The John Edwards campaign has already provided lots of enjoyment for us this year, and promises even more for the foreseeable future. The candidate sets a record with his most recent flip-flops on how to deal with Iran. First we have a report in the entertainment rag Variety, of all places, dated January 19, 2007, relaying something that Edwards had told a group of supporters at an event at the Endeavor Talent Agency in Beverly Hills, Calif. the previous week (fyi: Edwards has pulled out the old "I didn't say that" line, quickly followed by "that's not what I meant"- but the Variety reporter stands by his account):The aggressively photogenic John Edwards was cruising along, detailing his litany of liberal causes last week until, during question time, he invoked the "I" word -- Israel. Perhaps the greatest short-term threat to world peace, Edwards remarked, was the possibility that Israel would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. As a chill descended on the gathering, the Edwards event was brought to a polite close.Fast forward a little over a week from that event, and let's go overseas to a speech Edwards gave at the Herzliya Conference in Israel on January 22nd, 2007:
Let me be clear: Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons.Now let's look at an article in today's New York Sun, Edwards Talks of Nonaggression Pact with Tehran, reporting on an appearance made by Edwards last night on "Nightline":
...Iran must know that the world won't back down. The recent UN resolution ordering Iran to halt the enrichment of uranium was not enough. We need meaningful political and economic sanctions. We have muddled along for far too long. To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table, Let me reiterate – ALL options must remain on the table.
In an interview set to air on ABC's "Nightline" last night, the 2004 vice presidential nominee was asked whether he would declare that America "will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran."Let's again go back about 35 days to that speech that Edwards gave in Israel. Before he said that the the world (which I assume he is a part of) would not tolerate a nuclear Iran, he praised Ariel Sharon and said that he agreed with Sharon's position that "a strong Israel is a safe Israel and that Israel needs to defend itself against security threats". The Senator then went on to say "The Iranian president's statements such as his description of the Holocaust as a myth and his goals to wipe Israel off the map indicate that Iran is serious about its threats". Now how do those statements reconcile with his statement last night or in Beverly Hills? Answer - they don't.
"I'm just not willing to say that," Mr. Edwards replied, according to a transcript provided by the network. "I know it's a great question to ask a candidate or the president of the United States. ... Iran having a nuclear weapon is not an acceptable thing, but the question is how do we go about, in a responsible way, preventing them from having a nuclear weapon."
Three different positions in a little over one month! John Edwards makes Hillary and Bill look like truthsayers. I hope he stays in this race for a while.
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 2)
16. Does John Edwards Apology now change history so that he did not vote for the war? I mean does it matter if he apologizes for the war vote and If Iraq succeedes does this indicate that he was wrong 2 times? Does his comment about 6 years say that this is the limit for winning a necessary war and if the terrorists simply continue for 6 years and 1 day that is an indication tha they deserve to win. Since when did a war have a limit in which it had to be won? Its like saying in this war, not everything went right??? Of course not everything went right. You would think that someone who is running for President would understand the dynamic of war in which some battles are lost and some are won. What is it that he does not understand about this?
B Davis at 6:40PM on Mar 3rd 2007
17. You're swinging at air with this silliness. There isn't anything contradictory about the situation. Iran does need to be prevented from obtaining nuclear arms, we cannot take any options off the table, diplomacy would be the ideal means to settle this and a nuclear strike from Israel would be a complete and global disaster.
What I find it humorous and entertaining is that the right continues to come up with such terms. It's like 3rd graders arguing, "you're a flip flopper". Meanwhile Dubya, who has the reductionist mentality of a third grader, continues to stubbornly ride a sinking ship into the floor of the ocean. There's currently no thought behind the decision making process on the right. Just because your right doesn't mean you cannot be wrong. Changing course doesn't equate to failure, rather it shows an ability to think and rationalize, a confidence in being able to admit mistakes and true accountability (which is something this administration does not understand).
If you want to do your party a favor, use your voice to give it some direction. This assault on Edwards shows a lack of class, dignity and intelligence.
JMReyes at 11:17AM on Mar 22nd 2007