An JRE Ideas Supporter

Hello John Edwards.

The media loved you when you won big lawsuits for the little person. The media loved you for being the underdog in a senate race 12 years ago. They sort of liked you when you garnered Al Gore's attention for a potential VP nominee in 2000. But they didn't like you in the 2007-8 race for President.

Now, they despise you for stepping out on your wife, thanks to your mistake of being involved with someone not at your social-economic status that you brought your family to due to being a great lawyer. I guess your greatest mistake was underestimating a person who was lazy and never wanted to work --- an antithesis to your own beliefs. I don't like what you did either but I still think it wasn't my business--it was between you and the families involved.

Now I will bring this post to a third person mode.

I never liked John for just being a good looking politician, even if the media did for awhile. I was inspired by him for his ideas, especially being for bold change. As someone who was never involved in politics before, I got involved, and if one talks to other JRE ideas supporters, they will tell you the same story in feeling inspired to help our country. I might add I became a more informed citizen about our government. My hair stylist fires questions at me than anyone else because she trusts my views about various events. We had a big discussion yesterday about what happened in MA and she listens to my opinions since I plug into the blogs. And like me, she doesn't care about JRE's sex scandals. She cares about our country in general.

John helped define the other leading candidates (exception, Dennis K) who were more about identity politics than having ideas. I liked what one of my fellow supporters said about the three candidates in 2007: if you want an engineer of change, you voted for Edwards. If you wanted a shop manager, you voted for Clinton. If you wanted a great salesman, you voted for Obama.

And guess what the media wanted?

John went to Haiti this week and brought back 31 refugees. And the media thinks this is a gimmick? It's not. I know John Edwards in this regard: he cares about the most impoverished. He took the time to meet with me in 2006 privately and was interested in my family history of a family who struggled, just as his did.

Thanks, John Edwards for going to Haiti. And I still wish you were President at times because I think you would have obtained more change that we needed. But America forgives rich Republicans for their un-puritanical mistakes, and not well-heeled Democrats.

Back to MA--a final note: guess what, MA voters were pissed at our POTUS? Why? Here's the answer. John Edwards would have already had health care in the bag and moved on.

No Way, No How, No McCain

quote from Hillary Clinton's unity speech tonight.

Hillary Clinton and I Agree on Joe Biden

“In naming my colleague and friend Joe Biden to be the vice presidential nominee, Barack Obama has continued in the best traditions for the vice presidency by selecting an exceptionally strong, experienced leader and devoted public servant. Senator Biden will be a purposeful and dynamic vice president who will help Senator Obama both win the presidency and govern this great country.”

from The Page blog at Time Magazine.

Thank you, Senator Clinton. Your personal stock just went up with this blogger. Go knock a few out of the ballpark while at the DNC in Denver.

Thank you John Edwards and Hillary Clinton (updated)

Your candidacies for the White House will push Barack Obama to be more engaged and progressive on the issues.







Universal Health Care and getting us out Iraq number one priorities for this blogger. Also, creating opportunities for all of us and making our fellow citizens have the same opportunities you had. You both have truly been blessed.

It will be awhile before I will turn the page, but I do think we need a Democrat in the WH and better progressives in the House and Senate, which is why I will put my focus on them rather the Presidency.

Hillary, you were the runner-up, and I'm posting a video that someone did on your behalf, "This One's for the Girls"



Link to the transcript of Hillary's endorsement event, courtesy of WaPo.

Congratulations, John and Hillary. Your passion for our country is contagious.

To Borrow from Taylor Marsh: A Remarkable Candidate

Picture courtesy of Taylor Marsh. I believe it is the most attractive one I've ever seen of Hillary Clinton. She weathers well with age.

Good post about Hillary, John, and Elizabeth by Joanne Bamberger, Punditmom.

She will be welcomed back in the Senate. They need her there, as Jon Tester said today.

Congrats to Barack Obama.

Any One Care to Dance with Hillary Clinton?

Seems like she's taken a lot of lessons from her spouse and Mark Penn on how to dance around issues.

Cha-cha-cha!

New Dance: The Double Talk Waltz

The Politics of Parsing.

Priceless.

JRE Buzz Special Edition: The Son of a Millworker Takes on the Madam of Special Interests: Clinton

Critics lauded JRE and are falling over themselves about his performance at last night's debate. Here's a sampling:

TIME’s Mark Halperin Gave Edwards’ Debate Performance an “A”; Edwards “Came Across As Presidential, Optimistic and Patriotic — Essential for a Winner.” “Impressively he remained above the Clinton-Obama fray (no "look at me" antics) but swept in to best them while the media waited for the pair to duke it out. Calm and cool, he went after Clinton on (let's face it) character, and only occasionally seemed to be trying too hard. Hit both his Democratic and Republican targets with acute precision and impact. Appeared tough enough to perform well in a general election, with the kind of articulate passion he formerly demonstrated in the courtroom. Came across as presidential, optimistic and patriotic - essential for a winner.”

David Yepsen: “John Edwards Emerged As the Evening’s Most Effective and Articulate Challenger to Clinton.” In a blog post titled, “Johnny Be Good,” Yepsen wrote, “John Edwards emerged as the evening’s most effective and articulate challenger to Clinton. She turned in an uneven, sometimes waffling performance…Edwards came ready for the scrap and he helped his candidacy.” [Des Moines Register, 10/30/07]

New York Times: Obama “Was Frequently Overshadowed by Former Senator John Edwards.” “But for all the attention Mr. Obama drew to himself coming into the debate, he was frequently overshadowed by former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, who — speaking more intensely and frequently — repeatedly challenged Mrs. Clinton’s credentials and credibility. ‘Senator Clinton says that she believes she can be the candidate for change, but she defends a broken system that’s corrupt in Washington, D.C.,’ Mr. Edwards said. ‘She says she will end the war, but she continues to say she’ll keep combat troops in Iraq and continue combat missions in Iraq. To me, that’s not ending the war; that’s the continuation of the war.’ He added, ‘I think the American people, given this historic moment in our country’s history, deserve a president of the United States that they know will tell them the truth, and won’t say one thing one time and something different at a different time.’” [New York Times, 10/31/07]

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos: “I Think It Was a Good Night for John Edwards. I Think One of His Best Nights of These Debates So Far.” George Stephanopoulos: “I think it was a good night for John Edwards. I think one of his best nights of these debates so far. He was very, very clear. He didn’t back down at all. He knew exactly what he wanted to say about Hillary Clinton, again, that she can’t bring about change.” [ABC, “Good Morning America,” 10/31/07]

CQ’s Craig Crawford: “I Thought It Was Edwards’ Best Performance So Far.” On MSNBC: Chris Matthews: “Who was ready to be her number one challenger between now and January?”… Craig Crawford: “I thought it was Edwards’ best performance so far.” Crawford later wrote, ““John Edwards was truly passionate about taking on Clinton, targeting her centrist views as ‘doubletalk’ and accusing her of falling in line with hawkish ‘neo-conservatives’ on Iran. Indeed, it was the former North Carolina senator’s most forceful debate performance so far.” [MSNBC, 10/30/07; 10/31/07]

The Nation’s Ari Melber: “John Edwards Had the Strongest Showing.” “John Edwards had the strongest showing, pounding Clinton as the status quo candidate. ‘If you believe that combat missions should be continued in Iraq [with no timetable],’ he said, ‘then Senator Clinton is your candidate.’ Edwards repeatedly presented himself as the most credible ‘change’ candidate.” [ “Edwards & Obama Confront Clinton In Dem Debate...” 10/30/07]

Daily Kos Readers Declared Edwards the Winner. According to the Daily Kos poll following the debate, “Who do you think won the debate,” John Edwards led the pack with 33% of the 8,588 votes cast, followed by Obama at 21%, and Clinton at 16%.

CBS’s Jeff Greenfield: “It Was Former Senator John Edwards Who Used the Toughest Language” On Iran. “But it was former Senator John Edwards who used the toughest language, at one point reacting with incredulity to her claim that a vote to brand the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as terrorists was a way of opposing the president.” [“The Early Show,” CBS, 10/31/07]

The Nation’s John Nichols (first reaction): Edwards “Ended the Night as the Candidate Who Had Done the Best Job of Defining Himself as the Alternative to Hillary Clinton.” “It wasn't just a fight about Iran, however. Edwards hit hard, and effectively, on every front. After detailing the front-runner's contributions from defense contractors and other corporate interests, he said. ‘If people want the status quo, Senator Clinton's your candidate.’ That's tough talk. Blunt talk. The sort of talk that Barack Obama seemed to suggest that he was going to deliver Tuesday night. But it came from John Edwards, who ended the night as the candidate who had done the best job of defining himself as the alternative to Hillary Clinton.” [h, 10/30/07]

Then Nichols added this later: “Edwards, Not Obama, Hits Clinton Hardest, Smartest.” “It was supposed to be the night Barack Obama took Hillary Clinton down. But, when all was said and done, Obama was a bystander…Where Obama was unfocused and ineffectual, John Edwards landed plenty of blows. The former senator from North Carolina began by suggesting that ‘it's fair’ to talk about essential differences between the candidates. Then he highlighted a big one. ‘(Clinton) says she'll stand up to George Bush,’ argued Edwards. "In fact, she voted to give George W. Bush the first step to war on Iran...’… It was a smart, at times intense dialogue…But Edwards owned the moment. Accusing Clinton of voting for an Iran resolution that read like it was ‘written literally by the neo-cons,’ the 2004 vice presidential nominee declared, ‘We need to stand up to this president. We need to make it absolutely clear that we will not let Bush, Cheney and this administration invade Iran.’”

NBC’s Tim Russert: “Edwards Was More Aggressive, More on the Offense than Barack Obama.”
Meredith Viera: “So did Edwards emerge?” Tim Russert: “I think Edwards emerged as the most aggressive candidate against Hillary Clinton…But clearly, looking at their performance last night, Edwards was more aggressive, more on the offense than Barack Obama.” [NBC’s “Today Show,” 10/31/07]

Marc Ambinder: “John Edwards’s Instruments of Persuasion Were Sharper and Louder.” “In this discordant symphony – ‘A Clintonian Lament’ -- John Edwards’s instruments of persuasion were sharper and louder; Barack Obama’s were more resonant and more subtle. In music terms, Edwards played the French horn; Obama played the violin. Or, as the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza told me during a commercial break, ‘It’s the difference between someone who goes to law school and becomes a prosecutor and someone who goes to law school and becomes a law professor.’” [, 10/30/07]


ABC’s Rick Klein: “It's Rare That a Highlight Comes This Late in a Debate, But Edwards Picks up on That Inconsistency On Immigration.” “10:56 pm ET: It's rare that a highlight comes this late in a debate, but Edwards picks up on that inconsistency on immigration: ‘Sen. Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes.’ Obama: ‘I was confused on Sen. Clinton's answer.’ And Obama calls the Spitzer plan ‘the right idea.’”[ 10/30/07]

Then added Klein: “Edwards Still Seems Better, Though, at Finding Compelling Ways to Set Himself Apart.” “11:05 pm ET: Rick Klein wrapping it up -- Hillary Clinton gave a truly bad answer at the end, on illegal immigration, one that feeds the argument Obama and Edwards were making all night. Did Obama clear the bar he set for himself? Probably yes, but not with much room to spare. Edwards still seems better, though, at finding compelling ways to set himself apart. ” [10/30/07]

NBC's Domenico Montanaro: “Clinton Blurring the Lines AGAIN, Now on Illegal Immigrant Driver's Licenses… Edwards Called Her on It.” “Is Clinton blurring the lines AGAIN, now on illegal immigrant driver's licenses. She said the plan makes sense, but can't commit apparently. She said she didn't say she supports the plan, when Dodd said she did. Russert tried to pin her on it, and she obfuscated again. Edwards called her on it, evoking Bush-Cheney, saying Americans were tired of ‘double talk.’ Obama nodded and got called on and he got to chime in as well. Does this become a problem for her? Can she directly answer a question?” [ “Clinton having it both ways... again?” 10/30/07]

The Politico’s Ben Smith: “John Edwards Kept Up the Pressure Most Skillfully on Clinton… Drove His Point Home When She Refused to Say Whether She Supports” Spitzer’s Plan. “John Edwards kept up the pressure most skillfully on Clinton, putting his courtroom skills to use to build a case, at times mockingly, against the New York senator … Edwards drove his point home when she refused to say whether she supports New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s plan to give drivers’ licenses to illegal immigrants.” [, 10/31/07]

CNN’s Candy Crowley: Edwards “Stepped Up His Game.” Appearing on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360, Candy Crowley said, “John Edwards, who has never been shy about going after the frontrunner, stepped up his game, questioning her candor.” [CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360,” 10/30/07]

CQ’s Craig Crawford: “I thought Edwards made a good point when he said Republicans talk about you so much, because they want to run against you.” [MSNBC, 10/31/07]

Update: MJ Rosenberg at TPM declares Edwards Won.

"But, of the three heavyweights, I was most impressed by Edwards. He combined toughness and vision. Somehow I can imagine that Edwards' agenda for America would have a name like "New Deal" or "Great Society" in other words a rubric that suggests that his program for America would be larger than just his persona. I like that. I'm not so sure about the others.

I think Edwards will win Iowa and then we'll have a real race, one with an almost level playing field. It is not over. That is the main thing I learned last night.

Not over by a long shot."

I'm happy to hear the praise of the critics, but it's very clear none of them believed him when he said he has taken on the big interests before in the court rooms, and beat them at their game.

Madame Clinton, you, along the Re-thugs, represent those big interests and the double talk from the 1990's.

I would not underestimate the one who is the most authentic and will bring about positive change for our country: John Edwards. He's the son of a millworker.

Iowans Worry about Things Others May Not

This morning I was cruising through the Des Moines Register. In a poll conducted this past week, many of them think that the US is ready for a woman or African-American president. That bodes well for Madam Clinton and Mr. Obama.

But the same poll revealed their top 5 concerns: Iraq war, Social Security, immigration, health care policy and the last one, which bears some merit: moral values.

The results of that poll are surprising for two reasons: (one) those were key issues that were brought up first at the Town Hall I attended in Des Moines at John Edwards' kick off campaign, but (second) Charles Grassley is viewed more favorably in job approval than Mr. Harkin, also according to the DMR this morning. Mr. Grassley has been on record in supporting the Mc Cain Doctrine, privatizing Social Security, and I wouldn't doubt he supports the President's new health insurance tax on everyone considering he pushed forward the bankruptcy bill, making it easier for credit card companies to jack up their rates and try to squeeze the small business man who may depend on that kind of credit, or the single mom who had a child with a major illiness and couldn't afford her house payments anymore.

Moral values. I guess Mr. Grassley doesn't see poverty as a moral issue as many evangelicals do.

Then there is this editorial in the LA Times: that was lead off for the WJ segment of C-SPAN this morning:

Anyone but a Bush or a Clinton
The U.S. needs a leader in 2008 who doesn't inherit the office because of a last name.

The nation needs today, as it got in Ford then, a president respected by both Republicans and Democrats who can restore trust in politics. It needs new faces and new ideas if it is to confront advancing crises of war, debt and entitlement reform. And it needs a president who can assume office in 2009 swimming in the political capital that only a mandate can bring. The nation needs a candidate who can win 55% or more.

And that will not happen with a Bush or Clinton on the ballot.

LINK

Edwards has said many times that the world is looking to us to be the leader again. It takes intellect, backbone, and courage, and moral conviction. It takes someone to say "I was wrong", not just "I'm responsible for my vote", as Madam Clinton did yesterday in Des Moines. It takes a loving family in which there is no doubt that the husband and wife are best friends and have the kind of loving trust that is born out of the heart, not just for political reasons. That BW readers, is one of many things that separates Madam Clinton from John Edwards: moral values. Mind you, I like President Bill Clinton, but I am very suspicious of another Clinton administration that favors more corporate welfare while saying saying they worry about those whose wages are stagnant. Lest Madam Clinton forgets that it was John Edwards' speech in the hearings that swayed enough people from a "guilty" vote for lying to a grand jury about his indiscretions.




I never wonder whom John would rather be at home with at night. I don't think Iowans do either.







Photo credit: Joshua Brown, taken at TH in Iowa City, 1/20/2007

Political Parrots

Just about anyone who watches CNN has seen the announcements of Senators Obama and Clinton for exploratory committees to advise them whether or not to run for the Presidency in 2008. OK, we in the Netroots know they are going to run. Just about anyone who has submitted entries for Jeff Foxworthy's "Redneck Yard of the Week" knows they are going to run. Hillary says she is in it to win. I don't doubt for one minute that she is in it for herself and not for the good of the American people.

What I find very interesting is that both Clinton and Obama are parroting John Edwards in that they decided to announce on their websites first. Yet some moron blogorter at the HuffPo said that Obama was first to announce. Wrong. Even Elizabeth Edwards posted a comment to correct the poster:

John's YouTube and RocketBoom statement was that tomorrow in New Orleans he would announce his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for president. It was not in the least confusing, and it was also not "under the radar." It may be convenient to describe his online statement that way after your original post, but it is not accurate. Furthermore, he followed this in the next day with two town halls with live online streaming video and even took questions from the online audience. We welcome everyone to this medium, a medium where candor is important because people who care about the truth are listening. A better post script for your post would have been the words that John has used but seem so hard for people to say: "I was wrong."

Then Cindy Crowley at CNN said yesterday that Mrs. Clinton's announcement followed the lead of Barack Obama's earlier in the week (while covering Sam Brownback's announcement). Oh pulezze. What planet does that correspondent live on? Mars?

Robert Scoble has rightfully been speaking up about this issue. I'm glad he is.