Edwards: Too Cute by Half

[2rth2pwr]

(Peter Fenn)

...After all, he is the recipient of over $6.5 million in trial lawyer money by July of this year alone, and he and his surrogate organizations, One America and Alliance for America, respectively, took over $750,000 from one donor (“Bunny” Mellon, a descendant of the Mellon family of whom Edwards recently spoke disparagingly as part of the “Gilded Age” of America, though he has since dropped the reference). And, as we know, he never attempted to change the system as a senator.

Most important, he decided to take federal matching funds on Oct. 8, precisely when he knew that an independent group, run by his friend and former campaign manager, Nick Baldick, was poised to spend millions on his behalf in Iowa and New Hampshire. Lobbyist money. Independent expenditures. Special interests, as he defines them.

Not only did John Edwards fail to stop the questionable special interest activity, it appears that he was counting on it as part of his strategy to win Iowa.

These 527 organizations are part of the political landscape for both parties. They exist. They are legal.

What I object to is the self-righteous quality of the Edwards campaign and the hypocrisy of taking the money while railing against the very practice he is embracing — and making “the corrupt system” the very centerpiece of the campaign! He is pretending to “bite the hand that feeds him.”


Appearing on CBS’ “Early Show” Monday, Edwards said he has no control over those organizations — one of which is run by Nick Baldick, a Democratic strategist who managed Edwards’s 2004 campaign. http://pundits.thehill.com/2008/01/02/edwards-too-cute-by-half/

“It’s my understanding that the guy who runs the organization worked for me years ago. Yes, that is true,” Edwards said when asked about the connection.

Edwards’ campaign retained Baldick’s firm earlier this year to provide political strategy consulting. Edwards spokesman Eric Shultz said Edwards was referring to Baldick’s role as campaign manager in 2004.

Good grief. This response from Edwards stretches one’s patience — “the guy worked for me years ago”??? Come on, John, this smells — and it runs totally counter to what you say you are campaigning against. You could have stopped it with one phone call. You could have prevented it from happening months ago when you knew what they were up to in October. But instead you dialed up the rhetoric on the other candidates and how they were examples of Washington corruption but argued you were clean precisely when your campaign was hatching the plot to pour millions into a separate, special-interest media blitz....

This may get you through Iowa but, in the end, you will box yourself in and you will get called on it.

[jgraz]

1. More worthless crap from the corporate media

He gives himself (and you) away in the first sentence with his comment on "trial lawyer money". That's someone who's deeply invested in the corporate fiction about lawsuit abuse. That's someone who knows that his audience is not those whom the "trial lawyers" defend, but the moneyed interests who want to go on poisoning and polluting and killing with impunity.

[K8-EEE]

4. Yep! "Trial Lawyers" (for you and I) = BAD! Corporate Lawyers

are fine....GOP fiction....

[jgraz]

6. Sad that there are even 7 people on DU who agree with this

[truedelphi]

7. Not all corporate lawyers are bad - but the ones that we are

Thinking of when we think "Establishment" and/or Bush, are rotten to the core.

[cali]

11. It's all rather academic.

Edwards is not a viable candidate. He will not make it past Super Tuesday. Taking matching funds doomed the campaign. If I'm wrong, you can taunt me mercilessly. Of course, I wouldn't say it if I weren't damned sure you won't get the chance.

[jgraz]

18. I plan to taunt you mercilessly no matter what

But I do think (hope) that Edwards' message will overcome any money issues. Like a lot of people, I'm becoming less and less enthused about Obama.

[cali]

23. They are all flawed. There is no savior. They are all better

than any of the pukes.

[jgraz]

31. Too bad. Cuz we really need a savior.

I think Edwards is as close as we're going to get this time around.

[penguin7]

21. The interests of trial lawyers are not the same interests as those of the People

The lawyers sue the wealthy corporations for the same reason Jesse James robbed banks. this is where the money is, no more no less.

This idea that trial lawyers are on some higher moral plan is dishonest and sickening.

[jgraz]

30. And your evidence for that statement would be??

What's that? You just pulled it out of your ass? I thought so.

[penguin7]

32. And your evidence contrary?

It is the lawywers that pull out of their ass the idea that they exist on some higher moral plane.

[jgraz]

33. Sigh...go look up the Null Hypothesis and come back when you understand basic logic.

[penguin7]

34. HUH???

[jgraz]

35. My point exactly.

[aquart]

2. "Trial lawyer money." Wow.

Seriously, using Republican insults?

But it's good to know that the people most interested in keeping our courts available to ordinary non-wealthy Americans are donating to Edwards? I'm impressed. Thanks for the info.

[Cha]

3. The m$$$$$$$$$$m isn't paying

attention. They can't keep up with all the bushits dealing they have to cover up.

[keith the dem]

5. In the words of Paul Krugman:

"It may be partisan to say that a 527 run by labor unions supporting health care reform isn't the same thing as a 527 run by insurance companies opposing it. But it's also the simple truth."

Good response to your repug post here: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/122407N.shtml

[pnwmom]

8. He couldn't have stopped it if Baldick chose to go ahead anyway.

The law prevents Edwards from controlling the actions taken, or not taken, by 527's.

Even picking up the phone might put Edwards in legal jeopardy.

[Triana]

10. True. And that's exactly what he said when Creepy Crowley interviewed him..

...yesterday.

There isn't much he can do but speak PUBLICLY about it and he has. To do much else is illegal.

[Triana]

9. Republican catchphrases, Republican talking points, black-and-white thinking...

....shouldn't this have been posted at FreeRepublic? I think so.

It's been explained to death here on DU and verily debunked (and is AGAIN in this thread).

"trial lawyer" money. Gee. Can ya post something with a bit more of a rightwingnut sneer & smear tone?

Perhaps you'll get more traction with it at freerepublic.com

Pffft!

[JDPriestly]

12. The 527s are not supported by corporate lobbyists' money.

One is Carpenters Union, another is SEIU and the last is sponsored by Bunny Mellon who was a close friend of Jackie Kennedy and who is a well known philanthropist who supports poverty alleviation organizations.

Edwards does not control them and more than he controls me when I go out and campaign for him. I print my own materials. I pay for it out of my own money. I have a First Amendment right to stand on a street corner or go door to door and pass out my flyers on my own. That is not campaign money. Am I an Edwards supporter? Yes. Does Edwards pay or control me? No. The 527s work the same way. They do not contribute to Edwards and they do not pay him money.

The lawyers that donate to Edwards are not giving on behalf of corporations. Lobbyists have to be registered. Edwards does not accept money from registered lobbyists. Many lawyers sue corporations, handle local real estate deals, divorces, child custody matters, personal injury plaintiff's cases, plaintiff's employment cases, trusts and wills all kinds of things. There is nothing wrong with taking donations from lawyers. That lawyers like Edwards so much is a very good sign. He is well respected in his profession.

Who better to trust with the Constitution, the environment and with consumer rights than a lawyer whose mission was suing irresponsible corporations?

Obama and Clinton are also getting lots of support from lawyers who went to Harvard with him.
___

Even at Jones Day, the 2,167-lawyer firm that represents the Republican National Committee, attorneys have given 3 1/2 times as much to the three Democratic frontrunners, including $131,333 to Obama. The Cleveland-based firm's lawyers donated more than twice as much to Bush than to Gore in 2000 and slightly more to Bush in 2004.

Overall, lawyers in and out of large firms have given $18.27 million to Democrats Clinton, Obama and John Edwards, compared with $5.75 million to Republicans Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney. Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina and a trial lawyer, leads the pack, backed mainly by attorneys who sue on behalf of shareholders and individuals.

The donations of big firm lawyers mirror those of the largest Wall Street investment bankers who have also backed Democrats this year. Employees at the top 10 Wall Street investment banks gave more than $1.4 million to Democrats and a little more than $900,000 to Republicans, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=&sid=aRD.xjIxojM0

Please note: Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina and a trial lawyer, leads the pack, backed mainly by attorneys who sue on behalf of shareholders and individuals.

[Triana]

13. THANK YOU JDPriestly...

...bookmarking for future debunking purposes (tho I hope this rediculousness has been finally debunked here on DU).

[gmudem]

16. Great post JD

You are one of the more eloquent posters i have come across on DU. It's great to see somebody who can express their reasons for supporting Edwards in such a great way.

[avaistheone1]

45. Good point..

[Onlooker]

14. To be a frontrunner, you have to be a hypocrite

And Edwards career is blatant hypocrisy. Now that he's running for President, suddenly he swings to the left, with a negligible record in that regard.

[Pastiche423]

24. And look at all of the DUers that defend and support him!

His senate voting record has been posted many times, yet they always have an excuse - he's changed!

Bullshit. He is a silver tongued snake oil salesman.

Do we really want a Dem president that co-sponsored the deaths of innocent men, women, children and babies? Or one that clear cut thousands of trees for his new 28,000 sq' house while we are in the midst of Climate Change?

Keep your blinders on folks, you'll get the president you wanted, but certainly not the president our country needs.

On Edit: Thousands, not hundreds of trees.

[pnwmom]

36. Do you have a link for your claim about thousands of trees?

I googled "John Edwards" and "thousands of trees" and came up with nothing. Same with "hundreds of trees." Perhaps you have a source with the exact number of trees he cut?

Right.

:sarcasm:

[Pastiche423]

37. A source and a view

http://generalforpresident.wordpress.com/2007/01/29/john-edwards-runs-smack-into-green-value-test/

[pnwmom]

39. Your source acknowledges his source as a right wing foundation.

And it contains nothing but wild speculation.


"In Edwards’s case, the story originated with what turns out to be a right wing website, John Locke Foundation and a Carolina Journal piece published a few days ago, before making its way to political discussion sites, left and right. Subsequently, telling truth from spin or “green wash,” may prove tough. (Was it 50,000 trees clear cut from the building site? We do not know.)"

[Pastiche423]

42. What do you think happened?

All of those trees that were in a forest just fell down?

I don't know about you, but I care about Mother Earth and what is happening to her now. Cutting down trees on a 102 acre lot is anti-environment any way you look at it.

I want a president that cares about the environment and the people that live on this planet. It is quite obvious that johnnyboy only cares about himself and his twenty eight thousand square foot house.

Or, do you not believe in science?

[pnwmom]

44. He only cut trees on a portion of his property. Looks like a few acres to me.

And it doesn't look inappropriate for the retirement home of a future President of the United States.

He planned that home to please his wife of decades, who is dying of cancer. No way would I hold that against him.

[Pastiche423]

46. I see that you do not believe in science

That is all I need to know about you.

Buh bye.

[Auntie Bush]

15. Excellent reply.

That's a perfect example of what worries me about an Edwards win. I find it hard to trust him. If he wins...I hope I'm wrong...but he sounds really good.

[The River]

17. Sure Are A Lot Of Brand New Posters

flinging crap these days.
Makes a person wonder what their motives are.

[sallyseven]

19. They are repuks trying to get us upset

with the fine candidates we have. They are very outlandish in their statements.

[2rth2pwr]

20. Peter Fenn a repuke? you're high.

Peter Fenn

Since its founding in 1983, the Fenn Communications Group has become one of the nation’s premier political and public affairs media firms. It has worked on over 300 campaigns, from presidential to mayoral, elected more members of the House of Representatives than any other firm and represented a host of Fortune 500 companies.

Prior to forming the firm, Mr. Fenn was the first executive director of Democrats for the 80s, a political action committee founded by Pamela Harriman and then-Gov. Bill Clinton. Mr. Fenn also served on the staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee and as Washington chief of staff for Sen. Frank Church. In 1983, Mr. Fenn founded and was the first executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics.

In 1996 and 1998, the firm was chosen as the lead media consultants for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, producing ads that helped win back seats for the Democrats. In the 2000 campaign, Peter Fenn was an adviser to Gore for President and served as a surrogate spokesman on cable news programs. He performed the same role in 2004 for the Kerry for President campaign. In 2006, the firm helped pick up five Republican-held House seats and two Senate seats.

Mr. Fenn has consulted overseas for the Agency for International Development and the National Endowment for Democracy. He produced television programs in Russia, Bosnia, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic and consulted for political parties and candidates in such countries as South Africa, Mozambique, Romania, Latvia, Colombia, Northern Ireland and Hungary.

His writing and producing have earned him Pollie Awards from the American Association of Political Consultants, Telly Awards, Summit Awards, Vision Awards and the award from PRNews for the Best Public Service Ad Campaign of 2005.

Mr. Fenn has a B.A. from Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn., where he was president of the alumni association and where he is currently a trustee. He earned an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Southern California. He teaches Presidential Politics, Strategy and Message as well as Campaign Advertising at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management. Mr. Fenn appears frequently as a TV commentator on the major networks and cable news shows. He now appears regularly with Pat Buchanan on Saturday mornings on MSNBC.

[penguin7]

22. Why wouldn't Republicans wait until after the nomination?

[2rth2pwr]

25. read post #20.

[Hieronymus]

26. Contributions from Lobbyists from Open Secrets.

Lobbyists

Hillary Clinton (D)


graph $567,950

John McCain (R)


graph $340,365

Christopher J. Dodd (D)


graph $233,875

Mitt Romney (R)


graph $229,475

Rudolph W. Giuliani (R)


graph $212,100

Bill Richardson (D)


graph $134,950

Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D)


graph $114,460

Fred Thompson (R)


graph $90,000

Barack Obama (D)


graph $76,859

Duncan Hunter (R)


graph $30,900

John Edwards (D)


graph $18,900

Sam Brownback (R)


graph $17,225

Mike Huckabee (R)


graph $6,964

Tom Tancredo (R)


graph $250

[Hieronymus]

27. Here are the contributions from Lawyers according to Open Secrets......

Hillary $9,596,748.
Edwards $8,161,150.
Obama $7,940,424.

[cali]

28. Edwards has raised approximately $30 million as of Sept 30th

Obama and Clinton have each raised about $80 million+. That means that nearly 1/3 of ALL the funds that Edwards has raised comes from ONE special interest group. Spin that.

[Hieronymus]

29. Your source? I gave opensecrets.org

[cali]

38. Open secrets has the amounts raised thru the 3rd quarter

after that it's just simple math.

[Hieronymus]

40. Obviously, fuzzy math.

[cali]

41. perhaps, but as you don't explain how it's fuzzy

I see no reason not to stand by it. If you wish to explain it, I'm all ears.

[robbedvoter]

43. Moveon is a 527. Just sayin'