How dare Edwards declare himself the "grownup" in the party, "above the bickering," when HE was the

[jenmito]

one attacking Hillary to the point he was "unrecognizable" by some fellow Dems. One debate and he is suddenly the grownup? Please.

[JuniperLea]

1. ???

Where and when did he attack Hillary? What did I miss? Linkypoo?

[jenmito]

6. In the debate that everyone expected OBAMA to attack Hillary just because he

told a newspaper that he was going to sharpen the differences between them.

[Andy823]

30. You have to be kidding, right?

Edwards never acted like they did in the last debate, no way, no how! Your talking gibberish!

[jenmito]

32. Nope.

And yes he did. He was suddenly the "angry" candidate trying to distinguish himself from Hillary.

[Tom Rinaldo]

59. It began in late Summer - August and thereabouts, and continued into November

I fully understand that many Democratic activists applaud Edwards for attacking Clinton early and hard and agree with a lot he said, but that isn't the matter being discussed. The question is whether he went hard attacking negative early. Here are some pieces written about it at the time:

Thursday, August 23, 2007
Edwards on Hillary: she's a "corporate Democrat"

"Much has already been said about John Edwards as a man of many contradictions. I don't feel I have much to add to that debate.

What I do find interesting, however, is how the Edwardses--both John and Elizabeth--are at the forefront of attacking their fellow Democrats. Some of this, I think, will come back to haunt whoever becomes the nominee next year.

Today, Edwards will say in a New Hampshire speech that unless voters elect him president they are simply swapping out "corporate Republicans" for "corporate Democrats." This is quite obviously a swipe at Hillary and her refusal to stop accepting donations from lobbyists."
http://appletonian.blogspot.com/2007/08/edwards-on-hillary-shes-corporate.html


Edwards Attacking Rivals Only Indirectly
See How They Run: After Tagging His Rivals, Edwards Backs Off Criticism
The Associated Press By JIM KUHNHENN Associated Press Writer
IOWA CITY, Iowa Dec 14, 2007 (AP)
Font Size

At a key moment during a labor-sponsored debate in August, John Edwards laid down a marker against Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"The one thing you can count on is you will never see a picture of me on the front of Fortune magazine saying I am the candidate that big, corporate America is betting on," he said, an unmistakable reference to a cover story about Clinton with the headline "Business Loves Hillary! (Who Knew?)"

On his current bus tour of Iowa, with the caucuses only three weeks away, Edwards rarely mentions his rivals. His campaign believes he hardly needs to because he spent months branding them Clinton as the corporate Democrat, Barack Obama as the callow compromiser who would negotiate with special interests.

On the campaign trail, his antagonists now are the corporations and special interests themselves. The Clinton and Obama references are merely implied, hidden in a populist message he calls "America Rising." For the former trial lawyer, it's a closing argument to break away from a virtual three-way tie in Iowa and rise above the fray engulfing his main opponents.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3998924


Edwards Clarifies Comment On Hillary: "I Fully Expect To Support" Dem Nominee
By Greg Sargent - November 13, 2007, 2:13PM
Today at a press availability John Edwards was asked by reporters about his refusal to say that he'd back Hillary for President if she wins the Democratic nomination. The Edwards camp has just emailed me his answer:

"I fully expect to support the Democratic nominee, and I fully expect to be the Democratic nominee."

"I fully expect" to support the nominee -- not quite "I will support." It's more than, "I'm not willing to talk about that at this point," which is what he'd said earlier. But it's still not a full commitment to backing the Dem nominee.
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/edwards_clarifies_comment_on_hillary_i_fully_expect_to_support_dem_nominee.php


Tensions Rise in Democrats' Nevada Debate As Hillary Fires Back
Submitted by CPU Staff on Sun, 11/18/2007 - 2:28am.
In Thursday night's debate, tensions increased in the Democratic presidential primary. Clinton opponent's continued to emphasize Clinton's ties to the Washington political elite and her politicized way of making decisions. Edwards called her a "corporate Democrat" and a defender of a "rigged and corrupt" system.
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:zSj19tqKvbcJ:blog.cupolitics.org/+%22corporate+democrat%22+Edwards+debate&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=62&gl=us

[jenmito]

67. Thanks for all the links...

Those are the things I'm taLking about.

[shaniqua6392]

2. I like all three of them but

I think he did appear to be the ONLY grown up in that last debate in my opinion.

[SeattleGirl]

3. And where is your evidence?

I'm tired of hit-and-run slams. You have something to say, then say it all, and provide evidence to back up what you're saying.

[jenmito]

9. He just said it at a rally and they showed it on CNN. They even showed a new ad he put up

of Hillary and Obama "bickering" at the last debate.

[SeattleGirl]

16. So how is that a slap on Edwards.

Clinton and Obama WERE bickering at the last debate.

They were getting very personal, and it was getting ugly.

Please don't assign blame for what they are doing to Edwards.

[jenmito]

21. Who assigned blame to Edwards?

I just pointed out how when, in ONE debate, Obama defends himself and Hillary hits below the belt, Edwards claims to be the "grownup," Edwards thinks he's suddenly the grownup?

[surfermaw]

41. I think the media gave him the grown up thing

[jenmito]

49. He said, "I'm from the grownup wing of the Democratic party."

[JuniperLea]

18. You have to admit, they brought that one on themselves...

I have to agree with him on this point.

[jenmito]

23. No I don't. I see it as Obama finally defending himself among the Clintons' smears.

[JuniperLea]

36. Oh please...

They have been going back and forth for weeks. Each one claiming the same thing, which happens to be exactly what you just said... FINALLY defending themselves.


It takes two to tango, and this dance has become a dance marathon!

[jenmito]

52. No. They haven't been going back and forth. The Clintons started attacking him and he

finally responded.

[JuniperLea]

54. Oh brother...

:eyes:

Say it a few more times and it will be true?

[saracat]

66. Finally? He has been spreading inuendo for wreeks. Both of them have.Obama is no innocent

He is a Chicago machine pol. Give it a rest.Obama is taking care of himself and neither he or Hillary are presenting a great look right now.

[jenmito]

70. Innuendo about what?

[saracat]

73. Everything from cheating to racism.C'mon.Barack is no innocent. He is fighting back and so is

Hillary. neither have clean hands and that was obvious in the Debate. Barack shouldn't get a pass anymore than Hillary.

[jenmito]

76. Um, that's all in response to things the Clintons did/said!

So blame him for defending himself?

[saracat]

77. Sticking to the Barack is an innocent meme are ya? Good Luck with that!

I actually don't care for either candidate but ya know what, even if what you say were completely true, and you would have to be very naive to think so, Barack would STILL be wrong to conduct himself as he has.He should have just demurred and moved on, but too late now!It is there for everyone to see in the infamous Debate clips.They got what they deserve, IMHO!

[jenmito]

80. I'm telling it like it is.

Sorry you don't like it. If he DIDN'T defend himself, he'd be seen as weak and unable to fight back when lies are told about him.

[saracat]

81. But it is a biased version, but sticking to your candidate is understood.There are two sides

to every story though. None of them are saints!

[jenmito]

88. Did I ever say Obama's a saint?

[Andy823]

37. You are so funny!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

They looked like two kids on the playground, and Edwards "was" the adult that had to take them to the woodshed!

[jenmito]

53. He tried to look relevant.

[saracat]

64. He is relevant, and he doesn't have to rely on race or gender to be so!

[jenmito]

72. There have been Black and female candidates before. n/t

[saracat]

83. By the MSM. you would never know it.I guess they never created two to come this close to the

nomination throught the wonders of MSM.The last "viable" Black candidate was Jesse Jackson, and no woman ever has been this viable.Liddy Dole ran for the GOP, and we had Ferrrao as VP and Carol Mosley Brown as Prez but she never got any support.But that was it.Or at least worth mentioning.Sharpton was never a "real" contender.

[jenmito]

87. Jesse Jackson wasn't viable. He was seen as a "Black candidate." You're trying to say

the only reason Obama gets so much more attention than Edwards in your opinion is because he's Black but I proved you wrong with the example of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Carol Moseley-Braun, etc.-names that YOU just named. Obama gets attention because he transcends race. You're painting Edwards as a victim when he's just not as inspiring as Obama and he's not the spouse of a popular ex-president (which also isn't a good reason to get so much attention).

[saracat]

89. Never mind.You aren't comprehending what I said.Forget it

and you have proven nothing.That is why I named those names.Sigh.

[JuniperLea]

55. If you check their widdle hands...

You'll find hair... I just know there's been some hair pulling!

Probably some spitting too... can the foot stomping be far behind?

[golddigger]

56. I agree...

Kind of like this thread :crazy: :rofl:

[Mythsaje]

4. Maybe he realized how destructive it was...

and stepped out of the fray.

[LostinVA]

5. OMFG -- you're "defending" Hillary?

Or slamming JRE.

Hmmm..... the latter, I think.

[jenmito]

11. I'm sharing what I just saw on CNN and giving my take on it. n/t

[leftynyc]

20. Definitely the latter

The OP is a Obama sycophant.

[jenmito]

24. "Sycophant"???

No. Supporter, yes.

[leftynyc]

34. You say tomato

I see you trashing Hillary and Edwards and adding nothing of substance. Call it what you want.

[mondo joe]

7. I don't mind it. That's the identity he's pulled out of these scraps.

Good for him.

[liberal N proud]

8. If you look at all the news what do you see...

Hillary and Barack fighting like children.
Likewise for their supporters right here on DU.

Edwards has diverted back to the issues every time the media has tried to drag him into the fray.

Even the republicon candidates got involved while Edwards focused on the ISSUES.

[sam sarrha]

25. that is what i saw.. he doesn't have th charisma of the preacher , he just states his platform

the only one who doesnt preach trust me pie-in-the-sky.. no one else says how they will pay for it, only one who says when/how he will get the troops out.

[jenmito]

29. "The preacher"??? Edwards WISHES he had Obama's charisma.

And if you don't know how Obama would pay for his programs and when/how he'd get the troops out, you're not listening.

[liberal N proud]

50. Edwards he doesn't have th charisma of the preacher

Yes I am sure he wishes he had the charisma but he has issues while Obama and Clinton play into the media's hand and give them the squabble that makes Tweety pee his pants with glee.

[golddigger]

57. You mean Edwards doesn't have the...

here it comes "THE BAM" I'm shocked I tell ya.

[AndyA]

10. I'd like to see your proof, please.

"Attacking" is likely too strong a word to accurately describe whatever may or may not have happened.

[jenmito]

13. You don't remember the earlier debates and how he went after Hillary?

He was suddenly called "angry" by more than one influential Dem.

[AndyA]

38. I don't recall (shades of Gonzo!) Edwards attacking Hillary.

Are you talking about the debate when they got into the ID for illegals thing in New York? If that's the one, Hillary was all over the place on that one and she was trying to avoid taking a stand.

She was annoying and needed to be called on the carpet for that.

But I wouldn't call that an attack.

Look, Hillary Clinton always seems to have one foot on the boat and the other on the dock. She can change which foot her weight is on depending on the situation. But at some point, the boat is going to pull away from the dock and she's going to have to make a decision and stick with it, or get wet.

If Hillary is the nominee, I will vote for her, although I'll have to hold my nose to do it. But I don't buy her "35 years of working for Americans" crap because that's what it is. Crap.

Being First Lady of Arkansas, First Lady of the country, and a Senator from New York for a few years do not add up to 35 years.

In fact, the job Hillary held longest was with the Rose Law Firm, doing work for their clients, not government work, but private practice stuff. Yes, I'm sure she learned a lot, but she wasn't being paid for or trained in government work.

[sam sarrha]

28. quoting the Corporate media wont cut it either,

[red2blue]

12. whaaaaaaaaaaaa...

your whining only hurts your argument.

[jenmito]

15. Riiiight.

[judaspriestess]

14. all I can think of is: WHA????

[rucky]

17. From an undecided voter's perspective...

yeah, he's the grown-up.

[jenmito]

27. Nah. He's the phony.

[rucky]

33. I'm warming up to him...

but that's pretty much why I'm still undecided.

[jenmito]

39. Check out his record. It doesn't match his rhetoric.

[jsamuel]

48. MLK III seems to think he is the real deal.

[saracat]

65. Neither does Obama's.

[jenmito]

69. Have examples?

[TwilightGardener]

19. He'd love to be part of the bickering. But alas, he's running third--

so if he wants to declare himself above it all, it only means he's not really IN IT at all, in terms of having a realistic chance of winning the nom. If he looked like more of a threat, he'd have to defend himself too and get into the scrum. And you're right, he's done plenty of attacking.

[jenmito]

31. Thank you. I agree...

remember how he kept trying to insert himself into the middle of their arguments before? Suddenly, when he sees it to his benefit, he distances himself from it "all" and declares himself the grownup.

[TwilightGardener]

40. It's about the only tactic he can plausibly run with now, because

going on the offensive against Obama and Hillary didn't work.

[jenmito]

74. Yeah, that's a good point.

Yes, the offensive didn't work so on to the next tactic.

[leftynyc]

22. He was right

In the last debate he was the only grown up. Sorry the facts annoy you.

[asdjrocky]

26. Wow, what an incredibly thoughtful post.

I remember John Edwards trying to talk about the differences, and the issues for some time now. Going back to the very first debates. The crap about Edwards ever attacking anyone is just that, crap. A total media construction.

No wonder you believe it.

[jenmito]

35. If you've seen any of the debates before the last one, you wouldn't be saying that BS.

[Beaverhausen]

44. He never acted the way those two did at the last debate

debating the issues is one thing, the personal bickering at the most recent debate WAS childish.

[asdjrocky]

47. I'm just wondering-

Do you realize how stupid that sounds? I've watched every debate. I was in Iowa and Nevada for caucus.

I've made more than 2000 phone calls and knocked on many a door. I have followed every detail of this campaign, as a lot of people here at DU.

For the real BS here, take a good look at this people-

"If you've seen any of the debates before the last one, you wouldn't be saying that BS."

There is not one person here who would doubt for a minute, that I've seen every debate.

For crying-out-loud man, grow up.

[asdjrocky]

63. ...

[Blackhatjack]

42. Easy! Let's Go To The Videotape.... LOL

[Occam Bandage]

43. Link to "unrecognizable" statement?

[elizm]

45. You noticed that too, huh? nt

[jenmito]

78. Yup. I'm glad YOU did, too.

:hi:

[elizm]

79. Yep...been noticing that...

:hi:

[Adelante]

46. This sanctimonious scold

Feh.

[Jamastiene]

51. In that one debate when he said that,

he was the grown up.

[Madam Mossfern]

58. I think it's the

debate where he said that Hillary represented the status quo.

[The River]

60. Whaaaaaaa

what a BS post

[Monty__]

61. This is a joke right?

So sorry that Edwards wants to talk about issues while Obama and Clinton fight over who did what 30 years ago

[Triana]

62. Calling someone on the carpet about their genuflucting and triangulation is...

.."attacking"?!

I saw the debate to which you refer and Hillary was literally SLITHERING.

I'd have called her on it too had I been up there, frankly. GOOD for John.

[jackson_dem]

68. Obamites should be on their knees thanking Edwards for making this a race

[jenmito]

82. Edwards, by trying to look like he was on Obama's "side," gave Hillary sympathy as it appeared

they piled on her.

[Little Star]

71. That was when he lost me. I was with him since 2004.

[redqueen]

75. How did he attack Hillary?

:wtf:

[cooolandrew]

84. If he'd of come first in Iowa he would now be Hiillarys target in all fairness. It all changed there

[jenmito]

86. But he didn't. And he doesn't have funds equal to hers so he's not a threat to her.

She would've rather lost to Edwards than to Obama. Unfortunately, she lost to both. But Edwards was never really a threat to her like Obama which was made clear way before Iowa's caucus.

[Evergreen Emerald]

85. It is ALL politics. Obama's actions are politically motivated, as are Clinton's

as are Edward's. No one is taking the high road. They are pretending to take it, and the media helps some more than others.