Media Whores don't want Edwards on the ticket (D.Brooks on NPR-likes Gep)

[AP]

David Brooks who, on occassion, puts on a pretty good facade of appearing neutral, but is one of the most shameless RW'ers in the media, tried to argue for putting Gephardt on the ticket on NPR's ATC tonight. He says Edwards doesn't know how a bill becomes a law.

Also interviewed on the program was EJ Dionne who was much more enthusiastic about the value of having Edwards as VP.

[swag]

1. Brooks has a prose style

best described as "day old oatmeal."

Man, what a worthless mind.

[4_Legs_Good]

2. I've heard from several real RW-ers

after Kerry got the nomination, that it was Gephardt they were most afraid of.

You can never trust them to tell the truth before the election. It's kinda weird, really. The whole time they were cheering for Dean, I couldn't tell if they really thought he was easy pickins or they were really terrified of him.

We'll see soon enough wrt Edwards...

david

[AP]

3. Brooks isn't afraid. And he doesn't have enough respect for the ...

...intelligence of his audience to do double reverse psychology. He thinks his audience is as sophisticated as Homer Simpson.

[KoKo]

4. Oh..AP, we've gone round the bend in past posts about why Edwards is

weak for Kerry...I hesitated to post. If you really love Edwards I hate to keep going at you about him...but I will just reiterate that Edwards is not beloved by those of us who marched against "Iraq Invasion" in NC and those of us who want to change the Dem party from grassroots upward.

He's a very likeable person. My checkbook would verify your trust for him when he first ran in NC.

But, so many NC'linians have been trashed by him (who donated and believed in him) that he's just not someone I would want on the Kerry ticket.

Maybe I sound too hardline on this, but I just think he's not a good fit with Kerry. He would overshadow Kerry with his "silver tongue" and style and be a lightening rod for bad stuff.

I wish I could be more hopeful, but standing in protest outside a Kerry fundraiser (when I gave a sizeable,repeat...sizeable donation to him) and he wouldn't come out and talk to us at a "fund raising" dinner for which as a "high donor" I was invited but was out with "Anti-Iraq Invasion signs picketing him instead, speaks much to his "basic character."

Sorry...Edwards is a "no go" for this NC Democrat trying to "rebuild our party" so it speaks to the common person and not the rich and prvileged. :-(

[AP]

7. I worry about Democrats who want to run this election on the idea that

the war is the litmus test.

No Democrat who can be cast as not being interested in protecting the security of Americans will win a national election for President.

You know why only a Republican could place a moratorium on the death penalty in IL? Because Republicans would have a field day if the Democrats did it.

You've been against Edwards for a long time here at DU. During that time I've met dozens of NC'ians who are incredibly passionate about Edwards and respect him immensely. I know their names. I know their stories. I only know your screen name. I trust their opinions.

[surfermaw]

63. You got that right

Edward's is going to turn this red state Blue and bring along Bowles with him...Go John Reid Edwards

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KoKo]

11. Right on Bombtrack. I'm a "turd" who shouldn't be speaking about Edwards

Cease! We "anti Iraq Invasion DU'ers" have been trashed so much on DU that many left. Maybe this is a "wake up call" for those of us who are left here.

Edwards is a God...forgive those of us who desist from the accolades.
!

[wjsander]

13. I'm a NC Democrat...

and I'm for Edwards. :D

[surfermaw]

62. Be advised Ko Ko, you should check on the state

Bowles is now running ahead of the republican, and with Edwards on the ticket you will see NOrth Carolina and more states in the South turn Blue come November...Edwards Cut and dried....

[eaprez]

5. That's odd because....

...during the primaries he said Edwards was the best campaigner he'd seen since Clinton -- said he had a message - and sang his praises. Now suddenly he's found this tidbit of information to erase all of that?

[AP]

9. He loved Dean when it mattered. Wrote an article about how princes like

Bush and Dean are born to rule. He said the playing fields of Andover and St Georges are where American leadership is learned. He said there's something about the Episcopalian religion which makes it better than all other religions.

He backed down 100% from that BS after it was too late, when there was no chance Edwards was going to win.

Sometimes you just have to say what's obvioulsy true or people wonder if you've suffered brain damage. The trick is in making sure you don't say the truth when it might actually have a positive influence on politics.

Now that Edwards is back to having a chance at being involved in politics (where Brooks no doubt worries that he'll upset corporate hegemony) it's back to subtlely suggesting somebody else might be better. Wouldn't want Mr Kerry now would we Mr Brooks. And if he does, wouldn't want Democrats to win again in 2012.

[Bombtrack]

6. The thought that having Gephardt as vp is an actual consideration

of prominent Kerry campaign officials just gives me such a lack of confidence in the overall judgement of the Kerry campaign. It is such an out of touch and beltway-insider-ignorant notion.

I litterally had a physical reaction to change the channel every time Gephardt spoke at the debates. He just comes off as such a hackish run-of-the-mill drone. The Iowa caucus shows the bullshit belief of Gepardt proponents, that Dick is a midwestern/rust belt/union favorite son to be utterly empty and pathetically naive

[Dr Fate]

12. I have to admit, a Gephardt pick would really test my faith...

...I would like to think the Kerry people are not that out of touch...

Of course, it would not diminish my support, I generally like Dick as a person & DEM- I just agree with you that it would be a very boring, uninspired pick...

[Awsi Dooger]

30. I agree, Gephardt in contention is almost beyond belief

I view Kerry's political skills as mediocre so at least it was comforting he would make a choice on that level. Richard Gephardt is the Gerry Faust of VP picks, essentially a forfeit.

Bullshit is actually much too tame, Bombtrack. It is incomparable ignorance to believe Gephardt will do anything but cost us a small segment of votes, even in those union states. The only upside would be making Kerry's speeches look like a combo of Lincoln and JFK in comparison.

Ever since Dems lost the House, Dick Gephardt has been a pathetic caricature of a Sominex political robot, droning statements that he's confident we will retake the House this cycle, or the next cycle, maybe two years later...

This may seem totally irrelevant, but I view it as a small scale microcosm of the Edwards/Gephardt dilemma: When I ran for president of the journalism society in high school it became a two-man runoff between myself and another guy who was probably the favorite. For my VP choice, I picked a girl who came in 3rd in the original vote, even though I really didn't know her and she wasn't exactly a babe. I won the presidency by two votes, solely because most of her supporters came over to me. If I had made a buddy-buddy or strategic choice among those who got no votes, I could have faded the damn presidency and all the hassle it attached to the remainder of my senior year.

[chimpymustgo]

41. Awesome post, Awsie!

Humor and analysis!

[Dr Fate]

10. I agree. If the media told me "sex is good..."

...I would probably cut my wee-wee off.

People can chide me if they want, but my opposition to Gephardt & Vilsack is almost exclusivley based on my suspicsion of the media who seems to think they are great...

The same media that salivated over the prospect of a "wild-eyed" Dean and assured us he was the nominee? And I like Dean, I am talking about the Echo-chamber characterization of him...

No thanks.

I want Clark or that well-mannered Southern boy.

[Skwmom]

14. Thanks for the chuckle. e//o/m

[AP]

17. Yeah. Tell your friends.

[jayavarman]

15. I was listening this afternoon (NPR) & Brooks' points regarding the 2 VP

candidates wew more nuanced than you are portraying.

He said something along the lines of an Edwards pick could help Kerry's electability & would certainly be the best choice from a campaign perspective, but that Gephardt would probably be more of a help to him after he wins the Whitehouse in terms of getting legislation thru congress.

You can always check it out @ http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1976246

[AP]

16. Yes, I should point out that he did not actually say...

..."Edwards doesn not know how a bill becomes a law."

But I stand by the general characterization. I had the sense that he offered a platitude for Edwards, just so that people wouldn't think he had brain damage, but then made an argument that was subtley meant to foreclose the possiblity of having Edwards on the ticket.

I think the way EJ responded -- sort of "au contraire" -- in favor of Edwards really gave the impression that they were taking opposite positions.

[Skwmom]

18. Would help electability?

Yeah for the Bush/Cheney(new VP) ticket.

[janx]

48. Actually, in order to get legislation through Congress, he needs

more good people in Congress!

Seems like a no-brainer to me...This country needs some new blood in there.

But I understand the guy's point.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AP]

20. Which media whore is advocating that Edwards should be on the ticket?

I don't have cable. Brooks is the first media whore I've heard talk about it so far, and he thinks Gep should be on the ticket.

Dionne thinks it should be Edwards. Dionne isn't a media whore.

So who've I missed?

[cosmokramer]

21. All the cable news channels, especially Fox.

Cable news pushes him at least twice a day on all the cable networks. It is constant.

[AP]

22. Names? Quotes?

I don't doubt they're accurately stating that he's the favorite in order to make the 40% of Americans who want him disappointed when Kerry picks Gep.

However, I strongly doubt anyone's making arguments that he'd make a great VP. I don't think those whores like Edwards's position on the proper role of the corporation in society.

[cosmokramer]

23. Actually,

they talk about him every day, and it is all favorable. From Chris Matthews to Judy Woodruff to Wolf Blitzer to Susan Estrich to Dennis Miller to even Bill O'Reilly. To site specific quotes and so forth would take me as many weeks has they have been pushing for Edwards.

Take a look at some transcripts from some of these shows on their websites and you will clearly see: The whores have been pushing him since mid-March.

[spooky3]

33. They are responding to the polls.

[Skwmom]

34. They are driving the polls. e/o/m

[AP]

36. He's polling same today as on Super Tuesday - about 40%

I know you think they were whoring it up for him then (why didn't he win, if they were?), but if htey've turned it up a notch, why are the polls steady for him?

[cosmokramer]

42. They are DRIVING the polls...

...in the same fashion they drove up HD's numbers. Exact same way--JE, JE, JE all the time. Polls show name recognition only at this point, just as they did with HD, and the media is responsible for the push.

[spooky3]

43. Others will be convinced when we see EVIDENCE of this rather than simply

individuals' observations, particularly when those individuals have an agenda served by their observations. By evidence, I mean controlled studies with numbers, conducted by qualified and unbiased parties. The only such studies do not support your claims. AP has provided links to these previously.

There is such evidence of RW bias in the media but I have not seen any credible evidence of Edwards bias. And my own anecdotal evidence based on watching cable is that Edwards is rarely mentioned on basic news shows and the only times he is, is to report some poll result. Effects do not cause causes.

[cosmokramer]

45. Bullshit.

I have eyes and ears, and there IS a media push for Edwards.

[spooky3]

47. Cursing does not substitute for empirical evidence.

[cosmokramer]

60. Empirical evidence? hahahahahahahahhahaahahha

[janx]

46. Yeah...this is an age-old question in media:

Do the media create outcomes or merely report on them? Sometimes it gets pretty hard to tell, but in the end, it's both. The media feed the audience and the audience responds.

So I can't blame you for wanting a bit more evidence. ;-)

Edit: Not that it matters what the polls say; they won't determine the VP nominee.

[surfermaw]

65. Give it up your candidate seems to be loosing

Start cheering for Edward's or Gep.

[surfermaw]

64. Judy Woodruff, I beg to differ

Edward's was given the least amount of coverage of any of the candidates, if he had been given 1/10 of the time he would be the candidate..For all the travel he has done on the behalf of the candidate, he has been given very little coverage...I think you have other apples on your agenda.

[Andromeda]

29. Laura Ingram likes Edwards...

She said that when she was being interviewed by Greta Van Susteran on Faux New's "On the Record" about three days ago.

She is a Faux "political analyst" now. :crazy:

[AP]

39. Bet she'd rather see Gep on the ticket over Edwards.

[faithfulcitizen]

24. oh, whatever! this is hysterical!

:nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity:

[LimpingLib]

25. My fear with putting Edwards in the VP slot.

He has some speaches that sound just great. The problem is his policys arent too different from Kerry:nowhere near as pro union as Gephardt and not even on the same planet as Nader who would do the right thing(Naders specalty , he ALWAYS supports workers)and repeal Taft-Hartly .

Now the bad part, if we loose after all that rhetoric then it will be blamed on "radical extremist liberals" who "got their guy Edwards and lost" . Frankly even if we win with Edwards (who I do like) then he will become a new "left wing symbol" and banner carrier and we are screwed. It might actualt make Liebermann look left of center again.

While I like Edwards , I really hope we can do a heck of a lot better than him in future Presidential elections. I want us to start nominating true progressives. I think Gephardt is like 65 and not only is he more progressive than Edwards but he SOUNDS moderate and best of all he will probabilly be to old by 2012 to run.

Anyway Gephardt would be the absolute best choice in the eyes of this progressive and by like a 10,000-1 ratio. Honestly I frankly fear somebody else getting the VP slot ("fear" puts it mildly). I dont understand why Nader wants Edwards on the ticket unless he thinks some short term passion play (Edwards fantastic speaches)will somhow stir the nation toward somewhere it hasnt been in a while. Maybe Nader thinks Edwards will start to gravitate towards workers issues and other progressive issues by 2012-2020(frankly he hasnt outlined any)if a strong progressive grass roots effort gets him and Kerry elected.I think is risky , the most risky thing Nader has ever promoted.

[AP]

26. Take that theory and couple it with facts, and you have arg for Edwards.

Second link on this page is a study on voter preference during the primaries. It argues that the similarity between Kerry and Edwards on policy issues meant that voters didn't use policy positions to make final decision between Edwards and Kerry as much as might have been the case if, say, Lieberman were in the final group..

http://cdd.stanford.edu/research/index.html

And from this link, http://nationaljournal.com/members/news/2004/02/0227nj1.htm, comes the quote:

Judging by National Journal's congressional vote ratings, however, Kerry and Edwards aren't all that different, at least not when it comes to how they voted on key issues before the Senate last year. The results of the vote ratings show that Kerry was the most liberal senator in 2003, with a composite liberal score of 96.5. But Edwards wasn't far behind: He had a 2003 composite liberal score of 94.5, making him the fourth-most-liberal senator.

[LimpingLib]

27. I listened all during the campaign

Edwards (if he is infact evolving) didnt outline any real progressive issue stands. To be fair he did have the highest minninum wage stance (Im so sick of hearing Democrats blather and scream over a $6.65 minninum wage to "save the workers" that i could vomit out all their out of touch bs that I have to swallow)at around $8 I think which I highly insufficent to fire up our economy plus give workers justice.

Kerrys strength is his energy policys. Problem is that his plan wont fully kick in till 2020 and sadly by then we will already be nearly out of oil by then(world production will peak between 2008 and 2018 depending on how fast China and India grow economicaly).Kerry also has offered an modest health care plan that whiel weak is efficient and FINALLY a step in the right direction. I guess that noting to commend him over but its a good start (by USA standards) and best of all he has pegged it toward an immediate action he will take to improves peoples lives the second he gets into office.

Kerry is the right man for the right time on the most important issue there is , our fossile fuel dilema (the oil mafia could be the reason hummanity looses like 80% of its population once oil drys up), its just he might be too late in coming (we really fumbled trusting Al Gore in 1992).

[AP]

35. The problem with America is that power is flowing up a steep pyramid to a

few people at the very top. This is done by devaluing labor -- the only thing most people have to sell -- and by rigging the tax code to benefit people who make money from money (from capitall and not from labor).

Every aspect of Edward's policy agenda addressed this. He packaged this agenda in a way that the average American (the majority of voters) could percieve it.

It was brilliant.

To me Edwards not only was extremely progressive, but he was the best politican running because he knew how to present that agenda in a way that would freak out moderates (see Kucinich).

He didnt' evolve. He was the same candidate he was on his first trip to NH that he was on Super Tuesday. Laura Kanoy of NH publlic radio on CSPAN commended him for being the ONE candidate who didn't have to evolve and adapt. She said he knew what he stood for from the start.

[spooky3]

49. did you read the policy papers Edwards linked to his site for months

before Kerry and others had articulated their views? The stump speeches are not intended to include all of the details of positions.

[surfermaw]

67. AP..how right you are Edwards and Kerry look and sound

alike...No matter what you hear and read they are they are moderate on most things....or lets Moderate to Liberal. Many of the policies Edwards sat down, Kerry adopted...Let's go John Reid Edwards/ Kerry Ticket....you are a winner come NOvember

[surfermaw]

66. Kerry stole his policies

That explaines them being alike

[JI7]

28. i trust EJ Dionne

he defended Kerry during the primary and seemed supportive of kerry. this was especially important at a time when there were so many whores who anytime they reported on kerry it was just to talk about how his campaign is dead. but dionne focused on the issues and defended kerry not just from the attacks but on specific issues and using arguments with facts.

oliphant is another one i trust since he did about the same thing.

[Simeon Salus]

31. "Who cares what David Brooks thinks?"

to paraphrase a favorite pResidential quote

What does it gain Democrats to listen to this known idiot?

Really. David Brooks is a rabid rightist wrapped in moderates' clothing. He is the epitome of what our lamented MediaWhoresOnline calls a real A-List Whore. He sells talking points provided him by masters. His business is making our business less effective. His thoughts have relevance to the political process only as his personal and political interests diverge.

Can you imagine having to read this bastard on the NYT editorial page as long as we've been stuck with Safire?

[AP]

37. I don't care about the substance. But I care that what he says disproves a

theory about who RW'ers are whoring for.

[bushwakker]

32. Brooks would be the first one ridiculing Gephardt as

a tired old used up, insider, beholden to labor and liberal special interests if JK selected him.

[AP]

38. Exactly. That's why he wants to see him on the ticket.

[sparrowhawk]

40. I listened to the same program ...

and Brooks had a lot of nice things to say about Edwards. I didn't get the impression he didn't want Edwards on the ticket. He just thought Gephardt would be a better choice.

[AP]

50. He says the most important criteria is help in governing.

He says pick the LBJ candidate. Edwards would help with campaigning, but he should pick the person who can help him governing, and that is Gephardt. He's very clear about that.

Dionne's opinion is a rebuttal to Brooks. He says that LBJ was probably the only recent VP who helped the P carry a state. He said, help winning shouldn't be the race should be the criteria. But Dionne says Edwards can help make the argument for Kerry and that activist Democrats want Edwards, and that he believes it will be Edwards.

Listen againt. http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1976246

It starts at about 5 minutes.

[sparrowhawk]

61. I have heard it ...

and no where did he indicate that Edwards didn't belong on the ticket, just that Gephardt would make more sense. He has for some months now said flattering things about Edwards.

[janx]

44. Now I'm confused.

NPR--that much I understand. When was this aired?

Also, were Dionne and Brooks on at the same time, one pushing for Edwards and the other for Gep?

[AP]

51. See post 50. The link's in there. You can listen to the program.

[janx]

53. Thanks! n/t

[chimpymustgo]

52. I think both guys were picking who they'd like to see on the ticket.

EJ would like to see Edwards.
Brooks would like to see Gep.

[AP]

54. I think Dionne was basically saying that Edwards made sense,

that people want him, that nobody knows who it's going to be, but the word is that it will be Edwards.

Brooks was trying to spin an argument for Gep based on the "he will help govern"/"he has experience" mantra.

[janx]

56. To be fair, though, Brooks did say that Edwards would be

very good during the campaign.

[AP]

57. He threw a bone so he wouldn't sound like an idiot advocating for Gep

but the fact his, he framed his analysis with the statement, Kerry needs someone to help him govern. That's gep, not edwards.

Listen again.

[janx]

58. Oh I heard it. You're right of course. I was just trying to find

some kind of balance in the guy.

The whole thing was interesting. Thanks for the link.

[chimpymustgo]

59. I repeat. EJ wants Edwards, Brooks wants Gep.

They also want different election outcomes.

[janx]

55. I have the link now and will listen. I usually listen to

All Things Considered--must have missed this one. It sounds interesting.