Behind the Edwards Surge: Right Message at the Right Time
Much was made of Illinois Senator Barack Obama’s superb speech to a huge crowd of Iowa Democrats at the mid-November Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner in Des Moines. Without a doubt, it helped to propel Obama ahead of New York Senator Hillary Clinton in polls conducted in the weeks after the event.
But Obama’s speech in November may not turn out to be the definitional statement of the fight for Iowa.
What could turn out to be the most critical comment of the campaign came from John Edwards in the last debate between the Democratic contenders — and the former senator from North Carolina may well claim the caucus-night victory that is the reward for delivering the right message at the right time.
It wasn’t a great rhetorical flourish. It wasn’t even a new statement. Rather, it was a particularly pointed and effective restatement of the core anti-corporate message of his campaign.
But it came precisely when Iowa Democrats were getting serious about the caucuses. And it gave Edwards the boost he needed to get back in the competition — and, he is, very much in the competition now.
No serious observer of the December 13 debate in Des Moines doubted that the standout performance, and the standout message, was that of Edwards.
Indeed, undecided voters assembled in focus groups that watched the debate for the major television networks rated Edwards off the charts. That’s going to help the 2004 Democratic nominee for vice president as the Iowa caucuses approach. Despite the intense focus on the campaigns of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, most polls suggest that Edwards is very much in the running in Iowa. And rightly so.
To a far greater extent than Obama or Clinton, Edwards has struck at the heart of issues that should matter most in the race to replace not just George W. Bush, but the Bush agenda of corporate giveaways, job-crushing free trade deals, war profiteering in Iraq, and subprime mortgage profiteering in Indiana, Idaho, Illinois and, yes, Iowa.
Edwards summed up his increasingly aggressive and powerful anti-corporate themes with a declaration: “What makes America America is at stake: jobs, the middle class, health care, preserving the environment in the world for future generations.
“But all those things are at risk. And why are they at risk? Because of corporate power and corporate greed in Washington, D.C. And we have to take them on. You can’t make a deal with them. You can’t hope that they’re going to go away. You have to actually be willing to fight. And I want every caucus-goer to know I’ve been fighting these people and winning my entire life. And if we do this together, rise up together, we can actually make absolutely certain, starting here in Iowa, that we make this country better than we left it.”
But the former senator’s most effective statement at the Des Moines Register debate on Thursday was one that reflected his deep level of engagement with working people in the upper Midwest, an engagement born of long months spent in Iowa and neighboring states — at a time when Clinton and Obama were spending considerably more time fighting over who had better relations with the media moguls on Hollywood’s A-list and in the suites of Manhattan’s mortgage manipulators.
Edwards got to know workers in Iowa. He stood with them in their struggles.
Turning a broad question about human rights toward the specific issue of trade policy, the former senator said that human rights, human needs and human values “should be central to our trade policy.”
“But,” he added, “if you look at what’s happened with American trade policy, look at what America got: Big corporations made a lot of money, are continuing to make a lot of money in China. But what did America get in return? We got millions of dangerous Chinese toys. We lost millions of jobs.
“And right here in Iowa, the Maytag plant in Newton closed. A guy named Doug Bishop, who I got to know very well, had worked in that plant, and his family had worked in that plant literally for generations. And his job is now gone. The same thing, by the way, happened in the plant that my father worked in when I was growing up. It is so important that we stop allowing these corporate powers and corporate profits to run America’s policy, whether it’s trade policy, how we engage with China. This is not good for America. It’s not good for American jobs. And it’s not good for working people in this country.”
That’s an issue Edwards has taken far, far more seriously than his opponents in what is now a three-way race in Iowa. And that seriousness has benefitted the former senator.
Remembering the workers who have been battered by the failed trade policies of the Clinton and Bush administrations matters. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, both supporters of recent trade agreements, have never connected on the same level. Edwards, who once had a shaky record on these issues but has come to be a passionate proponent of fair trade, comes across as the candidate who gets it. That’s why he won the debate in Des Moines. That’s why every serious survey that has been conducted in recent days shows him within striking distance of the Iowa win that once was assumed to be Clinton’s for the taking and that was then supposed to be Obama’s.
No one who is watching the rapid evolution of this race is any longer counting Edwards out in Iowa — or in the rest of a yet-to-be-defined race for the Democratic nomination.
John Nichols’ new book is The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders’ Cure for Royalism. Rolling Stone’s Tim Dickinson hails it as a “nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic [that] combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the ‘heroic medicine’ that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to ‘reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.’”
Copyright © 2007 The Nation
And that’s why Ralph Nader is willing to endorse Edwards for president. The only reason Ralph Nader ran on these issues is because no one else was, and they needed to be addressed.
I’m waiting to hear from the Nader haters about this, but I won’t hold my breath, because they always need to blame someone else for their own shortcomings - that is, voting for corporate shills, and then blaming anyone else for getting what they vote for - a corporate shill. It hardly matters which party a corporate shill belongs to, it’s still a corporate shill.
Of course, George is in a separate class, a megalomaniac who arrived dressed in drag. Another person who makes me uneasy is Hillary. I don’t like hidden agendas.
Too bad this article didn’t appear in USA Today or the NY Times; it’s infuriating the way the corporate media is imposing a blackout on John Edwards by harping on the Clinton/Obama clash.
And particularly shocking when you learn that last week’s polls, which pitted Democratic candidates against Republicans (instead of each other), showed Edwards BEATING EVERY GOP candidate, and by better margins, than any other Democrat!!
John,
I grew up in Madison, Wisconsin. I used to respect you. But your ongoing and thinly-veiled ignorance of Dennis Kucinich’s platform and campaign have made me become suspect even of The Nation’s political stature as the voice of the people.
Step up to the plate. Stop ignoring Kucinich’s candidacy. If you have well-founded and well-reasoned reservations about supporting him, speak up. But your blindered editorials have become tiring for lack of awareness. You risk becoming part of the dark underbelly of the MSM, as does your magazine. Do your homework, and step up to the plate: your words still merit reading, in my personal opinion. But my patience is not eternal.
For anyone interested in facts or Edwards record as a US Senator you may find interesting that he voted for the Bush/Cheney Energy Plan; he voted to defund renewables; he supports the death penalty; he stands against equal rights for gay people: meaning he opposses gay marriage. The League of Conservation Voters who track voting records never gave him better than a 34% rating on the environment. He once voted to cut off debate on CAFE Standards for the benifit of his corporate handlers in the auto industry. Now Edwards tells us he is a born again anti corporate populist. At least until their money hits his bank account and then watch him flip flop right back in their laps.
Any one who thinks Edwards is going to reign in big money is living in a dream world.
BeForKids writes:
“And that’s why Ralph Nader is willing to endorse Edwards for president. The only reason Ralph Nader ran on these issues is because no one else was, and they needed to be addressed”.
No truer words have been written!!!
thewonderingyou:
Of interest to you: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080107/editors
John Nichols has been with D.K. in New Hampshire on http://www.kucinichtv.com and CONSTANTLY stopped sort of endorsing him in all venues. WHY?! Could it be his magazine’s policy? I have NO DOUBT that he is a FIRM Kucinich backer!
Maybe he is being a “real” journalist by not endorsing a personal choice? I just don’t know.
Stephen V. Riley: Are you ignoring Kucinich also. The statement about Edwards “alone” is NOT true!
Funny… Dennis Kucinich has been saying the same thing for years but only when Edwards mentions it, does it get coverage.
I’ve been an Edwards man from the start. While my progressive friends are arguing over Clinton and Obama and give me funny looks when I state my case for Edwards.
Now, if Edwards would just come out for Kucinich’s Single Payer Health Care system, he’d be perfect.
If Iowans are going to continue their unsustainable petro-fired destruction of Americans’ physical health through “cheap” beef, destruction of the Great Plains topsoil and Mississipi delta ecosystems, depletion of the Ogallala Aquifer, and destruction of livelihoods of tens of thousands of farmers practicing centuries-old sutainable agriculture traditions, then Iowans might as well vote for the political candidates who will keep the petro-fires stoked. Disastrous behavior should at least be consistent.
Huck,
John Edwards is very honest about admitting his past mistakes, starting with his vote to invade Iraq. Apparently, you haven’t seen his policy booklet which has a section on gay/lesbian equal rights (yes, he stops short of endorsing gay marriage, but he’s almost there–his wife Elizabeth already is–it’s just a matter of semantics). He’s been endorsed by Friends of the Earth, his past votes notwithstanding (he’s against nuclear and coal power). So, yes, he’s changed, and for the better, on some issues. But he also has a record of fighting for the poor and middle class. If we want change in Washington, we can start by electing someone who is running on donations and public money. The bottom line is that he’s the best viable candidate (sorry DK supporters). I wish Ralph Nader would endorse Edwards ahead of the Iowa caucuses and NH primary, it would give him the visibility he needs (as the mainstream media is only interested in the Clinton-Obama race). Then again, Nader has a lot of ill-will, so it may not be the endorsement Edwards needs.
It makes sense to me that the corporte media would limit the exposure of an anti-corporate candidate. I don’t like it, but there is a long history of how the media (mis)shapes the information we have, the decisions we make, and the world we live in.
We are taking power away from the mainstream media by having this discussion. In the past, we would read an article and that was it.
This is more democratic.
Thanks to everyone who is participating.
Edwards/Kucinich
Edwards/Nader?
mcpete December 27th, 2007 3:41 pm
Edwards/Kucinich
Although D.K. will ALWAYS be my first choice, I could live with that.
Then in 2016: Kucinich/Sheehan
max said:
“John Edwards is very honest about admitting his past mistakes, starting with his vote to invade Iraq.”
I wish he would admit his mistake in supporting marihuana prohibition and the racist, fascist WOD.
Otherwise, if Nader supports him, that could be good enough for me.
>>> Nichol writes …[what] should matter most in the race to replace not just George W. Bush, but the Bush agenda of corporate giveaways, job-crushing free trade deals, war profiteering in Iraq…
And that is exactly the issue. If you vote for Hillary you are still supporting the Bush agenda, but now Hillary will be overseeing it.
I would like to see Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader’s views brought into the larger discussion which would hit at the core of what needs to change. As an Iraqi once said of the regime change in Iraq (after Saddam was removed and the US was ‘in charge’) was this, ‘Different jockey, same camel.’
If we just get another mainstream democrat in it will just be business as usual, just a different jockey.
We need a fundamental change in why and how we do things. Corporations and greed have never taken this country forward other than let us be entertained with our video games while the injustice and wars continue.
peace and justice
AG
I guess Edwards’ anti-corporate stance doesn’t extend to insurance companies however, since his plan is right in there with the other ‘corporate’ candidates’ (except DK)–insurance company welfare thru mandated health insurance. On that basis alone, I can’t vote for him.
John Nichols advocates impeachment for Bush.
He should know, however, that Edwards voted for the Patriot Act and the Resolution supporting the invasion of Iraq.
Neither Edwards, Obama, or Clinton do it for me. If either Kucinich or Paul run as independents, they will get my vote.
John Edwards, I’m behind you, and you’ve got a fighting chance to make it to the White House!
the core issue of current political activity must be the economic collapse. edwards fails this litmus test i fear.
I prefer Dennis Kucinich too but would consider vooting for Edwards. Anyone who would consider voiting for Ron Paul (especially over Edwards) isn’t paying attention to the fact that he’s a xenophobic, racist, anti-science Christer.
I can’t understand why so many people are taken in by oily trial lawyer and undistinguished centrist former senator John Edwards. Are they fooled by his cheesy smile and televangelist swagger? Or just by his last-minute pandering words to the left? Is there anything in his Senate record to support his pledge that he’ll fight for the little guy against corporate interests? Does he even tell us how he’ll do that? Has any candidate ever made an emptier campaign pledge?
And what does Edwards’s last-minute surge mean? Good news for Hillary Clinton, I think. This is coming out of Obama’s potential support. A man with genuine, unmistakable progressive credentials is losing ground to a man who not only doesn’t have the bona fides, but is notably unconvincing in his assumed role, just because Obama is following a strategy to win the presidency, while Edwards is desperately clawing his way into the race for Democratic nominee. And the likely result is to boost the least progressive of the three.
to all you kucinich supporters out there (including myself), what a novel concept for an edwards/kucinich ticket. and for all you edwards supporters, why not convince your man that the only snowball in hell chance he has against hellbent hillary is in fact to team up with the only possible choice to help him get elected. really, it’s all about how badly somebody wants something. if edwards wants it, this is the way. and mr. kucinich, seriously, you are the only candidate with a grasp on reality. unfortunately, we’re not dealing with reality. we’re dealing with a country full of moronic sheople, wandering aimlessly. we need a shepherd and a guard dog. that, amongst this crop of candidates, is edwards/kucinich.
Far be it from me to suggest what should be changed and how to change it. I do know that with corporate interference in our government, we will pay and pay and pay. They have been allowed to write the rules, appoint who will represent us and make us pay the way. At least 7 Presidents warned us of corporate interference.
My selection for the next President is John Edwards. His rhetoric appears to be in the right direction. “You can’t live with them and you can’t live without them.” They will be here always, but KEEP THEM OUT OF GOVERNMENT!! Their money talks and it is the responsibility of our Justice Department to regulate corporations activity in dealing with the Government. It took them years to penetrate the right places. They have the resources and patience, we can’t wait that long. Instead of beautiful speeches and trying to look their best before the House Cameras, they need to act, act, act, act. TELL THEM !!!!
Jaded Prole,
I love your ad hominem “logic.”
Ron Paul is against the War on Drugs. He would decriminalize marijuana at a minimum for medical use.
Ron Paul is against imperialism and wants to pull ALL of our troops out of foreign countries.
Ron Paul is against all forms of government intrusion into our privacy. Specifically he wants to repeal the Patriot Act, the National (real) ID Act, restore Habeus Corpus, and eliminate NSA wiretapping, eavesdropping, biometric databases, and the use of NSA satellites against the American people. He also says he would support measures to outlaw any practice of torture.
On Meet the Press, Paul stated that the U.S. is creeping towards fascism and suggested that this fascism wasn’t a virulent form, but a subtle “soft” form. He gave this form a name: corporatism.
This says it all for me: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/22378876#22378876
Name on f__kin Democrap that will do that (with the exception of Dennis Kucinich - and I’m not even sure he’ll go that far).
ah, logrithmic,
sadly, last i heard, and read, ron paul is pro-life. that means he is part of a large group of twisted individuals who believe they have the right to dictate to women what their personal rights are. therein, pardon the pun, lies the rub.
When it comes to politicians, I do not listen much to what they SAY. I look back at what they have DONE. There is a BIG difference between Edwards, the candidate and Edwards, what he has actually done. He sounds good on the stump, but his record shows that he has not gotten anything done.
Mr. Kucinich has my admiration. He is a man of principles & sticks to them. Unfortunetly that reflects in what he has been able to accomplish. Unfortunetly politics is the art of compromise. To get something done, you sometimes have to be willing to accept less than what you want in order to advance your cause closer to what you want.
I know that it sucks, but that is the way it is. Edwards talks how he will fight the system and get things done. The man is on drugs! He will get his butt kicked by the system. Anyone who thinks otherwise is smoking some pretty strong stuff.
If you are looking for a candidate who will be able to get stuff done, you need to look at Chris Dodd. He is also a man of principles. Remember, Senators Biden, Clinton, Dodd & Obama all promised to vote against a FISA bill that included amnesty for the telecom companies, but it was only Chris Dodd who rushed back to Washington to fight the bill on the Senate floor for 11 hours before it was taken off the table. This man a true patriot! He defended our Constitution for us when even his own party was going to knuckle under to Bush. Senator Dodd has a long history of getting things done because he knows how to work with both sides to get things done. He might not be as good looking as Edwards or maybe his speeches don’t sound so populist, but the man knows how to get things done. Results count! Isn’t that what we REALLY want? A man with principles who knows how to get things done! Maybe he won’t go out and “kick the systems ass”, he will just get things done and he won’t let the Constitution get trampled anymore!
We ALL would love to see the world change to the pie in the sky world that we want to have. I too would love to see a lot of major changes made, BUT I am a realist enough to know that is just not going to happen. We have to work within the system to get things done. Candidates can say that they are going to do this or going to do that, but unless they have the experience of knowing how to get things done, they are doomed to failure. We don’t need to hear any more talk, we need to elect a man who will never violate our Constitutional rights, who will work with all sides to get the peoples work done! Chris Dodd is that man!!!
Paul is against abortion. I’m not saying I agree with everything he stands for. But I do agree with 85% of what he stands for - especially those issues he stresses in his current run for president - an executive run amok, the creeping fascism at home, an illegal and imperial foreign policy, and the virtual evisceration of the Constitution.
Think about it folks! The Democraps, including Clinton, voted for the Military Commission Act. What is that you say? Here’s what it does:
See link: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7622
“In a White House ceremony, George Bush signed the Military Commissions Act (MCA) now known as “the torture authorization act,” but it’s more far-reaching than that. It grants the administration extraordinary unconstitutional powers to detain, interrogate and prosecute alleged terror suspects and anyone claimed to be their supporters. It also lets the President call anyone anywhere in the world an “unlawful enemy combatant” and empowers him to arrest and incarcerate those accused indefinitely in military prisons without needing corroborating evidence proving guilt. The law states for persons detained that “no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause for action whatsoever…. relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military commission….including challenges to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions.”
MCA further scraps habeas protection (dating back to 1215 in the Magna Carta) for domestic and foreign enemies of the state, citizens and non-citizens alike, and says “Any person is punishable… who….aids, abets, counsels, commands, or procures” and in so doing helps a foreign enemy, provides “material support” to alleged terrorist groups, engages in spying, or commits other offenses previously handled in civil courts.
Other key elements of the act include:
– legalizing torture against anyone and lets the President decide what procedures can be used on his own authority;
– denying detainees international law protection and lets the executive interpret it;
– empowering the President to convene “military commissions” to try anyone he designates an “unlawful enemy combatant,” and hold them in secret detention indefinitely;
–denying speedy trials or any at all;
– allowing evidence obtained by torture or coerced testimony to be used against detainees in trial proceedings;
– permitting hearsay and secret evidence to be used; and
– denying due process, destroying human dignity, mocking the rule of law, and establishing the principle of kangaroo court justice for anyone the executive targets.”
Your rights under the Constitution have been obliterated. And, as some have pointed out, without Dodd’s threat of a filibuster, the Democraps would’ve rolled over and let a new FISA law become law, one that would forgive lawbreaking by the telecomm companies!
In addition, has as been written about here on Common Dreams, the Democraps lined up behind this new Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism bill. This bill will permit the drawing up of legislation to further disempower the American people.
You know, yes, abortion is an important right. But so are all of the rights we have based on the Constitution. These rights are being gutted and Paul is the only candidate running who has made and objection to this a centerpiece of his campaign. He sure has my vote if he becomes an independent.
Here is what Nader said not what he is purported to have said: take the entire thing in context people and note his attacks on the Democrat Party.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=77200&mesg_id=77200
I supported Dodd in his fight against the revised FISA. But where was the filibuster on the Military Commissions Act? On the Patriot Act? Etc.? Nowhere…
Dodd is also heavily tied to the banking industry. That’s right, the same group that gave us the subprime mess and is now looking for a taxpayer bailout. Sad but true.
With the one exception of Kucinich,I don’t know a single Democrat that is not in bed with the corporations.
In the this story that I am writing and speaking about it becomes clear that the lag time of science to accurately report its findings is part of the problem. But even if they had had this data before the special interests in Washington the corporate world would have scoffed at the science and continued to put future generations at risk. This science is only acceptable because the world has accepted the findings of global warming. That is the other 170 nations not the USA
The time lag of a thousands years makes science affecting the oceans completely unimportant when a lag of only ten years to reduce emissions by 80% seems to me more difficult to achieve because of the economic issues. if we are to avoid the tipping point the positive backs loops must be avoided if possible but the American Enterprise Institute, scoffs at this because of economic reasons. An entire change in the global economic patterns will have to change and not one of the candidates of the guts to come out with it and not Edwards either.
From the issues of Energy, getting at least 80MPG and changing CAFÉ standards is just the beginning of the changes necessary and we need a person with courage and the ability to stand up and show America that he has the courage to fight all big business , who does not pay taxes, and exports all jobs wherever the profit margin is best. Iowa heard Edwards when he said he would fight special interests. Almost every problem we can look at has its roots in the values of the corporate world and how they have distorted all values towards their own ends of making profit. For example, the acidity in the oceans is bad news not only for the life within the ocean but for the fact that it makes the ocean less able to absorb the excess carbon dioxide and therefore exacerbates global warming and climate change.
The UN, like most organizations built around the G8 nations and economics which is the number one issue not only to fight global poverty. The UN Goals are designed to do two things try the save humanity and try to save the world economy at the same time. The Kyoto treaty is problematic in that its policies promote continued pollution aimed at keeping the world economy afloat. It is economics that keeps the USA from joining. If the UN were really interested at saving this planet the UN would do away with pollution trading altogether and institute a crash rapid change to alternative energy and an end to global toxicity. But that is the truth and diplomacy is the method of compromise and lies. Politicians really just let you think they care, they want you to think, as all diplomats do. that they are really interested in change.
I have talked with delegates from the UN member nations and many of them have said to me if they really said what some of us NGO’s are saying that would be recalled and never have a job again. Most comments are very nice to hear but like the Congress they also come down beside the point as most politicians do. Like most comments from the present Congress and in the blogs or wherever they avoid reality and don’t deal with the issue head on. Most are still looking for the magic technological bullet or some disingenuous politician that will save all and we can continue on the way we are going with ever more growth and ever more and greater GDP as the bankers advise. Any candidate that does not talk about environmental issues first on the agenda, including Kucinich, betrays America and the world. BUT IF ANYONE THINKS THAT BIG BUSINESS WILL CHANGE FORGET IT! MONEY AND PROFIT AND POWER. . .THAT ALL!
But there really there isn’t any quick fix. I am a filmmaker and have worked on the environmental change issues since 1978 so I have a fair amount of experience to speak. While LED light-bulbs is good and 40 MPG for cars is better it is not the at least the 80MPG that is necessary and refits for all existing cars rather than exporting them to the developing world which is presently being done and will pick up speed as restrictions rise in the western world. We continue to export the problem from the USA to other countries as if we don’t share this world with other people. And while Jesse Jackson talks of the black people of the world, his particular crusade its the people of the entire world at issue.
It was GE that killed the electric car not long ago who in Congress who complained about that? INSTEAD THE BIG 3 IN DETROIT INTRODUCED THE HUMMMER. Whether health care, environment, energy alternatives, toxicity in the environment or any and all of these it comes down to who has the courage to talk about all of them rather than focusing on the head of a pin the one important issue to avoid dealing with the others. Like health Care for example but lets talk about health care? The advance of environmentally based health problems by a toxic environment and air related pandemics is what we are looking at in the next few years with rising temperatures. The candidates are discussing universal health care? Try that on for the global health care because what’s there will very soon be here because all the sicknesses have been on the rise because of the policies of the USA. Here try this fact on, three percent of the world’s population the USA, produces seventy three percent of global toxicity. You wonder where cancer comes from?
The people of the USA have been so ill informed as to what true change would really do and mean to this country and the change in leadership. Mr. Present bad president has taken your mind away from the really important problems by creating a false war and rejecting all the great innovation and industry. America could have been in the forefront by building innovation with manufacturing aimed at environmental invention to reduce global warming. New jobs and technology for America by saving the environment rather than making it worse. No one could be worse than George Bush. . . No one not even the dog catcher, at least the dog catcher has compassion for animals!
The real problem is not Kucinich as president, the problem is that he puts his emphasis on the wrong problem at the wrong time. The problem is getting him to address a credible platform of ideas. I say to him while impeachment is necessary, it is unlikely. There is not enough time and the issues most pressing are again avoided, like the environment and those really important issues before the congress now like kids health care! The issue of this election will affect the environment, economy and the future of the USA as no others. Yet if more than 50% of eligible voters cast their votes it will be a miracle because of regressive US election laws. It is compulsory for every one to vote in Australia. None of the candidates are really talking on the major points of the environment in association with the economy or health care and reform laws for elections.
The environmental news coming out is not new but it is very grave and keeps being pushed to more urgency as new research comes to light. If any one reading this comment cares to look at the website of NASA, the research papers of James Hansen in particular that were published long before Gore was on the scene and many since, they would understand that we really can not deal with much more than one degree to two and half degrees Fahrenheit of warming at its maximum to ward off the most serious effects of industrial societies pollution and to offset this growing catastrophe.
At about two and half degrees warming which is presently in the pipeline we will be dealing with about 550 ppm of carbon in the atmosphere, at the turn of the century perhaps more. Since industry will not cut back without governments legislating it. We will actually go above the tipping point of one and half degrees warming. The courage to slow the economy and turn its direction is what is necessary. To keep the global temperature at no more than 430 ppm , the absolute figure to avoid the major positive feedback loops, it will require economic changes most nations, including CHINA will not make! Therefore the start of the catastrophe is scheduled to kick in by 2020 or earlier if nothing is done quickly. Positive feedback are starting now with Methane now being released on the tundra at four times the addition to greenhouse gasses and causing the poles and glaciers to melt more rapidly, or has no one noticed?
The below scenario excerpted from the climate articles here on Common Dreams tell us clearly without rapid change runaway climate change and their feedback loops are in reach within 10 to 30 years if nothing is done rapidly. The positive feedback loops will melt the remainder of the glaciers and perhaps dump Greenland into the sea as well. Also, the melting of additional ice-shelf’s at the poles. That means perhaps a 3 to 30 foot ocean rise by the end of this century, but the process is beginning now and in 20 years or less without rapid change in economic direction the human race will reach a point of no return. The so called news and other media continue to bend the information toward the global economic agenda thus minimizing its importance. India for example is less concerned about climate change than they are about economic production thanks to the G8, although their neighbor Bangladesh is slipping into the sea . Still in India, there are several moves in the direction of smaller is better concepts of reality. GOOD BUT POSSIBLY TOO LATE!
There will be sufficient human displacement of people on this planet to bring American citizens into a nightmare scenario that makes the present Mexican border problem a walk in the park. What about the transfer of health risks as a result of this problem? Not to mention water and food related issues and the economy, always the economy.
Yet is seems the political discussion rests on the complete list of talking points in isolation, such as Clinton’s health package and its cost, rather than what is really at stake which is human survival. These folks on the stage wanting to be president rarely talk to the complete interrelated package of all these issues and more. The media reduces the public debate to its most simplistic level and all here are arguing about one issue or another rather than the entire package which a true leader must address. The media keeps the public dumbed down for obvious reasons they represent the money people. As a result we become unable to talk about moving radically to deal with climate change the first and major issue which affects all other issues and is completely related to economic change.
The world does not have (much later) before a more aggressive approach to all the issues beginning with climate change! Remember New Orleans many more of those and nothing is being done there, the USA is trying to make Pakistan a democracy instead. Within next 10 to 20 years is where it all hangs. If nothing is done very soon it will mark the beginning of the end for the human race. Those appear to be the facts and no technology will stop runaway climate change once it begins, indeed if we look at the melting poles the worst case is much more apparent than formerly believed . . .it has already begun!!
Perhaps it might be too late now, according to James Lovelock, in his view the feedback loops have begun. James Hansen at NASA makes a very compelling case for the time frame for action, 8 to 10 years, the term of the next president of the USA and that is why who it is so important! I think anyone who really wishes to be informed should go to the websites of these people mentioned, the IPCC of James Hansen, NASA. It is technical information but worth taking the time to inform yourself. The answer is to start working quickly for change and vote for those candidates who speak of change and another direction and who represent ideas rather than special interests.
For example the best work would be to defeat the pro-business Clintons and elect Kucinich or Obama or possibly a joint ticket while we know they have an outside chance they are the best possibility for change. But we all know business interests will prevail with Clinton capturing the vote and a pro-business vote is a vote against the environment. No one running on the democratic side could be worse than Bush.
But anyone who can think understands that the business interests control the environmental agenda and most candidates. The republicans will continue the work of burying the planet as will pro-business democratic candidates most of whom have been bought, whether by health interests or anything else concerning big money.
The facts concerning climate science is what is important. What the environmental facts really suggest is economic depression in the West in the near term if we want to save the world. There really is no quick fix do you think Wall Street or all of you out there with your 401ks will take a chance? But if we are really serious about saving the planet (no one wants to hear that if they are connected to big money) it means voting for economic and environmental legislation limiting pollution and green house gasses and taking another direction in terms of the economic picture. . .in any event that is change!
But the environment, water, energy production these are the real issues of this election campaign but no one would dare mention them in association with change in economic direction for fear of defeat. A redirection and a retooling of the global economy and of America is in order and that is not a popular issue on Wall street or people invested in Wall street. . .most everyone in one way or another.
We have to change rapidly and move to a none-stop production of environmental invention and energy alternatives for the western world and developing nations rapidly. It also means rapid technology transfer for the developing world without delay, this may save us some time. A cut of 80% of the carbon emissions within the next 10 years is in order and it must be done beginning now and well on the way before 2012 the next date for Kyoto. Kyoto is a western world fabrication to tell us we can keep polluting while where figuring a way to deal with this crisis economically.
A change of the present direction of economic production and fast move in a different direction economically is required by anyone that can think and put simple figures in context of this crisis. The world is waiting for this move by the Americans and watch the dollar rise rapidly against other currencies once this plan would be announced if ever. This is why this upcoming election is so critical and the results of it will determine whether the human race survives. . . . It is that critical!
The economic change in direction could possibly reemploy a lot of people who have lost their work in the polluting industries. This is the challenge to America to remake itself after eight years of the Bush/Cheney regime. It is equivalent to a fight for survival that required the retooling of America at the outbreak of WW 2. It requires change in the so-called war on terror, a Bush fabrication advanced by the media which is a money centered mind conditioning creation and finally, it means leaving Iraq, and using those resources to fight the real enemy to survival, the western consumer, hydro carbon based, societies of the western world.
Who knows that might mean less of an investment in China and more of an investment the western world for a healthier environment? And the Chinese might follow that example as well.
Which candidate will say this to America? Which candidate will really tell the truth? If they did they wouldn’t have a chance in this election because Americans don’t want to hear that! Any one having the courage to really tell the truth would find themselves on the next train to Siberia; they would be shouted down by the crowds of people on the stump and many on this blog. saying what the hell do you know anyway? “This is too scary for me!”
But the economy is the issues and that is determined by the war in Iraq. The illegal Bush-war that Kucinich wants to impeach Bush/Cheney for creating but takes us into another direction and one not well thought out. He is focused on the lies of Bush rather than the future of the world.
The production of alternative energy will soak up the idle job market, indeed it is doing so now! With a shift to the priority of economic production and development directed at saving this world and its equilibrium, means in simple terms a crash economic change which is vitally necessary, without that we are done. If any one thinks that we can continue with an oil economy and business as usual with a consumer based society, they are living in the world of denial which so much of the western world occupies. The below is a light message compared with what the truth really is: from UN sources of information!
“The world needs to spend 1.6 percent of global economic output annually through 2030 to stabilize the carbon stock and meet the 3.6-degree Fahrenheit temperature target. Rich countries, the biggest carbon emitters, should lead the way and cut emissions at least 30 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050. Developing nations should cut emissions 20 percent by 2050, the UNDP says.”
The above is letting you down lightly is really not what the actual projections are. The world crisis will crash in on its regional global populations is what the information below is saying. There really is no place in this discussion for a 5.4 to 7.2 Fahrenheit degree rise in temperature. . . .this scenario painted with the these numbers below is a different planet closer to Mars not Earth. The news media play with numbers like the lottery. We can tolerate one degree and perhaps two and half degrees warming at the outside, . . .in the next 50 to 90 years. . .that’s it!!!!! An additional 3 degrees to four degrees Fahrenheit is three more degrees greater than this climate and its creatures can sustain or endure without collapse!! This quoted from the recent UN assertions here in Common Dreams and from the real information by scientists not political organization:
“a temperature rise of between 5.4 and 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit (3 and 4 degrees Celsius) would displace 340 million people through flooding, droughts would diminish farm output, and retreating glaciers would cut off drinking water from as many as 1.8 billion people, the report says.” this is an understatement and conservative.
The above report is economically associated and conservative as well as misleading!!! Forget this idea of 5.4 to 7.2 Fahrenheit of warming that is the Martian landscape because it allows for the runaway positive feedbacks to take hold. Whomever believes this world can sustain this degree of warming is either working for the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank or is gathering this information from the laboratory at XXON/Mobile or its publicists!!??????
Meanwhile the group here is discussing who will give us better health care on a dying planet and impeachment of Bush a good way to avoid dealing with the truth. We can be suspect of anyone who says they have the truth. The need for understanding this current cast of characters wanting to be president is important. None of this group has the faintest idea of what we are really dealing with in terms of global warming numbers concerning the environment, and if they did they would not tell the public. They know it’s bad and their advisers are telling them they can’t deal with this issue to get elected by the masses.
The masses? Unless you have not heard, these are the people above who are worrying where their next bag of groceries comes from and the money to pay the rent! They really don’t give a damn about the environmental issues. . And have no time for thinking about 10 to 20 years from today that has no realty attached to it for most Americans or the rest of the four and half billion people on this Earth in the same situation. . . .
Or, for the rest of the population working for and controlled by big business and big money. . .that is what this election is really about and if one thinks about the complexity of all these interrelated issues we know that we can not beat the odds business will win. That means the future for humanity is limited even for the one percent that has everything. Sure elect Edwards, Obama, or Kucinich or any combination of most of the Democrats that are not funded by big business for this election. This is the reality of this time we still live, on this, still beautiful planet.
As always, it is the Bush nightmare that suspends and forestalls human action forward. if there was a single problem for this world in the past eight years it has been this throwback from the Jurassic period that occupies the Black House steeped in the blood of untold millions in this world both present and future. How much I like the call to optimism, to human adventure and responsible action. I rings like the bell of the angels and like so many who write her I am happy for those who are secure in their optimism, more people at Bali should get your vibes and act responsibly. Having said that I have written here on the problem and tried often to get the powers to be accept we have a really serious problem. I work at the UN and UNESCO in Europe, I know that politics keeps action from happening.
I must say, I loathe the establishment because my concerned friends, it comes down to vested interests, greed and the economy as so many here writing understand. I am afraid that we have lost this little game of truth or consequences. But if the truth really be known, the power elite and the one percent who have everything and own everyone really don’t care if some three billion people on this globe perish.
This is the reality of the circumstances of this situation of climate change and its results. The carbon producing industry want to burn every resulting carbon atom they can release, the atomic energy plants will continue mining uranium and its horrendous amounts a carbon produced to provide the fuel and the last tree in the Amazon will be cut as well as every other rain forest.
Why are there so many Republican/DLC supporters on these blogs? Nader2000, logrithmic, MFROAD etc.
MFROAD: Senator Dodd gets “things” (e.g. FISA amnesty) done like McCain fought against waterboarding. The FISA amnesty bill will be back just like the torture language was removed.
I’d rather have a politician tell me they are going to do the right thing and then fail or suceed at it than a politician tell me they are going to do the wrong thing and then succeed or fail at it.
Please go back to freerepublic.com or go to a good college that teaches you critical thinking skills.
BeForKids -
“And that’s why Ralph Nader is willing to endorse Edwards for president.”
This is the first I’ve heard of Nader’s endorsement of Edwards, but it’s apparently true. A Google search turned up this statement: “I do like Kucinich. But the frontrunners — Edwards now has the most progressive message across a broad spectrum … of any leading candidate I’ve seen in years.”
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Nader_likes_Kucinich_thinks_Edwards_looks_1218.html
I may have someone to vote for in November 2008 after all.
ike kay,
although it is good to digress, i hope your films are better than your writing. wouldn’t it be nice to limit the posts here to the issue(s) at hand??????
While I was Googling for “Nader endorse Edwards” Huck posted the video link. Thanks Huck.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=77200&mesg_id=77200
The only thing that bothers me about Edwards is that he wants to give parents of disabled children the right to end their lives.I have celebral palsey and I think that is wrong.
How about Edwards/Obama??????
“Outside groups are in the process of pouring more than $3.2 million into Iowa to support Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.
“A new group, run by John Edwards’ former campaign manager, is spending nearly a million dollars of unregulated money to run a so-called “issue” ad in Iowa this week. The ad touts “the Edwards plan” and prominently features a smiling John Edwards — but the group claims it isn’t meant to promote one candidate or another.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton’s friends from Washington are spending millions on attacks, including a mailing that misleads voters by falsely disparaging Barack’s universal health care plan. The mailing carefully uses a quote from another candidate and mimics the design of that candidate’s mailings — apparently with the hope that Iowans offended by the negativity will think it came from someone else.
The case has never been clearer — this kind of politics needs to end. And you have the power to end it.
Instead of benefiting from $3.2 million from big interests over the next week, we’re asking supporters like you to give whatever you can afford. That will put us past our goal of 500,000 people owning a piece of this campaign before the Iowa caucuses.
Be part of this historic movement by making a donation of $25. If you donate now, your impact will be doubled by matching a gift from a first time donor.
https://donate.barackobama.com/promise
With just one week to go before the caucuses, our opponents have revealed their commitment to politics-as-usual. Money is pouring in from outside groups to fund negative mailings, TV ads, phone calls, and attack websites.
Barack has repeatedly spoken out against the work of these outside groups, and this campaign does not accept any money from Washington lobbyists or PACs.
Instead, we put our faith in you. From the beginning, this campaign has been funded by a grassroots movement of ordinary people giving only what they can afford.
And your commitment to real change has gotten us pretty far.
The most recent polls show Barack ahead in Iowa and New Hampshire, and we’re building an unparalleled operation in the 22 states with primaries and caucuses on February 5th.
Thanks to your past generosity, we are in a position to win this nomination. But we need to start strong in Iowa and keep the momentum building.
Make a donation of $25 today, and you can bring in a new donor by matching their gift:
https://donate.barackobama.com/promise
We’ve set a historic goal of 500,000 people owning a piece of this campaign by the Iowa caucuses on January 3rd. That’s more people than have ever donated to a presidential campaign before voting started.
It’s not an easy goal to achieve, but it will send a powerful message to the entrenched special interests.
Let them know that their outside money can’t compete with a grassroots movement that’s committed to a new kind of politics. And let them know that the days of big, unregulated Washington money are numbered.
The time for real change is now. Make a matched donation of $25 today:
https://donate.barackobama.com/promise
Jaded Prole and the rest of the Ron Paul haters,
Just because he’s pro-life doesn’t mean he’s going to regulate abortion. He wants to limit and cut the federal government and federal intervention. I sincerly doubt he plans on using his position in the federal government to ban abortion. You’re smearing him for something that doesn’t matter. You add nothing to the dialouge.
And if I’m not mistaken, other than Kucinich, no one else has made a committment to reign in the empire. Ron Paul is right, we are going broke and most of it is from the military/intellegence-industrial complex.
Another thing we have to look when considering Paul is the things we dont like. You think with a democratic congress he will be able to eliminate social security, medicare, and several other of the programs progressives feel work? I don’t think so. This is an advantage to having a balanced government. With Paul we definetly won’t see an expansion of any public programs, but we also wouldn’t see corporate subsidies or bail outs either.
This is why you should vote for the right senators and reps, but we should go with Ron Paul as president. Most of the people in the country are idiots and without a mainstream media presence Kucinich doesn’t have a chance. But they seem to like Paul. We should stop hating the only real prinicpled political thinker that has a shot.
Join the revolution.
Yes, Edwards has an unattractive voting record. But he has admitted past mistakes, unlike Hillary, who never made a mistake! And he has spent the last four years working for the disadvantaged and talking about the increasing disparity in income. His health care plan is his biggest flaw to me, and Nader did say he hopes Edwards will live up to his words. Well, he’s the only one besides Dennis speaking those words, which is costing him seriously in press attention, although not voter attention. So I credit him for courage, and am willing to give him a chance to prove his words. An Edwards/Kucinich ticket would be excellent, and could lead to a Kucinich presidency.
I must say, this has blown the cover of Nader2000 and MRFOAD. They really are corporate shills. Yawping about corporate money is really grasping at straws. Edwards isn’t taking any, unlike Obama and Clinton.
Ron Paul wants to make some very important changes, which I support, but I do have a problem with ending Social Security, Medicare, and public education. I would hate to have to trust our present Congress to protect us from that, since they seem incapable of protecting us from anything. But realistically, they are probably far more likely to fight him tooth and nail over canceling NAFTA and the WTO. He would surely appoint Supreme Court judges that would put an end to Roe vs Wade. His views on states rights would create considerable suffering for the working poor in many states. Some states would probably do away with the minimum wage entirely. Personally I believe the federal government should set some sort of minimum standards for health and safety that states must meet, and he doesn’t. I wouldn’t mind his being president if we had a Congress we could count on to protect us, but I don’t see one out there. Just a bunch of corporate whores. And a few marginalized progressives.
George, on the other hand, was carefully groomed by Rove as governor in Texas to appear moderate, even appointing moderate state Supreme Court judges. Look where that got us!
cpotts, that’s the other thing I do like about Ron Paul, he is principled. He and Kucinich are both outstanding in that regard. I don’t agree with all his principles, I just admire him for having them.
Just a word for the Nation - Gore Vidal came out as the spokesman for Kucinich. And did a really good job. I think John Nichols was the advocate for Edwards. I don’t remember who came out for the other candidates, but they all had a rep. in the Nation.
I supported Edwards over Kerry in 2004. I didn’t even know about Kucinich then. I am going to support Kucinich in the primaries this time around. I would sure be nice to know though if Kucinich doesn’t get the nomination, that he would throw his votes to Edwards. That would make me feel better.
And for you Ron Paul suppporters, I don’t agree with much of what he represents, but if I had to chose between Hillary and Ron, he would win hands down. But if those wind up being my choices, I’ll probably vote Green. I’m not going to do the lesser of two evils thing with my vote.
What makes you think he will appoint a supreme court justice who will end Roe v. Wade? He is not in the evangelical pocket, so what makes you think he wouldn’t just appoint who he feels is the best person for the position?
Edwards Reloaded is just as tired as Edwards who voted for the Iraq war and Most Favored Nation status for China.
“I think with Hong Kong, China, Singapore, many of the more successful neoliberal states in terms of economic growth, what you see is that this economic model thrives and is indeed most successful in the absence of democracy. I mean, China is the most successful economy in the world at the moment, there is no denying it. And it also has advanced in this way by skipping the democracy stage entirely. I mean, it’s a laboratory for cutting-edge surveillance techniques at the moment, and is in fact pioneering the economy of surveillance. Not only in the city of Shenzhen do you have worker populations under cutting-edge surveillance using everything from networked CCTV cameras to GPS to biometric ID cards with a huge range of personal information embedded in them, but the selling of these technologies is one of the fastest growing businesses in China’s economy. Which is really interesting when you think about the rhetoric of globalization in the 1990s, which said that the high-tech companies were going to go to China and democracy would soon follow. In fact the opposite has happened, trade hasn’t brought democracy to China, and one of the fastest growing areas of trade is in repression and surveillance.”- Naomi Klein
http://www.leftturn.org/?q=node/1001
Thanks for taking on all the corporations dying to get into China while you were in the Senate John.
Obama says it best: “The real gamble in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expecting a different result,” Obama said, “And that’s a risk we can’t take.”
Obama has spent 10 years in elected office working on what Edwards and the Clintons only talk about it: Transparency in government and single transferable voting.
usaspending.gov and SB 1789
cpotts, thank you for adding nothing to the dialogue. bottom line, he is a republican and he is pro-life. think. think. think.
Here’s some information about Obama’s fundraising. And the following link is to a story with more information and verification if you need convincing. Don’t be fooled. And unlike Edwards, Obama hasn’t repudiated his former voting record. If you recall, he came into the Senate talking like a populist, and then started voting like a corporate shill. Now we’re getting the same pitch. Clearly becoming a Senator was just a stepping stone (and a quick one at that) to the presidency.
“Follow the money. Obama’s presidential campaign has received nearly $5 million dollars from securities and investment firms and $866,000 from commercial banks through October of 2007.
Obama’s top contributor so far is Goldman Sachs (provider of $369,078 to Obama), identified by Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) investigators as “a major proponent of privatizing Social Security as well as legislation that would essentially deregulate the investment banking/securities industry.”
Eight of Obama’s top twenty election investors are securities and investment firms: Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bros. (number 2 at $229,090), J.P. Morgan Chase and Co. (# 4 at $216,759), Citadel Investment Group (#7 at 4166,608), UBS AG ($146,150), UBS-America ($106,680), Morgan Stanley ($104,421), and Credit Suisse Group ($92,300). The last two firms are also known to be leading privatization advocates.
Meanwhile, Obama’s presidential run has been “assisted” by more than $2 million from the health care sector and nearly $400,000 from the insurance industry through October of 2007″.
http://edstrong.blog-city.com/obama_already_a_corporate_shill.htm
lino, Ron Paul isn’t a rubber stamp Republican, he’s a Libertarian.
And cpotts, he’s strongly pro-life. But that’s not why he would dismantle Roe vs Wade. He wants to leave the issue up to the states. He believes the federal government has no business making those kinds of decisions. He’s a states rights proponent. He is consistent in his beliefs, like them or not.
Edwards still voted for the Iraq war and is well worn corporate hack when it comes to trade deals. He started running for president when?
Give me a break. Obama has spent 10 years in ELECTED OFFICE fighting for government reforms like trasnparency, single transferable voting, and reducing the power of lobbyists- things Edwards blusters about but has never done.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008
Surprise! Goldman Sachs is Edwards 5th biggest contributor. Get real.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/corruption/
I don’t agree that Paul would dismantle Roe v. Wade. Instead, he would make it a states rights issue. Some states would keep it legal while others would not.
He also is not against public education. He is saying he will abolish the Department of Education. Please realize that Bush and his “no child left behind” BS is simply using the 15% federal financing of public schools to bully the states into accepting Bush’s perogatives. The states are perfectly able to shoulder the cost of their own school systems. True, schools in some states will suffer (think the south), but others would shoulder on.
However, we simply must take control of OUR government. Our government cannot remain in the hands of a dictator; and we do not need to be the policeman of the world anymore. Think about what it would be like if our scientists weren’t employed devising weapons of mass destruction! What if they were able to put their mental abilities to the task of freeing us from oil, like these enterprising people have done: http://www.aptera.com/
I also believe Paul would reopen 9-11 and call for a real investigation. No Democrat has even suggested that the 9-11 commission was deficient and that we need a real investigation into the events of that day - many of which were criminal.
Ron Paul is probably as good as we can expect. At least he’s honest.
Unless Al or Nader run, at the moment I have it:
Gravel, Kucinich, Paul, Edwards, Dodd, Obama, and as many Greens as I can vote for without excluding progressive dems.
I agree with mcpete. It recently occured to me that an Edwards/Kucinich ticket would be ideal, but it’s nice to know that someone else has had the same idea.
Ike kay,
Enjoyed your post. It is very right on. The environmental cloud that hangs over us all is something that must be dealt with. My hope is that with a demilitarization of the economy, we can invest in technologies that will reduce greenhouse gasses while conserving energy.
“cpotts, thank you for adding nothing to the dialogue. bottom line, he is a republican and he is pro-life. think. think. think.”
comments like that are antagonistic and bad form. it sounds like your the one who is not thinking. you see republican and thats it, the thinking is over.
lino, as stated above, Paul believes abortion an issue that should be decided by states. i have no problem with that. getting it out of the national picture might help the progessive agenda because it will take away a huge weapon the right uses to win over the “red states.” personally, i think it’s a minute issue both sides have focused way to much on. and it’s too small of an issue when put against the economy, government spending, and - most importantly - ending our imperialistic ambitions. these are huge issues that only Paul is addressing therefore i don’t care that he’s pro-life. clinton, edwards, and obama all won’t committ to end the wars. so, ironically, my best option happens to be the fringe republican who has a solid support base.
see lino, i can think think think.
If Edwards is so great, and he is, why did John Nichols endorse Joe Biden in the Nation a couple of weeks ago? Especially since he was such a big fan of the excellent Ralph Nader in 2000.
And for all you Obama fans, doesn’t his embracing of so, so many corporate lobbyists and funding from so, so many Bush Rangers bother you? You you think all this corporate power is siding with Obama because they favor the progressive platform you think Obama represents?
Read Paul Street’s articles on the Obama deception.
emkay
You need to take a closer look at the Edwards Healthcare plan. It allows people to bypass insurance companies and buy into medicare. It actually puts insurance companies in competition with medicare, and will cause a mass migration of people to single payer.
logrithmic
The patriot act was passed with a nearly unanimous vote after the anthrax attacks on Democratic Senators by the crime family. And Ron Paul is a nutcase. He is against universal healthcare, medicare, social security and the department of education.
Read this about Clinton and Obama. Arthur Silber, the author, does an amazing job at dissecting their foreign policy positions and shows how immoral and absurd they are (note, this is a long essay and not for the faint of heart, but Silber remains one of the greatest commentators on our modern dilemna and he ground his arguments in a strong historical context):
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2007/05/songs-of-death.html
MikeBinSC,
The Patriot Act was written BEFORE 9-11.
Yes, you’ve stated in part what he’s against. He’s also against imperialism, the military-industrial complex, corporatism, soft fascism, the surveillance society and foreign wars.
Nader2000
You haven’t been paying attention to what Edwards has been doing since 2004 when the elections were stolen. He was a one-term senator from NC, and realized that he could not change the system from inside, it is too corrupt. Look at what he has been doing for the last three years.
MikeBinSC:
Check it out - a bit of history on The Patriot Act:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/05.21B.jvb.usapa.911.htm
MRFOAD Said” “When it comes to politicians, I do not listen much to what they SAY. I look back at what they have DONE. There is a BIG difference between Edwards, the candidate and Edwards, what he has actually done. He sounds good on the stump, but his record shows that he has not gotten anything done.”
Politicians come and go, and they all [most?] have the ability to sway a group of people like the wind moves a leaf, on any given day - first one way, then the other. The same is true of the voting records of newly elected politician. Whether it is Obama or Edwards, they will generally vote the party line for their first term. Look at the votes of our esteemed newly elected Democrats who vowed to end the war in Iraq. Somehow, just like Obama, they ALL vote to continue funding.
When you are looking at the actions of people running for office trying to decipher what they’ll do next month or next year, you really have to look deeper then at just their behavior as politicians.
Where do they come from? what do they do in their spare time? How did they get their money?
I support Edwards, because he comes from a family similar to my own. a Dad working for a living at a back-breaking job, and the kid getting ahead by getting good grades and earning scholarships.
If you check the background of either Obama or Hillary, you will find expensive schools and more money then the average Joe Blow starts out with. At least Obama put some time in working on the South Side in Chicago, learning about being Black in America rather than privileged in Hawaii. Hillary was too busy with Bill and corporate law to work in the trenches after she left the Goldwater Republicans behind.
Edwards spent the past four years as a non-politician working on all those invisible but highly important issues like poverty and how to end it. He announced his candidacy at a work party rebuilding houses in New Orleans 9th Ward. No kleig lights and carefully scripted speech. Just a bunch of people swing hammers and one or two reporters who decided to brave the swamps of Louisiana for a different kind of campaign event.
Is John Edwards perfect? Not hardly, But he’s willing to admit that too, and work to improve. We could do a lot worse, as both Bill Clinton and Bush 1 & 2 demonstrate.
logrithmic
There is no doubt that Ron Paul is the best repug candidate and I hope he gets the repug nonimation, but he doesn’t have a snowballs chance in hell. He is also not a real repug, he is a Libertarian/repug, and he is certainly NO PROGRESSIVE!!
Labels are not arguments. I am not a tribalist. It is not, I am with the Democraps or I am with the RepubLICKlans.
Paul is so far right he is left of most Democraps; ergo, political viewpoints are best conceived of as a circle and not a straight line.
A few of the things Ron Paul supports are in sync with progressive views - Ending the war, protecting the constitution, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.
His views are old-school mainstream conservative, which are way out of sync with the current Neo-Fascist Republican Party. Again, HE IS NO PROGRESSIVE!
But, if you remember when Bush was running in 2000, he said he was against nation-building and said he was for kyoto.
John Nichols gave an amazing speech at a Dennis Kucinich rally, here in San Francisco last friday, along with Medea Benjamin and Michael Parenti. Parenti mentioned the “media/money Primaries” that precede the state Primaries-that really decide the “first tier” candidates. I have my Kucinich sign up and reregistered Democrat (from Green). Dennis is the only Democrat who has been on the side of the American citizens on all the issues: Invasion & Occupation, Military Spending, “Free Trade” and Labor, Single Payer Healthcare and the Environment. “In Feburary Vote Kucinich” I believe I quoted John Nichols correctly.
Richard
I would very much like to see DK win. I have supported him in all that he says and does. If he can get some traction in Iowa it could lead to a viable candidacy and I will support him further. Right now though, Edwards looks like the man. He is not taking corporate or PAC money and he is talking the talk and walking the walk. I have met his parents, and they are real, salt of the earth people, that would never be compared to the likes of George or Barbara Bush, and the apple don’t fall far from the tree.
I agree that Kucinich is the only true progressive in the pack. Edwards will be sucking corporate cash if he wins the nomination and i will be voting for any independent out there regardless. Blumburg is getting in, in my humble opinion.
No Huck, Kucinich is not the only true progressive, but he is the most progressive. Edwards will not cave in to the corporacracy or he would already have taken the money.
That’s a good point KEM, if people really want to know what John’s stand is on the war, watch this short video of his speech at Riverside Church in New York -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq1iSit7K60
Yes Huck, maybe you should jump on that independent, non-corporate, anti-MSM candidate - Blumberg band wagon. Maybe he can get that other independent, Lieberman, to be his running mate.
John Edwards is actually taking a bad rap for his vote on the Iraq war, most of those Senators who voted for it are.
Colin Powell read the latest NIE report to them, just a few days prior to that vote. The report stated, that Saddam DID indeed have WMDs, lots of them. Saddam also had purchased uranium from Africa. Both statements were absolute lies, __ but Colin Powell, our Congress and ‘we the people’ didn’t know they were lies, __ according to the lastest National Intelligence Estimate.
There were a few, including President Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and George Tennant, who knew they were lies, but Cheney and Bush had that honest CIA document buried. Also at that time of the vote, the UN inspectors were in Iraq and Hans Bliss was reporting there were no WMDs and he was not having any problems with Saddam, inspecting wherever he desired. Fnally, the Senate voted to authorize war__ AS A LAST RESORT.__ We all know what hapened as soon as the votes were in. Bush forced the UN inspectors out of Iraqq and the rest is a terrible history. Colin Powell and the Senators are the fall guys.
Indeed, some Senators MAY have had decent information from people such as Joe Wilson, and or perhaps, people such as those in the loop with intelligence agencies. But that wasn’t suffecient, and naturally gossip abounds in DC and many good people don’t listen to gossip and then vote because of what so and so said, or what is rumored. Time was not on their side eiither, the NIE report was briefed to them and a few days later they voted. __ WAR ONLY AS A LAST RESORT. Kerry kept saying that and was scorned and laughed at by at least 49.9% of the voting public.
So Edwards is not perfect, he has made mistakes, he even gave his private barber a check and tip for $400 or so for leaving his shop to come trim his head. So what, Edward is a multi-millionaire and he isn’t a cheapskate. He doesn’t wear $4,000 dollar suits and thousand dollar sneakers like many of the elite do. He earned his money and he does know what it is like to grouw up poor. He understands the middle and lower wage earners class of people and he CARES. He has faith in a God and he doesn’t preach it.
Big business are afraid of him. Why? Because he will sure as shootin give them fits if he’s elected to the presidency. Nope, Edwards is not perfect. Who Is, ___ other than our current theiving ‘president’. After the primaries, if Edwards is the man, I do hope that he asks Kucinich to be his running mate. Sorry, Kucinich will not win the primary, that is not his fault. If Edwards or Obama don’t win the primary, then the general, we will have pretty much what we have had for the past seven years. I will vote for Edwards in the primary as I did the last time.
Once in that voting booth, one has a choice of not just making a decision on who they like the best, they have choose to make a decision of who is the best one who has a prayer of winning. If there was no Edwards, I would personally vote for Kucinich or Obama in the primary, but we do have Edwards and he is the best electable option and would be a fine president, in spite of being less than perfect.
I am not a one issue person. On a side of beef, there are several cuts, some are not so hot, some are Okay and some are choice. We don’t always have prime beef, so we take the best cut if possible, with what is availabe. Sorry if I have just offended any veggies, the beef was just an un-holy parrable.
Another 20 cent post from the village idiot.
Good points KEM.
If people really want to know what John’s stand is on the war, watch this short video of his speech at Riverside Church in New York -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq1iSit7K60
Thanks you for that link MIKE. Funny how our posts show up twice sometimes. Sometimes, they don’t show up at all.
Now if VAUDREE arrives, everyone can read my post twice, or ignore them twice. When she writes. KEM SAYS, __ KEMS SAYS, __ KEM SAYS, __ KEM SAYS. Then after telling all what KEM SAYS, __ all can absorb her opinions on the issue.
Funny things happening to posts here at CD. I know I saw it the first time I responded, but after my responce, it was gone. I have had a lot of trouble trying to use the edit function here. I think I even advocated getting rid of it in a previous post.
Who voted for the war?
“The real gamble in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expecting a different result.And that’s a risk we can’t take.”
- Barack Obama
Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2
Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114
Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
YEAs —77 Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Biden (D-DE) Bond (R-MO) Breaux (D-LA) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Campbell (R-CO) Cantwell (D-WA) Carnahan (D-MO) Carper (D-DE) Cleland (D-GA) Clinton (D-NY) Cochran (R-MS) Collins (R-ME) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) Daschle (D-SD) DeWine (R-OH) Dodd (D-CT) Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND) Edwards (D-NC) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Feinstein (D-CA) Fitzgerald (R-IL) Frist (R-TN) Gramm (R-TX) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Harkin (D-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Helms (R-NC) Hollings (D-SC) Hutchinson (R-AR) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Johnson (D-SD) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Miller (D-GA) Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Nickles (R-OK) Reid (D-NV) Roberts (R-KS) Rockefeller (D-WV) Santorum (R-PA) Schumer (D-NY) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-NH) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Thomas (R-WY) Thompson (R-TN) Thurmond (R-SC) Torricelli (D-NJ) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA)
NAYs —23 Akaka (D-HI) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Byrd (D-WV) Chafee (R-RI) Conrad (D-ND) Corzine (D-NJ) Dayton (D-MN) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Graham (D-FL) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT) Kennedy (D-MA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Reed (D-RI) Sarbanes (D-MD) Stabenow (D-MI) Wellstone (D-MN) Wyden (D-OR)
Edwards is ignored by the Corporate Media simply because they are terrified of him. He spent much of his adult life fighting corporations and did very well. Right now, we have the media promoting Hillary simply because she is deemed to be beatable in a General Election. And even if she were to win in November, she would be more beholden to corporations than virtually any other democrat.
Right now, the media is looking at how to derail Edwards. Expect the media to pull a few Howard Deans against Edwards. Right now, “swift boaters” are being bribed to “come forward” (when the time is right) with allegations that Edwards did horrible things in his past, and the media will be waiting in ambush to report on these future allegations non-stop. And Edwards will be questioned incessantly about phony allegations 24/7. Real issues that affect real people will be deferred by the media in lieu of talk about the “Edwards Scandals”. I can see the talking heads on FOX NEWS frothing at the mouth as I text. I could brag about seeing all this in my crystal ball, but you really have to be an idiot to predict these things won’t happen.
There is reason to hope, however. More and more people are seeing the Corporate media for what it is. Less and less people are soliciting them in favor of the internet. We already seen what the Web can accomplish. In 2006, the internet provided the great equalizer to the MSM. This gave the Democrats the margin they needed to win in 2006 (even though the dems have been a dissappointment since). Because of the internet, the influence of independent media, the bloggers, and online fundraising is growing daily while the MSM is losing clout. Which is why preserving “NET NEUTRALITY” will be the next great media battle. Corporations will not let the current status quo stand unchallenged, for it is a threat to their dominance. They will fight, so we must fight also.
DOUGWAGNER, two weeks prior to that vote, Congress was lied to about the WMDs, and the uranium bought from Africa. They were also lied to about war would be only as a last resort. It was the only resort after they voted.
Had the Senate been given the true NIE report, I am certain the resolution would NEVER have passed. That is “precicely why” they were given a false report. It seems to be quite easy for so many, to later say they should not have passed that resolution. I always find it easy, to coach the Green Bay Packers on Tuesday, and tell everyone what they should have done to win the Monday night game.
I don’t blame Edwards for voting for that resolution. I blame Bush for ordering Tennant to bury the true CIA report, and to change the one we all heard, and tennant for obeying an illegal, criminal, impeachable, order. They are guilty of the worst crime of the century, not the Senate. If I were in a Senators shoes at that time, I am certain I would have believed the NIE report. Now, if were in their shoes, I would not believe anything that came from the White House. The damage is done, and we Americans will ALL pay dearly for that horrific, idiotic, forever and ever, thru perpitutity, unforgiveable crime.
How is Tennant speeled?
REDWRITEMAN ___ that was an excellent post. Great.
Kem, spelled George Tenet.
And I do hold John Edwards accountable and everyone else INCLUDING Hillary (even if she can’t hold herself accountable)who voted for the resolution. They had the same facts I did, but they were afraid to stand against the tide. Edwards didn’t try to defend his vote or justify it, he just said he was wrong to do it. I accept that and respect him for admitting he made a mistake. Unlike Hillary. She’s got that in common with George Bush, can’t admit she was wrong: “who could have known”? What a crock. Plenty of experts testified before Congress, plenty of generals were fired for speaking the truth. There were numerous reports of Cheney “visiting” CIA headquarters in the run up to invasion, unheard of for a vice president. There were rumors that he was pressuring the CIA to alter their intelligence. Did Congress investigate? No.
The Senate confirmed Alito and Roberts, pretending to believe them when they said they would follow precedent and ignoring their historical behavior. The Judiciary committee let them get away with being evasive under questioning even though it’s their job to scrutinize them. Didn’t happen. It’s all a game of pretend. The Republicans pretend not to lie and the Democrats pretend to believe them.
Edwards might betray us, but he might not. I can count on Hillary and Obama to betray us.
As mentioned above, Ralph Nader said he would support Edwards if he wins the nomination and continues his present stance against undue corporate power. Asked about supporting Obama, Nader said Obama doesn’t have a progressive agenda.
Case closed.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=77200&mesg_id=77200
I can also recall Nader saying that if the Dims run Clinton or Obama, he will run as well. For those that buy the DLC myth of Nader losing the race for them, they should pay attention. We don’t need a corporate repug-lite, candidate. Don’t toss us someone that makes us RALPH!
So who do you think would have a better chance of winning: Edwards/DK or Edwards/Nader? I like the later ticket because ralph is a stickler for saftey standards, and has a proven track record for standing up to the big corps. Either ticket would be great and shake things up though.
cpotts,
actually, the adding “nothing to the dialogue” is a quote from your 8:01 pm post. perhaps, a woman’s right to choose is a minute issue to you, as it seemingly is to the repulsican agenda, but unless you’ve been in that situation, or care about someone in that situation, i doubt that you’d be sitting there calling it a minute issue.
the huge weapon that the right uses is, in fact, not about abortion. it’s about fear and terror and controlling the massing with that combined concept, through the manipulation and control of msm.
you are in fact correct in stating that when i see repulsican, it’s over. perhaps you have enjoyed the last seven years of existence. perhaps you even enjoyed the previous bush presidency. remember that one? where everyone was walking around in a drunken stupor over an economy teetering on the edge of depression. perhaps you even enjoyed having a b-rated actor as president before that. i, on the other hand, am old enough to remember those fiascos. i also, regrettably, remember having the current buffoon leading this country when he was a so-called governor of texas. so the last thing i’d support is another east texas snake charmer. there are more qualified people on the other side who are at least aware of what’s going on, are in line, mostly, with what i believe is morally and ethically correct, and charm and charisma aside for a moment, have basic leadership skills. whether or not they use those skills, once elected, is another story.
and beforkids, how did mr. paul manage a slot in the repulsican debates? why not let him debate with the rest of the libertarians???
For all you war vote forgivers -
I was against the war before there was a war. I wrote to both my senators and my house member urging them not to vote for the war because:
a. Bush had presented no credible evidence of WMD
b. The U.N. inspectors had no credible evidence of WMD
c. Even if there was evidence of WMD, Saddam had no way of projecting them in any way that it would harm the U.S. After all, as RON PAUL stated on Meet the Press on Sunday, we had been bombing them for 10 years after we pushed them out of Kuwait and destroyed their Army.
d. Even if they had WMD, we have 12,000 nuclear warheads. Any use of WMD against U.S. bases etc., would be suicide.
These points were all self-evident. It didn’t require any confirming or denying “intelligence.” All it required was a forkin brain. That Edwards, Clinton, Dodd, Kerry et. al. voted for war shows they had no courage and were unwilling to stand with honor against the prevailing American tantrum. Meanwhile I and millions more of us who objected against the war were called traitors, commies, told we were enemies of the state, etc., all because we risked our jobs and came under govt surveillance as we marched, leafletted, yard signed and bumper stickered our preference for NO WAR.
I will not vote for a single politician that voted for this war. This means no vote for Clinton, Dodd, or Edwards. Regardless of Edwards’ humble background, etc., he clearly has no backbone and is using his populist rhetoric to simply get in the game. Look at how he handled the debate against Cheney. He could’ve ripped him apart. Nothing…. If he makes it to the big show, he will simply do a Kerry and begin running from the right.
Ron Paul won’t change his stripes. A man with principles will get my vote every time. Now if Nader were to run again….
lino,
ending the war and stopping this drunken spending spree is more important than anything right now. i reccomend you do what i do and where a rubber.
and the republicans do use abortion. everyone of those evangelical/values voters are certainly swayed by the abortion issue.
i have not enjoyed the bush years and, quite frankly, i have not enjoyed the clinton years. although bush is so blatantly a criminal that you almost have to laugh at the audacity, clinton still was committed to spreading empire and trying to loot the world.
and during these debates ONLY PAUL, RICHARDSON, AND KUCINICH PROMISED TO END THE WAR. edwards, obama, and clinton will keep throwing money away in iraq so you might as well throw away your vote if you drop it in one of their slots.
edwards may care about the poor but how does he plan on helping them? even repealing bush’s give aways wouldn’t cover the kind of debt we’re in.
a small government libertarian for 4 to 8 years would certainly create some headaches. but if we ended our empire and got rid of the military industrial complex that would be worth it. that’s the facist threat. and it seems like paul is the only one committed to ending it.
ohh yeah, the department of education should be out of existence. it does nothing but meddle in on something that should be so unique and decentralized.
Senator Edwards is the only candidate who is projecting an image of knowledge and caring about the American People first, and he is consistent.
We cannot afford a movie star for president.
In my judgment he is the only one who will afford a Democratic Win in November. Both, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama if they turn out to be the nominee for the Democratic ticket, will spell a Republican win.
We cannot afford that either.
Too bad Mike. Unlike you and the rest of the sheeple marching lock step to their Democratic Handlers, someone’s past record says more about their values than telling you what you want to hear in the present. Edwards stuffed the cash down the front of his pants before and he will do it again. Vote any way you care to but don’t tell me how i ought to vote and the same goes for Nichols who is every bit a part of the corporate media status quo marching band.
If Nichols is looking for respect and admiration he might give up his corporate paid job in his efforts to reconfigure standards to his and the other corporate owned candidate Edwards,
Bogus Story at December 27th, 2007 6:01 pm
“Why are there so many Republican/DLC supporters on these blogs? Nader2000, logrithmic, MFROAD etc?”
I am an Independent - I voted for Nader in 2004 and Gore in 2000. I am not a DLC supporter (Gore vote notwithstanding). Edwards, Obama, and Clinton are supported by the DLC, as are Dodd, Biden and Richardson. The outsiders are Gravel and Kucinich.
Kucinich has no traction. And I believe his generally negative disposition turns people off, even though his message is clearly one I agree with.
With the exception of Paul, all of the Republicans are either “hang em high” types or “convert them to Christianity and then hang em high.” They are brutal thugs and we on the left will be forced to duck and cover should any one of them achieve the presidency. My biggest fear is Romney, a rightwinger with no qualms about creating a dictatorship:
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/12/23/5968/
However, Paul, in marked contrast, actually wants to eliminate the surveillance culture and roll back the intrusions into our personal liberties. He says what we need is MORE freedom. It is a recipe for success.
Name one Democrap who is wants to end the War on Drugs? Just one….
Can’t can you? This is what I mean. We need freedom. Stop being a sheeple and smearing people you don’t agree with!