Edwards To Clinton: "That's what George Bush does..."

Quote of the Day

"That's what George Bush does... George Bush goes to events that are staged, where people are screened, where they’re only allowed to ask questions if the questions are favorable to George Bush and set up in his favor. That’s not the way democracy works in Iowa, and that’s not the way it works in New Hampshire."

-- John Edwards, quoted by CNN, comparing Sen. Hillary Clinton to President Bush after she was found to have planted questioners in a recent audience.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2007/11/10/quote_of_the_day.html

any of the other candidates do you know?

5 o'clock shadow, i will grant her that much.

but she is likely to be elected, promising to "end the war with honor" and then end up enlarging the war.

yesterday, and we were talking politics of the Islands(SuperFerry/repuke gov lingle)..and he said, "that, female candidate for president sounds like a republican(I think he was kidding that he didn't know her name right off hand). My son doesn't delve into politics too deeply but he gets it. So I told him about all the bushenabling she's done over the last 7 years.

I also told him we were labeled "hillary haters", by her supporters on DU, as red herrings, strawman, whatever diversion.. ect ect.. as a distraction from her actions on behalf of bush.

No, she's not bush she just likes enabling the poor little fartard.

to keep any campaign busy 24/7 for the next two months.

THAT will move you up on some ladders - like mine.

How Dare He?

How dare he attack another Democrat like this?

I think John Edwards must be paid by the GOP.

He is obviously a troll and a disruptor.

:spray:

That dyed-in-the-wool Democrat John Ashcroft must have been thinking of troublemakers like Edwards when he once said:

"...to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve."

John Edwards is aiding the Republicans and eroding the unity and diminishing the resolve of DU.

Face it, Senator: You're either with us or against us!

...of her supporters, I doubt she'll need any.

"Lead us out of Iraq now."

:spray:

Thorazine?

It's not thorazine.

It's :sarcasm:

I didn't think I needed to say that.

If he wants to show how he is NOT like the current "president" then he better dare. To ensure that none of the other candidates follow in Bush's steps, he better dare. Quite frankly we need this refining process to show to the public who is Bush light or a corporatist sympathizer.

I don't like it when Democrats attack other democrats either...however, if it isn't done to at least some degree, then democrats will remain to the right of the american people. Democrats need to be brought back to the left. This process is needed. Simple as that.

As for being a disruptor, I truly hope he does disrupt Hillary's current favoritism toward corporate interests. She could be a great president...but to be honest, while she is hedging toward corporate interests, I don't want her as my president.

As for the troll comment...I think your post might be the only trolling going on here.

Cheers.

And an passionate Second Post - I applaud you! :toast:

I really wanted to like and support Hillary, but I took the time to see just who is giving her money. I don't want more of the same, I want real change. I don't want continued support of the rich and powerful. I want more concern for the powerless and poor.

As a teacher, my big concern if that those most affected by poverty, and the most likely pushed and pulled by the media and big corporations are children. It takes a village to raise children, and Hillary's corporate sponsors only care about their own children.

I don't see my poor students getting health care when the person who is elected president has taken big contributions from the drug companies and insurance companies. I don't see my poorer students having any more time with their parents when it was Hillary's husband who took their families off welfare and food stamps in the name of reform, but this reform ends up meaning that their parents have to work at two or three jobs just to pay rent, buy clothes at a second-hand store, and buy groceries. Anyone who thinks that there was real reform doesn't spend their days working with the people whom that so called reform effected.

As a human being, my big concern is what global warming is going to do to the human race. I'm concerned that the people who back Hillary financially will be earning more profits from tragedies that await us due to global warming, just like they did in New Orleans. I dream of a day when the government is ruled by the consent of the people, and not by the consent of the likes of Blackwater. If Hillary showed even a hint of this, I'd back her, but with Blackwater giving her money, I can not.

Here's your troll.

... is positively spooky! It left me confused for a few seconds!!!

ever since I saw her (and the other candidates) at this year's Take Back America Conference in June. No questions were asked of any of the candidates, but only for Hillary's speech were extra people bused in (yes, I saw the buses) exclusively for a candidate's speech. After Hillary's speech they got up and left.

Wouldn't really surprise me.

First she used a fake laugh to dodge answers. Then she did her waffling on answers and now she answers only the question(s) she plants.

Much more palatable to the country. Let them eat cake (or tainted food from China)!

Hill and Bill were NEVER "New Deal" Democrats ... and the photo of the teen-aged Bill with JFK created a false impression of kindred ideals. Nothing could be further from the truth, imho. I see a far closer ideological resemblance between Eisenhower and Hillary (absent the military perspective) than between others and her (although Ford is close, too).

Maybe they were at the concert last night?

Edwards is a street walker for votes. His lust for the presidency sinks him to the lowest depths of depravity. He lies as much as the RNC.

Hillary Clinton does not go "to events that are staged, where people are screened, where they’re only allowed to ask questions if the questions are favorable." Edwards is flat out lying about that.

Her handlers wanted to get her daily message out so they defrauded crowds into thinking the message was in response to public demand rather than canned campaign material. That's wrong. That's also totally different from Bush, who can't allow himself to be questioned because he can't defend his lies.

Comparing Hillary to George Bush is pathetic. If there's a good comparison, its Edwards to Rush Limbaugh. Both can't go a day without lying about Hillary. Both of them pander to Hillary haters. Both of them have followers who don't care about dishonesty. Their followers cheer it, so long as it satisfies their hatred.

Give me back my board.

:spray:

Show me where Hillary screened all her audience members and questions like Bush does. Is there any possibility Edwards is not lying?

I refrained from criticizing Edwards for as long as I could because he's a Democrat. Now the Edwards has shown he has zero concern about whether Democrats win in November or anything else except for himself, I plan to write nasty things about him every day for as long as I can.

You may not have your board back.

This is what the candidates do. It's a rotten part of our system, but an entrenched one. I guarantee you that had Edwards pulled that same stupid move and gotten caught, he would have been piled on in just the same way as Hillary is getting it now. Hillary would have been the main one doing it, too, because, whether one likes her or not, it is obvious she is a savvy politician. Poli-tics = Many blood sucking parasites. So, jump into the fray if you want (since that is part of the age old process too) but don't expect to change one single mind with your vitriolic ways. The smart way to handle this season is do your own research quietly and then don't watch the bloodbath part.

Edwards is doing what a political animal striving for the highest rank does. So does Hillary, so does Obama. Kucinich, not so much but then he doesn't have as much of the instinct for the slime and going for the jugular. In a more perfect world, that would make him the frontrunner. In this world, it seems, he is unelectable.

Mad, mad world.

If Edwards planted a question and then Hillary lied about Edwards and compared him to George Bush, the reaction would be far worse than the one I've offered. I don't believe Hillary would lie like that about Edwards though.

I've never heard of this depth of deception until Bush.

Link or slink.

Here's what Edwards said:
"That's what George Bush does... George Bush goes to events that are staged, where people are screened, where they’re only allowed to ask questions if the questions are favorable to George Bush and set up in his favor."

But you'll only be satisfied if we can meet your new standards:
"Show me where Hillary screened all her audience members and questions like Bush does."

Isn't one single planted audience member or planted question enough to make you question the integrity of HRH HRC? Or is it only those other people who are partisans to a particular candidate? Not you, of course--oh no, never you.

:eyes:

Breaking store windows in the name of the worker is not democratic or progressive. It is closed minded and radical.


Give me back my board.

"Are you sure we should be dumping this tea, it seems wrong. I'm sure if we just compromise with the British will get representation in 50 or 60 years. They seem like nice people, if you don't count them shooting at us. Revolution is so HARD! It's so loud and dirty! Why's everybody shouting, it just makes us look bad to the tories. Maybe having a king isn't so bad."

Keep dragging your feet. When your heads on the chopping block don't say I didn't warn you.

and the fact that you don't see the difference between dumping tea and destroying people's hard earned small businesses shows how radical you are.

You keep your head in the dirt and pretend "they are all alike." That thought process is what got us into this mess in the first place. There is a difference. And as our constitution spins down the porcelain drain and our Treasury is raided by Cheney and his gang of thieves, you keep breaking the neighborhood store windows and sitting in jail.

Besides the fact that tea is, well, property. I didn't make any refrence in support of breaking store windows. You made a connection between the first posters distaste for Hillary and breaking store windows.

It was not only a non-sequitor, but it was a hyperbolic and unfair comparison.

What I understood from your post is that you equate strident dissent with the breaking of store windows. That provoked me to make my comment, not out of any support for breaking of store windows, but because I thought that you were being unfair and reactionary.

The long and short of it is that your post has only the most tenuous relationship to anything that was said before it and is designed only to abuse and attribute violent motivations to people who disagree with you.

"You keep your head in the dirt and pretend "they are all alike." That thought process is what got us into this mess in the first place."

And here I thought it was the fact that the coward Dems keep caving on everything from the 2000 election to the Kyle-Leiberman amendment.
I don't think that the Dems are exactly like the Republicans. I think many of them have quite different philosophies, only I think that they are so cowardly that the qualitative difference is virtually nil.

I really do.
:hug:

:spray:

is what Edwards is saying true? Once what Edwards does is revealed, what he is soon follows. I hate the guy.

Gives a good synopsis of what happened.

Read it and weep.

Limbaugh even runs Edwards' ads on his website.

Your comments are absurd.

else's fault. I mean, it may have been her people who staged the event, she may have gone along with it, but other candidates talking about it relieve Hils and her gang from all responsibility and it's automatically (whatever she's done) the fault of the person talking about it.

Interesting. My girls operated that way when they were in their pre-pubescent years.

.....

:think:

that's really sad. they go around telling people what to ask - do you know how DEMENTED that is? it is Dubyesque to say the least, but perhaps Clinton doesn't know about it. or maybe they don't even care as long as they right sound bite is produced? elections are funny things anyhow.

but honestly? All it took for me to write Hillary off was that shot of her sucking up to Rupert Murdoch. Heaven help us if we get saddled with her for four years. I've always wanted a woman to win the presidency but she would not be the one! We do NOT need repub lite. I have no idea who I am supporting but it's definitely not Hillary.

As for your comparison of John Edwards to Limbaugh? That's just stupid...!

just as in "attention whore"?

I can't believe Hillary's campaign would do that in a Democratic primary.

and we ought hold them to the exact same standard to which we hold the Republicans.

That being said, I have no problem with John using that fact to his advantage.

You have to admit he used a bit of hyperbole there.

but one must ask: if a candidate keeps staff with seriously faulty judgment, to we want that candidate in the Oval Office picking staff to run the nation/world?

Edwards is beating the bush trying to get her out in the light so we can see where she really comes from.

:evilgrin:

between Senator Clinton and king george

So it happened and they knew it happened, but they lied about it by saying 'it did not happen'.

Then they put out a false statement that the Campaign official had a 'preexisting relationship with the person asked to pose the canned question.' The person refused to back down, said she had no preexisting relationship with the Clinton Campaign official. So the Clinton Campaign tried to ignore it hoping it would go away. It didn't.

Other individuals then came forward and pointed out they had been approached by Clinton Campaign Officials about asking particular 'canned questions.' Realizing they could not impune the character of so many witnesses, the Clinton Campaign then moved to 'tell the truth and ask for forgiveness mode' only after they had no alternative.

So to recap, the Clinton Campaign got caught engaging in Bush-styled staging of questions. They got caught, and lied about it. Then when they tried to lie about the lie a second time and it did not work, they decided they had to come clean, admit it happened, and say it won't happen again.


Hmmmm... which administration does this sound like?

Voter beware

:sarcasm:


(actually I am appalled but I typically am with HRC)

NO more Clintons! NO more Bushes! NO more taking it in our tushes!;-)

I care more about the fact that she's taken more money from the health care industry than ANY other candidate, democrat or republican. I want that fact repeated over and over again, and I also want a Hillary supporter to explain how she can be trusted to improve health care in this context.

Electing her seems to be yet another blow to the publicly funded elections we desperately need in order to have any *real* change.

www.theyoungturks.com

Just a fact.

If we take a look at their votes, they voted for alot of the same stuff including the war and free trade the patriot act and so on.

I just don't see any real difference between Hillary, Edwards, Obama..ect

THE ONLY ONE THAT IS DIFFERENT IS KUCINICH!

Its very simple look at their voting records on the issues and you tell me who fucking cares about people and who cares about money and control.

For instance Edwards is coming out strong against Free trade now..but where was he in 2000....Oh thats right casting votes for it.

Free trade total % of votes cast against the WTO and Free trade agreement:

Edwards 63% ( two Republican candidates -- Reps. Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul – scored better than Edwards and all of the other Democrats running for the nomination)

Kucinich 93% (would be perfect except he missed a vote)


This is just one comparison, when you really start looking you will see that the only good one IS KUCINICH!

Clinton is going deeper and deeper in my esteem.

We here have unanimously condemned FEMA's and the White House's practice of planting fake reporters in order to be asked soft-ball questions (Remember Jeff Gannon?). But I wasn't expecting this from one of our major candidates. Thia is bad.

then you will need to stage empty questions to get through the whole PR malarkey.

Anything real and solid she says may look bad 3 or 4 months on down the road when she does something that absolutely flies in the face of it.

Does she also have protest zones set up 3 miles away? Are her audiences "invite" only? She really didn't need to do what she did! She's ahead in the freakin' polls! Sheesh. Tacky...tacky...tacky.

a plant with tons of $uport from corporate America. Whose interests do you suppose will be her priority. Ours, or corporate America's? Some in far-right circles believe helping corporate America helps us out mutually. How's that been working?