Now this is comical

rraley

New Member
From gop.com's "research" on Senator Edwards...

Edwards Declines Foreign Leader Quiz. MSNBC’s CHRIS MATHEWS: “And back in the last presidential election, a Boston TV reporter, Andy Hill, asked the president -- presidential candidate George W Bush if he could name the four world leaders of four hot spots around the world. They were Chechnya, Taiwan, Pakistan, India. Do you think that was a fair set of questions to put to a guy running for president?” SEN. EDWARDS: “No.” MATTHEWS: “Do you think it would be a fair question to put to you right now?” EDWARDS: “No. Absolutely not.” MATTHEWS: “So you don’t want to go that route? That was the option you have. I have the answers here, if you wanted to try, but since you don’t want to try, we’ll move on. If you -- Are you sure? You don’t want to answer these questions? I know you know at least one of them. You know who’s head of...” EDWARDS: “Let’s don’t go there.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 10/13/03)

It is funny how the website doesn't mention that President Bush failed the test miserably that was presented to him. So basically, President Bush deserved a free pass on the test and the test was unfair (as Senator Edwards said in the line of questioning), but Senator Edwards should have subjected himself to the test. I just love the humor in that. I think this shows how much the GOP has overreached and distorted in their attempt to attack the Kerry/Edwards ticket. Just my opinion.
 

rraley

New Member
Ah more from gop.com

Bill Clinton Advises Need For Big Message, The American Prospect Notes Lack Of Substance. “As Clinton said, according to a transcript on the Atlantic Web site, ‘I told him: John, you’re great on TV. You make a great talk. You can talk an owl out of a tree. But my opinion is, presidential elections are won by the strength of the candidate, and having a network of support, and then by the mega message, having the big message.’ In other words, Edwards looked and sounded good -- but there wasn’t much substance behind his words and image.” (Mary Lynn F. Jones, “Is John Kerry Peaking Too Early?” The American Prospect, 3/5/03)

This is funny. They take the opinion of a low-level conservative columnist of a conservative publication and pass it off as fact. You gotta love it.
 

rraley

New Member
Edwards Voted Twice Against The 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Package. (H.R. 1, CQ Vote 459: Adopted 54-44: R 42-9; D 11-35; I 1-0, 11/25/03, Edwards Voted Nay; S. 1, CQ Vote 262: Passed 76-21: R 40-10; D 35-11; I 1-0, 6/27/03, Edwards Voted Nay)

As did Senator John McCain, who is apparently the real choice of Senator Kerry for vice-president.
 

tlatchaw

Not dead yet.
Originally posted by rraley
From gop.com's "research" on Senator Edwards...



It is funny how the website doesn't mention that President Bush failed the test miserably that was presented to him. So basically, President Bush deserved a free pass on the test and the test was unfair (as Senator Edwards said in the line of questioning), but Senator Edwards should have subjected himself to the test. I just love the humor in that. I think this shows how much the GOP has overreached and distorted in their attempt to attack the Kerry/Edwards ticket. Just my opinion.

Seems to me that the point being made is that when W failed that test the media howled about it for days. Edwards (wisely I might add) declined to take this test, and yet we hear not a whisper.
 

tlatchaw

Not dead yet.
Originally posted by rraley
As did Senator John McCain, who is apparently the real choice of Senator Kerry for vice-president.

Hmmm. That would imply that perhaps some level of consistency is developing in the Kerry camp.
 

rraley

New Member
Re: Re: Now this is comical

Originally posted by tlatchaw
Seems to me that the point being made is that when W failed that test the media howled about it for days. Edwards (wisely I might add) declined to take this test, and yet we hear not a whisper.

No the point on the website is to say that Edwards isn't qualified on foreign relations issues. This entry is included under the heading "New to Foreign Policy and International Issues." Quite clearly suggesting that he doesn't know anything. If for some reason a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who has more national and international experience that President Bush had prior to his race in 2000, is unqualified for the president, I don't know what is.
 

rraley

New Member
Now to distortion on Senator Edwards' record on abortion rights...
In 1999, Edwards Voted Against Banning Partial-Birth Abortion. (S. 1692, CQ Vote #340: Passed 63-34: R 48-3; D 14-31, 10/21/99, Edwards Voted Nay)

and now they try to say he's a flip-flopper, a not-so-effective criticism that the GOP has taken to lately...

During 1998 Senate Campaign, Edwards Said Partial-Birth Abortion Should Be Banned. “‘I think partial-birth abortions should be banned,’ Edwards said. ‘These are terribly gruesome procedures. I think the only exception is where there is a grave, serious threat to the health of the mother.’” (“Edwards Campaigns On An Issue A Week,” The Associated Press, 9/19/98)

Well Senator Edwards said that he wanted to ban partial birth abortions unless there was a "grave, serious threat to the mother." The partial birth abortion ban that passed Congress did not include provisions that made that stipulation.
 

rraley

New Member
Onto defense...
ü Edwards Voted To Reduce Defense Spending By $3.1 Billion. Edwards was one of only 16 Senators to vote for the reduction. (S. 1122, CQ Vote #156: Motion Rejected 16-81: R 8-45; D 8-36, 6/8/99, Edwards Voted Yea)

So did Senator John McCain, who President Bush is touting around like he's his best friend in Washington. Look, if you are gonna attack Edwards, you might as well attack McCain too.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
raley...

...your bias is showing. You left out the good part from the Mathews interview:



Edwards Declines Foreign Leader Quiz. MSNBC’s CHRIS MATHEWS: “And back in the last presidential election, a Boston TV reporter, Andy Hill, asked the president -- presidential candidate George W Bush if he could name the four world leaders of four hot spots around the world. They were Chechnya, Taiwan, Pakistan, India. Do you think that was a fair set of questions to put to a guy running for president?” SEN. EDWARDS: “No. Who ####ing cares about those *******s? I'll sue them into oblivion if they #### with me!” MATTHEWS: “Do you think it would be a fair question to put to you right now?” EDWARDS: “No. Absolutely not and I'll ####ing sue your ass as well, #####...” MATTHEWS: “So you don’t want to go that route? That was the option you have. I have the answers here, if you wanted to try, but since you don’t want to try, we’ll move on. If you -- Are you sure? You don’t want to answer these questions? I know you know at least one of them. You know who’s head of...” EDWARDS: “Let’s don’t go there, #######. You'll hear from my lawyers! I'll sue your ass! Wait...I am my lawyer. Is that a conflict of interest? Is that ####ing camera on!?...####...Hi, I'm gentle, young, cute John Edwards and I love everyone...please vote for me or I'll sue your ass...” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 10/13/03)
 

rraley

New Member
I think that you got Senator Edwards mixed up with Vice President Cheney, Larry. :biggrin:

Did you see that Cheney called Edwards to welcome him into the race? I think that it would have been funny if Edwards would have told Cheney to go #### himself. Not nice and wrong, but still funny.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
He did...

Transcript: (phone rings)

Edwards: "Edwards residence, John speaking..."
Cheney: "Hi Senator Edwards, Dick Cheney here"
Ed: "Oh, hi DICK, how are you?"
Dick: "Fine, fine. Justed wanted to say congrats and welcome you to the jungle."
Ed: "Well, that's nice. How's the heart treatment going?"
Dick: "Cut the nicey nice, pretty boy. I'm gonna punk your ass"
Ed: "Well, how hospitable of you, Mr. VICE President. How's things in the cave?"
(signal becomes garbled)
Cheney: "Go (unintelligeable) yourself"
John: "Well, thanks and you (garbled) yourself as well. Stop in and see us soon, now. Buh by!"
Cheney: "You're mine, punk, mine. Have a nice (static)ing day!"

end of tap...
 

rraley

New Member
Ah yes that does sound better than the conversation that was reported....well I have to log off and stop criticizing gop.com so that I can write some college essays.

But don't worry I'll be back with more.
 

SmallTown

Football season!
Must suck to be a politician, having to bite your tongue and doing things just for the votes.

It is no mystery that Kerry really doesn't like Edwards. Yet he felt he had to choose him as a runningmate.

It is no mystery that Bush doesn't like McCain, yet he uses clips with him in his latest ads.

Heck, the next thing you know Moore will be running for office and he'll choose limbaugh as his VP :rolleyes:
 

FromTexas

This Space for Rent
Hey, let's get to the FACTUAL good parts of that interview, too. Same interview with Chris Matthews.

Let me ask but the war, because I know these are all students and a lot of guys the age of these students are fighting over there and cleaning up over there, and they’re doing the occupation.

Were we right to go to this war alone, basically without the
Europeans behind us? Was that something we had to do?

EDWARDS: I think that we were right to go. I think we were right to go to the United Nations. I think we couldn’t let those who could veto in the Security Council hold us hostage.

And I think Saddam Hussein, being gone is good. Good for the American people, good for the security of that region of the world, and good for the Iraqi people.

MATTHEWS: If you think the decision, which was made by the president, when basically he saw the French weren’t with us and the Germans and the Russians weren’t with us, was he right to say, “We’re going anyway”?

EDWARDS: I stand behind my support of that, yes.

MATTHEWS: You believe in that?

EDWARDS: Yes.

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about-Since you did support the resolution and you did support that ultimate solution to go into combat and to take over that government and occupy that country. Do you think that you, as a United States Senator, got the straight story from the Bush administration on this war? On the need for the war? Did you get the straight story?

EDWARDS: Well, the first thing I should say is I take responsibility for my vote. Period. And I did what I did based upon a belief, Chris, that Saddam Hussein’s potential for getting nuclear capability was what created the threat. That was always the focus of my concern. Still is the focus of my concern.

So did I get misled? No. I didn’t get misled.

MATTHEWS: Did you get an honest reading on the intelligence?

EDWRADS: But now we’re getting to the second part of your question.

I think we have to get to the bottom of this. I think there’s clear inconsistency between what’s been found in Iraq and what we were told.

And as you know, I serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee. So it wasn’t just the Bush administration. I sat in meeting after meeting after meeting where we were told about the presence of weapons of mass destruction. There is clearly a disconnect between what we were told and what, in fact, we found there.

MATTHEWS: If you knew last October when you had to cast an aye or nay vote for this war, that we would be unable to find weapons of mass destruction after all these months there, would you still have supported the war?

EDWARDS: It wouldn’t change my views. I said before, I think that the threat here was a unique threat. It was Saddam Hussein, the potential for Saddam getting nuclear weapons, given his history and the fact that he started the war before


And, yes, the question being brought up is because it was a sticking point with some libs on Bush's election. People said it showed his inexperience on the Bush side, so now it is being used as a device to show the irony. Hard concept to grasp I know...


:biggrin: :biggrin:
 

FromTexas

This Space for Rent
This is funny. They take the opinion of a low-level conservative columnist of a conservative publication and pass it off as fact. You gotta love it.

No, it is not that off base of an opinion. It is exactly what Clinton was saying. Go read the whole interview in the Atlantic. Clinton basically says he told Edwards that is good he can get on TV and look good and do the walk, but he needs to have a message and something to sell (that he does not have). Which is the same thing as not having substance in what you are presenting. Not a hard thing to grasp. Your liberal paranoia is showing. Its a long piece where Clinton focuses on Edwards.

:biggrin:
 

Toxick

Splat
Originally posted by SmallTown
Heck, the next thing you know Moore will be running for office and he'll choose limbaugh as his VP :rolleyes:


'Minds me of one of my favorite comic strips... Bloom County.

The gang is trying to put together a "Meadowcrat" ticket, and they're looking for running mates. So one suggests, Jesse Helms.

"No, he'll alienate half the country."

"Then what about Jesse Jackson?"
"No, he'll alienate the other half"

Thoughtful pause

"How about this: Let's alienate EVERYONE! Jesse & Jesse in '88"
"Shaddap!"
 

FromTexas

This Space for Rent
I'm in for the Spiers/Simpson ticket. Why vote for 2 ugly old boobs when you can have four great ones.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Toxick
'Minds me of one of my favorite comic strips... Bloom County.

The gang is trying to put together a "Meadowcrat" ticket, and they're looking for running mates. So one suggests, Jesse Helms.

"No, he'll alienate half the country."

"Then what about Jesse Jackson?"
"No, he'll alienate the other half"

Thoughtful pause

"How about this: Let's alienate EVERYONE! Jesse & Jesse in '88"
"Shaddap!"

Actually MY favorite one is where some guy is carrying a sign for Mondale/Ferraro. Binkley invites him to join the Meadow party.

"Who do you have running?"

"A dead cat and a drunk"

(pause)

Chucks the sign. "What the hell" he shrugs.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Re: Now this is comical

Originally posted by rraley
No the point on the website is to say that Edwards isn't qualified on foreign relations issues. This entry is included under the heading "New to Foreign Policy and International Issues." Quite clearly suggesting that he doesn't know anything. If for some reason a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who has more national and international experience that President Bush had prior to his race in 2000, is unqualified for the president, I don't know what is.

Then maybe he's busy with other things. I haven't seen much evidence that he's all that bright. I think we have another Dan Quayle here. You may have also read on that site that when it was suggested he attend Leah Rabin's reception, he asked "who's she?". "Yitzhak Rabin's widow".

"Who's HE?" he asked. Now I realize he was RUNNING for Senate, but I don't know HOW a grown man missed Rabin's assasination, much less didn't know WHO he was. Geez, even I knew that one.

I've seen him on air. When he's coached, he appears somewhat knowledgeable, but usually has to lean on lawyer BS to get through the tougher questions.

But you know? I really don't care. I think Bush said it best regarding Cheney, and Edwards. He said "Cheney can BE President". I'm not as certain about a man who served 3 and half years of a single senate term before he spent all his time on the campaign trail.

And it does work both ways. IF Bush failed the test that Edwards fails, why does Edwards get the benefit of a doubt?
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
rraley -

I just want to preface with the comment that I appreciate your thoughtful and civil responses. Even if I disagree, I look forward to reading your analyses.

However - on another thread, you mentioned that the 'liberal rating' applied to both Kerry and Edwards is unfair inasmuch as they both have shown up for only significant votes where they were needed - thus skewing the resultant liberal score to be even more partisan than normal.

However, the Americans for Democratic Action base their score on the lifetime votes of the individual. They give a lifetime rating of 92 to Kerry, who has been in long enough to warrant it, and one of 81 to Edwards. And unless he's been running for President since January of '99, he has earned that spot as well.

Just a heads up on the rating....
 
Top