Quote :

"John Edwards is just another highly protected eliteist democratic politician who will say anything on the record in attempt to disguise the fact that he thinks he knows what's best for you and your life whether you're going to like it or not."

how is that different than say George W. Bush?

1/23/2007 1:00:41 PM

Or any politician

1/23/2007 1:23:59 PM

I like that Edwards health care plan can generate discussion on health care plans. Its ultimately congress that would fund any move so whatever the end product is if he is elected, it wont be exactly what he has in mind, but he's sure to make it an issue that nation will have to take a look at even if they don't deal with it the exact way he would.

(& poverty too, as he mentions in the start of this interview http://tinyurl.com/2pe5t5 )

1/23/2007 1:37:50 PM

^^^its not, whats your point? cause my point is theyre both rich ass greedy liars, like pretty much anyone who rises up high enough to have a legitimate shot at running for President

1/23/2007 2:19:00 PM

I do not support this thread

1/23/2007 8:24:30 PM

Quote :

"its not, whats your point? cause my point is theyre both rich ass greedy liars, like pretty much anyone who rises up high enough to have a legitimate shot at running for President"

because he was making it seem like democrats namely edwards are the only ones who do that.

1/23/2007 8:29:27 PM

It used to be like that. Then Republicans had that whole Christian conservative movement, which gave rise to tools like Bush.

[Edited on January 23, 2007 at 8:53 PM. Reason : 2]

1/23/2007 8:52:57 PM

http://www.johnedwards.com/action/sign-petitions/nofunding

As soon as bush hits iraq in his SOTU, I bet Edwards gets alot more signatures.

1/23/2007 9:27:04 PM

edwards will go nowhere, and i'm glad.

1/23/2007 9:41:12 PM

Quote :

"I do not support this thread"

1/23/2007 9:42:05 PM

^well thanks for the bump

1/23/2007 10:08:18 PM

Edwards, in my opinion, is the most viable candidate. With Obama as a Vice President, it would be a winning ticket. Hillary is too polarizing of a figure.

It's just like what happened with Connecticut. Ned Lamont wins the Democratic Primary, but Lieberman won the election as an Independant because in addition to to his Democratic base, he also had a large number of Republicans and Independant voters. In this case, Hillary is Lamont and Edwards is Lieberman. Hell, I'm a Democrat and I wouldn't vote for Hillary.



[Edited on January 23, 2007 at 10:18 PM. Reason : .]

1/23/2007 10:16:02 PM

embed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfL5NrZ_1Zg&eurl=

1/24/2007 2:24:24 PM

he did about 50 of these interviews last night afterwards

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qfL5NrZ_1Zg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qfL5NrZ_1Zg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

1/24/2007 2:41:29 PM

1/24/2007 2:46:07 PM

1/24/2007 3:03:14 PM

I do not support this thread

1/24/2007 3:05:06 PM

At the vet clinic I work at, the most popular person running for pres right now is Edwards (even amongst my southern baptist republican coworkers).

I know alot of people in NC feel like he's from my homestate, I have either have to really like him, or really hate him... but outside of NC I think he is much less hated than hillary.

Well except for Iowa which apparently really likes him?



[Edited on January 24, 2007 at 7:22 PM. Reason : .]

1/24/2007 7:14:59 PM

Quote :

"Are you holding it against him that he is no longer working-class?"

not at all. i hold it against him when he claims to have any real clue what it's like to be working class. sure, maybe his father was but he's not.

Quote :

"there's nothing about their former lifestyle (and home) that I'd call opulent."

haha, are you serious? sure, they're not as baller as some people around here but it's always been plainly obvious what their financial standing is.

i'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned how many female (and some male to i guess) votes he'll get based on his looks alone.

1/24/2007 11:36:50 PM

Once again, the image-obsessed culture that is Our Modern World forces good-looking optimists with loads of idealism but little experience in working with the gov. (comparably) to the front of the pack, while the most qualified man ugly for the job gets lost in the hoopla and media-frenzy.


http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/about/

1/24/2007 11:51:21 PM

Richardson is lost in the hoopla for a lot of reasons. He is definetly the most likely "dark horse" though.

Hagel vs Richardson?

1/24/2007 11:58:37 PM

^^
Wen Ho Lee

"You've (Richardson)...shown a contempt of Congress that borders on a supreme arrogance... You will never again receive the support of the Senate of the United States for any office to which you might be appointed." --Sen. Robert Byrd (Democrat-West Virginia)

1/25/2007 12:11:26 AM

Quote :

"not at all. i hold it against him when he claims to have any real clue what it's like to be working class. sure, maybe his father was but he's not. "

Of course he isn't blue collar. He just grew up in a working class home. God forbid he improve himself and live the american dream.

1/25/2007 1:05:47 AM

Quote :

"idiot state students are going to vote for him because he "went to state" when that bitch doesn't even recognize NCSU until he hits the campaign trail"

you forgot the alums.

signed,

Johnne Smith
c/o 2003

1/25/2007 4:24:29 PM

^^^ Well I guess it's good that Byrd is almost out then.

Even with that, he posseses more experience and qualifications for the job than anyone in the race, save maybe McCain or possibly Hillary (since she was essentially president already).

1/25/2007 5:28:30 PM

Richardson is the most experienced candidate. Plain and simple. Lying in the Senate for 30 years doesnt qualify you to run the country.

1/26/2007 10:52:22 AM

Quote :

"Of course he isn't blue collar. He just grew up in a working class home. God forbid he improve himself and live the american dream."

oh thats funny, I could have sworn you people were against anyone doing that in this country... but it's ok if this scum bag does it though(not even getting into HOW he did it)


I'm still ashamed that NCSU kids are gonna vote for this tool

1/26/2007 11:41:14 AM

what the fuck are you talking about?

1/26/2007 11:44:11 AM

I think everyone can agree that he atleasted had to work harder with less family money than either Bush or Kerry have.

1/26/2007 7:08:17 PM

Quote :

"God forbid he improve himself and live the american dream."

oh, so doing blue collar work isn't improving yourself and you're just screwed on the american dream?

Quote :

"Of course he isn't blue collar."

no shit sherlock. you obviously missed my point. just because his father happened to be doesn't mean he has any clue about what it's like.

i can appreciate that he remembers where he came from, but he's taken it a little far. to hear him speak, you'd think he dug ditches every day for 60 hrs. a week.

it's not that big of a deal. he won't get my vote for a number of more important reasons.

[Edited on January 28, 2007 at 5:53 AM. Reason : .]

1/28/2007 5:51:59 AM

i have heard a bunch of his speeches. he barely refrences his father or where he grew up. But hey, its still 2004 right? right?

1/28/2007 11:07:36 AM

it's not my problem you don't retain what you hear.

1/28/2007 11:15:23 AM

its not my problem you are a fucking dumbass.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/28/AR2006122800457_pf.html
That is his announcement speech. Not a single refrence to his childhood.

[Edited on January 28, 2007 at 11:21 AM. Reason : ha. link quote ]

1/28/2007 11:20:20 AM

you're ignorant. just because he doesn't mention it in one speech is your defense?

like i said before, it's not that big of a deal. i was just referencing a minor annoyance, i'm not getting into a drawn out debate over it.

i'm certainly not going to waste my time digging through all of his speeches to refute you either, i know what i've heard and read in the past months/years. if you want to consider that a "win", that's fine.

keep your blinders on about the guy, i could really care less.

1/28/2007 12:31:48 PM

^"he won't get my vote for a number of more important reasons."

Alright, rather than getting in a debate over something minor with that guy, how about you enumerate the important reason for some debate over something more serious.

1/28/2007 12:44:48 PM

^^ I dont mind digging through stuff to prove my point.

Why wont you be voting for him? Is it because those damn lawyers make it so expensive to get health care?

1/28/2007 12:51:31 PM

^^because i didn't post to start a debate over why or why not i won't be voting for him.
^good for you, have at your googling if you wish.

i never said anything about lawyers like him causing a rise in healthcare. i would be interested in hearing why you think personal injury suits don't contribute to it though.

[Edited on January 28, 2007 at 1:00 PM. Reason : .]

1/28/2007 12:59:32 PM

^So your opinion on him is irrational, basically.

1/28/2007 1:09:32 PM

^^1% of the cost isnt that big of a deal to me.

1/28/2007 1:22:43 PM

^^it's irrational because i choose not to debate it? right.
^so where's the other 99% coming from?

1/28/2007 1:25:56 PM

since you havent given a reason we can only assume its completely irrational.

1/28/2007 1:29:54 PM

From today's N&O:

Quote :

"Edwards' nest is grist for critics Advocate for poor lives in $6 million mansion Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, who toured the country last fall talking about other people's homes, is now fielding questions about his own $6 million estate outside Chapel Hill. Edwards had hit the talk show circuit to plug his book "Home: The Blueprints of Our Lives," which describes the childhood homes of various more-or-less famous people, including his own modest mill village houses. But since he announced his second run for the presidency in December, Edwards has been more likely to be asked whether there is any contradiction between his 29,000-square-foot Orange County estate and his pledge to reduce poverty and help the working poor. The questions underscore how everything about a presidential candidate -- including lifestyle decisions -- becomes fair game in a political campaign."

(The rest of the story:http://www.newsobserver.com/643/story/537175.html)

1/28/2007 1:40:18 PM

I have no time to explain myself. Instead, allow me to make multiple posts explaining why I cannot explain my political views.

1/28/2007 1:43:12 PM

Quote :

"^so where's the other 99% coming from?"

insurance companies playing the market and losing a shit load of money.

1/28/2007 2:11:26 PM

29000 sq ft eh. thats quite nice.

[Edited on January 28, 2007 at 2:20 PM. Reason : 2 floors of my apartment complex]

1/28/2007 2:20:20 PM

I think it's funny that Republicans are engaging in the same class warfare that they accuse Edwards of committing.

1/28/2007 2:22:02 PM

yeah its hilarious, and they never do shit like that.
patriot act, clean skies act, telling us that tax cuts for 1% will help the poor more than giving them social services etc. they are very very good at what they do.

[Edited on January 28, 2007 at 2:25 PM. Reason : would be funny if it wasnt so upsetting.]

1/28/2007 2:25:30 PM

30,000 sf mansion...way to not forget about your constituency!

1/28/2007 2:43:27 PM

im glad you stopped in to add to the discussion. parrot much?

1/28/2007 2:58:23 PM

"WE SHOULD HELP OUT THE POOR"

1/28/2007 4:07:29 PM