I don't think Clinton had any real experience either, did he? He was smart and knew what he was talking about, but actual experience? I sure don't recall it...
I suspect foreign policy experience won't be the determining factor (even though it would be a very useful thing)
Posted by OldCoastie at December 28, 2006 09:00 AMBush was an ignorant fool that was ripe for manipulation by a cabal of strategists who singlemindedly set out to re-seat a king in the White House and the surest scenario was to make Bush a war time president. Just read US vs Bush by Elizabeth de la Vega and one of her many revelations is that Bush's team came to the White House with war in mind.
So, perhaps more important than foreign policy experience is foreign policy AGENDA. From what I've seen, Edwards not only can't be bought, but he is driven by an agenda based on people from the ground up. He does not surround himself with axe grinders, he's got Clinton's ability to analyze on his feet, he's toughened up (watch out McCain) politically and he's got Elizabeth Edwards who is simply the best.
O/T I see that Marcie Wheeler aka EmptyWheel from TheNextHurrah has just finished her book "Anatomy of Deceit" on the outting of Valerie Plame.
Not fair comparing Edwards' inexperience with Bush's. Dubya was only the vehicle to get the Cheney/Rummy agenda elected, even if he did shuffle them off to take the reins of his own swath of horror.
Edwards has the brains to get good people into the cabinet, and I trust him to listen to the advice of the experts.
Posted by iamcoyote at December 28, 2006 09:11 AMEdwards tabbed "The Surge" the "McCain Doctrine."
How do you like that little shiv, Johnny Mac?
Ouch.
Well played, Mr. Edwards. Well played indeed.
Posted by God Of War at December 28, 2006 09:15 AMGoW - Ha! first blood, baby.
Posted by iamcoyote at December 28, 2006 09:23 AMHa-Ha, great framing on McCain! Edwards is gonna be good, having been through one of these national election things already. Supposedly makes a big difference.
great observations by mailsailset, which sure seems dead-on to me---and "experience vs. agenda" could really catch on!
Posted by euzoius at December 28, 2006 09:25 AMI'm sure he will do well, as long as he keeps those thumbs down.
Posted by Seven of Six at December 28, 2006 09:56 AMMy main concern with the candidacies of Edwards and Obama are their relative lack of national experience, especially in foreign policy and national security in a post-9/11 world.
Both Obama and Edwards are smart and savvy enough to surround themselves with more experienced and well qualified advisers in those areas.
Unlike Little Boots who allowed himself to be laid across Poppy's knees and have his administration overrun by the very worst neoconservative thuggery on planet earth.
Posted by Christopher at December 28, 2006 10:14 AMExperience? Since when is that a prerequisite to governing? May we remind you the Decider himself had no experience whatsoever. For that matter, neither did Clinton. What made the difference between the two was intelligence (Clinton) and a genuine lack of hubris (also Clinton). Edwards is the real deal. What he lacks in experience, he would make up for by surrounding himself with good people.
Posted by nlacey at December 28, 2006 11:16 AMSteve,
I have the same concerns as you. I hope that answers will be forthcoming. I also hope that Edwards has been studying foreign policy the last 2 years. He seemed very light in this area 2 years ago.
As far as Bill Clinton goes, there really weren't any overarching foreign policy issues in 1992.
I hope everyone had a Merry Christmas!
Posted by Ga6thDem at December 28, 2006 11:23 AMCount me on board with Elizabeth and John.
1.He admitted his enable the chimp vote sucked.
2.He can tap into the ocean of poor non-voters.
3.As others have said, he will seek sound advice.
4.A very thoughtful, well meaning couple.
5.Let's face it, they're cute and cuddly.
I have been watching JRE for about 7 months and seeing his organization tighten up, his message being distilled. I believe he meant what he said about Obama and others---get into the fray, make your voice heard, offer a choice, let the people decide, but above all "do something" about what you already know needs doing. That is refreshing and I think authentically Edwards. I want him to accentuate the postive and keep coming back to basic issues of fairness.
Now, if he can only avoid getting confused with the Crossing Over-guy.....
Posted by gtash at December 28, 2006 12:55 PMMy first thought on seeing that Edwards photo with the open collar shirt with white t-shirt showing: Woody Guthrie.
Posted by Slothrop at December 28, 2006 02:01 PMEdwards gets high marks among anti-Arab Democrats (i.e., Israel First-ers) and is a BOMB IRAN hawk despite the fact that Iran's nuclear program is a soft-water reactor. He apparently doesn't have the intelligence to connect the dots between Iraq's imaginary WMDs and Iran's imaginary Nuclear ICBMs.
Edwards stated, "And it's important for America to confront the situation in Iran, because Iran is an enormous threat to Israel and to the Israeli people."
Edwards also thinks it's a great idea to flood the labor market with foreign workers. Thus, he will definitely get corporate backing and stands a good chance of getting the nomination.
My 2-cents.
Posted by Sgt.York at December 28, 2006 02:14 PMGOW, welcome back. We missed your rants. By-the-way, where's Ann?
Posted by Judith at December 28, 2006 05:07 PMMay we remind you the Decider himself had no experience whatsoever.
Yes he did. He signed the execution warrants for a bunch of retarded prisoners in Tex-Ass. He also fucked over education and the economy in Tex-Ass. The Mad Boy King, idiot son of George, had lots of experience.
...and is a BOMB IRAN hawk
Yep. Edwards is a pro war Hawk. He only seems to be rational on Iraq...or he is reading the political tea leaves. I think the latter.
Posted by phidipides at December 28, 2006 05:10 PMI thought I read last night that one of Edward's campaign slogans is "Today is our Future".
Of course I am thrilled that he has decided to run for all the reasons I have posted in other comment sections. I think we can win with Edwards.
Posted by Judith at December 28, 2006 05:17 PMEdwards -- who is calling for cuts in poverty, global warming and troops in Iraq -- scheduled his kickoff in New Orleans, still devastated from last year's Hurricane Katrina. He chose the site to highlight his signature concern of the economic disparity that divides America.
Edwards got right with the Iraq war in an op-ed piece in the Washington Post in November 2005. Without making excuses, he said he regretted his vote in 2002 for a resolution authorizing the U.S. invasion. From what I have read, he is also against escalating forces in Iraq.
Posted by at December 28, 2006 05:30 PM"TOMORROW BEGINS TODAY"
I wasn't even close.
Posted by Judith at December 28, 2006 06:25 PMExcuse me. Edwards stole that line about the experience in the administration from Obama. It was something he's said quite awhile before Edwards. Isn't that plagurism?????
Posted by vwcat at December 28, 2006 07:35 PMEdwards is my dude. Plain and simple. He's heterosexual, white, handsome and he ain't Bush.
Posted by Mal Feasance at December 29, 2006 07:18 AMJohn Edwards' short speech made me feel good. Finally someone talking about America's future.
National health care, fair taxation, the environment, that is America's future.
He may be a pro war hawk but I bet he's smart enough to moderate his position thanks to the current disaster now residing in the White House.
Posted by Daryl at December 29, 2006 11:27 AM