RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

John Edwards on Obama/Reagan & Media

By SusanUnPC on January 17, 2008 at 4:49 PM in Clinton, John Edwards, Media, Obama

Via Talking Points Memo‘s Election Central story: “The Edwards Media Blackout — Now On Video!” by Greg Sargent: “The Edwards campaign releases a new video spoofing the media’s lack of coverage of itself. It’s fun stuff. …” (I love it! The Edwards campaign should do more humor!)

Next from TPM’s Election Central, “Edwards Hits Obama For Reagan Comment“:

On the campaign trail today, John Edwards offered an interesting take on Barack Obama’s comment yesterday that Ronald Reagan changed America in a way Bill Clinton didn’t. It’s worth quoting Edwards extensively:

Here’s what Edwards said:

“I would never use Ronald Reagan as an example of change…

“He was openly — openly — intolerant of unions and the right to organize. He openly fought against the union and the organized labor movement in this country. He openly did extraordinary damage to the middle class and working people, created a tax structure that favored the very wealthiest Americans and caused the middle class and working people to struggle every single day. The destruction of the environment, you know, eliminating regulation of companies that were polluting and doing extraordinary damage to the environment…

“I can promise you this: This president will never use Ronald Reagan as an example for change.”

TPM‘s Greg Sargent observes:

As Ben Smith notes, Obama wasn’t praising Reagan in terms of policy specifics. At the same time, though, Obama did talk in neutral terms about Reagan’s reversals of the “excesses” of the 1960s and 1970s, whereas the changes wrought by Reagan are more customarily understood by Dems as the depredations that Edwards starkly described here.

  • WMCB

    Well of course he spoke in carefully “neutral” terms. Obama always speaks in carefully neutral terms when he leg-humps Republican values.

    God, for an actual Democrat on the Democratic presidential ticket. That would be nice. I plan on voting for her, or for John.

    • http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

      Yup. And Edwards — and his wife Elizabeth — know what the 60s and 70s brought. It galls me that Obama disses that entire era. There are so many things I could say about that stupidity, but I’ll just ask one thing: Does he also dismiss those white students who gave their LIVES in the South helping to bring the right to vote to blacks?

      • TeakWoodKite

        I have been wondering how to get some knobby mud tires for Edwards. I think he needs to go out and make some “sharp” statements. Serve up a few the MSM will be like Roger Rabbit with.

        Obama suffered from the outcome of the 60′s and 70′s with his use of drugs. Hell, so did many of us. I understand why he runs away from it but not the direction he takes.

    • Kathleen

      Obama is no Bobby Kennedy.

  • http://noquarterusa.net/blog/ Leslie

    Yeah, the excesses of the 60s and 70s, such as the Civil Rights and women’s movement, the anti-war movement, the environmental movement, labor unions…those excesses?

    Obama is ostensibly praising Reagan for reaching across the aisle to get things done, as Obama says he would do if elected president. But I question Obama’s version of history. Also, reaching across the aisle to pander to Republicans, who are against all the things Obama says he’s for, isn’t my idea of “change.”

  • Kathleen

    that clip, with the “Deliverance” theme song is over the top

    Reagan made it completely acceptable to be outwardly greedy and intolerant.

    Good news for John Edwards. I just spent three days with my father (a WWII Vet, Teamster kind of guy) and a bunch of his pals, they are all(7 of them in their 8o’s) and all Teamsters. John Edwards message focused on the middle class, making it better for the next generation, not taking PAC MONEY, one million more jobs, is really resonating with this group of hard working older gents. They were all well aware of the media not covering his campaign.

  • http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC
  • GF

    Reagan was ANTI US UNIONS, while he HYPOCRITICALLY loved the Solidarity Union in Poland!

    • TeakWoodKite

      while he HYPOCRITICALLY loved the Solidarity Union in Poland!

      Only because it was a convenient way to frustrate the Soviets…who by the co-opted some of those organizations. Reagan used Poland.

  • Simon

    And it was Reagan who criminalized progress and tolerance, censuring the national dialogue.

    The Reagan revolution was a failure, a complete and utter failure, a neocon delusion ending in a cultural slump of viscid mediocrity, reaching its nadir with George W Bush, 9.11 and Dick B. Cheney.

    For America to move forward, it must renounce everything Reagan, not embrace it.

    But the great trojan’s handlers know better, so Reagan it is, anything to sell the soap…

    • norris morris

      Obama’s pandering to the two most conservative papers in Nevada is a crude and outspoken act of sticking it to the Democrats. Clearly he is looking for Reagan Country votes [California].

      Openly asking Republicans to join Union caucus members in NV and vote [in his flyers, "against Hillary"].

      Having lived in Las Vegas for many years I can assure you that these endorsements are from Union busting, pro Bush/Cheney/Iraq and super conservatives.. without any doubt.

      Praising Reagan as transformational is a hideous joke. Reagan is responsible for anti union legislation, deregulation of eveything he could put his hands on, and setting us back years. Reagan paved the way for the judiciary swing to the far right and set up the power play of the Republican Administration. Democrats became castrated and spineless, and this “sunny” man promoted the reactionary climate we have been living through.

      Obama’s pandering to the Right is appalling.

  • ybnormal

    As someone who endured Reagan as CA governor as well as president, I can say that Reagan is NOT an example Dems should follow. My regular travels on the 118 “Ronald Reagan” freeway are a constant reminder. The freeway itself is OK, it’s just the “Reagan Freeway” signs that remind me.

    For some mysterious reason, voters thought the former position of Screen Actors Guild president was qualification to be governor of one of the world’s largest economies.

    An example of how not to learn from history is our current ‘governator’. First settling the power utilities lawsuit out of court for pennies on the dollar, and now today the “fiscal crisis” suggested solution of gutting stuff across the board.

  • Kathleen

    http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/436/t/26/pet
    tion.jsp?petition_KEY=884

    We know who has consistently brought our nations attention to the issue of Vets and others sleeping under bridges tonight

    On Air America’s “Clout” they have Richard Schultz addressing Bill O’Reily attack on Edwards

  • PrchrLady

    Hi All… I hope you are all enjoying the crazy weather thoughout the States, and for some, the world… We had a brief period of winter like weather on election day, but are back to wet, damp, cold, again.

    I decided not to vote in the Michigan primary. It was a very difficult decision for me to make, as it is the first time I have not voted in as long as I have been voting. First, my choice for President at this time is Edwards, with Clinton or Obama as VP. I could not even vote for him as a write in, leaving the only choice Clinton, as Obama was also not on the ballot. To add to the insult, the Democratic National Convention will not even count the Michigan Delegates, unless they decide to change the rules. Another reason is that I recieved several emails requesting Michigan Dems to cross over to Republican for the day and to vote for Romney. I hate the dirty tricks going on throughout this election ‘season’, no matter who it is that is doing them…

    Each of the Democratic candidates have strengths and weaknesses. We could not dare to hope for that ‘perfect’ man or woman… I pray that the primaries will not serve to destroy the candidates before the actual campaign has even begun. I hate how the media focuses so much on just one or two of the candidates… It’s like they think (and maybe they do!)that they already know who the candidates are… being without cable access isn’t always a bad thing!!! Best to everyone, Marlene

    • shirin

      Well, Marlene, for what it is worth, among the top three candidates, Edwards is the only one I could bring myself to vote for under any circumstances.

  • http://papertigertail.blogspot.com otherlisa

    I’m voting for Edwards.

    Clinton is my second choice.

    Obama…well, I’ll vote for him if he’s the nominee. But at this point, I really don’t want to see that happen.

  • Pingback: Democrats @ 2008 Presidential Election » John Edwards on Obama/Reagan & Media

  • http://acropolisreview.com/2008/01/john-edwards-for-president_18.html Jake