Edwards REAL statement on Clinton's tear up - I can't comment on that

[jsamuel]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/07/clinton-gets-emotional-at-new-hampshire-stop/

At a New Hampshire campaign event, presidential rival John Edwards told reporters he was unaware of Clinton's emotional reaction and would not respond to it, but added, according to CNN's Dugald McDonnell: "I think what we need in a commander in chief is strength and resolve, and presidential campaigns are a tough business, but being President of the United States is also a very tough business. And the President of the United States is faced with very, very difficult challenges every single day, difficult judgments every single day."

People are taking that quote out of context. Edwards was specifically saying that he wasn't going to talk about Clinton since he doesn't even know about it. The comment he made was in general terms. Notice Edwards puts no judgment on anyone who cries or says that Clinton is wrong for having emotions. He stressed how hard the campaign is and how hard it will be to be President.

[frogmarch]

1. Thank you, jsamuel. I am very happy to know this. k&r nt

[maddiejoan]

2. I can't comment on it

--but I will anyways. So here's my sexist bullshit smear of the situation.

[truebrit71]

3. Wow...leap to conclusions much?

:eyes:

[maddiejoan]

8. where's the leap?

It's right there in the OP

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Where?

I'm not seeing anything sexist.

[Alexander]

12. Maddiejoan doesn't need evidence. Bullshit is good enough.

[truebrit71]

18. Ed-Zackery!!!

:rofl:

[Tarc]

60. Well if you aren't seeing it

then you're kinda dim. Edwards just pulled a Huckabee, echoing his "I'm not going to air this ad, so let me air it for you" bullshit.

[fenriswolf]

15. bull $hit if anything he was defending hillary

by saying its a hard job. He didnt say if you cry you can't do it, he didnt say women cry and so are to weak to be president he said its a hard job period. did he lie?

[cali]

14. there's no leap there. why the hell do you thnk he said what he said?

That was no error.

[madmunchie]

42. Pretty obvious to people that use logic and facts and analytical skills

which doesn't seem to be on the top of the list of traits of JE supporters.

BESIDES he's a lawyer and really is expert at how to do lawyer double talk.

[huskerlaw]

11. Assuming that the rest of the comment

was about Clinton, which clearly it wasn't, but I digress...assuming that it was: how is what he said sexist?

In NO way did he imply that women are incapable of being the sort of president that he described. If it was about Clinton, then it was about CLINTON. Not women everywhere.

[maddiejoan]

16. keep telling yourself that

[huskerlaw]

19. I don't have to "tell" myself anything

I did, however, ask you a legitimate question, which you seem unable to answer...

[maddiejoan]

21. Here's your answer

It's sexist because he's using a sexist tactic.

I've seen stump speeches where Edwards tears up and says "it's personal to me"

why the different standard?

[truebrit71]

22. Difficulty with reading comprehension? Two separate issues...

...Or is pointing that out to you "sexist" as well...??? :eyes:

[huskerlaw]

23. WHAT different standard?

He said he wasn't going to comment on Hillary, and he DIDN'T.

:wtf:

But again. If you're going to claim it was a comment about her, answer the damn question that many people have now asked you. How EXACTLY was it sexist? You can't answer that question by saying "because it's a sexist tactic!!"...because, well, that's not an answer. WHAT was a sexist tactic? WHAT made it sexist? WHAT in that comment leads you to so fervently believe he was attacking HILLARY and not just making a general statement about what it takes to be a president?

If you can't answer those questions with legitimate answers, you might want to shut the fuck up. Because, frankly, your assertions have no substance.

[truebrit71]

26. Watch out now...you're being sexist too!!!

:evilgrin:

[huskerlaw]

30. Yikes! How does that work?

I'm female...can I be sexist against another woman? I'm SO confused!

:evilgrin:

[maddiejoan]

28. oh okay

then his next comment was just a bizarre non sequitor.

gotcha

[huskerlaw]

29. Thanks for once again NOT answering the question

and thereby proving my point for me.

Good day! :hi:

[Luminous Animal]

48. The thing is...

You have no idea what question was asked in between his no comment and the next statement. And most certainly there was. For all we know, there could have been 5 questions in between.

The media sure does know how to manipulate, doesn't it.

[maddiejoan]

32. I did answer it (Double standard from Edwards)

and to say it wasn't a comment on Clinton?

Then why did he add that statement afterwards? Was it just a random thought in his head.

[huskerlaw]

33. No, you didn't.

I posed many questions in the previous comment regarding how, exactly, you can claim the comment was sexist. You did not answer any of them.

I'm not arguing with you about whether or not that comment was about Clinton. I don't happen to think that it was, but my question specifically stated that assuming that it was (for argumentative purposes) how was it sexist? You replied with "it was a sexist tactic"...which isn't an answer at all.

For the sake of fair play, I'll give you one more chance. How, exactly, was the comment sexist?

[maddiejoan]

37. This is the last time I'm going to repeat myself.

it is a sexist tactic because the placement of his statement (following no comment) draws a relational connection between Clinton's having an emotional moment and a discussion of fitness for the Presidency.

This is a common tactic of sexists, and the underlying message that is supposed to be gotten is "Women are too emotional for the Presidency"


If you think I'm wrong so be it --but lawyers use connections like this all the time to draw two disparate concepts together as if they are one.
An opposing lawyer would probably have leapt up and yelled "Objection!"

[huskerlaw]

39. Well, thank you

that is actually the first time you've answered me.

Of course, I still think you're completely wrong, but to each her own.

Also, no need to give me the lecture on how lawyers operate. I am one, and again...you're wrong.

[Ignis]

27. It's sexist because...it's sexist?

Can we try that again without the circular reasoning, please? :)

I understand that many support Hillary as a way to fight against sexism, but you're not doing a great job of explaining WHY and HOW Edwards' comments were sexist. Without that explanation, it just looks like a knee-jerk reaction from the outside.

[maddiejoan]

31. because the statement itself cannot be claimed to be sexist

the placement, however, of the comment following a discussion of whether or not Clinton was emotional IS a sexist tactic.

"What did you think of Clinton's emotional moment?"

"No comment ---BUT ----Presidents have to be strong and never cry"

[huskerlaw]

34. You're right

That could be construed to be a sexist comment.

Unfortunately for you, he didn't say anything remotely close to your delusional translation.

:crazy:

[Ignis]

36. Okay, that's a better explanation, thanks.

I disagree with your reading of it, but I understand your perspective now.

I'd suggest that what you're calling a "sexist tactic" isn't a tactic, per se. You're really finding fault with his statement based on context and upon coded signals. Again, I personally didn't find it sexist, but this may help to explain your POV to others.

:hi:

[Cronus Protagonist]

66. She's projecting, in a Jungian way

Of course, John may have been thinking the way she thought he was, and he may not have been. She, however, will not give him the benefit of the doubt and acts as if her interpretation is factual, when clearly it was her that brought that interpretation to the table. I love how people's minds work. It's fascinating to see, although I don't do that kind of "mind-reading" myself, choosing instead to allow the benefit of the doubt or inquire further if I think it matters enough to do so.

[redwitch]

46. maddiejoan he is married to Elizabeth Edwards.

I don't think she would tolerate sexism from him.

[truebrit71]

20. ..and you just keep on bashing men...

...it's all good...

:eyes:

[Donnachaidh]

38. uhh dear, WHERE in the quote did he mention anyone's sex?

Talk about putting words in someone's mouth. :eyes:

[Seabiscuit]

4. Edwards is smart and classy ... thanks for the true "quote"

:hi:

[stillcool]

5. ouch....

[AzDar]

6. He is grace and eloquence personified.

Go, Johnny, GO!!!

[Thrill]

7. No Obama is the one who said

He can't comment on that

[THUNDER HANDS]

10. I don't see that as a knock on Clinton

i just don't, maybe it's me.

[monmouth]

13. HRC is exhausted as they all are, and JE showed class and smarts..eom

[ultraist]

24. Yes, Hillary looks and sounds exhausted

The stress seems to be getting to her. It also seems that each time she cries, is when she is talking about herself.

I think she's really surpised and disappointed she did not prove to be inevitable in Iowa.

As far as any comments being sexist, pffft! I say that as a woman.

[Quixote1818]

25. Its got to be hard for Hillary having been on top for so long and so far ahead

and to watch it just disintegrate so quickly. Then things like people liking the other candidates more must really start to wear on her. If it were me in her shoes I would have probably thrown up a few times and been more like Thompson and taken a lot of time off.

[fenriswolf]

17. way to go JE show them what a true president does

[Ellinorianne]

35. I don't even

know why this is a story. One, it annoys me the media is making a big deal out of it and two, why are they asking other candidates to react?

But I don't see what is wrong with Edwards' comment. He's right. It is a tough job and I would think that if Hillary isn't stressed and emotional during this process that would be something to worry about it. The way she expressed should be no judgement against her or any other candidate.

[lisainmilo]

40. I cannot see Obama or Edwards crying over their campaign!

EVER!

[spooky3]

41. wecome to DU, Ellinorianne

Call me paranoid, but given that the source is CNN, I would not doubt but that some of the story is missing. I would not put it past them to try to make both Clinton and Edwards look bad - a twofer.

For example, between the "I will not comment on that" and "I think what we need in a commander in chief ..." I would not be surprised if a reporter actually asked something like, "Do you believe people have to be tough to be President?" or maybe quite a bit of Q&A. The story just says Edwards "added" the latter comment. If there were a missing question or exchange, filling that gap in the story might remove some ambiguity in the situation that is causing different people to interpret it differently.

[Ellinorianne]

56. Oh it reeks

alright because it's such an obvious transition to mislead. Edwards is smarter than that and he knows better.

Please, men don't cry? She wasn't crying about her campaign to me, but about how much she cares and how it's perceived that she's doing it for other reasons.

[waiting for hope]

57. Hey Ellie!

Nice to see you here! :hi: - Hope to see you more often, it's getting a bit heated and you have always been a clam voice of reason.

[Ellinorianne]

61. Thank you

maybe it's because I breathe and count to ten before posting? I try to be levelheaded.

I'm branching out into the other forums. I started posting to a local orange county liberal blog, fun!

http://www.theliberaloc.com/

I'm just a handful of bloggers, so it's a complete change from The Daily Kos.

[saracat]

51. Hey, welcome to DU! I always enjoy your writing!

[Ellinorianne]

55. Thank you!

I've had an account for a while, I just haven't "jumped in". It's a different format, I have to get used to it.

I adore your icon, btw, I love Elizabeth!

[MalloyLiberal]

43. More thuggery from Clinton supporters

Lie, lie, lie. Why are you a bunch of liars, Lie lie, lie,

[robbedvoter]

44. So, after learning of it, he called it weakness - what a jerk!

I haven't read any original, BS statement yet, but the "rehabilitation" from your post sounds quite disgusting. I was angry at many DU-ers but I know now who sets the tone for this ugliness. :puke:

[gmudem]

45. People seriously think this is sexist??

Can you people please grow up? This is a standard comment about strength and the Presidency. Whoever thinks this is sexist is lying to themselves and desperately trying to find fault where there is none.

[IronLionZion]

64. I think he eats live kittens for breakfast.

Primary season sucks. I can't wait for this to be over.

[jazzjunkysue]

47. He's right. It's the first thing I thought: She's CRYING??? What?

She's gotta be alot tougher than that to handle the job.

[FlyingSquirrel]

49. Hmmmmm again..

I think Edwards is a smart cookie and while he did not specifically disrespect her there, he was certainly quick to take advantage of the situation and make the comment that he did, as any good lawyer would do. Time will tell whether it comes back to bite him in the behind. Certainly tears (or "choking up", more accurately in this case) are seen as a sign of weakness by many regardless of the context and so it would have been better for him to just not comment. However his comment does fit in with his overall "strength and resolve" argument that is the cornerstone of his campaign.

[onehandle]

50. Kick! nt

[Andromeda]

52. Thanks for clearing that up.

I was disappointed when I heard the rumor that Edwards was putting her down. I thought he was better than that.

[eridani]

53. He's probably more concerned that neither Clinton nor Obama

--will make any attempt to hold the Bushies responsible for their crimes.

[jackson_dem]

54. Edwards on C-Span

They are replaying Senator Edwards talking to reporters on C-Span and he avoided criticizing Clinton on that occasion as well.

[Generator]

58. Yeah but he picked on a girl

err gal-and that's mean! :P

[Seabiscuit]

59. Kick!

nt

[Occam Bandage]

62. LOL. I can't comment on it, but here's my comment. Reminds me of Huckabee's

"Oh, I'm gonna go positive, so I won't show you this negative ad I'm about to show you."

[Tom Rinaldo]

65. I had that thought also

Edwards is too bright for the obvious connection that he implied to not be obvious to him before he said it. Having said that this is not a really big deal to me. All of our candidates are exhausted. They are conditioned to have an instinct to find a way to use every event as a way to highlight their strengths and others weaknesses. I think Edwards blew it with that reply. But it's not like all of our candidates haven't reached for the golden ring a little too agressively from time to time themselves. When that happens you take your knocks and move on.

[itsrobert]

63. Edwards is a class act.

He could of took a cheap shot and didn't. He has compassion.