Download | Play 
Download | Play
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards talked with Keith Olbermann on Countdown about his take on the campaign so far, President Clinton’s statement that he was against the war, how out of touch the Republicans are with mainstream Americans and of course, the cavalcade of gifts they handed the Democrats in last night’s debate.
Edwards and Olbermann made light of way the right (I’m looking at you, Michelle Malkin, although it made Joe Scarborough an angry little Republican this morning as well) is going nutty over the fact that a Hillary Clinton volunteer–who, by the way, was a registered Republican and a member of the Log Cabin Republicans and has contributed no money to the Clinton campaign–was allowed to ask a question during the debate last night.
As Keith put it, if the Republicans can’t handle the Democrats, how can they handle Al Qaeda?
Filed Under: Campaigns/Elections, Countdown/Keith Olbermann, Debates, Democratic Party, Election 08, GOP, Iraq, John Edwards, MSNBC, Middle East
No Trackbacks To “Countdown: John Edwards Mocks Republicans For Being Afraid To Take Questions From Democrats“
I *really* hope Edwards wins Iowa…
Edwards is ok!
I guess thta’s good enough!
He sure is a Populist!!
How telling is it that CNN will plant a question at a Democratic debate insinuating that Clinton is an elitist (not that she isn’t, but it’s a smear anyway) and allow a Republican operative to ask a loaded question wrongly accusing Democrats of raising taxes, but when a gay veteran asks a question about why Republicans think gays who serve their country deserve to be discriminated against, it’s out of bounds? How’s that for your
LiberalCorporate Media?Ya know…this guy just might do it. Things seem to be going his way.
Thank. God.
Hmmmmm how real/honest do the American people believe this guys is though ? ……..
I don’t understand this ‘righteous indignation’ at all, though I will note that if vehemently right-wing bloggers like Michelle Malkin are reviewing the CNN/YouTube Republican debate by attacking the Democratic Party, I take that as a sign that things are going very, very well for the Democrats. Why, you ask? Because it means that the Republican candidates more or less bombed, and these apologetic neo-conservatives are entirely aware of that fact. Mind you, neo-conservatives never admit weakness; instead, they become defensive apologists.
The reason I say I don’t understand the righteous indignation is because I was not aware that there existed a U.S. policy wherein Democrats only answer questions from Democratic supporters, and Republicans only answer questions from Republican supporters. In fact, I find that to be an incredibly exclusionary, isolationist approach to a debate and it undermines the entire notion of a functional democracy as well. Should Democratic supporters wear little armbangs with a cartoon donkey on them, then? Please. The reason these people ’slipped by’ CNN executives is probably tied to the fact that those working on the YouTube project were concerned with the validity of a question over what party/candidate the questioner supports.
In short, the Republican Party is in miserable shape. Also, as Bill Maher once observed, it’s being run by a bunch of drama queens.
It is actually funny to watch the Republicans try and field an unexpected question such as the one given by General Kerr. The Republican party has always been about controlling the message and leading their unthinking followers towards a predetermined conclusion on an issue. Watching the Republican candidates respond to General Kerr’s question was like watching a robot blow a fuse. If one really looked carefully at the candidates on stage I bet you will see smoke coming from their ears or hear a mumbled “That does not compute.” :lol:
JerryM @ 5:
Apparently enuff to vote for him…Hmmmmm.
Edwards is our best hope of a win in Nov ‘08. After that, he is our best hope of putting this country back together again. Please considering voting for John Edwards in your state primary.
Question Blog @ 2:
Populist.
noun.
a member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
• a person who holds, or who is concerned with, the views of ordinary people.
• ( Populist) a member of the Populist Party, a U.S. political party formed in 1891 that advocated the interests of labor and farmers, free coinage of silver, a graduated income tax, and government control of monopolies.
Why are people trying to turn that into slander against Edwards? Sometime the poor really are getting screwed. As in right damn now.
I think it is hilarious. The Republicans are ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIED of Edwards getting the nomination!
Being an old time Republican I must admit that I like John Edwards and would certainly vote for him in the general election. Sure hope he get the nomination!
Australia is leaving too.
Soon it will be: A Coalition of One.
I have to say that I think Edwards could be a fine president!
dasands @ 11:
Thank you for loving your country enough to cross party lines to vote for a better candidate.
Has anyone else noticed the lag between Olbermann’s questions and Edward’s replies? That seems to happen in almost every single interview he does. He asks a question, and it seems like the person he’s asking is a good second or two behind. What’s up with that?
Shade Tail @ 15:
It happens often when a person is appearing live via satellite
The Economist noted during the 2000 campaign, before Kerry won the nomination, that Edwards was the strongest candidate to beat the GOP. The Economist endorsed Kerry “with a heavy heart,” as they put it.
Now that we’re watching Huckabee rise in the polls, how strange it would be if after all the hype and hooha over Clinton and Ghouliania, if we were faced in November 2008 with a choice between Edwards the populist and Huckabee the evangelist wannabe.
I still strongly support Christopher Dodd, and my appreciation for Edwards is lukewarm at best, but if Edwards can convince the Independents and if Repubs consider him a viable option, then let’s get this show on the road.
As Keith put it, if the Republicans can’t handle the Democrats, how can they handle Al Qaeda?
Well, of course that can’t handle either. Republicans are cowards and are afraid of everything. Libruls, brown people, gays, you name it, all they got is fear. They live in fear. Everyone of those losers are cowards except walnuts and he’s just nuts.
I have to a agree with Johnny2Bad I am not sure John Edwards is all that he pretends to be. he has been telling anyone that will listen to him that he is pro-labor…
Here is a interesting bit of information concerning John Edwards and his support or should I say lack of…
08/07/2007 — Statement from Larry Rasky on John Edwards’s right-to-work record:
Tonight, John Edwards said that he claimed to be a leader on union issues throughout his career. The public record does not square with Sen. Edwards’s memory.
The Facts:
Edwards Supported North Carolina Right to Work Law in 1998:
* In 1998 the Charlotte Observer reported, The AFL-CIO endorsed Edwards last spring. Faircloth used that in a TV ad, saying Edwards promised to be a warrior for labor.
In fact, Edwards said he would be a warrior for labor unions only on those issues on which they agreed. One of those issues is right-to-work laws, which prevent workers from being forced to join a union. Unions oppose such laws.
Edwards opposes a national right-to-work law, but favors North Carolina’s right-to-work law. Faircloth has introduced a national right-to-work law. [Charlotte Observer, 10/18/98.
* In 1998 the Charlotte Observer reported, As it turns out, Edwards doesn’t even agree with the labor group on their most critical issue - North Carolina’s right-to-work law.
That law, which the AFL-CIO opposes, means no one can be forced to join a union or pay dues. Edwards says he supports North Carolina’s law. But he opposes a national right-to-work law backed by Republican Faircloth. I don’t think the federal government needs to get involved with it, Edwards said.
That was good enough for James Andrews, the AFL-CIO’s executive director, who has virtually given up on finding a viable candidate who will fight North Carolina’s right-to-work law.
We understand that the Jim Hunts of the world and John Edwards of the world . . . are certainly
not going to oppose the current law, Andrews said. Politically, I don’t expect to have anyone leading the charge to change that. We understand and accept that.
Edwards is not going to be 100 percent with us on all our issues, but he certainly has expressed commitment and understanding of working families. Charlotte Observer, 10/7/98.
Were I to decide to vote, I’ll probably vote for Edwards on the Dems ticket, and Giuliani on the Reps ticket, so I won’t have to bother to vote in the general, knowing that Edwards will mop up the floor with Giuliani.
[refers to deleted post]
Mr. Edward’s public acknowledgement that his wife may not live very long after his possible election was an act of courage. Distorting that into “hiding behind his wife’s skirt” speaks volumes about you….Ugh. I want to shower…
Straight Shooter @ 18:
Christopher Dodd lost me for his vote to fund the wall along the Mexico border. Obama lost me…well he never actually had me, but he damn sure didn’t after 1) supporting the disastrous bankruptcy bill and then posing all smiley with Bush at its conclusion and 2) pandering to religious fundies, asking them to help him bring “the kingdom” to earth, and then McClurkingate.
It’s so simple. All we have to do is all vote for Edwards in the primaries so he can BE the nominee … then it’ll be no more Hillary who would only be a 1 term president anyway IF all the bubbas and their wives would ever let her in the White House in the first place! That will not happen. They crucified her as First Lady without any reason, and there is no way they will EVER let her tell them what to do as POTUS.
We should really stop worrying and just get behind the man who is the best candidate… Edwards. Remember when he debated Cheney. hehe This guy’s good! That’s why he’s being ignored by MSM.
mirth @ 14:
My former wingnut friends have all been talking about supporting Edwards… They finally figured out that they don’t make over $300,000 a year and they are getting “left behind.”
Most of them have family members who are really hurting… uninsured or can’t afford to have their kids go to college or simply not making ends meet.
It was bad enough when 440,000 Americans began filing for bankruptcy last year because they couldn’t pay their hospital bills, but now millions of Americans are about to lose their homes with the mortgage resets and millions more are teetering on the brink.
Edwards’ message has the ring of truth and more people are realizing it. The Democrats are too.
As he said in the last debate… in 1993 there was a Democratically controlled House, Senate, and President Clinton was in the White House. There were two pieces of legislation that came up… Universal Health Care and NAFTA.
The American people desperately needed Universal Health Care and they didn’t need NAFTA… an agreement that sent millions of jobs to Mexico and overseas. So what did we get… NAFTA!
Trading a bunch of corporatist Republicans in for a bunch of corporatist Democrats means that nothing will change!
Shade Tail @ 15:
Time Delay. Tom’s brother.
JerryM @ 5:
Amen, he sounds kind of soft in talking about the issues, while trying to personify a ‘real’ thorn in the side of our (US citizens) current dictator.
You recall hearing people saying “no one died when Clinton lied”, when the fact is kids were starving, malnourished and unable to get medical attention for all the days of the no fly zone under the barbarity of Clinton. Then of course there is the Clinton Bush Dynasty (The USA).. If only a healthy minded man like Kennedy were still around.. I think there is hope in R. Paul or Dennis Kucinich but there is little or no hope of them getting a chance by their own party presidential pickers, sucks for us.
As you said (implied), we all (US citizens) are hanging onto a wish/prayer that there is anything left of our Democracy, and that is all it is a wish/prayer. The book Political Ponerology puts it all into context.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-F6xfMl8Go - V - Speech
Salutes!
JerryM @ 5:
I can tell you that THIS American believes John Edwards is the most real and honest candidate we have had in a very long time. When I see and hear his speeches I just feel that he actually means what he says. He would be a friend to the American people in the White House and actually stand up for us.
Repubs don’t even want gay people in the same building as them. Jim Crowists always on the march
Rasputin @ 24:
Rasputin, it’s good to say Hi to you. :-)
As justme says above you, we make make it happen. But I suspect that our primary votes will be so scattered that HRC will charge ahead.
Good, for the love of god can you imagine if the situation was the other way around. I can only imagine how lovely of a spin job would be aimed at Hillary, or how somehow this would be another sign that Obama was “weak”. Who cares, get over it, and move on. All of the guys on stage last night seemed to dance around answering any question with substance anyways so what does it matter if they were coming from a republican or a democrat. NEXT
OMG, don’t let anyone who is not a Fan Boy of the Repugs ask a question of their candidates! They won’t know how to respond to such a novel situation. How unfair…
bloomberg/hagel anyone? As in Independent Party…..
Here is a interesting bit of information concerning John Edwards and his support or should I say lack of…
08/07/2007 — Statement from Larry Rasky on John Edwards’s right-to-work record:
Tonight, John Edwards said that he claimed to be a leader on union issues throughout his career. The public record does not square with Sen. Edwards’s memory.
The Facts:
Edwards Supported North Carolina Right to Work Law in 1998:
* In 1998 the Charlotte Observer reported, The AFL-CIO endorsed Edwards last spring. Faircloth used that in a TV ad, saying Edwards promised to be a warrior for labor.
In fact, Edwards said he would be a warrior for labor unions only on those issues on which they agreed. One of those issues is right-to-work laws, which prevent workers from being forced to join a union. Unions oppose such laws.
Edwards opposes a national right-to-work law, but favors North Carolina’s right-to-work law. Faircloth has introduced a national right-to-work law. [Charlotte Observer, 10/18/98.
* In 1998 the Charlotte Observer reported, As it turns out, Edwards doesn’t even agree with the labor group on their most critical issue - North Carolina’s right-to-work law.
That law, which the AFL-CIO opposes, means no one can be forced to join a union or pay dues. Edwards says he supports North Carolina’s law. But he opposes a national right-to-work law backed by Republican Faircloth. I don’t think the federal government needs to get involved with it, Edwards said.
That was good enough for James Andrews, the AFL-CIO’s executive director, who has virtually given up on finding a viable candidate who will fight North Carolina’s right-to-work law.
We understand that the Jim Hunts of the world and John Edwards of the world . . . are certainly not going to oppose the current law, Andrews said. Politically, I don’t expect to have anyone leading the charge to change that. We understand and accept that.
Edwards is not going to be 100 percent with us on all our issues, but he certainly has expressed commitment and understanding of working families. Charlotte Observer, 10/7/98.
Edwards has gone out of his way to gain the political and economic support of the trade unions, and was the first candidate to be endorsed by a major union. He has done this by speaking in favor of many pro-union legislative questions. But if he is so pro-labor, why has he not called for the repeal of the many pernicious anti-labor laws that are on the books, such as Taft-Hartley? The reason is clear. For all his rhetoric, Edwards and the labor bureaucracy that endorses him are more interested in maintaining the “partnership with the bosses” approach to trade unionism, than actually defending workers’ rights and interests.
Al Hart @ 19:
Why do you keep spamming that into this thread? Do you work for another political campaign?
To top it off it isn’t really even that damning… Edwards did the best he could in a VERY conservative state. How is that bad?
BTW, I looked up this “Larry Rasky”. He is a PR “fixer” for hire. Do you work for him or his company?
The republicans can’t handle toilet paper, for crissake!! What a bunch of whiny ba$tards they are… every single immature one of them.
Regardless of how you feel about John Edwards it is striking comparing him speaking to Bush. When Bush speaks I feel as if I’ve gotten dumber by listening to him. Listening to someone like Edwards you come away with the feeling that he is intelligent, poised, and has weighed the pros and cons of a subject before making a decision. Frankly this is the type of person that the United States needs to be electing as its President and not someone you’d like to have a beer with.
What I’m trying to say is it’s time America elects an intelligent President and not someone that meets the lowest common denominator. Just because you’re smart doesn’t mean you can’t relate to the common American and that’s what we need to be hammering home ramping up to the election in 2008.
Al Hart @ 34:
Becuase he didn’t single-handedly change the culture of the South overnight on one issue once a decade ago?
Wow. Keep wishing for a pony for Christmas, because you will never get some 100% perfect candidate — certainly not someone that could do that! Actually, I’m not sure I could trust a candidate that hasn’t made mistakes and owned up to them. Edwards sure has. Heck, I think he blinks too much when speaking, but its not like means he somehow isn’t he best candidate.
Why don’t you take a look at Fact Check, and see that Edwards has a lifetime AFL-CIO rating of 97%, tied for 1st with Kucinich? The site dings him slightly for saying that NAFTA cost us a million jobs, saying the figure is “disputed”. Yeah, NAFTA is working just freaking great. I’m glad Edwards is willing to stand up for what we know is happening, even if it is “disputed”.
Al Hart #33, why are you reposting old information? Isn’t there a site monitor here?
President John Edwards.
Get used to it.
No I just get feed up with that I feel your pain crap. I think we al can agree that the Democratic field is loaded with great people.