Edwards Consultant Mudcat: "Who Screwed Us? The Clintons Screwed Us"

Bombs away. David "Mudcat" Saunders, a campaign consultant for John Edwards, is out on the campaign trail in North Country in New Hampshire and not holding anything back:

The official name of this campaign swing is "economic fairness for the North Country," but he and Cooter and the boys call it the " 'Let's help John Edwards screw those who screwed us tour,' " Mudcat says. Us being rural America.

And who would that be?

"Who screwed us?" he asks, voice rising in incredulity. "The Clintons screwed us." And, he adds, "Anybody that says different is delusional."

The Clintons did it with NAFTA, and the Bubbas know it, Mudcat says. Why, it's no wonder Hillary once sat on the board of Wal-Mart.

"The slogan of Wal-Mart is the same as what the Clintons' policy has always been for rural America: 'Always less,' " he says. (Actually, Wal-Mart's former catchphrase was "Always low prices," but you get Mudcat's drift.)

Comments

[patanderson]

NAFTA wasn't just the Clintons, as much as the Right wingers, who happen to LOVE NAFTA might want you to believe.

The ORIGINAL NAFTA accord was signed by George HW Bush, Carlos Salinas and Brian Mulroney. It was ratified and signed into law by Clinton. It was already a "done deal" when Clinton took office.

There isn't one politician that has screwed us over more than George W Bush. No matter who takes over in 2009, he or she will have a goddamn mess on their hands that I seriously doubt they can clean up even through 2 terms!

[mcostello]

While I agree about GWB, it was Bill C. who rallied for this, and Hillary needs to be pinned down as to her policy on NAFTA.
Any answer (fat chance) would open all of our eyes as to who her real constituency is.
NAFTA helps her corporate donors, no matter how she spins it, and fighting NAFTA helps the common guy.
Look forward, not backwards

[knosiswar]

Let's not forget Free Trade China, that was ALL BILL CLINTON. Clinton and Greenspan are on the same page, they want to level the labor force with other countries. They of course will not say it, but they believe they are making a 'Necessary' correction for American Producers to be Competitive.

[godlessclif]

Kucinich says NAFTA will be an undone deal if he is President. He will end it.

[smartstuart]

Since this little gerbil HAS NO FUCKING CHANCE TO GET ELECTED, it doesn't matter what he says he'll do!!! His wife IS hot,though....he must have some package, because this midget sure is ugly!!!

[Alessan]

Bill Clinton will actually be the President he agreed with neo-cons on every issue during his eight years, including NAFTA,CAFTA and don't ask, don't tell. Former good friend David Geffen wrote an opt-ed in the NY Times saying why he will not endorse Hillary this time, he was angry, I wonder why. The Clintons are suspect and now untrustworthy.There are other options and more sincere candidates running, don't be a follower be a leader and vote the most honest candidate, not someone who doesn't have her own ideas and has imitated John Edwards on every domestic policy, she and her staff must use his website as a reference guide. So does Obama, neither should lead the country it's too bad, the Democrats haven't learned their lessen yet,last time they voted for Bush instead of Kerry. The worse President in the history of this country.

[TankerRat]

Check your facts patanderson. Bush may have had a hand in negotiations but it was the great "Bubba" who actually sold you down the river.

[zendem1]

The Clintons care about two things:1.Power 2. Themselves. Leave it to the Democrats to screw this up. They have the best collection of candidates in recent history, a Republican Presdent in an unpopular war, polling at a 12% approval rating. So, the democrats will nominate the one candidate with higher negatives than the Republican president;the one most likely to enetgize the nutball base. Brilliant.

[emncaity]

I've been practically screaming this into the ears of anybody I can find, zendem. You're exactly right.

It's pretty simple: Of the people who voted Bush into office (sort of), twice, how many of them will vote for Hillary this time rather than a Republican candidate? About two. Maybe.

I mean, Republicans are doing all they can to screw this up, and they may yet do so. In a year when they needed to nominate a moderate guy with a new direction, instead the frontrunner is the guy who says on 9-11 "Thank God George Bush is president," a guy who will be every bit as false a tough-guy poser as Bush is, and I think even worse.

If Repubs had a moderate, though, how would Hillary ever get a toehold on the general election? Dems are so pathetic at articulating why their ideas about government are better, they're perpetually stuck in Republican Jr. mode, the occasional alternative when you're really pissed at Reps and want to send them a message.

So if Benito Giuliani gets the nomination, Hillary will kill him in debates, but it won't matter any more than when Kerry beat Bush in the '04 debates. Still, though, it does make you wonder if just a few Republicans might be so sick of the whole thing they'd just stay home on election day.

But not if Hillary's the opposition. How many people do you suppose would come out specifically to vote against Hillary?

Just when Republicans were even going to have trouble with their vaunted turnout, along come Dems with the novelty candidate to help them out.

Meanwhile, an experienced and serious person like Joe Biden can't even get a look.

It really is unbelievable.

[nolalily]

Well, someone in Edwards' campaign got something right but I would add that it's not just the CLintons. It's all the corporatist politicians in Washington.

Throw the bums out.

[MontanaMaven]

Yup, don't trade one set of insiders and corporatists for another.

[Independent voter]

Geffen : “Everybody in politics lies, but (the Clintons) do it with such ease, it’s troubling.”

[Average]

Edwards screwed himself. FOUR YEARS to prepare for this race and he came up with NOTHING.

[Galvestonians for Dr. Ron Paul]

Condi Rice currently sits on the board at Walmart.
Walmart was approved today to open its first banking institution in Mexico. BBC 10/03/07

[OneEarthling]

Condi Rice does not sit on the board of Wal-mart. At least, not all of them.

[TN60]

I despise Hillary Clinton( Ms. Chipmunk Cheeks or Ms. Bobble head or Ms Thunder Hips) and have the same reaction as to Bush when she speaks. (It IS like fingernails on a blackboard)If there was a more condescenting, corrupt, conniving person on earth, it is she and I tune her out completely. She is a really is a Bush lite.

I worked for Bill's campaign, but now I realize that it is all about him all the time. They have been planning this take over since they were in the White House.

I for one am tired of the Washington insiders telling me that she is anointed and no one else need to apply. These are the same happy insiders who sold us the Iraq war and now the Iran war and Hillary voted for the first bill to put Bush on the road to bomb Iran.

The happy horse shit she puts out now is that she thought Bush would use that vote for the Iraq war for diplomatic purposes is exactly that, horse shit. She turned around and voted against the Levin bill to use all diplomatic means before going to war. Why doesn't someone ask her not only why she voted against the Levin bill but why she didn't go and read the intel before voting. She is a know it all like Bush and will never say she made a mistake.

She will never get a Republican or Independant to vote for her, whereas, I feel that Obama could draw in some of the Republican voters and most of the Independants and win the election.

If you want to insure a loss of the White House in 2008,just vote for her. I will not !!!

As for as the cackle, it is as contrived as her answers to every question posed to her. She is sickening !!!

[RogerHWerner]

Just curious...so then you'd vote for Giuliani over Clinton if he wins the GOP ticket? Or not vote? Or vote for a third party candidate?Giuliani who might ultimately Bush seem like a Mussolini...Thinking in absolutes is generally a mistake so I chose not to speak in absolutes. I don't like Clinton for my own reasons. I would prefer voting for someone I like rather holding my nose and casting my vote for the lesser of two evils, which is what I've done in every election since 1972. I'm tired of this. It's sad that the best person doesn't always get to run for office but that's the way the system works. I agree that we need a new system.

[WorkingClass]

If you always do what you always did.
You'll always get what you always got.

[Ping]

Guiliani was the mayor of NYC. One of the most liberal cities in the world.

But this time I am urging voters to look beyond party. Party affiliation has not worked for the last 15 years. We had a conservative Democrat that harmed the working class in this country in ways that the Republicans never did. We had a conservative Republican that could not stop spending and is fiscally irresponsible. These parties only care about their political clout and yearn to be in power so that they can reward their political benefactors with favors. This country needs to look past the phony rhetoric and lies spouted by both parties and judge the candidate. It's back to basics..look into the candidates eyes and judge if they are honest and truthful. Make your decision based on who would help the PEOPLE of this country instead of the corporations.

[Ping]

Truth honesty and love of country and its people trump political party in this election.

[Independent voter]

I have to concur. I will vote AGAINST Clinton rather than purposefully vote for the Republicans. Just can't stand the woman.

It's unfortunate that some of the other candidates, who have REAL experience, like Biden, Dodd or even Dennis can't seem to catch the MSM limelight.

[Give Peace A Chance]

You're talking about the corporate owned media, that Bill allowed to consolidate during his Presidency. We should all know better than to vote for the corporate sponsored candidate.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

I agree with everything that you say except your statement that Hillary Clinton "will never get a Republican or Independant to vote for her."

I hope that you are right and I am wrong.

Consider this: There are Republicans who may believe that they are independent thinkers but experience has shown that at least some of them are willing to do any foolish thing that a person in authority tells them to do.

The system is already rigged to give the country a limited and false choice.

If, for example, the Republican candidate is ultimately someone who has shown some pleasure in wearing women's makeup and dresses, and if a television preacher or two tells their followers to vote for Hillary Clinton, some of them will do so.

Giuliani is not the only weak Republican candidate and not the only false choice that the military-industrial complex can nominate.

If they truly want Hillary Clinton to win, they will rig it so that even registered Republicans will vote for her.

By the time that the MSM is finished telling everyone how wonderful it was under the Bill Clinton administration, many Democrats as well as Independents and Republicans will have forgotten about the destructive power of NAFTA, Hillary Clinton's vote for the Bankruptcy Bill, her successive votes to authorize more wasteful spending in Iraq, and her other actions to destroy the middle class in favor of the ultra wealthy.

All they will need to do is give the Republicans and Independents a choice that will make the official Republican candidate look worse.

[godlessclif]

I for one am tired of the Washington insiders telling me that she is anointed

Isn't it a co-incidence that the only other candidate that said he is anointed is the French Fascist.
France's interior minister wins unopposed UMP vote - Thatcherite hardman vows: I have changed Sarkozy Anointed Presidential Candidate .

Kings are anointed and Presidents elected.
I googled anointed and John Kerry was also anointed.
Bush says god made him President, but does not use the "A" word.

[lawyeredup]

I can tell TN60 is a certify idiot cuz ur hateful passion is misdirected.

[Misanthrope2]

I agree with most of what TN60 wrote. Clinton is corporate all the way.

[FogBelter]

That President Clinton pushed through NAFTA and WTO where a Republican President would never in a million years been able to is true. The old "boiling the frog" principle at work again.

But then, old Bill did have his charming ways ... like Reagan ... and in the end, isn't that what truly matters?

[RogerHWerner]

You are correct only I'd say Clinton was more of a Trojan Horse than a boiling frog. Whatever...it would be difficult to convince me that NAFTA has accomplished much good for Mexico or the USA and Canada. And indeed, style usually wins out over substance in national elections.

[MontanaMaven]

With Edwards you get both style and substance. His clear and concise way of speaking comes from talking to a jury of his peers. Abe Lincoln too talked short and sweet. No long ramblings. Economy. People like that ability to be clear and optimistic at the same time. Then you add what my rancher husband likes about Edwards. With Edwards you get the repair manual and not just a shiny brochure.

[godlessclif]

Only a hardliner like Nixon could make an alliance
with China, Birchers would cruxify a democrat that did that.

Only Dixie Bill could sell out to the multinationals because the Unions would cruxify a Republican who did that.

[FreedomCorpse]

funny how republican politicians support trade deals just like clintons...they are one and the same on that issue

[Misanthrope2]

Yes, but the devil is in the details. Some trade agreements and quotas can be good for workers.

[kellygrrrl]

America does not seem quite ready for a true POPULIST President.

We are a stubborn bunch, strong of will.
Our collective pride and arrogance hinders our ability to act on our vision.

while I don't believe Edwards can catch up to the lead in this race, I do feel much of his message is coming through. We just might see voters reflecting that somewhere down the road.

[pioneer]

America is more than ready for a populist president. We need a populist president to clean up this Republican and neocon mess.

The problem is that Americans don't know what that means and that they have a choice. They also don't realize that Democrats have been complicit in creating the problems. The Clintons, the DLC and Blue Dogs have not been on our side.

I love Mudcat's approach. He uses language that is hard to not understand. "The Clintons screwed us". They did!!! and are we going to let them do it again???

If the message is clear, people may want to look for real solution with a genuine leader who is on their side. John has always been on the side of regular folk.

Go get 'em Mudcat!!! Tell the truth.

[mcostello]

Bravo pioneer!
One thing I would like to add is that we need to use "class war" in our vernacular.
In this day of the Madison Avenue spin doctor, every policy needs to be looked at through the class war shaded glasses. (terrible metaphor)
The real poeple screwing us know what they want, know how to sell it, and know what the outcome will be. As a regular joe, I know that if the corporatist is gaining, then I am losing.
Ask anyone in the (ex) manufacturing belt. They are all re-training, or working at Chili's.

[godlessclif]

We should have elected William Jennings Bryan in 1896. Our only populist President was Teddy Roosevelt and some patriot had to shoot William McKinley to get him into the White House. It is about time we voted populist. In fact it is way overdue.

[Misanthrope2]

Friend, do you remember which side Bryan was on in the Scopes trial?

Also, and worse, he was a prohibitionist.

[Give Peace A Chance]

Actually, if you read history the middle class had to always fight and die for a decent living. Back in the early 1900s workers were killed by employers for joining unions and striking.

But Americans are not taught American History.

[godlessclif]

Phoney History tells us William Jennings Bryan
was arguing against science. What he was arguing against was the idea that the upper class was racially superior because it was more evolved.

The "Scientific" idea that it was O.K. to exploit the working poor because they were inferior, not as evolved as the bankers.

Letting a woman vote? What next? Let horses vote?

Clarence Darrow was a slick lawyer, working for rich dicks that wanted to teach the inferiority
of working people in schools. Workers were primitive Neanderthals fit only for physical labor.

[peterg76]

"The Clintons did it with NAFTA"

Well, yes, that part is true.

[WigWamWag]

No NAFTA was Carter's baby and Reagan, the Bushs and the Clintons all jumped on board that policy and supported it.

[Ping]

Wrong. Clinton pushed it through. Even Reagan didn't do what Clinton did. Clinton lied to us and screwed the workers of this country. And yes there was that great sucking sound, except it went to China instead of Mexico.

[SKonnery]

They are all going to screw you it's a matter of which one will do it the least!!

[whomung]

Agreed...

Money knows the wind blows different directions... they want to keep making money no matter what... so they need "NeoCon Liberals".... That's why Hill is the anointed one

And we need a populist President... So... go John.... And if you you can't get a fire going, draft Al Gore