Edwards vows fight against big business

[JohnLocke]

Edwards vows fight against big business
By Adam D. Krauss--Foster's
Sunday, July 29, 2007
----
DOVER — As his Democratic rivals debate whether to talk with leaders of hostile nations, a tough-talking John Edwards told hundreds of people Saturday that he's against negotiating with the big insurance, oil and drug companies that he said are running the American government.

Instead, he pushed for taking on "entrenched interests" with "big change."

"Now, there are some people who believe ... the way to do this is to sit at the table with them and negotiate. I think that is a complete fantasy," he said, standing in front of the Rotary Arts Pavilion in a crowded Henry Law Park.

Big business interests have "rolled over" average citizens for decades, Edwards said in response to questions after his speech.

"They are the power behind what happens in Washington, D.C.," he said. "The only way to change things is to take these people on. You can't negotiate with them. They're not going to give away their power voluntarily. They have to be beaten, and I absolutely believe that."

Before piling into a mini-van with staff for a campaign stop in Laconia, Edwards said insurance and drug companies have prevented universal health care, which he wants to extend, by law, to every American. He also said oil companies have blocked efforts to combat global warming.
(...)
On Saturday, he addressed his opponents' squabbling.

"I think the last thing we need when we're having to take on these powerful interests to bring about the change in this country ... are two Democratic presidential candidates fighting with each other instead of fighting for the change that we need in America," he said, his Southern accent booming across the park. "And, boy, do we need change."
(...)
Edwards, explaining that he wants to raise the capital gains tax from 15 to 28 percent for people making over $250,000 a year, also sharpened his sights on Mitt Romney, another Republican candidate.

"All that money that they're making from investments, I want them to pay their fair share of taxes on those investments, and I want them not to be treated better than other Americans," he said.
(...)
Edwards said in order for Iraq to stabilize, the U.S. needs to engage all countries in the Middle East, especially Iran and Syria, due to the potential of a refugee exodus or a broader conflict between ethnic groups.

He said once a troop deployment is in effect, the U.S. needs to prepare for two possibilities: the civil war between Sunnis and Shiites spills outside the country's borders or genocide breaks out.
(...)
Earlier in the day, at a house party in Epping, the campaign introduced the "Environmentalists for Edwards," an advisory group tasked with promoting the candidate's plans to fight global warming and create a "new energy economy." At the Dover stop, he said at least a million new "green collar" jobs can be created, some by setting up wind turbine factories where jobs have been lost.

http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070729/FOSTERS01/107290312

[Mythsaje]

1. I'm with you, John.

I just wish others would catch up.

[Double T]

2. I'm on board. Any politician that is willing to take on the criminals.......

of corporate america and wall street is MY candidate. How about Dennis Kucinich for VP?

[Sonicmedusa]

3. There's a ticket I could get behind 100%

[Double T]

4. If Americans truly want a new direction and real change............

Edwards and Kucinich would get the job done!

[draft_mario_cuomo]

5. Exactly. Don't expect HRC and BO to fight Wall Street and corporate America

Money raised on Wall Street

Obama $739,579
Clinton $424,545
McCain $334,585
Ghouliani $330,450
Romney $220,950
Edwards $40,000

[amandabeech]

10. That says it right there.

Tweedle rich dee and tweedle richer dum.

[southerncrone]

7. My dream ticket = Kucinich/Edwards or Edwards/Kucinich!

:bounce:

[tbyg52]

15. Works for me. nt

[rodeodance]

6. Thanks John.

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. That deserves a big K&R.

[Upfront]

9. K&R

Starting to like this guy.

[machka]

11. K&R

:kick: for the fight against our Corporate Overlords. ;)

[loudsue]

12. He's got my support from now on out. That just did it for me.

Edwards OBVIOUSLY gets it now. He's been rubbing elbows with the masses a great deal since he's been Kerry's running mate, and I think Edwards has matured nicely as a presidential candidate.

I'd REALLY like him to ask Wes Clark to be his VP. They wouldn't DARE assassinate Edwards. And we sure as hell don't need to worry about any "hanky panky".

:kick:

[Catchawave]

13. He's got his eye on the ball...Go JE !!

[ima_sinnic]

14. I am liking Edwards more and more--this really sets him apart

from the other "leading candidates."

[JohnLocke]

16. Kick

[DemBones DemBones]

17. That sounds great. Now, can you tell me what

Edwards did to help the poor while he was a Senator? The question has been raised a number of times and the questioner is always attacked for asking it. It would be helpful if someone who supports Edwards would just answer it.

[1932]

18. 100% AFL-CIO rating and the most anti-free trade Dem running in '04. Senate Record:

Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted NO on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Voted YES on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES to Increase subsidies for women-owned non-profit business. (Mar 2004)
Rated 15% by the US COC, indicating an anti-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on $1.15 billion per year to continue the COPS program. (May 1999)
Voted NO on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999)
Rated B- by VOTE-HEMP, indicating a pro-hemp voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction. (Apr 2001)
Rated 83% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
Voted NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)
Voted NO on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
Voted NO on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior. (Jan 2001)
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-family voting record.
Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on establishing free trade between US & Singapore. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on establishing free trade between the US and Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Voted NO on expanding fee trade to the third world. (May 2000)
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. (Dec 2002) THIS WAS LOWEST CATO RATING FOR ANYONE RUNNING IN '04
Voted YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
Voted NO on require photo ID (not just signature) for voter registration. (Feb 2002)
Voted YES on funding for National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES to require health insurance for every child. (Aug 2003)
Voted NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Jun 2003)
Voted YES on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted YES on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
Voted NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted YES to let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations. (May 2003)
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES to end government propaganda on Medicare bill. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on adopting the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on military pay raise of 4.8%. (Feb 1999)
Voted YES to federalize aviation security. (Nov 2001)
Voted YES to hiding sources made post-9-11 analysis impossible. (Jul 2004)
Voted YES to CIA depends too heavily on defectors & not enough on HUMINT. (Jul 2004)
Voted YES to administration did not pressure CIA on WMD conclusions. (Jul 2004)
Voted NO on repealing Clinton's ergonomic rules on repetitive stress. (Mar 2001)
Voted NO on killing an increase in the minimum wage. (Nov 1999)
Rated 100% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted NO on using the Social Security Surplus to fund tax reductions. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999)
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on More tax cuts and tax credits for 98% of Americans. (Jul 2004)
Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Voted YES on increasing tax deductions for college tuition. (May 2001)
Voted NO on phasing out the estate tax ("death tax"). (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Rated 22% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)

[DemBones DemBones]

23. Thank you. Do you have a source for that? nt

[JohnLocke]

26. Here

http://www.ontheissues.org/John_Edwards.htm

[DemBones DemBones]

31. Thank you. nt

[BigBearJohn]

19. And with that, he just earned my vote.

[tritsofme]

20. What's with all this "their" and "them"?

"All that money that they're making from investments, I want them to pay their fair share of taxes on those investments, and I want them not to be treated better than other Americans

Shouldn't it be "we" "us" and "our"?

Did Mr. Edwards learn all about this inequality when he raked in the cash learning about poverty from his work at a hedge fund?

I'll be honest, I never have never cared for this man, and I am increasingly lightened by the fact that it is becoming inceasingly less likely that I will ever have to bite my tongue and pull the lever for him in a general election.

[DemBones DemBones]

24. I think I've heard him mention that he's in that tax bracket once, but

it would be better for his campaign if he mentioned it all the time. Bill Clinton has said often that he didn't need the tax break and I seem to recall John Kerry saying so more than once in 2004.

Not that I'm crazy about any of the three, but if you're rich, you ought to own up to it and not refer to rich people as "they," particularly when everyone in the country has heard about the huge new mansion you're building and the very expensive haircuts you've gotten.

I'm betting Hillary/Edwards will be the ticket, from their little chat after the debate, so you may have to vote for him for VP, or not vote. Primaries don't seem to count anymore. The DLC, the GOP, and the media all want Hillary to be the nominee.

[tritsofme]

29. There's not a chance in hades that Edwards is the VP candidate again

He would be incessantly mocked by the GOP and the media as the perennial Democratic VP candidate and would not be taken seriously.

He's got to go for broke, because after this, his presidential aspirations are over as well.

[DemBones DemBones]

30. I don't think that's the case. If he became VP,

he'd be in a great position to run for president in 2016, assuming Clinton (or whoever) won two terms with him as VP.

Of course the GOP would mock him; they'll mock anybody. They'd mock him if he were to be the nominee, too.

[JohnLocke]

32. ...

"The truth is Mitt Romney shouldn't pay lower taxes on the money he makes from his money than middle-class families pay on the money they make from hard work. Neither should I. We're both incredibly fortunate and we should pay our fair share.

"That's the big difference between people like Mitt Romney and me. Mitt Romney thinks he and his insider friends helped make America great, I think it's the hundreds of millions of Americans in the working class and middle class who make America great. It's these hard-working families who deserve a break and a chance to live the same American Dream as I have. That's what I'm fighting for, and that's what people like Mitt Romney have spent a lifetime fighting against."

http://johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20070727-romney-attacks/

[goodhue]

21. excellent

[Norrin Radd]

22. k+r

[Forkboy]

25. K&R

:kick:

[KillCapitalism]

27. Edwards motto seems to be...

power to the people, not the big corporations. He is my pick so far. If he gets the nomination, I'd like to see him pick Kucinich for VP.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

28. And the big corporations are returning the love. Look at who corporate America is lining up behind

Clinton, Obama, Giuliani, and Romney.

[RBInMaine]

33. Right now, he has the best shot in the general election.

I like all the D candidates, but Edwards right now has the best shot in the general election. Recent polls show him with fairly solid leads against ALL the R frontrunners. Edwards does best with his populist economic message, BUT he MUST talk about helping working and MIDDLE class folks too, not just those under the poverty line. It is a noble cause and one he should talk about (but in the context of MANY higher callings), but he runs a risk making the over-arching centerpiece of his campaign because middle class folks will decide the election and they ALSO need a lot of help these days. It needs to be a BROADER economic message. I like Hillary (she has done great in the debates) and Obama A LOT, but the tough issue with the former is her electability in the general election (man, her negative ratings are just so high and we need to cut into red territory this time, win over some moderate R's, and DEFINITELY win I's - Hillary is a real risk on all these, especially Indpendent males whom we MUST win to win the general election. She COULD do it, but it is VERY questionable. - Obama's problems so far have been lack of real substance and lack of national experience, BUT certainly a very good VP choice. So right now I lean toward the idea of an Edwards/Obama ticket(or perhaps Edwards/Bayh, or Edwards/Clark, or Edwards/Biden, or Edwards/Richardson - all those would be good) but will STRONGLY support whomever the eventual nominee is. I just hope the Dem base will not annoint anyone at this early stage and give this very long consideration. We need to look at all the dynamics and nominate a ticket that can and MUST win the GENERAL election which, as Ned Lamont found out in CT against Lieberman, is a VERY different animal than the primary.