MyDD :: Elizabeth: "Why I Called Ann Coulter"

Elizabeth: "Why I Called Ann Coulter"

by littafi, Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:17:52 AM EST

I received this email from the John Edwards campaign.
I think Elizabeth's words speak eloquently and I have little to add.

<>Last night I had an important talk with Ann Coulter and I want to tell you what happened.

On Monday, Ann announced that instead of using more homophobic slurs to attack John, she will just wish that John had been "killed in a terrorist assassination plot."<>

More below the fold.

Elizabeth Edwards further explains why she called:

<>Where I am from, when someone does something that displeases you, you politely ask them to stop. So when I heard Ann was going to be on "Hardball" last night, I decided to call in and ask her to engage on the issues and stop the personal attacks. I told her these kinds of personal attacks lower our political dialogue at precisely the time when we need to raise it, and set a bad example for our children.

How did she respond? Sadly, perhaps predictably, with more personal attacks.

John's campaign is about the issues--but pundits like Ann Coulter are trying to shout him down. If they will not stop, it is up to us cut through the noise. Help us fight back--please give what you can today.

www.johnedwards.com/rightwing

There are just over 3 days left to hit our $9 million goal for the end of the quarter. If we make it, we can directly reach voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and all over the country with our detailed plans on the issues that matter. Please give what you can right now to help raise the dialogue and show that Ann Coulter-style politics will never carry the day.

www.johnedwards.com/rightwing

Why do Ann Coulter and other right-wing pundits keep attacking John? Because John's bold, specific plans hit them where it hurts: solving global warming, ending the war, building a fair economy--John's agenda threatens everything these talking heads and their corporate cronies stand for.

And they know John can win--just last week a new poll showed that John is the only Democratic candidate who beats all the possible Republican challengers--by an average of 13 points. So they are trying to take John down early. Their strategy is to sling mud and manufacture scandals--about houses, haircuts and anything else they can think of--to discredit John and take down our movement for change.

The best way to beat them is also the right way--take our message of substance straight to the voters. And that is exactly what this campaign is all about.

But we need your help to hit our goal. Please give what you can today.

www.johnedwards.com/rightwing<>

Elizabeth Edwards handled Ann Coulter with class and dignity.

Let's show her where we stand: Donate here:

http://johnedwards.com/rightwing/

Tags: Elizabeth Edwards, John Edwards, Ann Coulter (all tags)

Permalink :: 86 Comments :: Post a Comment

Send some love to Elizabeth: (3.00 / 6)

http://johnedwards.com/rightwing/

by littafi on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:18:26 AM EST

Elizabeth Edwards (3.00 / 4)

Mrs. Edwards let the Coultergeists out there know that they are hijacking the media with hate talk instead of discourse about the issues of the candidates.

by benny06 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:34:25 AM EST

Re: (3.00 / 3)

This may help with fundraising to an extent, but I am not sure if this "outshouting each other" on Hardball is productive. My initial sense is that this circus does some harm to the Edwards campaign.

I understand that you have to be prepared for rapid responses when something that tears at your substance is brought up by one of your opponents or an important operative on the other side. However, Ann Coulter is a gasbag and an attention hound in addition to being a loser. Engaging her in this way is, IMHO, not what you want to do. You are playing into her hands to an extent. These dumb idiots on the right punditry circuit are not going to stop, it is just going to get worse. Best to ignore the lot of them, unless they are trying to smear with specific allegations of wrong-doing, which, if left unaddressed, could affect your standing with the electorate.

by georgep on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:40:05 AM EST

Hard to tell. I do appreciate (3.00 / 4)

your thoughtful comment.

One thing we all agree on: Coulter demeans political discourse in our nation. So why is she even on Hardball?

by littafi on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:47:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't understand... (3.00 / 2)

When did it become acceptable for Ann Coulter to announce on national TV that she wished a candidate were DEAD!! - but unacceptable for Don Imus to make despicable comments toward women on a successful basketball team?

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:12:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Getting the message out - requests for funding (3.00 / 4)

Money is what is valued in our society. People vote with their dollars. The corporate elites have gotten their dollars by providing us with overpriced health care and drugs and high interest credit and lower wages. They drown serious discussion about our real problems with Faux News.

Yes, the Edwards campaign is using the Ann Coulter dustup as a fundraising tool, but consider that it is necessary. Edwards has chosen not to take any money from lobbyists and PACs who do provide the big money. Note who is getting getting the big money both on the Republican side and the Democratic side. To have a real voice in the chatter filled mass media you need money. I think taking advantage of Ann Coulter to raise money is justice. The only way that the Edwards campaign can keep the discussion on solving problems is with sufficient funds to cut through the noise.

Has Hillary spent her enormous hoard of cash on talking about a strategy to leave Iraq, or presenting a new health care plan? No, her ads have been all about framing her past in a positive way and two cute videos about choosing a campaign song. Richardson focuses on a job interview. Obama continues to sell himself and hope. If Edwards was not pushing an agenda to address real needs of the country we would be having the most frivolous campaign in the nation's history.

So when you can use the RW vitriol to fuel fundraising for the only one looking at real grownup issues in the campaign, it is justice and we should applaud. We should also donate to keep the discussion on us.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:16:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Getting the message out - requests for funding (none / 0)

Um, so you're saying that instead of raise money on his vision for ONE America, Edwards should raise money by using public sympathy to ask for money whenever someone personally attacks him? Am I wrong? I hope I misunderstood you.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:26:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Getting the message out - requests for funding (3.00 / 1)

Yes you got it wrong. He should raise money by the very noise the media likes to promote.

He will use the money to promote ONE America.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:50:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Getting the message out - requests for funding (3.00 / 1)

Exactly Pioneer!
Hey - Hillary grassroot supporters! keep sending in those hard earned buckaroos so Hillary can roll out Part 2 and Part 3 and Part 4 of her health care plan. LOL - WHILE she receives million$ from Big Insurance and Big Pharma.
btw - Edwards provided his comprehensive and detailed health care plan - for free.
From the gitgo!

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:59:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Getting the message out - requests for funding (none / 0)

The way I understand it, the plan will be in 3 parts, not 4.

Of course, it is a people-driven plan creation, so Vox Populi may even push it into 5 parts. :-)

by georgep on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 02:34:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Getting the message out - requests for funding (none / 0)

Isn't Obama calling for a "new kind of politics"?
Has he responded to Coulter's death wish for Edwards?
Obama has Secret Service protection - right?
More and more - the real Obama shines through.

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:21:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Completely agree. (none / 0)

Ann Coulter has built an anti-grievance industry. As long as idiot pundits who have nothing better to do give her press, and everyone works him/herself up into fits of righteous outrage, it will only get louder and more annoying. She needs to be ignored.

by jforshaw on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:47:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hardball (3.00 / 4)

I didn't see that Elizabeth Edwards was trying to outshout as much as telling the media this is balderdash. Coulter is a perfect person to go after since she says her comments are for entertainment, but in truth, they are more than that. To the rightwing, maybe they are. For the MSM, it's time they started paying attention to the issues, not just cheap political potshots or about Paris Hilton. Our country is in a serious mess.

by benny06 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:52:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hardball (3.00 / 2)

Republican preachers and pundits have used their perch on national TV to call for Chavez's assassination.
Coulter emulates the Republican model of American "democracy" - and Elizabeth STRIKES BACK!

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:24:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (none / 0)

Georgie_P!

John Edwards - The candidate that is most in line with our values is also the most electable.

by EdwardsSupporterCentral on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 04:31:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (none / 0)

Whan they start saying that so and so should be assasinated...it's time to hound them. Outshout them, show them up, help them hang themselves.

by Rt hon McAdder esq KBE on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:24:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why" (none / 0)

How does this work? Why is it at the top of the page it says 7 comments but when I scroll down there are only 5 comments?

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:49:57 AM EST

Re: Elizabeth: "Why" (3.00 / 2)

Well- it's been a busy morning for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
So - just be patient...

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:14:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why" (none / 0)

Because someone "0" rated a comment - it's hidden.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:17:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why" (none / 0)

So anyone can censor the comments if they don't like the opinion expressed?

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:23:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why" (3.00 / 4)

A trusted user can zero out a comment. I don't tend to do that - I give "ones" and add snark because I think sloppy critical thinking should be publicly mocked without mercy. And, because I also enjoy clubbing baby harp seals.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:31:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why" (3.00 / 1)

LOL
Baby kittens - run for your lives!!!

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:28:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't know if turning this into a (3.00 / 0)

fundraiser sends the right message. It would be better to ask supporters to boycott sponsors and put pressure on the companies that give Coulter space.

The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.

by Populism2008 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:17:28 AM EST

Fundraising (3.00 / 3)

If pointing out Ann Coulter's foul mouth and even worse critical thinking skills can be used by Democratic candidates to raise money for the cause, who am I to complain? Hell, I'm about ready to write a damn check...

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:22:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fundraising (none / 0)

Maybe if they can get money from people who otherwise would not give money, but... the risk is that people take the slander less serious if you actually benefit from it, and use it to benefit from it.

The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.

by Populism2008 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:32:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fundraising (3.00 / 2)

How quaint.

Nobody who's running is playing patty cake. You take the advantages you're given. Hand wringing is never good for any campaign.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:37:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know if turning this into a (3.00 / 1)

I don't either. She attacked Barack Obama and stated that because of his name, he should never use the words "religion and hijacked". That was not only racist, but xenophobic and I have not seen anyone, from the supporters to the campaign itself, launch a Press Release asking for money because Ann Coulter attacked Barack Obama. It's called Politics. It happens. Boycott MSNBC, Boycott the Sponsors, write letters, but, I'm sorry. I can see doing it once, but every time you are attacked, you send out a letter crying and asking for money, it starts looking petty. I know some Edwards Fans are going to slam me for this, but it's true.

They have gotten way obsessed with this. I see tons of posts on various different blogs where if a dissenting comment was made about Edwards , someone would post a message stating that; that very comment caused them to just send John Edwards $500.00. One poster at Huffington Post was so caught up in it, that he posted it everywhere stating different amounts each time. From 500.00 to 2,500.00 Finally, I got fed up and told him that either he was a liar or he just broke the Law because if what he was saying was true, he just maxed out after I accumulated all these donations he was claiming he sent in as a result of a negative comment about Edwards.

So, I guess that's why I'm starting to feel a little iffy about this strategy. They already reported on MSNBC that Elizabeth Edwards called in because she knew Ann Coulter would be on and she wanted instigate a fight knowing that Coulter would get even nastier so she could try to use it to raise more money. Now, I scoffed when I heard that. Then I saw a post here that said: Why I Called: By Elizabeth Edwards talking about what happened yesterday and asking people for money reminding them of the deadline and the fact that they need to reach 9 million dollars before Friday. I mean , come on!

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:42:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Taking advantage of the MSM noise machine (3.00 / 1)

Edwards does not have the corporate elites like Murdoch holding fundraisers for him. If he can use that MSM noise to raise funds to get out a real message in his campaign, I say the more power to him. Obama gets his funding just fine from his connections with the power brokers.

To each his own strategy. Why would you be complaining about Edwards approach when Obama is set to be the winner in the fundraising race? Sounds kind of petty and small-minded to me.

Of course MSNBC advertised Ann Coulter appearance. Elizabeth used the opportunity to confront Coulter. That was genuine. The fact that the Edwards campaign also used it to fundraise is brilliant and necessary for them. Shows being alert to the moment. They don't have the support of industries like coal, oil and pharmaceuticals to support them.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:03:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Taking advantage of the MSM noise machine (none / 0)

ROFLMAO,

Now now, Liarneer, We settled that argument already. Do we have to dig up those numbers again? You and I know full well that Obama gets the bulk of his money from small donors. He just has more of them that both Hillary and Edwards combined. You don't have to make up an excuse for Edwards by lying about Obamas money source. Just say you defend Edwards tactics and own it.

I really can care less. I was not responding to this Diary, I was responding to a previous comment that I actually agreed with. We are entitled to our opinions as are you.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:15:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Taking advantage of the MSM noise machine (3.00 / 1)

Obama got over 75% of his donation dollars from big donors. You check the figures, they are available. And he does have a large donor base of small donors - I never disputed that. However the industries I indicated do fund Obama and they expect a return on that money. They also have been getting a return on that money by the legislation he has supported.

And yes I feel that Edwards approach is perfectly acceptable.

You are an unpleasant poster with those on another team. This has not been my regular experience on MyDD. Usually the discussion is more civil here than on Dkos. I didn't call you names and I stated facts. Of course you are entitled to your opinion and your attitude. But when you post on a blog lots of people answer whether you want or not. You being a good case in point.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:03:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Taking advantage of the MSM noise machine (none / 0)

Your 75% figure is not true. $2300+ donors: Hillary 74%, Obama 49%, Edwards 47%. Obama has the most $200 or less donors: 22% to 14% for Edwards and 9% for Hillary. Check the facts here:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donord ems.asp?cycle=2008

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:56:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Taking advantage of the MSM noise machine (3.00 / 1)

Thanks for the link. I was going from memory. It was Hillary that was ~75% from max'd donors. 22% is excellent from small donors but it still is not where the majority of his money comes from. Nonetheless Obama has done well to get ordinary people to donate.

The issue is who are the large donors? I give credit to Obama for his fundraising operation. I still get uneasy with both Obama and Clinton as to where some of their money comes from. However they all need donations from people who can give a lot. Unfortunately that is how the game is played.

Just for people's information:
Obama 49% from max'd donors ($2300) 29% from medium donors ($200+) and 22% from small donors (<$200)
Edwards 47% from max'd donors ($2300) 39% from medium donors ($200+) and 14% from small donors (<$200)
Clinton 74% from max'd donors ($2300) 17% from medium donors ($200+) and 9% from small donors (<$200)

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 03:31:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Taking advantage of the MSM noise machine (3.00 / 1)

Open Secrets is a great site and a lot of information about the donors can be found there. It is a little confusing when looking at what appears to be corporate donations which are in fact individual donations from people working in that corporation or sector. By law, you are now required to state who you work for when making an individual donation and that's how they gather their corporate and sector information.

I know Obama is not accepting money from Lobbyists or PACs and specifically requires people to confirm that they are not being used to funnel money through them for another. I won't speak for the other candidates, especially since there are some discrepancies between what they espouse and what you are required to confirm when making a donation.

By the way, the opensecrets.org site is run by the Center for Responsive Politics.

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 04:18:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ooops, (none / 0)

Sorry,

I misspelled your user name. I kid you not, when I hit spellcheck, that's what came up and I must have accidentally clicked on it.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:20:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ooops, (3.00 / 2)

LIARneer came up when you spell-checked PIOneer?

by georgep on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 02:41:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ooops, (3.00 / 1)

Thanks, George, my thought exactly, but I just didn't want to respond.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 03:50:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ooops, (none / 0)

No,

I don't recall what I originally typed as I was watching the News and typing at the same time and got distracted. I don't care if you don't believe me.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 09:16:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ooops, (none / 0)

I don't believe you. Given the use of upper and lower case, that was deliberate namecalling. You aren't even big enough to admit it and apologize. Instead you make up a silly story that no adult would believe. And you react like a child - "I don't care if you don't believe me". Suit yourself, but one doesn't convince others nor act as a good advocate for Obama by alienating posters on the site. I guess "new politics" is only for Obama but not for his supporters, or at least not for you.

You may want to learn to respect others and what they say. Then they may be willing to hear and consider what you say.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 02:05:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know if turning this into a (3.00 / 1)

Ignoring her has not worked and she continues to get on MSM.

I think the best strategy is to confront her like Elizabeth did. If it improves fund raising so be it.

by BDM on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:04:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know if turning this into a (none / 0)

I agree. But, don't just do it days before the end of a Fundraising quarter, do it all the time. I don't know. I guess it doesn't matter what I think. If I were an Edwards supporter, I'd probably be defending it too.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:10:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know if turning this into a (none / 0)

Coulter has been targeting Edwards with inflammatory comments since 2003.
Perhaps when Coulter mocks Obama's "dead child" - he may respond.

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:34:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know if turning this into a (none / 0)

Obama doesn't have a dead child and I don't know what you are implying. Besides, AC made that specific comment three years ago. I could see it if EE argued about the "wishing John were killed in a terrorist attack". That was what she should have attacked because AC had just said it the day before. Then, she could have tied that into the death of her son. You know?

But now, guess what? Right now, on MSNBC, they are bringing up the dead son story and trying to explain it away by saying that John Edwards exploited his sons death to win an election. Now, they are going to reassert the same thing whenever EE talks about her cancer and suggest theirs a pattern of exploiting sympathy to get votes or even worse, cash.

Okay, John Edwards is not my candidate, but he is a Democrat and I really don't like when our Democrats give free fodder to the Republicans to attack the Democratic Party. I know he needs money for the Primaries now, but he should not be doing things that will give free fodder to the Republicans to use against our party in the future.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:13:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know if turning this into a (none / 0)

That's why she called. It's pretty safe to assume it was a response to the GMA.

Well that is going to be jim dandy.

Giuliani2008.

Forza America!

four years of Fascism awaits.

by Rt hon McAdder esq KBE on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:31:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know if turning this into a (none / 0)

Hey, at least we had Paris. :-)

by georgep on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 06:13:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Whyr" (3.00 / 1)

Apparently if you criticize Elizabeth your post gets deleted, so let me put it this way. Imagine the furor there would be if MSNBC advertises Hardball with Chris Matthews saying "Last night I had an important talk with Ann Coulter". You don't have an "important" talk with a clown. I guess the Edwards camp is praying Paris Hilton will say something negative tonight about John so they can put her on the front page of their website after Elizabeth calls in to have a meaningful and important dialog with her.

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:21:41 AM EST

Re: Elizabeth: "Whyr" (none / 0)

I guess the Edwards camp is praying Paris Hilton will say something negative tonight about John so they can put her on the front page of their website after Elizabeth calls in to have a meaningful and important dialog with her.

Uh, that really rich figment of popular culture didn't spout off about a candidate and his family on a cable news show.

Let's reduce it to an even further absurdity. Why don't you throw in Attila the Hun?

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:27:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Whyr" (none / 0)

Well when I used Don Imus to draw the parallel it got deleted so I was forced to go to the even more absurd.

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:32:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Whyr" (3.00 / 2)

Uh, the absurdity is in your hypothetical extension.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:35:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Whyr" (3.00 / 2)

I also compared the Don Imus deal - but my comment hasn't been deleted - yet.
But apparently it IS unacceptable for Imus to make disparaging comments about women, but ACCEPTABLE for a Repub "author" to wish a Democratic candidate were DEAD!
When a judge was shot and killed, what happened to the Republicans who had called for the demise of "activist judges"???
Zilch!

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:43:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Whyr" (none / 0)

Hmmm.... criticize Edwards and your comment disappears. I've had almost all my comments on him gone- meanwhile the most vile vicious stuff about Hillary stays up- obviously you can say anything you want about her- no matter if it is true or not- plus you get to make attack diaries on her and God forbid a praising diary of hers goes up- the other day at one point, every single recommended diary was on Edwards- there is a lot of unfairness going on here.

by reasonwarrior on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:33:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, it's a conspiracy. (none / 0)

Are you as paranoid and, well, just plain dumb, as you sound?

by littafi on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 12:52:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: " (none / 0)

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:32:59 AM EST

Sorry Elizabeth (1.00 / 1)

Elizabeth Edwards' husband is running for President of the United States. Elizabeth decides to pick up the phone, of her own volition (unbeknownst to John or his campaign team) and call in to a show that is featuring the biggest smear-whore in America. The smear-whore accuses Edwards of being a corrupt lawyer and the crowd applauds.

How would Obama have handled this? He would have said, if asked, that he was not affected by Coulter's comments. Would Michelle Obama have reached for the phone and placed that call to Coulter? Not very damned likely.

How about Hillary. Coulter has bashed and smeared Hillary hundreds of times, with zero response from the Clinton camp. The only time Hillary spoke out against Coulter was when she went after the New Jersey 9/11 widows, at which point Hillary issued a statement against Coulter.

Our candidates should be Presidential at all times.

by samueldem on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:12:46 PM EST

Re: Sorry Elizabeth (3.00 / 1)

counter-attack, EE style. What a family.

by kostner on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:22:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry Elizabeth (3.00 / 1)

Apparently, you don't get it. Fox News is flooding Hillary with fundraisers and donations. It's all a game.
And yet - some "progressives" think Hillary will promote media reform. ha!

Hillary/Obama08

by annefrank on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:47:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry Elizabeth (none / 0)

Hillary is one of Rupert Murdoch's pets.

by Rt hon McAdder esq KBE on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:32:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth (3.00 / 0)

If my post, above, is deleted, I will open a diary about the importance of being Presidential
at all times.

by samueldem on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:17:39 PM EST

Re: Elizabeth (3.00 / 2)

Yeah, your post is really presidential! Let's attack surrogates of candidates for trying to bring a little reasonableness back to campaigns.

I hope you aren't speaking on behalf of, or supporting any candidate.

by aldon on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:36:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth (none / 0)

He's responding to concerns expressed in the above comments.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:15:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth (3.00 / 1)

Being presidential means not responding to attacks? Since when. That was the complaint about Kerry that he did not respond quick enough.

Also I have seen Obama supporters delight in highlighting Obama's "smackdowns". I hate that term, it is too much wrestling theater for me. Nonetheless I applauded when he responded to McCain and to Faux News.

Presidential is the ability to stay gracious in the face of absurdity. Obama has done well. So has Edwards. And so has Hillary. Any one of them would represent us well in the WH. I have not seen that much of Michelle but she seems to be quite gracious as well. And I love Elizabeth's classiness and fiestiness. The personalities are different and they are in play during the campaign. You may have you own definition and rules for being presidential, but many think Elizabeth is great.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:14:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth (none / 0)

Okay,

But if Barack Obama took those clips and sent them in a fundraising e-mail highlighting that he wants to meet a certain financial goal, I would think it very cheesy. One of the things I like about Obama most is , in his e-mails, he places emphasis on the number of people and not on the dollar amount he's seeking to raise.

Here's a personal story. This is why I cringe when I read e-mails telling me to hurry up and give so that we can reach a certain amount for a certain purpose. I was at a Church Service and the Preacher, after giving his sermon, conducted the Offering. He expressed how the "Spirit of the Lawd" was on him and he ( the Preacher) He said, and I remember it as though it were yesterday, "Oh, that the Lord would touch ten people who would give $15.00 so we can meet the needs of the Church this month" I was young and very very dumb, but I loved the Lord and I had just cashed my check.

I had $ 350.00 left after paying my Tithes and my bills so, I felt "moved with compassion" to give $ 150.00 instead of go shopping. I walked up to him and handed it to him with tears in my eyes and guess what? He said, "Oh Glory" , looked at the money. Saw that it was a $150.00 and KEPT THE OFFERING GOING ON FOR ANOTHER TWENTY MINUETS. Still pretending the "Lawd" was asking for money. I was still crying, but not because I felt "compassion", but because I was just screwed out of $ 150.00.

It was an expensive lesson. One I never , ever had to repeat again.

Here He Is

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=h ttp://www.jerrybarnard.org/CustomerImage s/1240-1052/images/img_radC659B.jpg& imgrefurl=http://www.jerrybarnard.org/&a mp;h=180&w=147&sz=10&hl=en&a mp;start=2&tbnid=i-PjegLkE9x6oM:& ;tbnh=101&tbnw=82&prev=/images%3 Fq%3D%2BJerry%2BBarnard%26gbv%3D2%26svnu m%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:37:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth (none / 0)

I've never given a dime to a church. That's your own damn fault.

by Rt hon McAdder esq KBE on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:34:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth (none / 0)

Well, maybe you are not a Christian. That's YOUR own darn fault.

My point is, I learned from my mistake and that's why I don't like the smell of these types of e-mails.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 09:41:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth (none / 0)

So you are admitting you are a sucker?

That's great.

I'll follow your opinion. not.

by Rt hon McAdder esq KBE on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:35:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Open your own diary, then (none / 0)

Your "threats" are like saying you will hold your breath until we agree with you. Go for it.

Your comments are rather silly.
No, let's be blunt. Stupid fits.

by littafi on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 12:54:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Random Reactions (3.00 / 2)

I suspect that if many of us joked that we wished Rudy Giuliani had been in the World Trade Centers when the planes crashed, or that we wished Dick Cheney's secret hideout had been in an empty field just outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania, not only would we have conservatives crying foul, we would probably have Homeland Security checking us and either be added to a no-fly list, or receiving an extraordinary flight courteously of the CIA. I'm pretty tolerant of hate speech, but I believe that we need to stand up very strongly against it.

One of my favorite exchanges where a man of reason outshouted a leading supplier of hate speech is the one that Joseph Welch had with Sen. McCarthy. You can watch or read that exchange here.

Yes, Elizabeth Edwards was calmly yet forcefully outshouting Ann Coulter the same way that Joseph Welch was outshouting Joe McCarthy, and I hope the longer term effects are similar.

by aldon on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:24:22 PM EST

Re: Random Reactions (none / 0)

I can't believe I had to sit through almost ten minuets of crap from the 1950's to get to the point you wanted to make. There is absolutely, no comparison whatsoever, between the conversation between EE and AC and that flash from the ugly past that my ears was just now tortured with. LOL.

If you'll excuse me, I'm going to watch a few clips from one of the last Democratic Presidential debates to get that disgusting sounding old accent out of my brain. Oh wait. Hillary's voice has the same effect. Arg! You have ruined my hearing. Shame on you. (jk)

In all seriousness though, I just don't don't think it helps. I think it hurts them because now, they are playing it all over the Media, but guess which clips they are showing? The one where AC is talking more smack about Edwards so now, everyone is hearing even more negative stuff about him.

Then, they will get her on T.V. and guess what? She will add more stuff about Edwards and then guess what? There will be stories about that. Then guess what? There will be another e-mail. Then guess what? People will start getting sick of it. Then guess what? Every time they see Edwards on T.V. they will think he's a weak baby who cries every time he is insulted or a little boy that needs Mommy to defend him. Then guess what? When he's attacked at the next debate and he strikes back, he will look like that little crybaby again and no one will pay attention.

Oh, wait. You know what? On second thought.......

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 12:53:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Random Reactions (3.00 / 2)

I can't believe that you thought you had to watch the whole exchange when the transcript was immediately below it. Personally, I enjoyed watching the whole exchange, because history is important to me, but that's a different story.

In all seriousness though, I do believe it will help. 93% of the people on the MSNBC poll are siding with Mrs. Edwards. The freepers are only able to freep 7% for their lady.

You might not be tired of the politics of personal attack, but most American's are, and it is great to see people starting to stand up to it, whether it be Coulture, Imus, or hatemongers of the past.

by aldon on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:17:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Random Reactions (none / 0)

Okay. I hope so.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:38:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Random Reactions (3.00 / 1)

Joseph Welch you sir are just legitimizing Mr McCarthy...Joe Kleinisms.

yeah. That's a winner.

by Rt hon McAdder esq KBE on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:37:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why I (none / 0)

I watched the segment...and while I appreciate the effort to confront Anne, I rubbed me the wrong way. It just doesn't seem presidential. I couldn't image Barack or Michelle Obama doing likewise. Nor, could I image the Bush's doing anything like this. I think Anne is best left ignored - at the end of the day this only helps the Edwards and Ann Coulter, not our nation's politics.

"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama

by gb1437a on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:03:27 PM EST

Re: Elizabeth: "Why I (none / 0)

Trouble is that they have all done such things. And you know it. SOOOO transparent.

by Rt hon McAdder esq KBE on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 05:38:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why I (none / 0)

WOW!

You are really on a (t)ROLL toay.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 09:43:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elizabeth: "Why I (none / 0)

[today]. I figured I'd correct myself lest thou doth it for me.

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 09:44:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Edwards v. Coulter (none / 0)

As the Edwards campaign is now mudfighting with Coultergiest in order to garner money and attention, the next logical step is for them to show up at a WWF spectacle and engage in chair fighting.

The choice is simple: A President who voted for the worst of Bush's odius agenda, or one who didn't.

by Liberal Avenger on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 06:06:22 PM EST

Re: Edwards v. Coulter (none / 0)

If participating with hate-spewing media-created morons is the best tactic to take, why did John Edwards back out of the Fox News sponsored debate? It would have been the perfect time for him take on the moderators. I thought I read something about not giving them credibility but perhaps I was wrong.

by Doug Dilg on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 07:53:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Why I Called Ann Coulter" (none / 0)

There is no way the candidate who gets into a publicly televised pissing match with Ann Coulter is ever going to be our next President. I know you all love John and Elizabeth Edwards but it seems they can't even figure out what they keep doing to harm their own campaign.

If John Edwards, with his huge heart for the poor, really wanted to make a political statement that would rock the country, he would have sent out his fundraiser emails as he did, with all proceeds to be donated to a specific charity. He could have set up the homepage on his website with stories of specific children or disadvantaged people who would be directly receiving the money raised off of Ann Coulter's hatred.

That would be "fighting bad with good". Instead he chose to use the Coulter smears to help himself get elected. As a result he stands to make maybe another hundred grand (am I being generous - I don't know), before the second quarter fundraising deadline on Saturday.

If he hadn't been so damned self-serving, he could have edged his poll numbers up by using this as an opporunity to help poor people. The publicity would have been amazing.

I am very glad he was never my preferred candidate because I'd have had to dump him long ago.

by samueldem on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 11:43:32 PM EST

Re: "Why I Called Ann Coulter" (none / 0)

It's interesting to compare the differences of the 3 candidates websites right now: They all are featuring their donation drive, they all have links to ads or promos, but only Edwards has no featured section on Issues. Obama has a link to his speech on Taking Our Government Back. Hillary links her Stem Cell Pledge. Edwards has Ann Coulter Attacks with an update banner across the top.

by Doug Dilg on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 12:04:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL!! (none / 0)

Edwards runs a campaign of issues. Obama offers bipartisanship and vague hope. Clinton says she is inevitable, like a plague.

You make me laugh with your weak attempts to attack John Edwards.

by littafi on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 12:56:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOL!! (none / 0)

I guess Ann Coulter is now an issue? I just described accurately what is featured on each candidates website. If I'm missing the featured issue please correct me.

by Doug Dilg on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 01:03:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ann Coulter (none / 0)

If you think about it she is an issue. She represents all that is vile in the MSM. She smears all the Democratic candidates, with particular emphasis on Edwards. However, there she is, given a whole hour to promote her book filled with hatred towards the left and Democrats. No other Democrat is calling her out.

Coulter's particularly vile comment about wishing Edwards being assassinated could not be ignored and at the same time it left an opening to challenge her. Those kinds of things you have to take advantage of when they happen. Just as Obama did with McCain. The point of challenging Coulter is that it points out the bias in the media across the board. Kudos were given to Obama when he called out McCain. I find it interesting that Edwards in his response tonight defended Obama and Hillary as well. However here there is no willingness to give Elizabeth or Edwards for standing up to Coulter. Just something to think about - the smallness of politics.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 02:18:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ann Coulter (none / 0)

- the smallness of politics.

Exactly. That's why they won't entertain it. You know what's worse than wishing John Edwards would be killed in a "turr-tack"?

Calling a presidential candidate a TERRORIST!

"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama

by BlueDiamond on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 02:59:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Elizabeth Edwards (none / 0)

Yes, Coulter is the featured highlight on johnedwards.com homepage, where you can get to listen to Coulter spew her hatred by clicking on the video, also provided on edwards homepage.

It's pretty basic, fundamental stuff that is inherent in human nature - in all of us, ie: You strike me. I strike back. You strike me again. I go on Hardball and strike you again. Then you strike back and write a column about the fight (expect Coulter's next column to be all about Edwards) and on and on and on.

Human nature. Absolutely.

But John Edwards "is asking to be President". Isn't that what he said about Hillary and Obama during the debate?

And tonight, Elizabeth Edwards went to dailykos.com and opened a diary and it was hard to know from reading her comments and all the other comments (it was a busy diary!!), why she chose tonight to blog on kos. Damage control? A final push for donations?

I am left with the same question that always comes to mind when I study John and Elizabeth and their faltering campaign .... who are these people?

by samueldem on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 01:24:00 AM EST

Re: Elizabeth Edwards (none / 0)

The campaign is not faltering. And who are these people? If you really want to know then read their books. Or go to Dkos and read some of the diaries. They are informative. If you want I can recommend some.

They are two sincere individuals who have had success and great tragedy in their lives. They feel blessed and believe that a calling to public service should be answered. They have already changed the nature of this campaign. Do you think anyone would be talking about health care if Edwards was not in the campaign? Do you really believe that issues on poverty and the middle class would be discussed? Without Edwards this would have been a personality driven campaign with little substance for the people.

And yes his approach to fund raising is different than the mostly high end events for Obama and Hillary. I appreciate the differences. However I think while Obama dreams of transformation, Edwards will deliver on it.

I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives

by pioneer111 on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 02:27:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.