Edwards launches repeated YouTube attacks at Clinton

[DeepModem Mom]

CNN: November 7, 2007
Edwards launches repeated YouTube attacks at Clinton

WASHINGTON (CNN) — For the fourth time in one week, former Sen. John Edwards is using online video to accuse Sen. Hillary Clinton of parsing her words. And this time, he’s using her interview aboard CNN’s Election Express to try to make his point.

The video, entitled ‘Politics of Parsing – Part 2’, focuses on Sr. Political Correspondent Candy Crowley’s question asking if Sen. Clinton supports drivers licenses for illegal immigrants. Clinton starts by saying, “No. What I have said is that I support what governors are trying to do” and then continues on with her response. After Crowley interrupts by asking, “But you can see why people think that you are not answering the question,” the video displays a series of graphics saying “What’s Senator Clinton’s answer? Nobody knows… Not even Senator Clinton”.

Edwards’ original “Politics of Parsing” video, targeting Clinton’s answers at last week’s Democratic Presidential debate, received almost 300,000 views on YouTube.

Sen. Clinton’s campaign responded to that video by saying of Edwards, “now that his campaign has stalled, he’s launching false attacks on his fellow Democrats”. The Clinton camp didn’t respond Thursday to Part 2.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/07/edwards-launches-repeated-youtube-attacks-at-clinton/

[jmp]

1. Politicians should be under oath ...

And under threat of perjury charges anytime they step in front of a camera or microphone. That would improve US politics 1000%

[Yael]

2. What of this is perjurous?

He is showing clips of her, not making up shit as he goes along.

Color me confused about your post.

[jmp]

4. And my sig didn't offer any clues?

:)

[Yael]

26. I have sigs turned off. Too many large images and my connection has been lousy lately

[jmp]

34. It says ...

"Clinton '08: Representing the Republican wing of the Democratic Party"

It's true ... I'm a hater. :P

[Yael]

35. LOL!

Ok, okie then. *snark*

[asdjrocky]

41. agreed

[MethuenProgressive]

52. “now that his campaign has stalled, he’s launching false attacks on his fellow Democrats”

He's probably even running automated clicking programs to up his you-tube views, like all the other kids.

[ecstatic]

3. The more Edwards attacks, the higher Obama's numbers go... nt

[jmp]

5. I can think of 1 worse fate.

...

[bfantana]

7. I'm glad Edwards is fighting for the common man

instead of letting Clinton get away with her elitist corruption and double-talk.

Its about time a populist came back to the white house.

[Skip Intro]

9. Edwards is fighting for Edwards.

that's it

[emilyg]

10. Agree.

[bfantana]

11. Who's Hillary fighting for?

no one but her

[Apollo11]

22. Womankind?

Wronged wives of the world?

It's just a hunch ... :eyes:

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[avrdream]

23. Well, you'll find out in a bit over a year!

But welcome to DU anyway. Enjoy yourself.

:headbang:

[saracat]

16. And Hillary is fighting for nothing except blind ambition.

[Evergreen Emerald]

32. this is more of that right-wing drivel that we were sold in the 90's and that some

still believe. They were lies and distortions in an all out attack on the Clintons with the media as the tool. It is a shame it even works on "progressives."

Look past the superficial attacks and look at her record.

[saracat]

37. I did. She never takes a stand with difficulty. Ever.

[laugle]

44. Why is it that a man can be ambitious, but if a woman is,

she is seen as power hungry?? Sexism, I think.......

And what's wrong with being ambitious, especially in public service, which is no easy feat!

[saracat]

46. Ambition without anything but selfish motivation behind it is dangerous.

[laugle]

47. Well that's your opinion, I just don't happen to agree.

[saracat]

50. Perfectly alright to differ! Thats what primaries are for!

[laugle]

54. On that we agree on....

But I do hope you will vote for whomever the nominee is in 2008, as the alternative is unthinkable!

[IndianaGreen]

6. This is how Hillary will flop in the general election if she were to become our nominee

Edwards is doing us all a favour by showing clips of Hillary contradicting herself, and giving non-answers in the same interview.

[Skip Intro]

8. Edwards is DONE.

I never thoguht I'd say this, but I'll vote thrid party or sit it out before I'll vote for him.


I am SICK of the slime and the twisting and misrepresenting of his oppents' words and ideas. He's done. He's engaged in slime and he's done. For me at least.


Wow, I really respected the guy at one point.

[ClarkUSA]

12. Edwards is NOT done -- in Iowa, at least.

In fact, he's in a three-way statistical dead heat for first place there.

[Yukari Yakumo]

17. According to what poll?

Every poll I see puts him in a clear third place position.

[ClarkUSA]

19. Zogby's latest shows him in a statistical dead heat/three-way tie.

He's also surged 6 points as the second-place choice since August.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3693986

[Texas_Kat]

48. if he comes in 2nd or 3rd in Iowa...

how is he planning on financing his campaign till Feb 5.... yeah, he's done.

[CyberPieHole]

13. Same here...once upon a time he was my top choice...

I don't think he has a chance now...he's just gone way too negative. Besides, if I were he, I'd be cautious about throwing stones at Clinton...doesn't he live in a giant glass house?:shrug:

[ClarkUSA]

20. I thought you said Obama used to be your candidate. Now it's Edwards?

Hmm...

[Hawkowl]

33. Yeah that never works.

Negative I mean. Jesus H. Christ. The only way people get into the White House is by going negative. I at least want the dem nominee to have that weapon available in their arsenal. Besides Hilary does double talk, and never gives a straight answer.

[Cameron27]

14. He's been twisting facts

to suit himself for a long time, so I'm not surprised at this at all. I haven't trusted him since he cosponsored & cheered on Lieberman's IWR.

[saracat]

15. But Hillary is to be trusted for her vote on KYL/Lieberman?

And for her support of IWAR, which she has never rejected?

[Bo Bike]

21. Should Edwards be trusted?

This is the guy that voted for IWR and claims he made an error and wants to take it back. This is a guy that claims to want to help people caught up in the mortgage crunch then worked for a Hedge Fund. This is a guy that talks about two Americas then gets a $400 hair cut. This is a guy that talks about global warming then builds a 28,000 square foot, 6 million dollar mansion.

There was a time when I liked John Edwards, but he has totally turned me off with his misleading negative crap. I think he has turned allot of other people off as well.

I think this is his last season in the sun of national politics for John Edward. He is done, and soon the sun will set for him and he will be gone from the national spotlight for good!

[Apollo11]

24. Edwards believes in spreading the wealth

He pays his hair stylist a fair rate for the job - plus he covers their travel expenses.

Maybe you think John Edwards should ask his wife to cut his hair in front of the bathroom mirror?

Building a house also gave work to a lot of people. I guess they were all paid for that work.

If John Edwards was trying to get away with not paying folks properly - then we should complain.

But I'm not saying I like the way he is dissing Hillary on the Spitzer thing.

[Bo Bike]

30. Maybe some of that is justified.

Maybe he can afford a $400 haircut. Maybe he took the hedge fund gig as a fact-finding mission. Maybe he dose pay a carbon tax on in his mansion. Maybe he is sincere when he apologizes for his IWR vote. But you know what. As far as the voter is concerned perception is reality. In the general election Edwards would be relentlessly pounded on all these issues whether they are misleading or not.

He who lives in a glass house?

[saracat]

39. Like the SNL halloween sketch when everyone saw Hillary as a witch but she thought she was

a bride? Snort!

[Bo Bike]

43. I don’t know what skit you were watching

but the one I watched did not have everyone see her as a witch. The only ones that saw her as a witch were the other dem candidates. I am pretty sure the point of the skit was if you were 20 points behind her in the polls you would see her as a witch too.

[saracat]

51. They and Bill. who were the only other characters, were who i was referring too.

Can't remember what Richardson said but Obama was the only candidate I recall "getting" her as a "bride"." Bill Clinton" kept insisting she was a witch as well. Whatever.It was a "joke".

[JTFrog]

25. And for the knife she

stuck in Kerry's back (while Edwards was running for VP).

[Ninga]

27. I respect the fact that Edwards is in a race with lots of qualified candidates. I respect the fact

that the money Edwards might have gotten has been spread around to other candidates.

I respect the fact that Edwards message, along with all the other candidates other than Obama and Clinton, has not received attention from the media.

I respect the fact that politics is a game, a strategy and a war. I respect the fact that Edwards has managed to be a solid 3rd in a race that is HISTORIC in as much as it is the first time a woman and a person of color are number 1 and 2.

I respect the fact that it takes Edwards courage and strategy to develop a way to keep his platform and message fresh, and news worthy.

I respect the fact that when Edwards points out the inconsistency and differences he will be accused of engaging in "slime" from people who are not real supporters.

Edwards deserves a lot of respect.




And if he manages to overcome the $$$ and the polls and is able to win.....he will be a stellar President.

[mtnsnake]

29. Amen to that. nt

[laugle]

45. Yeah, I too was a strong supporter for Edwards as VP,

put I'm turned off by personal attacks. It seems that BO is benefiting from Edwards personal attacks though......go figure....not enough to propel him to 1st place though.....

[surfermaw]

53. That is funny... Edwards is going to win in IOWA

Dennis will give over to Edwards as he did in the last election, remember Edwards was so they said at 5%. and finished 2 % points behind Kerry, if the Clinton's hadn't gotten their friend Clark to jump in the same time Edward did, he would have not only won S.C., he would have won Oklahoma, and Iowa....

[Chomskyite]

18. Edwards is my guy on the issues

. . . but I don't see how this nibbling around the edges crap helps him. He does well when he goes populist, because Hillary can never quite do that.

[mtnsnake]

28. John Edwards is making life for the Republicans so much easier

Shit, with Edwards consistently attacking his own people, Republicans will be able to use Edwards fodder for years to come against Democrats in future elections. I don't think there's a bigger loser of a candidate than John Edwards. Thank goodness we won't have to worry about him taking on any Republicans in future general elections. He couldn't even stand his own against that asswipe Dick Cheney in the debates of 2004. In fact, Cheney mopped up the floor with him. What a disgrace that was.

[saracat]

38. And Hill is their dream candidate but according to some we are not supposed to notice that!

[magnolia]

31. I'm disappointed in him....

...and not because of Hillary.

The reason we are in the mess we are in is because of an incompetent president who is either too lazy or stupid or both to see more than two sides to an issue. He sees black and white and no gray when most everything falls into gray. So...why is it that our candidates are using Bush as a role model???? Since when do we think that every issue has a yes or no answer???

In cases like the war and immigration there are no good solutions, just a bunch of bad ones. You can't always choose what you prefer or what you are for...you choose what is necessary.

If your roof leaks and it's raining you put buckets around to catch the water. That doesn't mean you like buckets or are for buckets, it means the buckets make sense until the roof can get fixed. That is essentially what Hillary said about immigration. She doesn't have to be for or against driver's license for illegals. They are a solution until the problem can get fixed. Trying to force her into stating whether she was for buckets or against them was a gotcha question since there was no good answer to it.

Those who were against driver's license claiming that it's a privilege as an american were using patriotism to divert from having to think about a difficult problem. Isn't this what Bush does????? A driver's license is not a right or a privilege it is a necessity for someone intending to drive. My life should not be at risk because our government can't come up with a solution to the problem and our candidates can't even be honest about it because it might hurt their political careers!!! So if I'm in an accident with an illegal and my car is totalled or worse I should salute the flag and say...at least he didn't have a driver's license!!

Considering what a hot topic immigration is, it took courage for Hillary to be supportive of Governor Spitzer. The patriotic answer given by the others was a Bush answer....easy, lazy and cowardly.

[FrenchieCat]

40. I agree........

When Politicians get into the soundbyte "gotchas" against their opponent a la pundit, we all lose.

Edwards is taking advantage in a disingenious manner, and that shows that he is willing to be deceitful in order to win. He doesn't care as much about the issue as he does about attempting to bury Sen. Clinton. Edwards is not being honest, and yet he is the one talking up big about telling the truth. That is hypocritical and does not speak well of one such as Edwards who likes to point out the "double speak" of others.

[creeksneakers2]

42. I don't see a link to the video. Is Edwards still lying?

Last video Edwards dishonestly accused Hillary of going six days without taking a position on the licenses. Hillary took a nuanced but not contradictory position to begin with. The day after the debate she clarified.

Edwards is teamed up with the GOP to do slime jobs. The latest poll shows only 10% of Democrats rule out voting for Hillary. Three times that many rule out voting for the mudslinging phony John Edwards.

FROM THE POLITICO

Edwards may be changing his position to court working-class Iowa voters, among whom illegal immigration is an emotionally charged issue.

Former Senator John Edwards (N.C.) has been accusing his rival Sen. Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) of double-talk for a week, since she refused to say clearly whether illegal immigrants should get driver's licenses – but his own position on the issue is also incoherent, experts say.

Immigration policy experts on both sides of the debate say they're puzzled by Edwards’ stance, which appears to hinge on blurring the distinction between state and federal powers.

"He supports licenses as part of a path to citizenship. He doesn't support the Spitzer plan because it doesn't include a path to citizenship," said Edwards' deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince in an e-mail referring to the New York governor’s plan that prompted the question that flummoxed Clinton.

"That's not a rational position — Eliot Spitzer couldn't ever offer somebody a path to citizenship," said Margie McHugh, the Co-Director of the National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy at the Migration Policy Institute, which favors immigration reform.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6755.html

[Reno.Muse]

49. go Edwards!

Keep reminding people whether they like it or not.