Edwards criticizes Obama for view of Reagan

January 18, 2008

By JULIE BOSMAN
New York Times

HENDERSON, Nev. —
The legacy of Ronald Reagan was invoked in the Democratic nominating race on Thursday when John Edwards attacked Senator Barack Obama for remarks he made to a Nevada newspaper suggesting praise for Reagan.
Mr. Obama made the comments in an interview with the editorial board of the newspaper, The Reno Gazette-Journal. He said Reagan had “changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not.”

“He tapped into what people were already feeling, which was, ‘We want clarity, we want optimism, we want, you know, a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing,’ ” Mr. Obama, of Illinois, said.

Speaking at an event on Thursday, Mr. Edwards told the crowd that Mr. Obama used Reagan “as an example of change,” a description with which Mr. Edwards strongly disagreed.

“When you think about what Ronald Reagan did to the American people, to the middle class, to the working people,” Mr. Edwards said, adding that Reagan was intolerant of unions and the labor movement, he “created a tax structure that favored the very wealthiest Americans and caused the middle class and working people to struggle every single day.”

“This president will never use Ronald Reagan as an example for change,” Mr. Edwards added, referring to himself.
The remarks were made as Mr. Edwards tried to be heard in a race that has increasingly focused on the winners of the two Democratic contests so far, Mr. Obama in Iowa and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in New Hampshire.
Bill Burton, a spokesman for Mr. Obama, said Mr. Edwards was mischaracterizing Mr. Obama’s remarks.
“Obviously, Obama strongly disagreed with a lot of what Ronald Reagan did,” Mr. Burton said. “He was simply acknowledging Reagan’s ability to change the political landscape.”

Mr. Edwards has been campaigning heavily in Nevada this week, but is not running television commercials as he marshals resources for later contests. The state’s caucuses will be held on Saturday.

On Friday, he will depart on a tour to include Oklahoma, Missouri, Georgia and South Carolina, among the next states to vote.

**********************************

Here's what Mr. Obama said. You decide.

"When the country was so sick of a blue state president, Carter, Reagan was able to tap into it by being 100% red-state," said Obama. "Reagan knew the electorate was so sick of a blue-state president and blue-state policies, they we're willing to go 100% red. Reagan didn't mince words. He ran on a 100% red-state message. When Reagan won with a 100% red state message, Reagan had a 100% red-state mandate. Reagan knew transformation was all about mandate. Reagan ran a clear red-issue campaign. He never reached out to blue. Reagan was able to bowl over any resistance in Congress because he had a clear 100% red-state mandate. When you have a 100% red-state mandate, no one is surprised by what you do. Reagan, therefore, was able to get all the changes he wanted. Reagan was for those reasons...transformational."

Seems to me (disregarding the nod to Reagan for the moment), Mr Obama makes John Edwards' point - rather than his own. Roughly speaking, it says that bold change and a willingness to be confrontational with entrenched interests is what can change the direction of the country, instead of the conciliatory approach Mr. Obama so frequently touts.