New Elizabeth Edwards book is a veiled hit piece of the Kerrys

[beachmom]

Today I had some time, and saw EE's new book, so I grabbed it, and paged through it to get an idea whether recent remarks Elizabeth had made in Time magazine were unfairly taken out of context. They were not. The entire book as it related to the campaign and the Kerrys were all about how the Edwards were "regular people" and how THK and JK were not. The book also is a foundation of the campaign Edwards will run on to discredit Kerry in '08. I urge everyone to take a look at it.

(The ONLY nice thing she said about Teresa was that she played with EE's kids, and it was no big deal when she pulled Jack's thumb out of his mouth. It goes down hill from there.)

Here are some key points in the book to back up my thesis:

1. She quotes Howard Dean, who when it was obvious he was going to lose (by Wisconsin) wanted Edwards over Kerry. Quote from Howard to JE: "The shop foreman in Ohio, those people will vote for you. They will not vote for Kerry."

2. After Kerry won Iowa, EE claims the trends had been going her husband's way. She claims that someone connected with the JK campaign said if it had been three weeks later, JE would have won. Well, look, lady, if the presidential election was held the week after Katrina, JK would have won. Your point is?

3. When she goes to Teresa's Pittsburgh home after JE is named VP, she can't help but throw in that "this isn't the Pittsburgh I know -- working class".

4. The Kerrys go to Raleigh and are planning to come to the Edwards' home. EE calls it a "modest" home (worth $1 million as we all know), and that her guest room is "not good enough" for the Kerrys, so they remodel Cate's room (totally weird, if you ask me) for the Kerrys' visit. At first she buys very nice linens but then returns it because it's too "expensive" (she names the store -- never heard of it, and frankly I don't care). The Kerrys end up not staying there, and just get changed before they have to leave again, so all of this effort was for nothing (a scheduling thing).

5. Criticizes Kerry for not having any real policies or bills that help the African American community.

6. Tells the story of how they all go to Wendy's. THK had chile, JK a hamburger, and Elizabeth and Edward have their "usual #1 combo" (barf!). Then she claims that gourmet meals were sent to the bus for the Kerrys, who "had never been to Wendys" and were afraid they wouldn't like it. I have no idea about Teresa, but I'd say we know for a fact that Kerry has been known to frequent fast food joints on occasion. Even if this story is true, sounds to me like the Kerrys are sensible enough to want to eat a GOOD DIET instead of the junk (that's killing America, I may add) at Wendy's. Still, this story sounds gossipy and ridiculous.

7. We all know of the vague notion that Edwards "wanted to fight" and not concede the election; she gives very little details as to who he told and what reaction he got. Then JE gives that ridiculous "concession" speech which doesn't concede, and then John Kerry gives his speech. He says what her husband "wouldn't say". WTF? So our VP candidate didn't concede? How embarassing!!

8. Elizabeth, who had not told anyone but John, about her breast cancer, but talks about how Teresa is talking about her sprained ankle prior to the concession speech. She says it's great to focus on something that trivial instead of the election loss or her cancer (which Teresa had NO idea about), but you can hear snark in those sentences, too.

9. The excerpts printed in the Pittsburgh paper that we read about Teresa giving advice about which doctors were the best were accurate and not taken out of context. Teresa was trying to help out but she was "wrong" and threw EE into a depression.

This book makes me not like this woman one bit. Even as she tries to paint the Kerrys as uppity rich folks, she herself ends up coming across as snooty and condescending. Dare I say, it's not that Elizabeth is not high class enough, it's that she has NO class or inner poise (ah, new money -- no sized bank account can buy one class -- either you have it or you don't). In the end, she seems to have very low self esteem if she felt she would need to "impress" the Kerrys. John Kerry went to fricking Vietnam -- don't you think, Elizabeth, that he could handle staying in a small guest room for one night? Teresa traveled for months in Iowa, not staying in fancy smancy hotels (the campaign could not afford that early in the primaries) -- I think she could have handled it as well.

Who knows, maybe Elizabeth IS a nice person if the politics hadn't gotten in the way. For this book is hardly personal -- it's all about positioning her husband. Here is Edwards' campaign against Kerry in a nutshell (something I EASILY ascertained from the book, which supposedly is personal):

-- too rich to connect with regular people
-- conceding election without fighting
-- has done nothing for African Americans


Kerry is going to have to go after him at some point, because these notions are PREPOSTEROUS! Here's what I have in mind:

-- Edwards does not have the gravitas to fight the GOP on security, as shown with his mediocre performance debating Dick Cheney.
-- Only 4 years experince in public life, which happens to be the SAME amount of time he's spent running for president.
-- They're phonies, acting like they're "regular people" (by eating junk food) when they're worth millions. This is disrespectful to people and utterly shallow. What's better? Talking about being "working class" or actually HELPING the working class?
-- I think a second look into JE's voting record in the Senate is warranted -- any votes showing him voting for corporations over people?

Anyone else look at the book?

[blm]

1. You think Teresa slept on a few mudhut floors while tending sick villagers

in Africa with her father?

I am VERY disappointed in Elizabeth's tact here.

Unfortunately it fits in with what I heard during the primaries, that the Edwards' campaign was sweet as can be in public bemoaning the acrimony and mudslinging, and then going back to the bus and figuring how to do it themselves without losing their crafted image.


This is shameful of them - and I have always given them the benefit of the doubt.

[beachmom]

4. The funny part is SHE is the one who comes across as uppity

She never gives a quote of Teresa saying something like "oh, I wouldn't EVER sleep there, wear that, eat this, etc." It seems all of the anxiety is on Elizabeth's part. I mean -- bloggers -- didn't y'all have a BEER with JK? Did you feel wrongly dressed, not ordering the right food/drink, felt incomfortable talking to the "rich guy"? And yet Elizabeth felt this way, and they were a) rich and b) her husband was the VP pick.

[whometense]

2. Wow.

I haven't seen it myself, but I take your word for it.

Was it written by EE herself, or did she have a ghostwriter?

I have to say, I'm really disappointed in her. It sounds like they are trading on peoples' natural sympathy for her and the positive impression she made during the campaign (a la Laura Bush) to say things they couldn't otherwise say and still be seen as sunny and optimistic.

I still think John Edwards is a one-note candidate, but it's incredibly low (not to mention cynical) of them to use EE and her situation as a positioning tool.

[StoryTeller]

3. This is sad...

Maybe I'm giving too much benefit of the doubt, but knowing how the publishing world functions, I wonder if she's been used. Chances are extremely good that Elizabeth herself did not actually sit down in front of a computer and physically type in these words herself. Celebrity "authors" almost ALWAYS have a ghost writer. And it's extremely possible that she was interviewed and all the negative stuff was pulled out, positioned, and subtexted to produce this result.

It's also equally possible this is really how she feels. And that would be sad, too.

But I just want to caution everyone that TV and radio media aren't the only media that can distort, reframe, and revise what actually happened and what people actually think.

So, yes, it sounds like a hit piece. If it's actually what she feels and her take on things, shame on her. But shame on JE and their staff, and the ghostwriter, for taking these sort of interpersonal issues and using them for political gain instead of focusing on issues, ideas, and real leadership and integrity.

[beachmom]

6. No, I'm not going to give her the benefit of the doubt

She TOLD Time magazine the SAME THING in an interview. I still can't figure out what the truth is:

1. EE is lying or
2. She's telling the truth and is that shallow.

[StoryTeller]

8. I didn't know about the Time interview

Okay, no more doubting benefits, I guess.

I still think she probably had a ghostwriter. :)

[beachmom]

16. Agree with you on the ghostwriter. But don't you think she would

have read it before it was published?

[whometense]

18. Absolutely.

THe reason I brought up the ghostwriter, was that using one might be a way to get plausible deniability. If called on anything that was said, EE could always respond that the ghostwriter didn't phrase it that well, or some such.

[StoryTeller]

28. Well...It's not that simple.

She *should* have read it before it went to print. I've never ghostwritten, but I've had author friends who have collaborated with "big names" before, and it's not like the celeb and the ghostwriter sit down in the celeb's office and write the book together.

Elizabeth and the ghostwriter MAY have actually spoken a few times, or the ghostwriter MAY have even actually done the interviews personally. But it's more probable that the Edwards have a staff that includes a media contact or publicist who was in charge of hiring a literary agent, who would have either tapped one of his other clients or worked with the ghostwriter's literary agent to draw up the collaboration agreement.

Most of the contact between the writer and EE would have been through one of these several intermediaries. The writer may have even been given the interview material without having ever actually met EE in person or personally conducting the interviews. Then when the writer is finished with the book, he/she submits it to their agent, who gives it to the EE agent who turns it over to the Edwards staff people, who may or may not actually read the entire thing, but who will make suggestions and request changes.

The staff MIGHT actually get the manuscript to EE, who MIGHT have actually read it. However, by this time, chances are quite good that the editorial timeframe has shrunk to almost nothing, so it gets a quick copy-edit and runs to press.

I'm just saying that there are a TON of layers of people who probably had much more say in the tone of the book and the content than just EE. Her name goes on it, but you don't know who else in their staff actually had the most influence over the results.

[Mass]

12. She is that shallow.

I have no problem believing all she said in the book happened. My only answer is : "so what?"! Nothing damning there and nothing really interesting either. The woman had the chance to participate in a campaign to get her husband in a ticket to change the country and all she can talk about is how her husband running mate wife is rich? This certainly did not make me think more of her and him.

[karynnj]

38. Even so she would have had the chance to review it

There is no way she and JRE didn't read it thoroughly and approve it. I know both Christianity and Judaism frown on idle gossip of this type. I have heard nothing but kind words from Teresa and John Kerry on the Edwards.

A Lieberman like pledge never made sense, but this is almost snake like. I hope this is a JRE miscalculation and that people who pick it up see that the problem is her. What is strange was their biggest asset was that she was perceived to be nice. This doesn't sound so.

We won't be able to tell here because the Edwards people are very committed, but I wonder what someone in say Iowa or NH will thing if they pick it up because they are undecided. In either case, they likely have a friend, neighbor or co-worker who may have had some contact with the Kerrys. From Beachmom's account it sounds like they can see through the unreliable narrator (Elizabeth) and see the truth.

(I did come back and read the rest of Beachmom's post.) Elizabeth is supposed to be a brilliant lawyer. She and her husband were out of law school in 1976. It wasn't long after that that they were well off, then wealthy. They were multi-millionaires before he went to Senate in 1998. So, here's a woman who was wealthy for at least 2 decades.

The idea that you would redo your house to have someone stay overnight, during a Presidential campaign, is extremely strange. You give the guest a room that is as nice as you can reasonably make it. The funny thing is the Kerrys may not have stayed there because they sensed her anxiety.

Didn't Elizabeth know that Kerry is the Senator, so low on money he regularly slept on friends' couches 15 or so years before - when she likely had a fashionable house.

[beachmom]

43. Just so I don't sound like I embellished, the remodel wasn't

structural -- but she took down pictures, bought new linens, etc. STILL, I thought that was overboard.

[karynnj]

55. I understood that - I doubt there was the time line to

completely remodel a room. Especially as the BG made sure everyone knew this was a guy who slept on frieds' couches. He clearly grew up seeing friends who lived in mansions, while his house was more modest. He just handled it better than EE. :)

[ProSense]

5. "has done nothing for African Americans"? With that comment,

the Edwardses are in for a rude awakening!

[politicasista]

34. self-delete

Never mind, it's already been explained.

[Mass]

39. I am always a little bit surprised by your account of the perception

of JRE by african-american communities. I am asking the question because what you describe is in direct contradiction with what has been reported in the media and by the results of the polls in the primary. As you have a direct experience as compared to a purely academic experience, I was wondering if you could explain how extended is the popularity of JRE around you.

It has been widely reported in the media that John Edwards, despite all his claims, did not connect with the African-American activists in the South and that they widely endorsed Kerry once Dean was out of the race. Polls in early southern states (like SC) show that Kerry split the AA vote, and that Edwards's victory was largely predicated on the white male vote.

Was there really a support before the primary or is it another of these things that happened after?

CNN exit poll from SC
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/SC/index.html

And Missouri
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/MO/index.html

[politicasista]

40. You mean Edwards or Kerry?

I went back and deleted everything cause I didn't want to cause trouble. :shrug:

[Mass]

41. Dont. I meant Edwards and I was sincerely curious of your take!

[politicasista]

51. My college friend liked Edwards

and he was AA said he was only voting for Kerry cause of that, which made me mad. He thinks he can do a better job than Democrats in DC. :crazy: Although he thinks Kerry conceded cause of the news of EE having brest cancer.

It's just so frustrating to see people you admire repeat RW talking points about someone at his expense. I heard that same line during the 04 election and so-called Democrats bought into it.

[ProSense]

44. I'm sorry you deleted the comment!

I missed it!

[politicasista]

47. It was about the Edwards and Clintons using the AA vote

to their advantage and make Kerry look bad based on the remark you posted. It was an outrageous demand that Kerry and Momma T take his voting record and issues he has done for AA straight to the AA community. I am very glad he is making inroads to the AA colleges (HBCU's like Howard U and SC State) and I was wondering if there was some support left after the concession and counting votes.

[karynnj]

54. I wouldn't characterize that as "outrageous"

I realize that there is a thin line between pandering and making sure you explain yourself so a community can see wht you did that helped them.

The college speeches, HBCU or not, are wonderful. I had never seen the black staion's news until I watched it because Kerry was on (and I new that from the Kerry blog). I was impressed how serious and how detained they went. It's more like the real news we got decades ago. I hope Kerry will interview there - because he really is good and solid on a wide range of issues.

[politicasista]

58. "Outrageous" came from me

I didn't want to sound like the lefty freepers in the blogsphere, so I figured that that demand was over the top. :)

I too understand that there is a thin line between pandering and explaining that you do care about the interests at hand. I read the Howard speech and saw the article welcoming back despite the snark. It sounds like they are looking for anyone to just stand up and speak out.

I agree that these speeches would have made news if were the same news media decades ago. I miss the BET news. That's where you could get news about politicans speaking to AA, now you got the cable news media, which is really a joke!

[karynnj]

70. Is BET news gone?

I knew outrageous was your word, I was trying to say the proposal was anything but outrageous - it's a very good idea. It looks like that is what they are trying to do with the outreach they have.

I think the same think about the speeches. A moment when there was a stark realization of change was when Kerry gave his October 2005 speech and got little substanitive coverage. This was the man who lost the Presidency by 60,000 votes and he was calling for a plan that would in 12-18 months have us out of Iraq. The coverage he got as a 27 year old war hero vert was about 5 minutes on the nightly news on all 3 networks. Now, when if life were fair he would be President,he got almost NO coverage.

[politicasista]

72. Unfortunately, yes

The only media outlet is BET.com, AOL Blackvoices.com (though a lot of RW trolls hang out there) and BlackAmericaweb.com (Radio jock Tom Joyner's official site). There maybe more but those three come to mind.

[ProSense]

56. I really don't think that's possible!

It's opportunistic, but will possibly have little effect! Kerry didn't accidentally get more AA votes than Clinton and Gore in most of the south! If they want to compare their record on the issues to try to make the case to AA voters, let them. Like I said, they'll be in for a rude awakening. Most people are becoming aware of the possibility that election fraud had a hand in the outcome of Ohio. These people will more likely support an investigation and not resort to crying about the fact that Kerry conceded. There is still significant political motivation driving a segment of the group that is doing this. I acknowledge some people are still bitter, but Kerry has been out there pushing for election accountability more than Edwards, both Clintons and Gore put together.

[politicasista]

59. Exactly. nuff said n/t

[karynnj]

46. You could never cause trouble

You have a view on this we lack. It's also clear Kerry is making an effort to meet with blacks now.

In South Carolina, Edwards got 45% of the vote in the primary, Kerry 30%. I don't have any idea of the % of blacks vs whites in the Democratic primary. It would seem that Edwards likely overwhelming carried the whites. The question is where were Kerry's votes from.

[politicasista]

49. No, I wouldn't do that. (smile!)

I just have a habit of being redundant. I am glad that he is continuing to reach out. I just wondered if there was some good will left.

I am sure Kerry's votes were from minorities, veterans, and swing voters.

[fedupinBushcountry]

60. Not causing trouble

but when the facts are out there it is not hard to counter those that you talk with.

In your state it is Tennessee right? I think you mentioned that is where you are at before.

African-American (23%) Clark-28% Dean- 3% Edwards-15% Kerry-47%

In Virginia:

African-American (33%) Clark- 7% Dean-3% Edwards-20% Kerry-61%

In Geotgia:

African-American (47%) Dean-1% Edwards-25% Kerry-61%

In Florida :

African-American (21%) Dean-2% Edwards-7% Kerry-81%

Louisiana:

African-American (46%) Dean-4% Edwards-10% Kerry-83%

Mississippi:

African-American (56%) Dean-2% Edwards-6% Kerry-82%

[politicasista]

62. It's not hard,

but sometimes it's like no one will listen to me. Like talking to a brick wall.

I even did it here with the election fraud thing, posted fact after fact, but it's like bla, bla. (I am not as fast at countering like your guys:)). Outside of blogsphere, it's the same "no backbone," "two years, too late," garbage. :puke:

I read your rant yesterday, I am with you, people will never get over the primaries or never question why their candidate lost.

[Mass]

7. I went through the book and it did not seem that bad.

I did not see 1 and 2

3 - It is clear that the Heinz House is not in a working class neighborhood. I saw the remark, but just thought that it was plain stupid.

4 and 6 - are more a reflexion on the campaign than on the Kerrys themselves and it is probable there were people in the campaign that were this way.

5 - Actually 5 bothered me as well, but her point was not that Kerry did not have policies, more than the campaign did not provide the policies to her staff. My reaction was double:
- Knowing that the campaign DID NOT EXPLOIT Kerry's record, this may be true;
- She needs to fire her staff. The record was easy to find.

7 - It was for me the real problem, because the claim is so vague, but it is there in the book.

8 - I think you misread the passage - First, Teresa knew she was afraid to have a cancer, or at least JK knew. Secondly, if somebody finds something bad in this passage, they are really stupid.

9 - I dont think there is a lot there either.

Sure, anybody who is already poorly disposed towards Kerry will see these things negative, but I dont think anybody else will see that this way (except for the election context claim). She is describing the campaign and that she did not find anything perfect with the Kerrys and the campaign is no big surprise.

What we are missing at this point is that somebody on the Kerry's side report this campaign. I would not expect Elizabeth Edwards to be this person. Nobody should expect that from her. However, it is important that the truth on these issues come, and somebody close from Kerry should be this person.

This said, no, the book did not endear Elizabeth to me. Sadly, I do not like the way they exploit their personnal grief for a political goal. I find as indecent as the way the kids were exploited during the campaign, and I have issue with somebody who has kids that young campaigning without interruption for 4 years now (including through his wife's sickness). The Kennedys' s imitation is wearing off.

[beachmom]

14. That's why it's good that everyone looks at the book

Interesting about #4 and #6 -- you're saying the staffers themselves were snooty, not necessarily the Kerrys?

I don't think that you can argue with the fact that the Kerrys come off pretty badly in the book. They sure don't sound like people I would want to meet -- I'd be afraid of what I wore, what I ate, where I lived. I thought it was completely unfair and baseless. And these are the kinds of things that lose you votes, I'm sorry to say. And she went on Oprah -- so that whole crowd will read the book and believe it.

[Mass]

19. I did not think it was that important. Just a few pages in the full book.

This is not something that bothers me. I think this makes her look shallow, nothing more.

She actually says a lot of good things about Alex, at some point, and about John and how he interacts with the kids. She also says nice things about how Kerry talked to her about her cancer.

[beachmom]

22. Re: Alex about the piece of jewlry her daughter gives her, and Alex

wears it for a while. Even then, I hated the tone. She said "Alex won some points with me wearing that chain, at least for a little while". I found every compliment to have a snark within it. There was just a haughty tone to it. But I did miss the part about JK, so maybe I'll look at the book again another time. All the parts I read were not nice.

[Mass]

23. I think you are even less well disposed about her than I am, and

I am not exactly well disposed.

Dont worry about this book. If anything, she comes out as incredibly shallow.

[whometense]

21. Not to mention weird.

The one main thing I've taken away from my encounters with JK and THK is that they go way out of their way to be approachable, friendly, and very down-to-earth people. If EE found them intimidating it seems likely that those were her own insecurities talking.

[karynnj]

42. Like Alexandra Kerry who is

more fun, wittier, more honest and very likable from things she has written posted here and from everytime she was interviewed. She is also incredibly beautiful.

[karynnj]

9. What a bitch

(My kids will never believe I typed that line.) I stopped reading at Teresa "throwing EE into depression". I KNOW depression - my mother - in law and my kids have suffered from it. NOBODY can throw you into a depression.

The other thing is, she could have stopped seeing Teresa. Teresa was smart enough dealing with health issues that she saved her husband's health and possibly his life.

I think that people will see through the cattiness. After all, Kerry gave her husband the VP position. He was overrated by the media. Where people may see through her, is that she doesn't see how not connected SHE is. Saying they had to struggle on $28,000 when they first married (1976) is asinine. I know how much I made then - about $17,000 - $18,000 and my friends and I knew we were doing very well - in a higher cost area.

I suspect she is so use to wealth they had for the last 2 1/2 decades they see that as poor. It reminds me of when a flight attendant speaking to my then 5 year old about the 3 Barbies she had told her she was lucky to have so many, my daughter then said she only had 10 (using her hands). To her, this was not many, and less than her peers at day care - she was informed 10 was a lot.

It's funny that my middle daughter thought that EE was a phony - I now heartily agree and she was the only think that made me not think Edwards was slicker than Clinton. So, I now think little of each.

The story of redoing a room is absolutely stupid and reflects on HER not the Kerrys.

[beachmom]

24. That's the word that came to my mind after looking through the book,

but Mass thinks I'm being too hard on her. Admittedly, I didn't read every word, so I must have missed the nice things said. Maybe I'm more sensitive, but if someone talked about me the way she talked about Teresa I wouldn't speak to that person for a while. Totally petty.

[Mass]

25. I take that from a different angle. I see that as shallowness.

If this is all she has to say about this experience, this does not impress me.

[ElizabethDC]

10. I haven't read the book yet, but

my mom has read it, and the other day we were discussing something and I mentioned what a nice and regular guy JK is in person, and my mom said, "yes, he comes across that way in EE's book." So she got the impression that JK, at least, was portrayed well in the book. I hope to read the book for myself soon, so I'll reserve judgment until then.

[Mass]

13. This was the impression I got. I am not sure why it came out this

way to beachmom?

[beachmom]

17. Maybe I missed that part. I did spend a good hour looking through it.

Well, it's good that everyone looks at the book. What I read made me mad.

[beachmom]

20. Now that's bugging me -- where does she say anything that nice

about John Kerry? I didn't see that. Maybe it was in the first half of the book, which I didn't look at since it was about their son, for which I already know the story. I started reading in the Primary chapter.

[fedupinBushcountry]

11. You know

I liked EE more then JE during the campaign. Did she really put such a BIG front on during the campaign with all those hugs with the Kerrys.

You know my daughter was onto something when she met the Kerry girls, Andre and Cate Edwards. She sensed a snootiness in Cate and did not warm to her at all. But as far as Alex, Vanessa and Andre, she felt very comfortable around them, and knew then that they were brought up very much like she was, we are all equal no matter what our backgrounds. That spoke well for both JK and THK.

[whometense]

15. My daughter did some volunteering

for Kerry at the NH headquarters in late 2003.

While she was there, she was seated next to Vanessa. She said Vanessa was actually a little shy, but very, very nice - just "one of the girls" in the office.

I was really impressed when I heard that - it only confirmed what I'd seen on tv - that both Kerry girls were thoroughly well-brought-up, normal, and lovely young women, inside and out.

[_dynamicdems]

26. What goes around comes around.

Let's just say, you reap what you sow. The Edwards should be careful lest people look a little closer at their claims of being from "common" origins. What they describe as "poor" 25 years ago is more than most people made at that time. They really don't want this discussion.

[StoryTeller]

45. You're right.

My dad was hired as a junior college teacher here in Omaha in 1975. He has a Masters Degree and 2-3 years ju-co teaching experience, and his ANNUAL salary those first couple of years was around $8,000. And he and my mom had an 18-month-old, too. ME! :)

So, to hear that around the same time, the Edwards were making $28K. Oh, poor babies. Wah. So sorry.

And yeah, have to factor in the difference in cost of living between Omaha (always been comparably cheap) with wherever they were. But still. They definitely weren't "poor."

[sandnsea]

48. I made about $4500

I worked for the forest service, GS2-3, something like that. $28,000 - poor?? Heck, come to think of it, after business expenses and taxes, I don't make much more than that now. Talk about out of touch.

[fedupinBushcountry]

53. They were by no means poor

The average middle class income back in '76 was around $15,300 in the Northeast and $13,--- in the South. The minimum wage back then was $2.30.

$28,000 was quite a bit to live on back then.

[globalvillage]

27. What Pittsburgh does she know?

I'm not quite sure if EE thinks we're all millworkers here, but we're not. Pittsburgh is a city, with rich and poor and middle class, just like any other city.
To suggest that we're not economically diverse is a bit naive and stereotypical. Does she think we all take our hard hats and lunch buckets with us every morning? This is a city of higher education and technology and commerce. It's not a mill town.
There's nothing wrong with working class. It's the heart and soul of most cities, but we don't have a lock on blue collar workers here in the 'burgh.
Really, is that what she said? Because I need to know what to wear to work when I get back from vacation, and I think my Carhartt jacket is at the cleaners.

[beachmom]

29. Is she from Pittsburgh?

Well, look at the book for the exact quote, but yeah, you're not way off base with how you characterized it.

[Mass]

31. She said that she was going in vacation in Pittsburgh when she was

a kid. So she does not have either an extended or uptodate percerption of the town.

Also, she is an army brat. She did not grow up in a working class environment.

[globalvillage]

35. Well, she was a kid before I was a kid.

She's basing her impression of a major metropolitan area on some vague memory of a vacation she took 40 years or more ago?
This is Teresa's home. She knows this city, as do I. I don't think an outsider's brief view of the area is especially valid. I have business associates who visit our beautiful city and are totally blown away.
I wonder where she took that vacation, because we've had upscale areas of the city since long before she was born. Maybe she missed those parts.
Seems to me, EE has a problem with progress if, as the wife of a multi-millionaire she eats at Wendy's, shops at Target, and bases her perceptions of a major city on a 40 year old vacation.
Is there something about 'moving on' that she is uncomfortable with? Is she stuck in some sort of time warp?

[Mass]

36. Their campaign is based on a vision of blue collar and middle class

people that is totally outdated (from HIS childhood in the 1960s South). Each time they try to talk about poverty, they overreach because they want too much to belong to a group they have stopped belonging decades ago.

[Firespirit]

52. They are banking on a method of campaigning whose days are done.

Allen and his idiotic Western cowboy boots.

George W. hauling an assortment of big tools around his "ranch" pretending to cut up lumber.

And the most terminally rage-inducing question ever to leave its stench on a presidential election.... "Who would you want to have a beer with?"

Are we really not past this tired old race to see who can pretend to be the best redneck?

Yes, that is likely offensive to some. I am sorry. I mean no insult to anyone in particular, save those politicians who do it. Certainly no one here. I'm not saying that eating fast food, being working class, or shopping at any particular store brands one a redneck, but let's be honest, that's what the game is about -- a race to see who can be the very best good ol' boy. The Republicans began it in the 1990s with their hate of anything they wanted people to perceive as "elite liberalism."

Affectation, the lot of it. The Edwardses are not good ol' boys and it's stupid to pretend they are. Eating at Wendy's and shopping at Target are not signs of caring about the working class. It's a crap premise. It's like saying that you can't really care about reproductive rights unless you have an abortion. Absolutely insane. I want a president who understands working class issues without the need to pretend to be something he is not.

It's also a fundamentally pessimistic and cynical philosophy. It implies that people are so naturally self-centered and unable to put themselves in others' shoes that they must live exactly as someone else to understand and sympathize properly. No. Just... no. I want to think better of humanity than that.

[karynnj]

50. Hey GV, I saw you in Boston

NO WAY would EE approve of you either - you were way too well dressed and high class. I only saw Pittsburg once, in the late 70s. I remember there were some parts that were majestic near one of the rivers.)

[globalvillage]

61. Thanks. I eat at Wendys.

It's right down the street and I'm almost always in a hurry to get somewhere. I like Burger King better, but it's not close.
But if I had a bunch of money and the means to take it easy and eat better, I would. I don't shop at Target, but I do like Costco. I buy almost everything on sale. Those are my choices, and I'm lucky to have them.
Hey, people should eat what they want and shop where they want within their means. I don't fault the Edwardses for their choices even though I think they're a little unusual, and I certainly don't fault the Kerrys for theirs. If I had the money, I'd rather live like Teresa than like Elizabeth, and I wouldn't feel the least bit guilty about it. From the little contact I've had with Mrs. Kerry, she seems someone I'd like very much to have a beer with (preferably a glass of good wine).
What gets me is that Mrs. Edwards seems to be making this an issue. Doesn't she have anything better to write about than where she gets dinner? Geez.

[sandnsea]

71. Subway toasted beef

Since my husband's heart attack, that's the only fast food on the list. For what it's worth. Run far far away from burgers and fries - or at least buy the 97% burger and make your own. Even if people do call you a snob. :)

Oh, and fish tacos with mango salsa, organic. Those are pretty good too, and cheap at the little organic restaurant here in town.

I'm with you, why eat crap when you can eat healthy and yummy at the same time. Makes no sense to me. The only thing cute about them eating at Wendy's was because it was an anniversary tradition. In fact, it's kind of condescending when you think about it. 'Look at me, I'm so rich, but I still lower myself to eating with po' folks.' Blech.

[Firespirit]

30. I don't want to buy this book

and don't have the extra cash to blow on something like it. It's not that I distrust your account (I don't, at all), but I always like to look at something myself and form my own impressions about it.

However, if this is accurate, it says something very ugly about the Edwardses, something I have not wanted to consider could be a part of them. JRE was my first choice in 2004 -- yes, because of one issue (job outsourcing), but nevertheless I can't hide from my past. I realized long ago that JK is the more liberal and experienced candidate, who would make a far better president, but I nourished a soft spot for the Edwardses despite the switching of my real loyalties. I can't do that anymore if this is true. This is ugliness almost on the level of Lieberman stabbing the party in the back. Kerry MADE Edwards what he is today. He MADE him a serious 2008 contender. If not for Kerry, Edwards would just be an ex-Senator who "retired" because he didn't want to lose his seat. This is backstabbing of the first order.

You know that JRE approved the content of this book. There's no way he couldn't have. They are cynically exploiting sympathy and concern for Elizbeth and using it for political advantage, while stabbing the very people who made him something other than a footnote in Senate history.

It's ugly, and there's no way getting around that. Dante considered betrayal the greatest sin. I cannot excuse it, and it hurts.

Now, the substance of the attacks themselves... They seem to center on the very same anti-intellectual, "liberal elite" attack that the Republican Right used in the 1990s to nearly destroy the Democratic Party -- you know, the "we're good ol' boys, just like you" meme. It is nothing -- NOTHING -- other than a different form of snobbery. Snubbing people for not eating crappy food is absolutely no different than snubbing people for not eating expensive food. None.

Besides the foulness of the tactic itself, the accusations are false. We did indeed have a beer with Kerry. He was about the most regular guy you could think of. I did have one of my now notorious "Katrina rants," but it was before he showed up in the restaurant and the effect had worn off by the time he showed up. Despite that, it was STILL almost second nature to want to call him "John." His aura was that of a regular everyday guy and it promoted openness and normalcy.

At one of the Faneuil Hall speeches -- the healthcare one, I believe -- I was hanging around the building after the crowd had dispersed, waiting for WEL and her friends. JK showed up. I said hi. (Earlier, he'd shaken my hand in the crowd and recognized me from the PAC office. I remarked that he had a very firm grip.) He turned to me, burst into a snarky grin, and said (jokingly), "Why are you still here?" Being who I am, I smirked back and said something like "I could ask you that too, Senator." He laughed and grabbed my wrist, deliberately demonstrating the firm grip that I had mentioned before, then thanked me again and wished me a good afternoon. I exchanged snark with this man, and it came naturally because of the vibe he gave off when he spoke to me. You don't get much more normal than that.

As for the 2004 election... Edwards did not have top secret information about Ohio that Kerry didn't have. Kerry didn't have his head in the sand. Kerry DOES care about electoral reform, very much so, and is quite aware of the problem. I have personal accounts to confirm this. The (again, this word) ugly fact is that on election night, there was no evidence that Ohio had been dodgy enough to flip the vote. None. Even one of the sleaziest counties, Warren County Ohio (the one that had a "terror threat" and locked down all the voting equipment in a back room, where it was counted out of sight), didn't have its sordid tale reported until several days after the election. Like any election, there were reports of thuggery, intimidation, and isolated misdeeds, but there was not enough evidence that night to suggest that the fishiness could have flipped the result. For an ultimate insider to suggest otherwise is dishonest and coldly calculating.

This has been a long and somewhat rambling post, but I hope it makes some sense. This is really quite distressing, and it provokes a mix of anger and sadness in me.

Kerry, once again, trusted those who were secretly unworthy of it.

But you know, the more this happens to him, the more it sets him apart as the one who does not sell others down the river for his own gain.

[beachmom]

32. Oh just do the poor man's read like me:

I went to the book store, grabbed the book, and looked through it, and then I left. That's actually encouraged at Barnes and Noble, because eventually you end up buying something.

I just finished reading your entire post, which was great (thanks for the JK story, snarks and all!). As Mass said in this thread, she didn't take it as negatively as I did. So, really, I don't want you to take MY word for it, especially since you really like the Edwards. I apparently missed a few places where she said something nice about JK. I can't see that making up for the other stuff, however. I just don't like her, and you're absolutely right about it being a GOP tactic to try to out-working class somebody else . Haven't we had enough of "I'm a regular guy" with George Bush?

[Mass]

33. That is what I did too. What I read certainly did not push me to buy it

[beachmom]

37. Ain't that the truth, Mass!! n/t

[cadmium]

57. Well so then this is how it is?

Note that a lot of the liberal radio hosts -- who still will diss Kerry (I'm thinking of Thom Hartmann, Mike Malloy, and Sam Seder) will frequently slip in "I hear some good things from John Edwards.

I am saving any bad comments about any Dems (except Lieberman) until after the 06 election.

The word backstabber comes to mind.

I wonder how many JE supporters are doing the "Kerry didn't fight for us" "were was he" repititive BS under different screen names. We know the right-wingers do that.

Also note Kerry has totally avoided critical comments about other Dems, except for Lieberman

[whometense]

63. She's on Hardball today -

right now!

[beachmom]

64. Tweety is annoying me. EE is dodging all the questions.

She's nicer here than in her book.

[Mass]

65. Dont expect her to SAY something umpleasant.

They want to stay nice. All the unpleasant things that they had to say about Kerry has always come indirectly.

Remember his image is the sunny boy.

[whometense]

96. exactly right. n/t

[sandnsea]

66. Oh, I didn't think so

She didn't know the difference between Kerry and Bush's health plans????

I heard the woman stump for JK's health plan and she damn well knew it inside and out.

Edwards was sent to third tier cities?? Well yeah, that's why he was chosen as VP - to get the rural and suburban vote, NOT to bring in the big cities that always go blue.

I get your point completely, their plan is to trash the Kerry campaign and I wonder whether some of this crap we've heard in the last couple years has actually come from their staff.

I am really disappointed, I thought a lot better of them too.

[beachmom]

67. Oh, I missed the beginning and didn't hear that.

Okay, so you guys don't think I'm nuts, that there's an underlying nastiness. And Tweety saying Edwards is the big competition for Hillary? That is just sad. What does John Kerry not exist anymore?

[sandnsea]

68. Yes, the beginning

I'll have to watch it again because I was screaming at the tv!! I was so angry about that health care comment because subsidized health insurance and a federal catastrophic pool is COMPLETELY different than anything Bush was offering. They do come off as so sweetsie pie, while stabbing you square in the back. It is a political skill, I guess I have to admit. I take pride in not making any bones when I'm punching you in the face, I think it's less than honest to do otherwise. I hate people who make their snide little comments and then say "who me?". Give me Teresa and a well placed "shove it" any day. And yes, I know, that is certainly not appropriate behavior for a well bred southern woman - my sister tells me aaallll the time. :)

[beachmom]

69. Okay, who made me put cable tv on, whometense?

I'm somehow listening to Tucker Carlson and Joe Klein talk about Barak Obama!! WTF???? He's on the cover of Time this week. So I guess the president isn't the person to do the job anymore -- they're just a performer and a fresh face. It's like Kerry doesn't exist!! Who has given speeches like he has?? It's only Hillary, Edwards, Obama. That's it.

Arghhhh. . .

[sandnsea]

73. hehe, primaries 2003

Dean, Dean, Dean. An occasional Lieberman. And Hillary is going to get in at the last minute. Edwards was the Obama of 2003. Nothing about Kerry at all, that's how he ended up down at 1%. Except on the ground in Iowa, where it mattered. I just do not understand it.

[whometense]

98. awwww - sorry

:hug:

Did you see Olbermann?? It was pretty good - lots of notice, even if the terminally snide Frank Rich was on. I turned to my daughter at the beginning of the segment, and I said to her, "the first thing out of Rich's mouth is going to be, "where was this guy in 2004?"

And you know what? It was.

And they gave Clinton credit for kick-starting the dem anger. Well, I was screaming at my tv at that point. Jesus. Kerry's been making those speeches for over 7 (8? 9?) months now.

[Mass]

74. OK, I was wrong - So, should the race come to Hillary vs Edwards

(I sure hope not) it will be Hillary for me. Edwards just became lower than Richarson in my list.

[sandnsea]

80. I don't know what is up with her

I really was suprised. Between that interview and book excerpts, I just don't get it. I always liked her an awful lot. Here's something else-

So she said at one point she had no desire to be the one in the 'lead', based on being junior class president. She prefers to be the worker bee. Then, at the very end, Chris said she would be President in a fairer country - which you would expect a self-depracating laugh at least, she did not bat an eye. They always said she was the brains behind the Edwards campaign, and boy did that come through today. She's a very ambitious person.

[Mass]

82. Me too. I never like him particularly, but I had a lot of respect for her

I always thought (and am probably right) she was the most intelligent of the two, but, when intelligence is coupled with this level of ambition, it really can give nasty things.

[karynnj]

84. Never thought I'd say it but me too

What I wonder is how does this ultimately play with the public. We are all partisans and it is not just backstabbing, but backstabbing someone we greatly respect.

[WildEyedLiberal]

76. Are you serious.

She ACTUALLY said she didn't know the difference between Kerry and Bush's health care plans.

She actually said that?

Wow - nail meet coffin. I am DONE with them.

[sandnsea]

79. Yes, she said that

Matthews asked her something about the campaign not really having a platform - and she said if somebody had asked her the difference between the Bush & Kerry health plan, she wouldn't know. I was SHOCKED.

[WildEyedLiberal]

83. Wow.

Fuck them.

I am now not sure I could vote for any other candidate in the primary besides Kerry (not that I would anyway). I don't think Clark, Gore, or Feingold will run - that's just my personal hunch - so if the choice were between Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Clinton, Richardson, or Bayh, Kerry is quite literally the ONLY palatable one out of that whole bunch.

[sandnsea]

85. I see it the same way

I could vote for Clark, Gore or Feingold - but I don't think any of them will run either. The rest of the field, blech. JK's the only one of them that I think could make a radical difference as President.

[karynnj]

88. me too

if it comes down only to Kerry, Clinton, Edwards, Biden.

one other possibility is Bayh. He is bland, more conservative than I would chose, but is a nice guy. (My sister knew him slightly in college in Bloomington she lived in the same dorm as his girlfriend. She remembers him as nice and he loved arguing politics.)

[whometense]

99. me too.

Though I think I could vote for Dodd.

He doesn't excite me in the least, but he strikes me as intelligent, a grown-up, and thoughtful. Right now he's my second choice. After him?? Steep drop-off.

[karynnj]

101. Forgot him - Yeah I would pick him next

[karynnj]

86. The answer to that is

if it were true, she was an incredibly awful surrogate and that as she was a brilliant lawyer she desrves the blame for not examining the differences.

If it's not true, she like Bush is a liar.

No way does she come out well on this.

[karynnj]

81. The health care plan reflects badly on her

Kerry's was designated the best and he actually continued part of it as Kids' first. You may be right that they immediately under the surface started attacking, It makes JRE' Senate speech look a bit insincere.

The question may be will he like Clinton get away with being insincere - I don't think he's as charismatic as Clinton.

[whometense]

97. Tweety was at his most obnoxious,

baiting her to come out and slam Kerry - or the campaign. She didn't bite, but she didn't defend them either.

I liked her a lot less than I did in 2004. There was a sharkishness to her smile that I don't remember picking up on before.

[sandnsea]

104. She bites in a back-handed way

She doesn't directly slam them, she just puts out enough slights that when they're put all together, they equal a giganitc slam. Then again, it could be she's just wised up to how vicious politics is. I sure have. And it is true about southern women, they really do know how to cut you to your knees with a smile on their face and a pie in their hand. (No offense to southern friends)

[Mass]

87. Video of the interview

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/

She says there was a difference, but the campaign did not convey it.

This is still silly, but I was surprised that there would be a frontal attack.

She is accepting all the premises Matthews poses.

Once again, she is criticizing the campaign and not Kerry directly, as she always do. She did an awful job answering to the questions concerning whether her husband was well used in the campaign.

[sandnsea]

89. Spot 1:40

I stand corrected, she said if you'd asked people the difference, they couldn't have told you, indicating a failure by the campaign. Which I still disagree with and think was a cheap shot, considering the distinct difference between health savings accounts and subsidized health insurance.

[Mass]

90. Oh, it is a cheap shot, but you will notice the Edwards never deliver

their cheap shots directly. They keep plausible deniability.

Remember how Edwards attacked Dean in IA, by having a staffer "forget" pamphlets that described Dean as rich and not connected to people, to say afterwards that he disagreed with the pamphlets.

This is why I was so surprised she would attack that directly.

[sandnsea]

91. And attack the strong suits

Learning from Rove perhaps, knowing that JK still has the best health care plan out there which is one of his strongest domestic policies. Obviously that's what you want to attack if you want to be the people's candidate.

[WildEyedLiberal]

92. The "some people say" garbage

"Some people couldn't tell the difference between Kerry and Bush's health care plans."

"Some people thought that John and Teresa Kerry came across as aloof, out of touch, and elitist."

"Some people say that if Edwards had been the candidate instead of Kerry, we would have won, because some people say he connected better to the middle class."

The rightwing spin machine is a master at this kind of indirect smear, and it's disappointing when Dems do it.

[ProSense]

93. Some people

didn't know Bush had a health care plan!

[karynnj]

95. What surprises me is that some people can sleep

at night after doing this. At some point decent behavior has to win -

[karynnj]

100. "Rich and not connected to the people"

That sounds familiar. We should get a link next time EE's comments come up. Rather strange for a multimillionaire.

[fedupinBushcountry]

94. Well she explained during the campaign.

http://c-span.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=Elizabeth+Edwards&image1.x=31&image1.y=8

In the townhall meeting and call in segment video. She discusses it around 1:12 and 1:14 minutes into it.

[WildEyedLiberal]

75. This is deeply disappointing to me.

I will go to Barnes and Noble soon and do a drive-by reading - is there an index where I can look up all mentions of JK/THK and see what is being said? That's usually what I do with new political books - go to B&N, look up Kerry in the index, and see if what's said is positive, neutral, or negative. That determines my further interest in the book.

After reading this thread, I predict I will be inclined to interpret the book the way beachmom did - I admit I am incredibly sensitive to any criticism of JK, and besides, I HATE this kind of condescending pandering to the working class. Firespirit summed up nicely everything I hate about the whole "I shop at Target and eat at Wendy's so ahm jes a normal fella jes like you" tactic - it is so incredibly offensive and insulting to the intelligence of working class voters to assume that eating a cheeseburger from Wendy's makes you "one of them."

However, Mass and ElizabethinDC had different reactions so I will check the book out for myself. I'm not expecting my misgivings to be assuaged, however.

[Mass]

77. WEL, I had a different perception, but I did not see the book as

something positive for Elizabeth Edwards. I just dismissed these comments as the comments of somebody really shallow.

If now she goes on Hardball and trash Kerry (she does no the difference between Kerry and Bush's healthcare). God, how can she be that stupid to say that! She stumped on this healthcare.

It is more than disappointing in my opinion to see so much hypocrisy. It seems that even his wife cannot promote her husband without thrashing others. What is it with Edwards's supporters?

[WildEyedLiberal]

78. Definitely agree on the shallow

Her attempts to pander to the middle class with such insignificant and patronizing crap as where they eat and shop is incredibly shallow - who cares where they eat? It definitely shows a shallow understanding of the working class, if she would define "reaching out" to them as eating fast food.

The key difference I see between your reaction to the book and beachmom's is that beachmom seems to attribute direct maliceto the Kerry-related anecdotes, whereas you just see shallowness and political positioning. I am going to go to Barnes and Noble this week and read for myself - but either way, it cannot reflect well on the Edwardses. It's beyond cynical for the campaign to use her as a tool to gain sympathy as a way to get more votes. If Teresa had battled cancer I am sure she wouldn't be rushing out a book on the eve of her husband's presidential bid subtly manipulating public sympathy in order to pander to the electorate.

During the campaign I liked JRE and EE, and it disappoints me to see them reduced to crass political pandering. The Hardball interview is the nail in the coffin - she is either completely ignorant or lying. Having his WIFE act as a political hitman is beyond tacky.

[nam78_two]

102. This person sounds highly annoying...

I thought she seemed nice enough in 2004- but this is just annoying...

They aren't exactly in rags themselves are they :eyes:. Its actually kinda offensive -it isn't as though working class people define their identity as "people who eats cheeseburgers at Wendy's". :eyes:

wtf-this entire post is highly annoying (not the post but the stuff from the book)

>>>The Kerrys go to Raleigh and are planning to come to the Edwards' home. EE calls it a "modest" home (worth $1 million as we all know), and that her guest room is "not good enough" for the Kerrys, so they remodel Cate's room (totally weird, if you ask me) for the Kerrys' visit. At first she buys very nice linens but then returns it because it's too "expensive" (she names the store -- never heard of it, and frankly I don't care). The Kerrys end up not staying there, and just get changed before they have to leave again, so all of this effort was for nothing (a scheduling thing).

:wtf: Who the **** asked her to do that??? Are the Kerrys to blame for the dumb crap she comes up with -I know she isn't "blaming" them per se but the insinuations are obvious.
This is all in her head. Btw if I thought someone was coming to my home and it wasn't "good enough" for them cause I thought they were snobbish in that regard, I wouldn't remodel my home for them.
I would expect them to suck it up-its not my business to cater to snobs.

The Kerrys don't sound like snobs from this bit-she does.

[wisteria]

103. The publisher may have wanted to use the slam the Kerry's angle

in order to sell books. You know, everyone likes gossip. I am not excusing her in anyway. The comments about health care really irks me and I have lost respect for her. I think this books will be on the sales table in a short period of time. It is good that it came out now and not during a campaign. We still may have it mentioned during a campaign though and we should be prepared to courter the lies. I think their is enough documentation to do this with, though.

We may even be better off now, knowing the issues Edward's will be pushing and how he will conduct his campaign. Edward grows tiring after a while. He doesn't hold up after intense examination. If his campaign is to be based on promises to bring "The two America's" together, and help the middle class with wage increases and health care, he better have detailed information on how to accomplish his promises. People have grown cynical about promises to the middle class that never seem to be undertaken. And he had better pray we don't have to run on national security and defense issues-a major deficit of his. I would never trust this man to protect our country effectively.

[sandnsea]

105. He has a book due in November

So we'll see more of his approach then I guess.

[MBS]

106. at the rate this thread is growing,

it's soon going to exceed the entire number of posts in the DU-Edwards-group site!!

[sandnsea]

107. bwahahaha

Yeah we do get to goin' when we get to goin'. :)

[karynnj]

109. They claim that is because Edwards has a blog himself

The Kerry blog opened some time last week (and it has lots of stuff there) - we still have posts. (They're different.)

[Democrafty]

108. But this is during a campaign.

It's 2006, and Democrats should be focusing on the midterms, not what happened in '04. That, alone, is enough to make me feel sad and disappointed.

[karynnj]

110. True - compare it to Kerry's email

trying to focuss people onto winning 2006. I know Edwards is out for 2006 candidates too.

[wisteria]

111. Oh, I agree! It shows how well meaning they aren't.

They both talk about bring America together, then they go about trying to further divide our party. They are really disingenuous.

[karynnj]

112. You know it may be very good that they are out so early and

publicly. They got reasonably little scrutiny in 2004, because they were never realistically winning.A year plus of a blinding spot light has to be tough for anyone, unless they are really being themselves. So, if they are less the perky smiling people they projected themselves as, it will show.

[JI7]

113. i wonder what she thinks of people who shop at expensive places

but don't have much money. and not nearly as much money as she has.

they work long hours at jobs that don't pay much. but still like to spend a bit extra on certain things like bags, shoes, or wahtever else they may personally enjoy.

and i know a lot of non wealthy people who don't eat fast food. they think Wendy's is too expensive and serve junk . they think you are paying a lot to eat crap. they MAKE their own gourmet meals for much less.

i'm thinking of this woman i know. she is always complaining about the high cost of things. she works full day plus overtime for minimum wage. she complains about the cost of fast food food. tells me she buys her own in bulk and can make much better meals which taste better and are healthier.

[Mass]

114. The statement on the fast food bugged me because it is characteristic

of the fact that they do not understand what poverty is.

This statement must have made anti-poverty and health advocate jump in their chairs because they are trying to fight so that lower income people can afford healthy food.

Contrarely to Kucinich, their disconnect with these issues is amazing.

[karynnj]

115. They also lay themselves open to reporters following them

and seeing where they do shop and the restaurants they do go to. Nobody buys houses at those prices and then furnishes it at Target. It's also NOT even that much cheaper in the long run as cheap stuff doesn't last as long and they do have the money to pay more up front.

I remember photos of EE, her clothes were NOT from Target. I suspect that given how concerned she was about what the Kerrys would think of her house, she doesn't have the confidence to furnish cheaply.

[wisteria]

116. You know, I think they have the potential to embarrass our party and

make us look like dishonest phonies because of the snow job they are trying to shove on us. Oh, and I wouldn't put it past them to shamelessly remind people way to often of the loss of there eldest son Wade and also shove those little ones in front of the cameras as much as possible.

[WildEyedLiberal]

117. Okay, that is going a bit too far

They have refused to talk about Wade or politicize his death at all. And that won't change. The loss of a child is something that transcends politics and, while I think this put-on "we're regular folks" act is pretty phony, that does not mean that they are going to use the memory of their child for political purposes. That's not a fair thing to say.

I have to admit I lost a lot of respect for both of them because of the subtle little digs at the Kerrys, but c'mon, they aren't soulless power-crazed ghouls - if they were, they'd be Republican.