ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Edwards decries Hillary's 'double-speak'

Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 1:39 PM by Mark Murray

From NBC/NJ's Tricia Miller
Cheraw, SC -- Campaigning here this morning, Edwards decried “the politics of double-speak” he said was displayed in Tuesday night’s debate in Philadelphia.

“Now I have a really simple rule,” he said. “When you get asked a yes-or-no question, you can’t answer it yes-and-no. That doesn’t work, and we saw some of that the other night.”

“What I heard was Sen. Clinton saying she wanted to be for change, but defending a broken system in Washington,” he continued. “Saying that she wanted to end the war, but she would keep combat troops in Iraq who would continue combat missions in Iraq. Saying that she would stand up to George Bush on the issue of going to war in Iran, but voting for a resolution in the Senate that enabled George Bush to do exactly what he wanted to do. Saying that she didn’t want to change anything about Social Security in public, but then in private saying she might be for raising the cap on the Social Security tax. See, my view is, we need to say the same thing all the time.”

The Edwards campaign released a video -- entitled the "Politics of Parsing" -- hitting Clinton on the same point.

In a media availability following the event, Edwards downplayed any implication that Clinton should be treated differently because she’s a woman. He was surprised to hear about the exclusion of Stephen Colbert from the South Carolina Democratic primary in an interview with CNN following the availability, adding with a laugh that he “kind of liked” the extra attention Colbert had brought to the race.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

I am a female voter and I think that Senator Clinton, is not the best person running for office.  I have listen and watched her over the last 12 years and she has only been the same.  She will say what she thinks is needed to convey the point she is making.  I am looking for a person who will speak the truth and not someone who says what I want to hear.  We now have a President, who many said would be someone that who like to have a beer with; look where it has put not only this nation, but the entire world.  I am not sure who I will vote for; but it will be someone with the intelligents and concern for the people of this great country.
I’m sure that it is hard to run a campaign against media darlings. Hillary is getting some attention because she’s a woman and Obama some because he’s a black. Quite frankly, some feel if they get Hillary in the White House they’re getting Bill back in. That’s a foolish assumption.  And illegal aliens given driver licenses? Is that a joke? Obama just seems like candidate lite. When Obama first addressed the Democratic conference several years ago some Democrats were already trying to promote him as a presidential candidate without being tested. So it is an uphill battle for Edwards. I think it’s silly for some to criticize Edwards for wanting to help the poor when he’s rich. Do you think a poor person could get elected? Give Edwards credit for being smart enough to make some money. If he wants to help poor people, that’s not such a bad goal for the president. If he wants to make sure everyone has health care, that’s not a bad goal either. Seems rather Christian, like although I’m sure the Christian right wouldn’t support it.  

So it comes down to who can beat a Republican candidate in a general election. The number one people to appeal to is independent voters. Bush certainly has lowered the bar as far as presidents. His job performance was bad but his alliance along with the Republican party with corporations has been to circumvent the government. Corporations don’t have to consider public policy like governments do. For an example when Reagan came out with a drug policy to promote drug testing. When corporations drug test it is the governments way of skirting the 4th amendment. Privitation is a way of putting corporations in charge instead of government because government has the weakness of having to be accountable. Of course the Bush administration has done a good job of getting around government with privacy issues too. Any Democrat might be a good step towards reclaiming our rights. However Hillary, in the past has been a little secretive. What Obama stands for is secret anyway. At least I kind of understand where Edwards is coming from and hopefully we’ll get a chance to see where he’s going.


Hillary is toast my butt! Everyone had piled on including the Media that only wants a horse race and rest of you seem to somehow take Hillary’s 30 seconds to the extreme… some perspective please?  They all at some point in time, McCain, Bush, Giuliani, Romney almost a majority of Congress,  had earlier this year supported Immigration Reform and now almost everyone of them have decided to conveniently flip their stance since now it’s a political  hot potato…”so say Lou Dobbs and so say we all”.  The mass of spineless, Clinton haters that have managed to turn some liberals into back stabbing idiots and water carriers for the Right is telling.  What??…did some of you forget who’s in the White House at the moment and who we’re running against?  

What a sorry bunch we’ve become. We deserve 100 yrs of Republican rule if we loss this one!
I love it!  Everyone talking about H.C. waffeling etc.
Give me one thing John Edwards has any solid plan for.  Oh yeah that's right he doesn't have Elizabeth bashing H.C., so in desperation he has to start looking like a man and try his own attacks.
I bet he came home and sat on mommy Elizabeth's lap and asked her forgiveness for being so harsh.  She patted him on top of his little $400 hair cut in their 36 million dollar home, and said "it's ok John they're looking at you just keep talking about how we are helping the poor.  Oh yeah I hope they don't mention the hedge fund again.  If Tim hadn't been all over H.C. you may have had to answer why you headed a hedge fund.  Boy we slipped by that one didn't we?"  
I admirer of his when he was running with Kerry. Now all I see is spinless man he is.  Yes folks he does more whinning than H.C.
Everything John Edwards is claiming about Hillary has been manipulated so far away from the truth that his honest and integrity are now seriously in question. The man is a desperate and very malevolent candidate right now.  The new polls out today show Hillary maintaining her incredible strength, right across the board.

John Edwards:  He is leading nowhere, not even in Iowa or his home state(s).  In S.C., he is polling at 7% - SEVEN PERCENT!  The support he "does" have is not hard support - or at least 37 percent of it isn't.
He does not lead in any demographic group - NOT one - even the poor (they prefer Hillary).

And he has very little money.

Rant on John Edwards.  Your days are numbered.
Bob Tiratto you are so right on!!  If these people  did listen to what Edwards has to say, they would come to realize that he is REAL..on all and every subject. Look at Hillary in that video...she is pathetic. Obama can't compete, it is clear he has no experience... and I cringe when I think of either Clinton or Obama as our next president. They are the ultimate posers. And to the guy who thinks John Edwards "beats his wife".... you are an idiot for sure.
Amen to previous posters that indicated if you don't know where Edwards stands on the issues you aren't paying attention!  He has had the most extensive policy proposals on Healthcare, dealing with National Security, Poverty, the list can go on.

To those who want to call this negative or desperate.  Quite frankly, he, Obama, and any other candidates MUST shock the system with things like this just to get the Media to go, "Oh yeah, there are other candidates." and "Maybe Hilary doesn't have a lock on this thing.  What were those other guys saying again?"   It's not desperate, it's smart.  If the media isn't going to do their job, one of the candidates has to step up.  I believe John Edwards should be the Democratic nominee for many reasons.  With this video he gave me another.  He and his campaign no full well that all of this could blow back on him, but he's willing to do it even if it benefits a candidate other than him, as long as Hilary isn't allow to cruise through this thing without taking stands and making commitments to the Democratic party and it's voters.
Now you get the picture! A Washington self serving Paper Hanger. Two Faces, Two Votes, One ""LIAR"", open conjecture.

You want this for a PRESIDENT???

TWO BAG"S One full of lies and scandal, the other Washington Self serving paper hanging hidden agenda's!!

Now this is desgusting!
I refer every one to the NYT op-ed piece by Frank Rich (Sunday 11/4/07) entitled 'Noun + Verb + 9/11 + Iran  = Democrats' Defeat?'

The conclusion is brilliant.  And I quote:

    "Potentially facing that Republican (the nominee) may be a Democrat who is not in favor of rushing to war in Iran but, now as in 2002 may well be in favor of walking to war.  In any event, she (HRC) will not have been a leader in making the strenuous case for an alternative policy that defuses rather than escalates tensions with Tehran.
    Noun + verb + 9/11 - also, Mr. Bush's strategy in 2004, lest we forget - would once again square off against a Democratic opponent who was for a pre-emptive war before being against it."

Man, no wonder journalists get paid for their prose while I, alas, must keep my day job.  For all of you Hillarophiles (both genuine as well as the men haters) please, I implore you to wake up to the duplicitous manner of Hillary and her campaign.  Not only do Hillary's positions on foreign policy smack of unprincipled political expediency but one must consider that it is dangerous for an American presidential candidate to so straddle an issue of this magnitude.  

If this is any indication of Hillary's potential for leadership and she does happen to get elected (God, I hope not) then 'fasten your seatbelts', it's going to be a bumpy 4  years.  Therefore, I ask that everyone choose the candidate who exhibits the most principled stands and for those of you who must have a woman candidate (certainly a childish concept based on traumas of the past or the need for some inane symbolism), please present a woman (and I know there are plenty out there) who is worthy of Democratic support.  We need a candidate who takes a clear stand for diplomacy and who is committed to using force, only as a last resort.
Obama '08
Babbling, back pedaling, vote swapping, Ideas of grandeur, misconception of the military commanding generals, failure to understand the written laws and regulations on immigration, constant conjecture and scandal.

This is what resides in Washington ""NOW""! Why would America want this failed track record as the next President. Many Issues have been stated, the lack of leadership traits and history, America has stumbled  backwards by letting those running to become the next President.

Issues of conjecture reside as they will not address priority concerns. Major failure of present policy and failure to enforce Federal law on national security, our nation never before has seen Washington fail in such a horrible display of unity!

Those in Washington use their office and position as self serving to their hidden agenda's. None of these agenda's reflect addressing ""With solution"" as to :Poverty, Homeless, Failed national Security, Industry, moral Being, infrastructure!

Yet, While we watch unqualified people spew low level dialogue, misleading agenda we Americans stand mute ""like lost sheep being taken again to slaughter.

Question: Are you going to set silent and do nothing only to complain again when it's too late!

Washingtons power is our tomorrow, shall we continue living their lies and poor judgement? Sending one who resides at present to serve as the next President ""would induce more of the same failure!!!
Babbling, back pedaling, vote swapping, Ideas of grandeur, misconception of the military commanding generals, failure to understand the written laws and regulations on immigration, constant conjecture and scandal.

This is what resides in Washington ""NOW""! Why would America want this failed track record as the next President. Many Issues have been stated, the lack of leadership traits and history, America has stumbled  backwards by letting those running to become the next President.

Issues of conjecture reside as they will not address priority concerns. Major failure of present policy and failure to enforce Federal law on national security, our nation never before has seen Washington fail in such a horrible display of unity!

Those in Washington use their office and position as self serving to their hidden agenda's. None of these agenda's reflect addressing ""With solution"" as to :Poverty, Homeless, Failed national Security, Industry, moral Being, infrastructure!

Yet, While we watch unqualified people spew low level dialogue, misleading agenda we Americans stand mute ""like lost sheep being taken again to slaughter.

Question: Are you going to set silent and do nothing only to complain again when it's too late!

Washingtons power is our tomorrow, shall we continue living their lies and poor judgement? Sending one who resides at present to serve as the next President ""would induce more of the same failure!!!
hey hillary 08, if she has had over a year or years to make her stance on issues then why cant she make it clear in a 2 hour debate? Is it that she has a stance but she "forgets" her political beliefs or is it that she has none and she goes where the wind is blowing in the area she is...looks odd to me.
Regarding this quote from NYT: "Clinton needs to ration her obfuscations. Otherwise, she risks looking as silly as she did at the end of the debate, when she gave a perfectly rational explanation of why she once said that New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s plan to allow illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses “makes a lot of sense,” then raised her hand a minute later to add that the fact that she understood why Governor Spitzer was trying to do it did not mean that she thought it should actually be done."--One can say that the plan "makes a lot of sense, affirm over an over again that one understands what the plan is trying to accomplish, and still quite rationally assert that the plan should not be carried out. The reason is that there may be a number of such plans, all of which make a lot of sense, and one may need to choose among them, based of their tradeoffs. If this was doublespeak on the part of Clinton, that can't be the reason (let's hope!).
I feel like this Hillary is doing a great job she is not the first and want be the last to bet around the bush


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=445146

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google