I did want to donate to Edwards on Friday so that he could get some media attention, and add some fairness to the election process. I donated to him once before, and I donated to Biden, as well.

I really don't care if you believe me, but I find it very distasteful for him to have taken an Obama quote out of context and made headlines (at least here on DU), with it. I don't care for personal attacks on candidates, and in particular, dirty ones.

[brentspeak]

115. In which, I apologize

Nevertheless, Edwards was correct on this. (Also, I'm not sure why you consider this a "personal" attack on Obama.)

[Laurab]

119. Accepted - thank you.

I don't see why you can't see it as a personal attack. All day, I've been watching thread after thread taking Obama's comment out of context. I understand what he meant by it, and it was not praising Reagan's Presidency, it was, IMO, his explanation of why Reagan got elected.

Obama is a Democrat. I've seen posts saying he should run with Mike Huckabee, rehashed posts of old comments which were taken out of context. Maybe it wasn't the wisest thing for him to say, but taken in context, it was NOT what people on here are saying it was. Nor, is it what Edwards is insinuating it was.

Yes, what Edwards says is correct, but the reason he's saying it is to take advantage of the comment, put it in a far more negative light, and in that way, it is a personal attack on Obama. It is the timing of Edwards remarks that make it a personal attack. I just don't like seeing it, especially from a candidate I actually like. It's actually something I would expect from the Hillary camp.

I think, seeing as today has turned into anti-Obama day on DU, I'll take a little break from DU, because I've learned these things pass very quickly. It was nice of you to apologize, though, and, incidentally, I would feel the same way if the names of the candidates were reversed.

[Gonnuts]

213. What one must focus on ...

is who would be the best candidate. This is an election campaign, it would be stupid not to take an other's stupid remark and not use it against them. Obama's remark was stupid. There is no way Obama can defend his remark. He is either ignorant of what the Rayguns Revolution spawned, which is all the neo-con crap we're dealing with today, or he's pandering to the right-wing macho vote, either way it should be a deal breaker for anyone that was leaning towards Obama.

Which leaves us with Clinton or Edwards. Clinton is simply has too much baggage. Be it her connections to the status-quo or if you're just sick of the dynasty rule of government we'd suffer under.

Of the electable candidates Edwards is the only one that has a progressive platform. And if he points out that another candidate is pandering to the right just to get votes, I do not see anything wrong with that. It's not like he's putting words in Obama's mouth, he said what he said. If any candidate mentioned that Hitler had some good traits, wouldn't it be prudent for other candidates mention that? Not that Rayguns was Hitler - but he certainly was no progressive.

[Laurab]

120. I see Edwards has also apologized.

I do believe my donation is back on! It takes a decent man to do that.

[jaybeat]

106. Damn right he understands

Obama said, of Reagan:

He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.

What's not to understand? He's not just saying "Reagan took the country in a different direction." He's CERTAINLY not saying "Reagan took the country in a different direction, and it was the WRONG direction."

He said, clear as day, that America was "ready" for Reagan because of "the excesses of the 60s and the 70s".

I want him to say WHAT "excesses"? Civil rights? Affordable college? Women's rights? Protecting the environment? Public opposition to the war in Vietnam? The Great Society? The Voting Rights Act?

Tell us, Barak, why do you feel the need to adopt Republican talking points like "there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it (government) was operating." It sounds like you agree with Reagan that America needed and wanted "a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing." That canard about how government penalized work and rewarded laziness. Welfare queens vs. hard working Joe six-pack.

Edwards understands, all right. Damn good thing he called him on it, too.

[dglow]

130. Using Reagan as an example

I agree 100%! Using Reagan as an example as an academic exercise, as I believe was Barack's intent, was naive at best. While people thirsting for change back in 84 may have supported Reagan, they were screwed by this corporatist in every which way. Edwards is right to say that Reagan was no paragon for positive change, and candidates for the Democratic Party nomination who toute him are pandering to the enemy. Obama's misstep shows that he's not the man for the hour. Edwards is.

[Divine Discontent]

172. sorry you feel this way - but Obama's wording is distancing himself towards GOP thinking

and if you've watched the video like I did, I'd hope you were cringing when he talked about the GOP being the party of ideas the past 15 years.

I'll assume you were going to give $50-100, so I'll make up what I can of that and donate what he'll lose from you. It's your right, but I think you're making a mistake in not donating. Reagan tremendously set back this country, as the Reagan-revolution (that I lived through very poorly) is what these neo-cons love to invoke - and Barack Obama invoked it a little too much, and added to that other comment about ideas really let many of us down who liked him. You original estimate of the media silencing dissent should be given support, but do as you will.

[Laurab]

226. I disagree with you still...

after watching the interview in its entirety, I didn't think he invoked Reagan too much - I understood what he was trying to say, in that the country was optimistic, and behind the president. I also don't think he meant they were the party of GOOD ideas - he probably could have worded that better, but he made it clear a few minutes later that he didn't mean good - at least that's what I saw. It's a totally overblown non-issue.

I couldn't afford to give $50, I'm relatively poor right now, but I did reconsider, and did donate to Edwards (25), because I think it's the right thing to do for the Democratic party. I agree with you on that much.

[TankLV]

180. SURE ya were...

wanna buy some desireable swampland I have in Las Vegas? - comes with PLENTY of WATER!!!!

[Laurab]

223. See post #109

And, actually, I've changed my mind, and I still am going to donate to him today.

I meet such lovely people on here sometimes.

[Laurab]

224. No, thanks, I'd rather add something to the democratic process

although Edwards isn't my first choice. The other poster was kind enough to apologize, and I find most people who support Edwards to be great people. I just donated, and saved this just for you:

Dear lori,

Thank you for supporting John Edwards for President and showing your commitment to building the America we believe in. On behalf of John Edwards and the entire campaign team, I thank you.

Please take the next step and ask your friends and family to learn more about John Edwards for President.

Spread the word.

Together, we will transform the United States of America. Thank you again.

Sincerely,

David Bonior
Campaign Manager
John Edwards for President

[stickernation]

186. i think it's hyperbole to say this was an anti-Obama quote.

i think every single Repugnican is genuflecting at the Reagan throne.

it is more to point a barb at THEM, not to hurt Obama.

just because Obama defenders are a little bit sensitive on the topic, doesn't mean it makes sense to believe their touchy defenses that it was a jibe on their candidate. Mitt Romney is a plastic Reagan figurine. THAT is who Edwards wants to jibe at.

Obama's invocation of Reagan wells up TRUE FEELINGS in Edwards. Those feelings came right to the fore when the topic was broached. This is how a real Democrat reacts when thinking back on Ronald Wilson Reagan, whose name consisted of three words of six letters apiece (666).

[Laurab]

225. You might be right, and I've reconsidered. Thanks. n/t

[Yael]

154. Thank you LostinVA

[ZinZen]

41. This is why I could not get on the bandwagon for Edwards

in 04 I saw and opportunistic phony and unfortunately just as I was warming up to him, I see him pull this crap again. Edwards knock that shit off.

[AX10]

45. I see the phony in Obama quite well.

[we can do it]

68. I'm With Ya Sis

[bpeale]

101. i see it too thank you very much

[Skittles]

196. I can spot phoniness a mile away

while I don't actually tag Obama as phony I do see a lack of substance that does not merit the kind of devotion he is receiving

[redqueen]

215. Well said.

I wouldn't go so far as to call him a phony, but there's enough iffy stuff in his recent words and actions for me to consider all the devoted support he's getting a bit strange.

[smiley_glad_hands]

84. What do you call a dem praising Reagan's legacy?

A phony.

[TankLV]

181. completely uttterly DISGUSTING...

but I've come to expect as much from obama...

sigh...

[Qutzupalotl]

113. I think it's pretty funny,

and I say this as an Obama and Edwards supporter.

[EOTE]

128. Are you trying to be ironic or something?

Are you really unable to see that Edwards is by far the most genuine and progressive candidate we have (with the possible exception of Kucinich)?

[we can do it]

63. How So? Raygun Blew Sunshine Up Our Asses, While Stabbing Us In the Back

Why would ANY thinking Dem use him as an example? Oh maybe because he was SO nice while screwing us all over, maybe?

[TankLV]

179. hardly - made me respect him and admire him more - and wonder what the FUCK is wrong with obama...

[Skittles]

194. LOL

speaking the truth is now "desperate"

[Politicub]

16. Right on, John!

It's great to see a post filled with so much common sense.

[Mags]

24. Looks like Obama and his flock are getting kinda cocky.

[TankLV]

182. and ever more desperate...

[ShortnFiery]

17. et tu John? You KNOW Reagan was an "example OF change" - to spin this is just SAD. eom.

[redqueen]

27. John didn't say that Reagan wasn't an example of change.

He just pointed out WHY he wouldn't pick that particular person to use as an example, that's all.

[noiretextatique]

168. let's call it what is was: regression

if obama is honest enough to say that instead of "change" then i wouldn't have a problem with his admiration of reagan.

[stickernation]

189. MAHATMA GANDHI WAS CHANGE. Reagan? HA!

Listen, our candidate is dragged through the mud and marginalized at every turn.

Yours gets TIME Magazine covers and tons more money.

You are going to have to get used to hardball politics !!! If your candidate invokes Reagan, expect a STRONG REACTION. With a username like that you must understand.

Reagan was an example of A STEAMING PILE OF MANURE. If you step in it, is that "change" ???

[William769]

207. Whats really sad is your head exploding

NOT!

[ProgressIn2008]

19. Whoa, I have no candidate but MUCH respect for JE here - he'll take much heat on this, too

And he knows he'll take heat, but he said it anyway.

Jeez, I didn't think you were even allowed to mention the labor movement in mainstream American politics anymore.

Ugh, Reagan is such a hot button with me. I have a level of loathing for Reagan I can't even muster for Shrub, if that tells you anything.

[robbedvoter]

57. I think he knows he'll peel some of Obama's voters - bring them to him

but he said the right thing anyway.(let's just not make him into a martyr for this - it's clever strategy)

[tsuki]

65. People say they want candidate to say something more than

platitudes, but when the candidates do, those same people attack them.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

133. Ain't it the truth. Man, we ARE a demanding bunch.

MKJ

[annie1]

20. LOL!! lol.

[FSogol]

25. K&R. n/t

[ShadesOfGrey]

30. Thank you John! And I can promise you this:

You've got my vote and support!

[redqueen]

33. Did you just decide to support John?

Whether you decided today or long ago... YAY! :D

[ShadesOfGrey]

64. Gore was my first choice...

with Edwards a close second. Now I'm totally behind Edwards. More and more convinced every day that I made the right decision! :D

[AX10]

32. Edwards is the real deal!

[Peregrine Took]

35. Way to go, John E! We're sending you a donation tomorrow. Reagan, and

any "Democrat" who admires him, for any reason, either isn't really a Democrat or they are playing some angle trying to curry favor with his old Raygun supporters. Either way - its sick!

[Avalux]

37. Ronald Reagan DID change things.

I am disappointed John would go this route and bring up specific Reagan policies. That was not Obama's point and Edwards knows it.

[More Than A Feeling]

46. If the reality of Reagan is inconvenient for Obama, maybe Obama shouldn't be using Reagan

as a rhetorical symbol.

[Avalux]

50. Maybe people should use their brains and listen to Obama.

He used Reagan as an example of moving in a different direction with support from diverse groups. He did not bring up policy or make a determination about whether or not that direction was good or bad.

[More Than A Feeling]

55. You want to read what he said narrowly, but Reagan is such a loaded symbol

that Obama sends too many other messages alongside the one he wants to send. That's why I said that Reagan is a bad rhetorical symbol.

[MH1]

87. You assume the existence of brains.

[stickernation]

190. I sometimes wonder about you.

Did you forget your medication today?

We all have brains.

[madmom]

98. that ain't gonna happen, people don't want to have to learn anything, they

want to be told what is going on, and the msm is more than happy to do this, what have we all been complaining about for the last several years. Like it or not Obama f*cked up.

[noiretextatique]

166. besides white democrats

which "diverse groups" supported reagan?

[robbedvoter]

49. 9.11 also changed things - which makes Rudy legit!

[Catchawave]

51. If the Reno Gazette endorses Obama

Will we all get "the point" then? It was simple pandering to the RW media, as politics is the only spectator sport where spectators can participate :D (h/t to Craig Crawford for that goody).

Gotta admire JE for calling this as it is....you know the media will say, "Oh he's mad again..." :silly:

[Yael]

155. Ironically, they just did. They endorsed Obama and Romney

Maybe they can jooin forces and run together as "outsiders for change".

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-17-reno-endorsement_N.htm

[redqueen]

71. He's bringing up the policies to explain why he'd not use Reagan as an example of change.

That's all.

[smiley_glad_hands]

86. So Obama will give us the kind of change Reagan did?

God help us all.

[jaybeat]

107. I call Bullshit!

Obama said America was "ready" for Reagan because of the "excesses" of the 60s and government that was to big and not "accountable."

Hellooooo! Those are Republican talking points! The "excesses" of the 60s and 70s brought us civil rights, reduced poverty and protected the environment. Reagan didn't *shrink* government! He GREW it! He hacked away at the parts he could that benefited large numbers of people, and expanded to unprecedented levels the parts that benefited the military-industrial complex!

AND, the Reagan administration spawned the thought-leaders of the administration of our Criminal in Chief. Without Reagan, there would not have been the current Bush administration. At least not as we know it.

Obama should be ashamed.

[Yael]

156. He also said that the Republicans were the party of ideas the last 10-15 years

For the mathematically challenged, that would be 1993 to date.

[bleever]

38. I predict this will top the Greatest page.

Thank you, Senator Edwards.

[whatdoyouthink]

39. Sick of Hearing Regan

From there SIDE! Someone did a count on one of there! Last Debates! 20-50-100 or more times

Maybe Obama - meant to say the He (Regan) had Gift of Gab (I want to know were was the Beef)
or something

[Yael]

157. Listen for yourself

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080115/VIDEO/80115026&oaso=news.rgj.com/breakingnews

18 minutes in, runs through 22

[skipos]

40. Embrassing. I'd expect this from anonymous bloggers but not a candidate.

He just lost a point from me. Good thing is, he is about ten thousand points ahead of Hillary in my book.

[jaybeat]

108. Why embarrasing?

Obama should be embarrassed. Edwards has every right to point out that he would NEVER use Reagan as an example of ANYTHING that he would emulate as President. And he sure as HELL wouldn't say the country was "ready" for Reagan or us Reagan's talking points.

[bluedog]

42. Bravo......good for him n/t

[farmboy]

44. It is wonderful to back a candidate that just keeps impressing me more and more. Go Edwards!

He has owned up to mistakes in his past (certain votes as Senator) and his actions keep showing those regrets to be real. He just gets more and more progressive with each misstep that Obama and Clinton makes. Boy, I'm glad I picked the right Democratic candidate to back this time. No matter what happens, I will always be proud to have been with John and Elizabeth from the start.

[Yael]

158. You and me both

We have a lot of work to do. Get those sleeves rolled up!

[robbedvoter]

47. Ha!Ha! Quick turn there! Clever, I'll give him that!

[mnhtnbb]

48. I think Obama and Hillary are even now for making fu*ked up

comments: Hillary re MLK and Johnson and Obama for invoking Reagan when he wants to talk about change.

[Yael]

159. Yep!

Funny to see the Hillarites jumping on an Edwards support thread.

Politics is a hoot.

[pleah]

53. Bravo, Mr. Edwards!!!

[Proud2BAmurkin]

56. And with that, Edwards is a contender again.

[Adelante]

59. But the world *respected* us - we "gained respect" under Reagan

September/October 2007 by John Edwards :shrug:

For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us. We gained that respect by viewing our military strength not as an end in itself but as a means to protect a system of laws and institutions that gave hope to billions across the globe. In avoiding the temptation to rule as an empire, we hastened the fall of a corrupt and evil one in the Soviet Union. The lesson is that we cannot only be warriors; we must be thinkers and leaders as well.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86502/john-edwards/reengaging-with-the-world.html

[PresidentObama]

61. And? What does that have to do with what JE said? The quote you posted from 07 from JE is true.

Of course Ronald Reagan did some good, I'll admit that.

And what John said in 2007 about Reagan and our alliances and respect around the world is true.

But, John Edwards is right that he shouldn't be talked about in the same breath as change. He was pretty much a complete wreck as our President, and I strongly hate Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

[jsamuel]

69. quite obviously a completely different topic than "change" as Edwards says

believe it or not, this election for change has little to do with the Communist bloc

[Two Americas]

169. not at all comparable

Edwards is criticizing the Bush administration's foreign policy there, and pointing out that it is out of step with all previous administrations, both Democratic and Republican. That is in no way praising Reagan.

Your subject line is misleading and not supported by the Edwards quote.

[THUNDER HANDS]

62. Edwards: I use my own record in the Senate as an example of change

"I've changed my mind on everything in my record."

:)

[SIMPLYB1980]

91. I like your pic.

Do you like this one.

[Yael]

160. *cough*

Kick

[Radical Activist]

97. exactly

[stickernation]

187. OBAMA is shifting RIGHT from where he once was.

We the Edwards supporters have had a greater influence on OUR candidate. Obama supporters are being largely IGNORED by theirs as he cozies up to advisors and special interests.

Ah but they're all CFR anyway. But Edwards, when he speaks to CFR, speaks truth to power as he sees it (though the Greatest Generation was the most murderous by far). Barack probably just votes "PRESENT"...

[Barack_America]

66. Run with this, people. As an Obama supporter, I thank you...n/t

[Phx_Dem]

67. K&R

[asdjrocky]

70. I've come to the point where I just expect the best out of this man.

And he never disappoints.

[femrap]

72. a big K and R!

Tell it like it is, John!

[ecstatic]

73. He gets his talking points directly from DU

ha! Has anyone noticed how his statements are timed precisely with disruptions on DU?

[NJSecularist]

74. I have been critical of Edwards' campaign

over the last few days, wondering what states he will win, how he is going to compete as we enter Super Tuesday. But I just have to say, he knocked this one out of the park. Good job, John.

[balantz]

76. The truly progressive candidate for real change speaks correctly.

There is nothing about Reagan and the greedy insanity that Reagan and his friends have spawned that ANY liberal candidate should have to give a positive light to.

Obama's positive reference to Reagan changing course from the "excesses of the 60's and 70's" is immensely troubling to me.

[OzarkDem]

77. YESSS! The grownups have their say..

It was different for those of us who lived through it than for those who just read about it in shcool.

[LittleClarkie]

78. ... anymore...

forgot to add that, didn't he.

You know John, you almost had me. But the smarm factor got in my way.

Shmuck.

[redqueen]

217. I guess "Smuck." (sic) is an improvement over "Smarmy bastard."

Stil... *sigh*

[MH1]

80. Too bad that's not what he said a few months ago.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86502/john-edwards/reengaging-with-the-world.html

[Catchawave]

95. Where did he kick Bill Clinton in the cajones ?

snipped:

For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us. We gained that respect by viewing our military strength not as an end in itself but as a means to protect a system of laws and institutions that gave hope to billions across the globe. In avoiding the temptation to rule as an empire, we hastened the fall of a corrupt and evil one in the Soviet Union. The lesson is that we cannot only be warriors; we must be thinkers and leaders as well.

[OzarkDem]

152. Sorry, nothing in your link

to substantiate your claim.

[NorthCarolina]

81. I'm a Kucinich Supporter but I Give Edwards Kudos for this

I think Obama made a huge mistake by channeling likes of Ronald Reagan. No doubt it earned him the admiration of his DLC supporters though.

[smiley_glad_hands]

82. Please win Nevada and gain momentum John!

I will be donating tomorrow.

[zulchzulu]

88. Whoops, Johnny... actually you DID praise Reagan!

Lookee here!

For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us.

- John Edwards

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86502/john-edwards/reengaging-with-the-world.html

:rofl:

[jefferson_dem]

89. JE: ..."Ronald Reagan...built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us..."

Whoopsie... :rofl:

[jsamuel]

92. notice all the ellipses in that quote?

We need a new path, one that will lead to reengagement with the world and restoration of the United States' moral authority in the community of nations. President Harry Truman once said, "No one nation alone can bring peace. Together, nations can build a strong defense against aggression and combine the energy of free men everywhere in building a better future for all." For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us. We gained that respect by viewing our military strength not as an end in itself but as a means to protect a system of laws and institutions that gave hope to billions across the globe. In avoiding the temptation to rule as an empire, we hastened the fall of a corrupt and evil one in the Soviet Union. The lesson is that we cannot only be warriors; we must be thinkers and leaders as well.

Obviously, one cannot deny the fact that the Soviet Union fell under Reagan. That is not the issue here though, it is CHANGE.

[Art_from_Ark]

129. The Soviet Union "fell" in 1991

That was 2 years after Reagan left office.

[creeksneakers2]

150. I can deny it

The Soviet Union fell under GHW Bush. Remember when the Berlin Wall fell? Dana Carvey doing Bush: Before me, wall. After me, no wall.

[Two Americas]

132. no he didn't

You took that out of context.

He was criticizing the Bush administration and pointing out how out of step the Bush administration was with all previous administrations, including Republican administrations.

By no stretch of the imagination does that qualify as "praising Reagan."

[navarth]

93. I think it'll turn out a positive for John.

Obama is still on my list of people I'd like to see president, but sorry, he went down a couple of points when he invoked that bastard Reagan. I know, I know!! His reasons for doing it, what he really meant, yeah, I understand!

But REAGAN. Ugh. Barack. Wrong, bro.

[Radical Activist]

96. what a disingenuous red herring.

Edwards is smart enough to know that Obama wasn't praising Reagan's policies as President. This is a shamelessly dishonest and unfair attack on his part.

[jaybeat]

111. "Obama wasn't praising Reagan's policies" BULL

Then why was he using Reagan's way of framing the debate?

The "excesses" of the 60s and 70s?

Government had "grown and grown" without "accountability"?

Reagan was elected to restore the "dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing"??

Right-wing talking points to this day.

Obama should be ashamed of himself.

[DiamondJay]

184. he is not praising reagan, but merely stating why he was liked

Obama is actually making a smart move by not actually praising Reagan's policies, but invoking why he was so politically successful. When he says "excesses" of the 60's and 70's he is referring to what the people saw as such: the drugs, the hippie culture, etc. I and obvi himself think it was OK but he is nodding to the fact that many more traditional blue collar white men didn't approve of such things. But Obama is right when he says Reagan was a united, because he was, and that is what the democrats need. We need to try to invoke Reagan like GOPers invoke Kennedy.

[Tarc]

208. distinction without a difference

Obama is shitting on the progressives that brought many civil liberties and rights to the table thougout the 60's and 70's while hwaping praise upon Reagan in order to woo moderates and right-leaning centrists. This is the same pattern we saw a fe months back when he insulted the GLBT community by partnering up with bigoted preachers while on tour.

barack Obama is a shameless panderer, not unlike Mitt Romney in a way.

[jaybeat]

220. BULL! He's repeating Reagan's lies

He is using right-wing talking points! Those talking points are LIES!

Do you think the democrats "need" someone who will LIE to them, who will PANDER to the divisive aspects of our society (pitting "Joe six-pack" against fictional "welfare queens," pitting whites against affirmative action, pitting Vietnam vets against the anti-war movement)?

We do NOT need to "invoke" Reagan--we need to tell the TRUTH about his destructive regime that put us straight on the course to Bush II and all the horrors thereof.

[Two Americas]

135. confused

Edwards didn't mention Obama. How is it an attack?

What did Obama actually say - in context, and when?

[Yael]

161. Listen for yourself

Starts at minute 18 and runs through 22

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080115/VIDEO/80115026&oaso=news.rgj.com/breakingnews

[katty]

99. Thanks John - great comeback line!

[Plucketeer]

104. How abhorrent!

Now - GO JOHNNY GO!!!

[Seabiscuit]

105. Damn right Johnny! Clear thinking as always ...

:thumbsup: :dem:

[Phred42]

112. Obama made a Sophomoric mistake - Edwards: Correct!

Again Edwards demonstrates that he understands that you cannot NICE the Reich-Wing and nails BO attempting to do the 'Nice' thing

[kelligesq]

114. kick it

:kick:

[desertflamingo]

118. JE: My Hero!!!

:yourock:

i lived through the the reagan (poppy's sock puppet) years and then the prick poppy bush years. no thank you obama. john edwards got obama's nuance and SWOOPED down on it like a hawk!! you only have to watch the rightwing pundits fawning over barack to realize he is a republican plant. the want him to win soooooooo badly because it's a win-win for the repubs. IF barack loses, well, they have another 4 or more with a repuke. if he wins, he's their boy, so to speak (i do NOT mean that in a racist way - sad that i have to make that disclaimer - because i'd say hillary'd be their "girl" or mittsy would be their boy,etc. sheeeesh). john edwards gets it. he's made mistakes (of course i haven't EVER made a mistake nor has anyone else i know... but i'm just sayin'...) and has the cajones to admit it. all i care about is that this man is speaking in a straightforward manner, and he's saying all the right things to "the people" and he's kicked the asses of corporate giants in the past - and there's a media blackout on him. i get it and he's getting my vote. i'm essentially unemployed right now (temporary, but still...), but i'll be kicking him some green tomorrow. i'll skip a few meals in the next several days and i'll still be alive to enjoy a bright new day when JE is elected president in nov.

[dogman]

121. Would Elizabeth?

Snip>" Elizabeth Edwards, speaking to reporters before a giving speech in Savannah, Gal., invoked the name of Republican Helms when asked if her husband could appeal to conservative Southern voters.

"I remember one-time somebody saying, 'That John Edwards reminds me of Jesse Helms,'" she said. "They didn't agree on a single policy, I don't think. But here's what they agreed on—that people should know where they stood."
Snip<snip

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PIRLOG0&show_article=1&catnum=3

[jsamuel]

126. "They didn't agree on a single policy"

no such statement was made in Obama's comments on Reagan

[dogman]

127. Obama did not compare himself to Reagan.

If you don't realize the change Reagan made in this country you don't understand politics or history. Obama did not say it was a change for the good, either.

[ozone_man]

123. I remember the day the unions died.

11,000 air traffic controller laid off by Reagan.

And who can forget the death squads of El Salvador and Iran contra, all brought to you by Reagan. Not a happy time for America.

[blue neen]

139. So true.

Not a happy time for America at all.

[7horses]

125. Right on John!!!

Give em Hell!!!!

[unc70]

140. Remember Obama began by attacking Baby Boomers

Obama began his campaign by telling Baby Boomers to "get over themselves". He told us it was time to give up those divisive fights of the 60's that were replayed in the 90's and to give way to a new type of politics.

I initially saw this as just the new kid trying to position himself relative to the other BB candidates, particularly Clinton.

When I started looking more closely him, I realized that under all the lofty rhetoric that inspired so many, I found a disturbing manipulation of emotion, a use of RW talking points to define the debate and to attack his fellow Dems, and no real understanding of how hard were those fights, how many were needed, how precious those gains, how fragile our grasp, how easy their loss, and how tragic loss.

I am not ready to give up those "divisive" issues. They are core values of the Democratic Party, our very soul. To appeal to Independents and Repubs, what would he have us sacrifice to make room for them? Civil rights? Equal pay? Family leave? Environment? Housing? Poverty? Sexual orientation? Right to organize? Peace? Health care? Social Security? Education? Social justice? Voting rights?



Over the last two weeks, I have noticed more and more of us, at DU and elsewhere, re-examing our candidates. A growing number of us are unsettled by Obama, maybe initially because he was being pushed upon us. In my case, it began with him glossing over his actual position wrt Iraq -- something shared with Clinton. Others started posting their concerns. It appeared that thousands of mostly Baby Boomers were raising the same concerns in various corners of the internet.

And then, in the last day or two, concern turned to outrage and started exploding across the net. Maybe we aren't ready to make nice, maybe we still have a lot left to accomplish, maybe we just found a few minutes in our busys days of caring for our parents, children, and grandchildren, our worrying about our jobs, our health, and the economy (much less our retirement), our concern that there be a future for us (any of us, all of us), and we became offended, angry, alarmed, that our legacy is being carelessly wasted, our lives, our struggles, our losses -- all reduced to a few phrases, misunderstood, and misused to sell products we would not buy, policys and candidates we dare not support -- all to a soundtrack that now instantly refreshes our collective memories with all that was important then, all that still is, and why we must act now.

[bonnieS]

212. How is the cynical quest for Independent votes over the Dem base "change"?

Tom Hayden has already written an open letter to Obama asking him to rethink his negativity about those of us of the 60's and 70's who paved the way for him and others, including women, to have more rights/opportunities. While he admires MLK, he does not seem to realize what actually went on in the 60's , and that there was a whole movement and not just one charismatic man with the rest of us excessive and unruly.

He also completely ignores the women's movement of the 70's. Those of us who marched in both movements changed this country for the BETTER only to have Ronald Reagan come along and take us backward. Reagan led the way for Bush to destroy most of the legacy of FDR, who was a Democratic agent for change who could and should be invoked at every opportunity. if, as some suggest, Obama is playing politics by throwing the more progressive wing of the party to the dogs, how is that different? Is that the kind of cynicism we have been waiting and working for? Obama considers me old, out of touch, excessive, and irrelevant. He does not want my vote, so I won't bother him with it.

[Skwmom]

131. Of course not. You need to promote the phony populist image.

Edwards is Bill Clinton Jr.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

134. Is that bad?

:shrug:

MKJ

[jasmine621]

136. That was a great one from Edwards.

Way to go.

[stravu9]

142. VOTE JOHN EDWARDS!

He hates Reagan as much as I do.

[FredfromSpace]

143. I am beginning to think Obama does not want my vote...

What is with this praise of Reagan stuff?

Was he one of the "Reagan Youth" of the 1980s?

Timing is about right...but who knows?

He certainly seems to think highly of him now.

Baby Boomers take note: Do you want this guy who admires the union-busting, "welfare-queen" blaming Reagan and seems to view the political struggles of the past 40 years as "old news" presiding over YOUR Social Security funds?

Looks like we need John Edwards more than ever now.

[dominickdon]

145. Now THAT is a PROGRESSIVE n/t

[Hatchling]

148. I just saw both clips on Dan Abrams,

I certainly got the impression that Obama was comparing his campaign to Reagan's campaign of optimism and hope. The unfortunate part is that that optimism and hope turned into trickle down economics, allowing aids patients to die, etc, etc. I followed his analogy all the way through. He needs to be very careful saying things like that. I also looked at it cynically: he gets the Republican votes by invoking the Great Ronnie. That just gave me the chills and turned me off Obama.

Then Edwards speech voiced all my feelings about it. It was very good.

[creeksneakers2]

153. Get even! Pile on Edwards! Here 'ya go:

Edwards said he dropped his support for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage site in part because of a scandal over forged documents. But he switched his position in 2004, and the scandal came along a year afterward.


http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/stacking_the_deck.html

[liberal N proud]

162. Isn't that enough reason to vote for him right there?

I know a little over dramatic but I take that as Edwards denouncing the Reagan Administration and what his policies did to this country.

I can only imagine how much further along I would be if it were not for Raygun. I was just digging out when along came the son of a bu$h and just hanging on now.

[MrSlayer]

167. Yay! A Democrat gets it right. Reagan was a pig.

And should never be held up as a positive example for any reason nor under any circumstance.

[Moochy]

171. K&R

Go John Edwards!

[RetroLounge]

173. Way to go john!

:applause:

RL

[loveangelc]

174. awww he's still fighting for relevance? that's cute.

[Divine Discontent]

175. your comment is inspiring!

It reminds me of how president reagan incited mass love for America when he was president! Good heavens, those were some great times! Fortunately, the party of ideas - The Republican Party - has been helping lead this great country since the Reagan-era ended with his VP leaving the oval office in 93. Thankfully we've had the GOP to thank for 28 years of great ideas and leadership, Obama should be commended for pointing that out. Ahh... yes. Great times. Great leaders. Great ideas.

[redqueen]

218. So's your sig pic.

:rofl:

[krabigirl]

176. Finally! He needs to distinguish himself from Obama more and more.

[TankLV]

177. Thank you John Edwards...now tell it to the obamabots...

they are aparently highly CLUELESS...

[NastyRiffraff]

185. Obama made a dumb mistake

No matter how much anyone may love Obama, this was just stupid. I can't read his mind, so I don't know whether Reagan is his hero, or if he was just trying to make a point and making it badly. Of all people to use as an example!

Don't the Republicans deify Reagan enough? Not saying that Obama did, but NO Democrat needs to praise Reagan. He, more than Nixon, started the downward spiral favoring the super rich and corporations vs the middle class and poor.

Good for John Edwards.

[deacon]

191. kick and highly recommend! n/t

[Major Hogwash]

192. That's easy for John to say - he will never be President.

As he lives in the fantasy world of his own making, referring to himself as president, he has yet to win a primary.

Have you seen the numbers for South Carolina lately?
Edwards is way down in 3rd place.

He should stay in the race until August.

[AlertLurker]

199. What a freaking LIAR.

Last May, Edwards gave a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations where (quelle surprise) he actually uses Ronald Reagan as an example of change not once, BUT SEVERAL TIMES.

What the hell is he thinking??? That no one will ever look it up? Sheesh! How anyone can possibly believe anything this hypocrite says is beyond me!

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86502-p0/john-edwards/reengaging-with-the-world.html

"For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton built strong alliances and deepened the world's respect for us. We gained that respect by viewing our military strength not as an end in itself but as a means to protect a system of laws and institutions that gave hope to billions across the globe. In avoiding the temptation to rule as an empire, we hastened the fall of a corrupt and evil one in the Soviet Union. The lesson is that we cannot only be warriors; we must be thinkers and leaders as well."
...
"Millions cheered in Berlin when President John F. Kennedy stood with them and said, "Ich bin ein Berliner." Millions of people imprisoned behind the Iron Curtain silently cheered the day President Reagan declared, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Even if these ordinary men and women did not always agree with our policies, they looked to our president and saw a person -- and a nation -- they could trust.
...
"We also need to renew our commitment to engagement and diplomacy in order to solve problems before they occur, rather than scrambling to deal with crises after they have erupted. With engagement comes far greater knowledge and the potential for progress and even trust. Presidents Kennedy and Reagan talked with Soviet leaders at the height of the Cold War, in both cases turning back major threats to our national security. We need to do the same with Iranian and North Korean leaders."

[Azathoth]

200. Good catch

:thumbsup:

[AlertLurker]

203. Thanks - I just don't know what Edwards is THINKING!!!

I opened a new thread for this, as well...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4104295&mesg_id=4104295

[Azathoth]

204. It's opportunism, pure and simple n/t

[redqueen]

219. I love how this is ignored, as it should be, as it is nowhere near the same.

Keep trying, Obamatons! :)

[Perry Logan]

201. That whooshing sound you hear is people switching their votes from Obama to Edwards.

[SKKY]

202. Let alone the fact that Reagan's attitude towards Aids...

...and those infected with the HIV Virus can best be described as "Aggressive Indifference", nah, I probably wouldn't want to be associated with him either.

[happygoluckytoyou]

205. IN HIS LATER YEARS, RONNY WAS FOR CHANGE....

--- SO THEY CHANGED HIM ON A REGULAR BASIS

[William769]

206. How in the hell did I miss this thread Yesterday?

Thanks jsamuel, K&R!

[flasoapbox]

209. Well said!!

This is part of the reason Edwards is my candidate. I see him as an antithesis
to scumbags like Reagan.

[theFrankFactor]

210. This is Partially Why the Media Wants Him Out

If he can be believed; this is what America really needs. The greed factor is out of control.

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

[Frances]

211. Thanks for the link

[Beacool]

221. Go get him, John!!!!!!!!!!

[valerief]

222. Bonzo Boy broke America and Bush is burying it. nt

[midnight]

227. John Edwards: "I can promise you this:

I will never use Ronald Reagan as an example for change." Thank you John!!!!!!!

[bluhoodie]

235. I was so proud of him when I heard him say this on TV

You tell 'em, John.

Reagen -- phttttt! :puke:

[ClericJohnPreston]

228. That says it all

No matter how hard they try, no matter the effort at spin, Obama has revealed his true intentions as the Centrist Appeasor and Democartic Quisling that he is.

Sorry, but I want a FIGHTER for Democratic Principles, not some conciliatory Repub-lite, running as a Democrat.

Lets keep this thread at the top, where it belongs!

[CatnHat]

232. Obama is NOT the candidate

of change. Aligning the 'repugs' is just great; but whatever its worth, he's not doing much for the democratic party. I too, want a candidate who will get this country "back on track". One thing Clinton was right on about is that Obama can inspire (didn't reagan do that with the repugs); Tired of all the "inspiring rhetoric". Our country needs a leader, not a "preacher". How could Obama be slobbering over Reagan. I was uncommitted, now I know there are two candidates left; Clinton and Edwards. :wtf: :dilemma: