Posted on 05/10/2002 6:56:30 PM PDT by Pokey78
Everybody seems to be talking about Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) these days. The hotshot magazines are all writing about him, and he isn't having any problems getting face time on television.
But if the freshman North Carolina Senator really wants to emerge as his party's nominee in 2004, he needs to acknowledge the obvious: His appearance on NBC News' "Meet the Press" last weekend showed that he has a long way to go to beat out House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (Mo.), Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) and former Vice President Al Gore for the Democratic nomination.
After watching Edwards, I learned that the United States needs to "show leadership" in the war against Afghanistan. I know it, because Edwards repeated that mantra as if it had been programmed into his brain. Voters clearly want "leadership" from their leaders, but repeating a phrase like a trained parakeet does not make someone a leader.
When asked by host Tim Russert whether he would commit 2,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan if that's what it would take to get America's allies to commit more ground forces, Edwards said he would not. But he did say that the United States should convince our European allies to commit troops, and suggested that the United States could offer "logistical support," among other things. That's really crawling out on a limb and showing leadership, huh?
Leadership also isn't dodging and weaving on domestic issues, including taxes and what the Senator referred to repeatedly as "fiscal discipline."
Edwards told Russert that the Bush tax cut was "fiscally irresponsible," but he wouldn't support the plan offered by Sen. Edward Kennedy that the Massachusetts Democrat says would roll back most of the tax cut for the top 1 percent of income earners but retain it for 80 percent of taxpayers.
Mostly, the North Carolina Democrat wanted to reiterate whenever he could that he would not support Republican efforts to make the Bush tax cut permanent - with the caveat, of course, that he would "support making the tax cut permanent for about 90 percent of Americans."
Edwards is right, of course, that voters want to elect someone as president who displays leadership qualities. But that means Edwards needs to display leadership ability, both in the Senate and by proposing ideas and grappling with tough choices, not by regurgitating some phrase that Bob Shrum probably told him to use.
The problem for Edwards, and for the other potential Democratic contenders, is that voters currently believe that President Bush is showing considerable leadership.
In early July 2001, and again at the beginning of this month, Gallup asked respondents whether the phrase "is a strong and decisive leader" applied to Bush. Back in July, 55 percent said Bush was a strong leader, while 43 percent disagreed. But just two weeks ago, 77 percent of respondents said that he is a strong and decisive leader, while just 21 percent disagreed.
Bush remade himself by reacting to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in a measured yet forceful way. Incumbents often have that kind of opportunity. It's much more difficult for any challenger, Republican or Democrat, to display the same qualities.
As I watched Edwards on "Meet the Press," I recalled the first time I met him, when he was running for the Senate against then-Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C.). Back then, I was struck by how sincere he sounded, how natural he was.
I remember thinking that he was straight out of the movie "Hoosiers," a clean-cut kid who had just stepped off the basketball floor of some small-town gym. Of course, he wasn't, even then. He was a wealthy trial lawyer, an accomplished speaker and a would-be presidential hopeful. But he had a disarming quality that was irresistible. He didn't seem like a Washington insider.
But when I asked a friend of mine about Edwards as he was appearing with Russert, her response was light years from my initial one. "I don't like him," she said. "He's ... a politician."
Edwards still is handsome, articulate and Southern. He's got a great profile for a Democratic presidential nominee. But in running for the nation's top job just four years after being elected to the Senate, the North Carolina Democrat may strike too many as just another calculating politician, as a pretty boy who hopes to win his party's nomination on his looks, courtroom skills and trial lawyer money - someone with more ambition than accomplishments and maturity.
Luckily for John Edwards, the Democratic race is just beginning. He has a number of important assets in a presidential bid, and he'll have many opportunities to sell himself, to present proposals and to demonstrate his leadership potential. And he set the bar pretty low for himself with Tim Russert on Sunday.
Oh, you mean another Clinton?
Does anybody know if this jerk has submitted any interesting or important legislation during his short term as Senator?
John Edwards on 'leadership'
House Editorial
Published 5/10/2002
North Carolina's first-term Democratic Sen. John Edwards, whose recent travels from California to Florida, interspersed with visits to Iowa, clearly signal his intention to pursue his party's 2004 presidential nomination, appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday. What a disappointment.
Before Sunday's interview, Bob Shrum, whose media-consulting firm worked for Mr. Edwards during his 1998 Senate campaign (and for Al Gore in 2000), must have whispered "leadership" and "fiscal responsibility" in Mr. Edwards' ear. On foreign-policy matters, Mr. Edwards' presidential solution to any problem would be to "show leadership." Regarding the Middle East, Mr. Edwards said, "This is one of those things where I think leadership from the president is needed." Asked how, as president, he would prevent Afghanistan from descending into chaos - a development he recently charged had already occurred - Mr. Edwards replied, "What I would do is show leadership." During a brief exchange, "leadership" popped out of Mr. Edwards' mouth no fewer than four times.
In terms of the economy, the buzz phrases were "fiscal discipline" and "fiscal responsibility," variations of which were uttered by Mr. Edwards nearly 10 times. Repeatedly, Mr. Edwards cited last year's tax cut, which was timely passed in the middle of a recession with bipartisan support, though not his. Repeatedly, Mr. Russert asked Mr. Edwards if he advocated repealing the portion of the tax cut that had not yet been implemented. Despite Mr. Russert's best efforts, Mr. Edwards, who minutes earlier had been obsessed with "leadership," repeatedly refused to endorse such a move.
Asked which spending programs he would cut and which taxes he would raise in the near term, Mr. Edwards tried to weasel his way out of providing a direct answer. Instead of offering a single specific, he incomprehensibly asserted, "[I]t does no good for Democrats to have one position and Republicans to have another position." How's that? Isn't that the basis of the two-party system? In any event, wouldn't it be helpful if a presidential aspirant had a positon - Clearly, Mr. Edwards, whom People magazine identified as America's "sexiest politician," does not have the courage of his convictions - if he has any.
Mr. Edwards began actively testing the presidential waters less than three years after North Carolinians narrowly elected him to a six-year term to represent them in the Senate. So, it should hardly be surpising that his constituents today are far less infatuated with their over-ambitious senator than he is with himself. In fact, a poll conducted in North Carolina last month by home-state Elon University revealed that Mr. Edwards' approval ratings have plummeted to 43 percent, down 14 percentage points since October. Moreover, three out of five North Carolinians oppose his potential White House bid. Those who watched his performance Sunday will know why.
A question for some of the ladies out there. How does someone with a wart on his lip become the "sexiest politician"?
Sickening
Other than soaking the rich with more taxes, he didn't seem to be able to commit to anything.
The same way Chelsea Clinton is suddenly considered "sexy" - because they're liberal Democrats!
Ahhh, yet another opportunity to point out how much more depth republican women have than dem women.
You see republican women can certainly appreciate an attractive man, but we need much more than that! I know there are women out there who think bubba is so hot (the mind boggles) but I can't even get to the packaging because the content is so disgusting.
Now to some W might not be the cat's meow, but for many of us women the admiration we have for him comes from his true love for his wife, family, God and country. I won't consider him sexy because I feel that's not respectful of the man and his position. In addition, we republican women can spot a real man every time and Golden Boy Edwards ain't one and will never be one. Maybe if he cut off that ugly thing attached to his wart (his head) I could muster a glance in his direction. :-)
He's a front runer because he's not UGLY like most of the DEmocrats are.....that's why they picked Bil Clinton, also.
I still think sudden baldness would effectively end his aspirations.
The old model is so, so retro... a little tarnished, a little tatty.
Too much a reminder how they were all duped like the Soccer Moms they secretly despise.
They need a fresh start... time to "move on" to the 21st century version of Little Big Fraud®...
If Edwards doesn't pan out, there's always Kerry or Barnes--
If he were able to survive the swim through the primary waters of his own party, so infested with hungrier and more seasoned sharks than himself-I predict that he will join Gore in the failed to carry his home state club.
Blinky Edwards !
His eyelids were in constant motion. Watch for it!
I find Rummy yummy, and W double-good. I've had a long and faithful crush on Jimmy Stewart.
But Edwards strikes me, as I've written earlier, as a swishy Savannah interior decorator. A crooked swishy Savannah interior decorator.
I hope that doesn't mean he's a shoe-in!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.