And the feeling was mutual. Edwards attacked Kerry on the poverty issue, saying he doubted Kerry would make the poor a priority. He criticized Kerry for being inconsistent on his approach and votes concerning the Iraq war. And Edwards implied that in 1969 he and his parents were "sitting around a kitchen table ... trying to figure out how we would pay for college ... that is a difference between me and Sen. Kerry." There's much, much more on the Republican National Committee Web page (http://www.rnc.org).
Don't look for the big media to point out much, or any, of this. They'll call Edwards a "moderate" or "progressive," while they label President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney "conservative" or "very conservative," which is precisely what the media called them in 2000.
A preview of the way the big media will treat Edwards (and Kerry) occurred early Tuesday (July 6) when it became known that Edwards would be Kerry's choice. CBS' Byron Pitts gushed: "He is a newcomer, but he is by no means a novice to this business. He was on the Senate Intelligence Committee, he is considered one of the best debaters on the Senate floor. ... The expectation is he will be a good match next to Dick Cheney in a debate." Pitts theorized that Edwards could "deliver his home state of North Carolina."
That is not what Kerry said last February. According to The New York Times (Feb. 3), Kerry said: "Edwards says he's the only one who can win states in the South. ... He can' even win his own state."
But Pitts didn't explain how Edwards could win North Carolina since Edwards' approval rating was just 37 percent, according to an April 7 poll published in the Greensboro (N.C.) News & Record. A Winston-Salem Journal poll published in September 2002 showed President Bush beating Edwards by nearly 2-1.
The Bush-Cheney reelection team should have no problem campaigning against these two. Call Kerry "lightweight" and Edwards "lighter weight." And would someone in the Democratic leadership mind sending an apology to Dan Quayle?