The problem with Edwards and Gore...

[Blarch]

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in a time of moral crisis, remain neutral." -- Dante Alighieri

We have entered a time of moral crisis ...Edwards and Gore could end this moral crisis by NOT REMAINING NEUTRAL.

But here we are. Are they positioning for the hottest place in hell ? ...Why are they remianing neutral ?

[msongs]

1. there is no moral crisis in this matter and they are not your stooges nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

8. exactly. n/t

[tsuki]

26. Agreed. nt

[BklynChick]

2. very true, we need them now

[whatchamacallit]

3. Is this about endorsements? nt

[stray cat]

4. The primaries is a moral crisis?

I wish moral crisis were never more consequential than a primary. I think of a moral crisis where those who don't get involved are destined for hell as usually being more black and white and life and death - usually on a large scale.

[Blarch]

6. Yes, it has become that.

look around.

She pledged to not count MI and FL ...now she wants the counted.

She has now claimed the new number needed by Obama is 2209.

She also wants the will of the voters ignored.

Shall I continue ?

[The Night Owl]

31. "Shall I continue?"

Yes! By all means continue to dazzle us with your erudition.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[brentspeak]

7. Uh, yeah

And what "powers" is he "scared of"?

[Blarch]

10. the clintons stealing the nomination...

and then having a scorched earth policy against anybody who opposed them.

[The Night Owl]

21. Do you suspect that the Clintons are in league with...

...Satan?

[WA98296]

11. Actually "the powers" (i.e. corporations) are afraid of Edwards. NO media would cover his race.

And they damn well should be, he wasn't afraid to say he'd take them on, FOR the PEOPLE.

[WA98296]

9. EDWARDS voted for Obama. He said so this weekend...

paraphrasing:

question: Are you going to be endorsing the person you VOTED for (in the primary)?

response: Yes, it looks very likely.


This was so obvious it couldn't even be considered a dog whistle.


As far as WHY not publicly. Could be because corporate America is terrified of Edwards. Maybe he didn't want to extend that towards Obama.

[iamjoy]

27. Not Only That

On Morning Joe the other day when asked why he wasn't endorsing :

People on television act like these endorsements are a big deal. I may have missed something, but I think Barack Obama is doing pretty well without my endorsement."

Did you catch that? Not only is he letting us know who he isn't endorsing, but he's letting us know why.

There's no lack of moral courage here - perhaps an dash of humility in acknowledging that his endorsement isn't necessary. The Kennedys, you may remember, endorsed Obama before Massachusetts, and Clinton still won that state.

Or, maybe Elizabeth Edwards is for Clinton and she has more control over John than any of us thought :evilgrin:

[petepillow]

12. Ever consider that not endorsing too early could serve a greater good?

The greater good here is a democratic win in November. Obama doesn't need Edwards or Gore endorsements to get the Dem nomination. Their strong support in the GE will be most beneficial, but why risk imposing their own possible polarizing effects on him (or in a remote universe, her) too early. Ultimately it's about the Dem candidate winning, not about further dividing the party before we've even begun the Big Fight. Don't damn two of our Democratic MVP's to hell just yet...

People can read between the lines enough to know who they support without it being used against the candidates later should something crazy like Hillary getting the nomination. Imagine republicans saying in the GE "well your beloved Gore didn't think you should be president, why should any democrats?"

May seem wimpy, but possibly the best strategy (remember Obama wasn't the "presumptive nominee" until this past week.)

[rug]

13. They're either with you or against you?

[grantcart]

14. The problem is that they were probably asked not to

I have noticed that in the last lap its been Obama all by himself. Even his strongest surrogates backed off. I think the reasoning is that if it were seen as 'piling on' it would create a bigger problem with Clinton supporters.

The real problem is that Clinton has put us into this situation. It is most unfortunate.

[Willo]

25. I was thinking the same and agree with you. nt

[Tommy_Carcetti]

15. Moral crisis? Get over yourself.

A heated and prolonged primary season is hardly a moral crisis. And frankly, I'm glad that Edwards and Gore have stayed above the fray.

[tandem5]

19. I'll second that!

[barack the house]

16. Injustices are our lessons in life. How we develop as people depends on how we react.

As Gore has told us many times it would be immoral not to act on global warming.

[The Night Owl]

20. Yes! John Edwards is committing a grave injustice by not endorsing Lord Obama! Maybe he is racist.

:ROFL:

[The Night Owl]

17. Blarch's mindset is a perfect example of the kind of zealotry some Obama supporters have embraced.

The Obamatons have entered a new phase. They have gone from arguing that anyone who opposes Barack Obama is evil to arguing that anyone who is less than enthusiastically supportive of Barack Obama is evil. In the Obamaton realm, being less than supportive of Lord Obama is the kind of offense which earns one an eternity in Hell.

[iamjoy]

30. Sounds More Like George Bush

If you aren't for us, you're against us.

John Edwards said it himself, Obama is doing quite well without his (Edwards') endorsement.

And maybe Obama hasn't quite picked up the poverty issue (as a campaign issue) the way Edwards hoped in order to give enthusiastic support. But he's not about to criticize either of our candidates now - not because he doesn't want to burn bridges, but because he doesn't want to do the Republicans dirty work for them.

As much as I liked Edwards and wanted to see him as our president, I have to acknowledge that he is irrelevant in the process.

[Blarch]

33. Your candidates only path to victory is ...

ignoring the will of the voters and having the nomination handed to her by the SD's

Your camp is the crazy bunch ...now your candidate has moved the goal posts again...now Obama needs 2209 to seal the deal

knock it off already. If you think I am a zealot because I want the votes respected then you are fucked.

Get it ? ...hillary can't win and still respect the voters ...It can't happen.

[The Night Owl]

34. I called you a zealot because you suggested that John Edwards and Al Gore are evil...

...for not being supportive enough of Barack Obama. Your post is an abomination.

[mamalone]

18. I agree with you.

I have to admit that I am repelled by Edward's coyness over the last few days. He's throwing out all kinds of signals, basically saying that he supports Obama yet without saying the actual words. And yet he then refuses to actually endorse him, saying "noble-type stuff" like "I can't see where my endorsement really matters all that much" and that he thinks it is better to just let the process unfold. It's like he wants the benefits of both endorsing and remaining neutral. Now, don't get me wrong, I love the guy but everytime I see him on Tv I feel like just shouting "C'mon Edwards.. be a man!

Now, if I find out that he has been asked to hold back and is acting as part of a concerted effort to end this nightmare, I will of course retract my statements of irritation;)

[Cleita]

22. So Dante has the last word on Hell?

Shouldn't this be in the religion forum?

[MonkeyFunk]

23. There's no moral crisis

it's just a primary campaign.

[LWolf]

24. I don't believe in hell,

except for the hell we make for ourselves on earth.

I'm thankful that they have both remained neutral, and taken the high ground in the complete humiliation this farce of a primary has been.

Endorsing one of the candidates would simply enrage the other half of the party further. What you really mean is that you want them to endorse YOUR candidate, right? What if they endorsed the other one?

If the supers really want to win in November, Gore and Edwards will walk out of the convention with the nomination. They could unify the party and win in November. I don't believe either Clinton or Obama will be able to do that.

Not that I think that's likely to happen.

[Yukari Yakumo]

28. Who cares about Edwards?

He's got paltry few delegates that Obama will likely not need to win the nom, the Carolinas are behind us, and he's not a SD.

So, except for his hardcore fans, who cares about Edwards?

[Two Americas]

29. purge them

We don't need them.

[The Night Owl]

32. Yes! Throw the unbelievers into the lake of fire!

:ROFL: