John Kerry's Running Mate...

[Guest MikeSC]

You're spreading lies about our beloved David Cassidy.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

You're spreading lies about our beloved David Cassidy.

-=Mike

BTW, interesting bit of trivia --- infamous VP lightweight Dan Quayle actually had MUCH more experience in office than Edwards has had.

 

So, I suppose we'll be getting all of the same Quayle is a child jokes for Edwards.

-=Mike

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Sure.. when Edwards matches Quayle's record of screwing up stuff

[Guest MikeSC]

Sure.. when Edwards matches Quayle's record of screwing up stuff

Well, the usage of junk science in his trials is going to be a FERTILE ground for mockery. Look up his cases dealing with cerebal palsy.

-=Mike

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Sure.. when Edwards matches Quayle's record of screwing up stuff

Well, the usage of junk science in his trials is going to be a FERTILE ground for mockery. Look up his cases dealing with cerebal palsy.

-=Mike

Yeah, because that makes for fascinating news stories.

[Guest MikeSC]

Sure.. when Edwards matches Quayle's record of screwing up stuff

Well, the usage of junk science in his trials is going to be a FERTILE ground for mockery. Look up his cases dealing with cerebal palsy.

-=Mike

Yeah, because that makes for fascinating news stories.

Oh, it will. Go over his cases where he sued doctors for causing cerebral palsy (an EXTREMELY specious argument, mind you) and you have a goldmine for satire. He was almost channeling the OTHER John Edwards at points.

-=Mike

[Vyce 0]

They're not really going to go with this "George Bush is for two Americas!" crap, are they? Because I don't see how it's going to work with Edwards, seeing as a) the economy won't be as big of an issue as it was just a few months ago, and b) Edwards, given his history and who he is, is the last person who should be preaching about the differences between rich and poor.

 

I mean.....Edwards is part of the reason that I'm paying huge chunks of money for health insurance now. And SHITTY health insurance at that.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Still, hardly anyone outside of the health care field (or the right) care about it.

 

EDIT: It being these cases. The reason being because nobody understands what, exactly, went on during them.

 

Edited for clarity.

[Guest MikeSC]

Still, hardly anyone outside of the health care field (or the right) care about it.

 

EDIT: It being these cases. The reason being because nobody understands what, exactly, went on during them.

 

Edited for clarity.

If the Dems wish to harp on rising health care costs --- as Kerry does --- the right simply has to say "Look who he's running with" to explain that.

 

And transcripts will come out of them.

-=Mike

[BX 0]

A hypothetical. If for some reason, Kerry/Edwards won, and Edwards lost his mind and advocated health care reform, would you reconsider your stance on Edwards?

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

No, because he's a democrat.

 

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

A hypothetical. If for some reason, Kerry/Edwards won, and Edwards lost his mind and advocated health care reform, would you reconsider your stance on Edwards?

If he advocated tort reform (lawsuits affect far more than just insurance), I might support him.

 

But he won't, so it's moot.

 

And is flaming necessary, Tyler?

-=Mike

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

You'd find another reason to hate him. Don't deny it.

 

 

The question is stupid anyway. It's like saying, "Well, if Bush took up a platform like Kerry's, would you support him?"

[Guest MikeSC]

You'd find another reason to hate him. Don't deny it.

He's a lightweight. If he did something that indicated any thought for others, I'd consider supporting him.

-=Mike

[Vyce 0]

The question is stupid anyway. It's like saying, "Well, if Bush took up a platform like Kerry's, would you support him?"

Would YOU?

 

If the answer is no, then blah blah blah, glass houses, stones.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Uh, no, considering I'm not really enthusiastic about Kerry's platform, either.

[NoCalMike 0]

Uh, no, considering I'm not really enthusiastic about Kerry's platform, either.

I was just about to say that.....

 

Much like 2000, it doesn't get more bland and unwatchable then Kerry vs. Bush....

[Guest MikeSC]

Since we're discussing Kerry's running mate, it's time for this question:

 

Why were no black candidates considered?

 

The Democrats are the party of minorities, but NO civil rights group has griped once about the total lack of minority representation in Democratic tickets.

-=Mike

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Pot.

 

Kettle.

 

Black.

 

And Bill Richardson was considered, so STFU.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

Since we're discussing Kerry's running mate, it's time for this question:

 

Why were no black candidates considered?

Its not a good idea to have a vice president who's penis is larger than your own.

[BX 0]

You, I, nobody knows who Kerry's committee considered for the VP job. The media did all of the speculating. So if you want to try and slap some racist drivel on someone, it shouldn't be Kerry.

 

Plus, Richardson is a Latino.

 

I'll use some Bush parlance here..

 

"You pay real good attention to details, what I'm trying to say is, you're up on the facts - and that's great, Mick."

[Slayer 0]

Since we're discussing Kerry's running mate, it's time for this question:

 

Why were no black candidates considered?

Its not a good idea to have a vice president who's penis is larger than your own.

Shame on you for bringing HD material into the CE folder

 

Shame shame shame

 

SHAME

 

I condemn you

 

*wags finger at FS and condemns him*

[SuperJerk 0]

I'm sure looking forward to 4 months of getting to hear the Republicans call the Democratic VP choice an "inexperienced, liberal, millionaire trial lawyer." [/sarcasm]

And how would any of that be false?

Not completely false, but annoyingly repetitive. (Those last two words really sum up this campaign, don't they?) Edward's "inexperience" and and status as "liberal" are interpretations of subjective concepts. He is, as a matter of public record and by his own admission, a "millionaire trial lawyer." Whether or not being an "inexperience, liberal, millionaire trial lawyer" is a bad thing is also a matter of opinion. The Democrats will attempt to present the case that it is not, while Republicans will attempt to show that it is.

 

BTW, interesting bit of trivia --- infamous VP lightweight Dan Quayle actually had MUCH more experience in office than Edwards has had.

The Quayle example may be the most compelling case for arguing that the media has or once had a liberal bias. Quayle had an excellent resume in 1988, having served 4 years in the House and 8 years in the Senate. The media became obsessed with his National Guard service, young looks, alledged wealth, and average speaking ability.

[Guest MikeSC]

You, I, nobody knows who Kerry's committee considered for the VP job. The media did all of the speculating. So if you want to try and slap some racist drivel on someone, it shouldn't be Kerry.

 

Plus, Richardson is a Latino.

 

I'll use some Bush parlance here..

 

"You pay real good attention to details, what I'm trying to say is, you're up on the facts - and that's great, Mick."

Richardson said he wasn't a contender.

 

And why no black names mentioned?

 

Do you think the press just pulls names out of the ass?

-=Mike

[BX 0]

What exactly are you driving at, Mike?

 

The Republicans didn't exactly flood the speculative list of VP candidates with black people either, did they?

[Guest MikeSC]

What exactly are you driving at, Mike?

 

The Republicans didn't exactly flood the speculative list of VP candidates with black people either, did they?

1) The Republicans "hate minorities", right? I thought a vote for Bush would be a vote for church burnings and lynchings. That's what the NAACP all but argued.

 

2) Colin Powell has an infinitely better shot at being a VP or Presidential candidate than any black in the Democratic Party.

-=Mike

[Guest MikeSC]

BTW, you want Edwards' REAL views on Kerry? This is from his website. It's a column from a newspaper that Edwards obviously supports.

Mesabi Daily News Endorses John Edwards For President 

The Mesabi Daily News today endorsed John Edwards for President. The full text of the endorsement is below.

 

We endorse: Edwards

North Carolina senator would be best candidate for Democrats in November

 

When Democrats caucus this week in Minnesota they will be on the national political radar screen as one of 10 states where presidential primaries and caucuses will be held.

 

The results will go a long way toward deciding who will be the Democratic presidential nominee in the November election.

 

We hope Minnesota DFLers give a strong boost to the John Edwards campaign. We believe the North Carolina senator would be the best candidate to carry the Democratic Party’s banner against Republican President George W. Bush.

 

We definitely feel he is the strongest of the four remaining candidates.

 

Sen. John Kerry is the clear favorite and at this point will be hard to beat. But Edwards more than rivals him in many ways and on many issues. We are also very troubled by how out of touch Kerry was with an economic development project — the proposed Excelsior Energy power plant that holds the potential of 1,000 construction jobs and 500 permanent jobs — on the Range. An energy bill currently being debated in Congress contains, because of the hard work of Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., $800 million in federal loan guarantees for the project that could serve as a vital catalyst for private investment in the $1.2 billion clean-energy coal gasification plant. Kerry was one of five senators who signed a letter last year calling the provision of loan guarantees for the Range project “pork.” That’s bull. To sign such a letter at the same time he is campaigning on investing in new jobs in the country makes him, on that issue, a “walking contradiction” — which is a label he has given to President George W. Bush.

 

Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio speaks with sincerity the language of the American worker. We applaud him for bringing that passion to the campaign. If it had not been for Kucinich, we do not believe Kerry and Edwards would now be speaking as much as they do about the grossly unfair loss of U.S. jobs overseas. Kucinich also has a hands-on knowledge of just how devastating illegally subsidized imports have been to the steel and ore industries. But the reality is he currently has two delegates — one being himself. He will likely finish the campaign with but a few more. Presidential nominee? No chance. Position in a future Democratic administration in a trade or labor role? Absolutely.

 

The Rev. Al Sharpton is a hoot in the debates. He is quick with one-liners and good-natured jabs. A black man, he also brings needed diversity in race and life’s experiences to the campaign. But voters, even in states with a large black vote, have given his campaign little credibility. He’s just a bit too “Shady Grady” to even challenge double digit vote totals.

 

We like Edwards for several reasons:

 

Trade: Kerry has been a strong supporter of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which has helped to terribly constrict the nation’s middle class, from the start. He now is trying to position himself as someone who will battle for fair trade and against the loss of American jobs. But he has been part of the problem, not the solution. It’s easy on this issue for Edwards to say he would have voted against NAFTA if he had been in the Senate back in 1993. He wasn’t. So who really knows? But we believe Edwards does have a better understanding of the embattled middle class. His upbringing and life experiences — his father was a mill worker in North Carolina and he, too, put in a stint in the plant, better puts him in touch with the everyday worker. He has connected on the jobs and trade issue with voters in several states. We believe he would continue doing that in a general election against Bush.

Electability: Kerry was the leader of the pack a year ago, then fell far and fast behind former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean last fall and into the new year, before doing a trampoline routine and bouncing back to the lead in the days leading up to the Iowa caucuses and the days and weeks following. He did so in large part because he was viewed as the most electable Democratic candidate — and especially the most electable when compared to the often erratic Dean. However, we believe that Edwards would be the most electable for the Democrats against Bush. We believe he would give the Democrats a much better chance in some border and southern states — such as North Carolina, Tennessee, Missouri, Georgia and even Louisiana — that have become fairly solid Republican presidential territory. A native son in the South, we believe he would be a much more credible candidate there than would Kerry. Edwards has also shown he can attract Independents and Republicans in certain primaries — and the Democratic candidate will not be able to build a November victory solely by rallying the party’s core believers.

Style: Edwards brings a refreshing can-do outlook to the campaign trail. He doesn’t just criticize with an angry tone — which has been far too prevalent in this Democratic field. He talks about what we can do together by being optimistic, not just negative. He exudes hope. And that is something the country is always looking for, regardless the political party of a candidate.

Lack of Washington Experience: Too often, Kerry falls back into the murky Washington bureaucracy. That can come with the territory when you have been there for decades. That experience can certainly be a plus. But we believe there is a strong need at this time for someone to come not as beholden to that bureaucratic grip. Some would argue that Edwards does not have the Washington experience to be president. However, history has often shown otherwise.

It could very well be that after “Super Tuesday” Kerry will have built a nearly insurmountable lead and his nomination will be inevitable.

 

However, we hope that is not the case. We hope that the Edwards candidacy will gain enough strength on Tuesday to move ahead, either to win the nomination or else to keep pushing Kerry to be a better candidate.

 

Minnesota Democrats can help make that happen on Tuesday.

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/page.asp?id=740

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

BTW, you want Edwards' REAL views on Kerry? This is from his website. It's a column from a newspaper that Edwards obviously supports.

So when you quote someone else on your website, that means you automatically agree with everything they say?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Gee, who knows, maybe they had to concede some points to one another. We'll see whose view on trade prevails, I guess.

[Guest MikeSC]

BTW, you want Edwards' REAL views on Kerry? This is from his website. It's a column from a newspaper that Edwards obviously supports.

So when you quote someone else on your website, that means you automatically agree with everything they say?

Um, your official website?

 

Yeah, that is EXACTLY what it means --- seeing as how his people posted it and all.

-=Mike