Edwards Radicalizes Anti-Corporate Pitch

[tekisui]

Dubuque, Iowa - Amid a heavy snow storm Friday afternoon, an overflow crowd of several hundred supporters bundled into a meeting hall in this economically battered town to hear candidate John Edwards escalate his closing campaign message of opposing "corporate greed" and denounce what he called a "small group of profiteers" dominating American life.

"Everything about America is threatened today...this is an epic struggle for the future of America," Edwards told the cheering crowd. "Corporate greed and the very powerful use their money to control Washington and this corrupting influence is destroying the middle class."

While all of the presidential campaigns have refocused to some degree on foreign policy in the wake of the murder of Pakistani leader Benazir Bhutto, Edwards is keeping his message of economic fairness front and center during the final week of campaigning here. "We will defeat greed and fear - and strike a blow for working people, for those with no voice, for those Washington has ignored too long." Edwards made no mention of the Pakistani crisis in his newly re-tooled stump speech.

While Edwards has consistently campaigned on an economically populist program, his speech today in Dubuque was marked by a noticeable ratcheting up and radicalization of his critique of corporate wealth and power.

"Why on earth would we expect the corporate powers and their lobbyists, who make billions by selling out the middle-class, to just give up their power because we ask them nicely?" Edwards asked. He made no mention of rivals Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in today's speech; in the past, he has slammed Clinton for being too indebted to powerful Washington lobbies.

Edwards is in the midst of a final 38-county push to win next Thursday's Iowa caucuses. Even his own supporters will concede that taking Iowa is a do-or-die must for a campaign running third in national polls, but in a virtual dead heat in the Hawkeye State with rivals Clinton and Obama.

more at link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/28/edwards-radicalizes-anti_n_78600.html

Keep it up Edwards!

[saracat]

1. Thank you John. He is the candidate who care about us! John Edwards

the Peoples Candidate!

[tekisui]

3. He keeps moving more towards Populism, and I like it.

I think that is the way to win indys and pukes.

America is hungry for true representation.

[keep_it_real]

12. Edwards just might be another JFK

I hope he wins the Iowa caucuses.

[helderheid]

13. me too!

[bobbolink]

18. I think he's closer to Bobby. And, welcome to DU!

:bounce: :toast: :bounce:

[ChiciB1]

77. Yes, Much More Like Bobby... & His Son Broke My Heart Recently

as once I cried for days after his father's death! I want America back and feel Edwards can be the one to "start" us toward that goal! I wish I had more confidence in the system that exists today for I fear "THEY" will do anything to stop him!

And I don't just mean Repukes either!

[karynnj]

45. Sounds more like William Jenning Bryant

and the Cross of Gold speech than JFK. Or Huey Long. JFK had a very "cool" tv persona. This does not in anyway sound like JFK.

[EVDebs]

70. Bryan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jennings_Bryan

JE also seems a lot like Eugene V. Debs,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs

JE seems to be channeling bald guys. Odd for a guy with a great head of hair !

[Laurenceofberk]

82. Edwards is closer to FDR, and that is what we need.

In 1935 congress passed and FDR signed the Wagner Act, which made it easier for unions to organize and to be recognized by the National Labor Relations Board. Then in the late 40's the Taft-Hartley Act rolled back much of the gains of the thirties, setting the stage for Reagan and subsequent Republicans to nearly destroy the Labor movement and the middle class. Can Edwards initiate a new growth of Labor? He is the only one who is even talking about it. If we nominate him NOW, the electorate will be ready for him in November, in the midst of the Bush recession or depression.

When the economy tanks, the inevitable result of growing inequality and the debt crisis, we will have to choose between a resurgent labor movement and a descent into corporate feudalism. Edwards is the best candidate to help us make that choice.

And if you want to see what American business is capable of, check out the London Independent story (haven't seen it in US media) of physical slavery in the Florida tomato fields. "Slave labour that shames America." Dec 19.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3263500.ece

[bread_and_roses]

86. Exactly. But those who talk abour "good" and "bad" capitalists will never get it

They never seem to notice that while BurgerKing, for instance, may not beat and enslave its' workers, it is quite happy to profit from those that do.

And I agree with you - Of the top three, Edwards is the only one speaking to corporate exploitation of labor.

[OHdem10]

2. It is a sad state of affairs when a Candidate who tries

to speak for the Middle Working Class and poor, has to be
defined as radical.

Yes, J. Edwards is the true Democrat, and I guess this makes
him Radical.

[bobbolink]

19. Yes, compassion IS radical.

And, yes, it's sad.

Power To The People!

[ladjf]

38. Republicans think that "compassion" is a weakness. (nt)

[bobbolink]

40. I have a bombshell for ya. Many "progressives" think compassion is "weak", too.

I find, much to my chagrin, that compassion and caring for us poor folk is very unpopular.

People who only want to denigrate Republicans, and don't look at our own side, are missing a lot of issues.

[Two Americas]

74. seconded

You are not the only one who sees this. I think it is a small minority of people who express a callous and indifferent atttitude to those around us who are suffering, but those messages are corrosive to our spirits and out humanity, and destructive to the future of the party and they must be countered, politely and repectfully, but firmly.

We already have a party, the Republican party, that represents "don't care" and "they have no one to blame but themselves" and "why don't they just..." and "stupid people get what they deserve."

We are better than that.

[hraka]

85. Thirded (if that is a word)

I think that's why I like JE. He doesn't just trash the other candidates in his speeches. He tells us what HE believes, and what HE is going to do.

[Cronopio]

94. Fifthed, sixthed, and seventhed.

The people who need to hear this about "their team" won't hear it, but it needs to be said regardless.

The most dangerous enemies are teammates who aren't motivated by principles, but by tactics.

People who support the principles I believe in will find no better ally than me.

[bobbolink]

100. Yes, the "our team is so great" meme is rotten to the core. And hurting and killing people.

From what I see, the "our team" mess is doing the worst thing... killing hope. I know it's killed mine.

Bitterness comes when hope dies.

And it's very painful.

When you look on both sides of you, and see the lack of support, the lack of concern.... even the lack of being willing to look you in the eyes and LISTEN, hope dies.

[bobbolink]

102. You may be right, but in my situation, I have been SHOCKED at the callousness

from people I would never have thought would be so heartless, and so Raygun-like!

Yes, it's corrosive.

It kills hope.

It kills spirit.

It kills any means to develop relationship.

Because most of the heartlessness also refuses to HEAR.

I wish it was only on "their side".

But the most damage and hurt is this same heartlessness on "our side"!

Again, I would wish it was rare.

Not too long ago, I thought it was. Not any more.

And it's not amenable to reason or human sharing.

Their walls are much too thick for that.

[Leopolds Ghost]

93. Fourthed.

just look at the public housing crisis, you know what I mean

[bobbolink]

99. I've been looking at the public housing crisis... while sleeping in my car in the cold and snow.

Thanks for understanding.

It's "our side" that is allowing this!

It's "our side" that can't be bothered to call and write in support of more low-income housing!

It's "our side" that says it's all because of the war.... if we end the war, magically there will suddenly be safe and decent housing for the likes of me.

Again, thanks for understanding.

I'm so very tired of blaming it all on the republicans!

Lack of heart exists on the left, too.

[Jackpine Radical]

48. It's always been that way, you know.

Sometime you might want to re-read the story of the early labor movement, from Haymarket Square to Joe Hill and beyond. The Overclass has always been trying to marginalize us and eviscerate those who oppose them. Read the news accounts of the times. The workers have never had a fair shake. We got some breathing room from FDR, but it was all rolled back in the era between Nixon & Bush.

Yeah, I'll stand at the barricades with Edwards.

[asdjrocky]

54. Remember the Ludlow Massacre. n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

64. 1914, Colorado. The Militia machine-gunned the miners & their families

in their tents & set the whole mess on fire with kerosene, killing 20 men, women & children. Some of the children were under 1 year old. Is that the fun little incident to which you refer?

[EVDebs]

71. Later the same thugs went into Matewan WV and did it all over again

but this time the miners shot back.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093509/

John Sayle's Matewan and the documentary film The Corporation should be used as campaign tools for JE !

[Jackpine Radical]

88. Oo, Oo, Thank You!

You don't know what you just did!

I'm the chair of the county Dem Education Committee & we're looking for movie ideas. We show free films to the public at a local restaurant & have been looking for ideas. You just gave me two, that fall very nicely in line with my "hidden agenda" of pushing anti-corporatism & maybe moving us along the Edwards trail.

I'm gonna immediately email my committee with these suggestions.

Thank you, thank you!!

[EVDebs]

105. Try this one too

Three Days of the Condor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Days_of_the_Condor


but first pass out this news article,


Document reveals Nixon plan to seize Arab oil fields
'70s embargo sparked 'last resort' measure, says British memo

Lizette Alvarez, New York Times

Friday, January 2, 2004
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/01/02/MNG8G427D61.DT

BTW, here's the link to The Corporation,
http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=312

But the John Sayle's "Matewan" movie is soooo kick-ass. I won't give away the ending but the little preacher-kid finds a way; evangelical progressives will love it !

United Mine Workers has a lesson plan already set up,
http://www.umwa.org/history/matewan/

Baldwin Felts Detective Agency was involved in the Ludlow Massacre. The end result was that the Rockefeller charitable foundations was used to counter the bad pr that ensued after these labor massacres.

[bobbolink]

103. I remember. I had an elderly neighbor who knew first-hand. I've been to the memorial.

:cry:

Worst of all, I fear those days will return before too long.

And will be met, this time, with great indifference.

Again...

:cry:

[Benhurst]

4. All our DEMOCRATIC candidates should be talking this way.

Recommended :kick: #5

[bobbolink]

20. And, why aren't they? Bought and Bossed.

And, so far, it's undetected.

:(

[cynthia]

49. We can wait for the MSM to detect it.

I think the people are hearing it. I hope they are.

[polichick]

5. I'm so glad he's staying on message...

Go Johnny! :yourock:

[Kansas Wyatt]

6. Without President John Edwards....

We only get more of the same.

[indypaul]

7. As Dean phrased it:

Speaking from the Democratic wing of the
Democratic party. Give 'em hell John.

[polichick]

11. Yes indeedy...

I supported Dean, and now Edwards, because they're both REAL DEMOCRATS ~ meaning imo that they represent THE PEOPLE.

[lastliberalintexas]

108. As a founding member of the Deaniacs, I must

give proper credit for that statment, since it originated from Paul Wellstone. Not that I think he would have minded if Dean borrowed it. :)

[pberq]

8. He must be getting a positive response from this populist message

Otherwise he would not be pushing it.

Go Edwards!

[bobbolink]

21. OR... it's his whole raisin deter (hehe), and he's learned how to phrase it.

I'm almost finished with "Four Trials". Populism isn't new to Edwards.

The popular response is because he knows how to listen to and speak to the jury.

[Cronopio]

29. A populist message is the only thing that consistently works in American politics.

It's just that Reagan co-opted populism and tied it to the big-money corporatist ethic. Edwards is reclaiming (and clarifying) the message for its rightful owners - the people.

[Two Americas]

73. not just populist

Populism is good, but this is much more than populism. It is a return to the traditional - and highly successful—program of the Democratic party : advocating strongly for working people - 90% of the population - and for the less fortunate. It is quite simply a matter of valuing labor over capital, people over profits, the defense and preservation of life before the preservation of property.

That does not mean eliminating capital, property or profits, as some will accuse us of advocating. It means restoring a sane and humane balance. That is why we even had a middle-class - labor unions and government programs that helped level the playing field and give everyone a fair chance.

Human beings are not a commodity, they are not a "drain on the system," they are not an expense or a burden. We are the source of all wealth, the strength of the country and the hope for the future. We have been "down-sized" enough. The economy exists for the benefit of the people, the people do not exist for the benefit of the economy. It is time now to fight back, together in self-defense and for the sake of all of the people and for future of generations to come.

[Cronopio]

96. Good to hear from another person who is thinking about this in the right way. nt

[Sugar Smack]

9. Reading this is like breathing fresh air again.

:D Go Edwards!

[burythehatchet]

10. that's why he has my vote

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. I hope he wins Iowa. Anyone willing to take on the Corporations who are hell-bent on wiping out the

middle class in this country, deserves to win. I only hope Iowa voters have absorbed his message. In a state where HUCKABEE is leading in the repuke polls, who knows what will happen? I do hope he wins though.:)

Thanks, John!

[Yuugal]

15. "who make billions by selling out the middle-class"

Yeah, thats my guy!

[rodeodance]

16. Very nice work John

[Peace 2008]

17. Then get the corporations out of our health care!

Cancel NAFTA and the stupid ass war on terror.

[bobbolink]

22. Are you familiar with his proposal? Because that's exactly what he intends to do.

[Peace 2008]

24. Edwards is offering not for profit health care?

??

[bobbolink]

26. YES.

Read his words on the subject.

[Peace 2008]

30. I have read about his health care plan

and it is NOT not for profit, single payer health care.

[bobbolink]

31. Try reading IT, not some one else's digest version of it.

[Peace 2008]

36. Why don't you tell me his plan, which removes profit from health care?

I truly hope Edwards helps the poor, but he sounds to me like he is just trying to get elected.

I agree the message is important, but he has proven in the past he doesn't have the ability to seek the truth for himself.

Why was he pushing the IWR? Why did he cosponsor the Patriot Act? His actions speak louder than words.

[bobbolink]

39. You clearly have an ax to grind. Why are you here to disrupt?

You obviously don't like him, and don't wish to hear the other side.

He's the only one who speaks for ME--- He's the only one caring about poverty, and DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

OK?

I don't wish to argue with you further.

You don't have to like him.

So long.

[Peace 2008]

37. here is part of it...

Edwards' truly universal health care plan will ensure that every American has health insurance. He will require proof of insurance when income taxes are paid and when health care is provided. Families without insurance will be enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP or another targeted plan or be assigned a plan within new Health Care Markets.

Families who lose coverage will be expected to enroll in another plan or be assigned one. For the few people who refuse to pay, the government will help collect back premiums with interest and collection costs by using tools like the ones it uses for student loans and taxes, including collection agencies and wage garnishment.

http://johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/20071128-health-care-mandate/

[OzarkDem]

68. and if you can't afford it you'll be enrolled for free

but we can't have universal health care w/o universal participation - thus the requirement.

If your income is high enough you can buy into a federally funded plan (Medicare, etc.) or buy into private insurance. Thus private insurance will be forced to compete w/ Medicare and other federally funded programs.

[bobbolink]

101. Thanks, OzarkDem. What's important to understand is the OPTION of the federally funded plans!

Yes, John Conyer's health care bill is fine.... but people forget it will take at least 10 years to get there. Edwards is doing the same thing, just letting people make their own choice, which will beat out the corporations because they can't compete with government plans.

Same/same.

Just a different means to the same end.....one that cuts out the bickering from affluent people who don't want to give up the plan they have and think is superior.

I gave up with that poster because it was about health care, then scatter shot about all his other gripes. Clearly, there wasn't a desire for real information.

[OzarkDem]

67. His plan makes private insurance compete w/ Medicare

by offering the public a choice of buying into one or the other. Read some more.

[Cronopio]

23. That talk may or may not get Edwards into the Oval Office ...

... but it will get him elected to it.

[tekisui]

25. You had me for a second.

I was about to tell you that Populism works, but you know that.

We need to make sure it is a Tsunami Democratic vote to keep the vote thieves at bay.

[Cronopio]

32. Of course populism works, when the vote is counted accurately.

But we have this little anti-populist party crasher called the Electoral College ...

[Peace 2008]

28. the problem is it is all talk

When Edwards and Kucinich both ran in 2004- they were opposites in their platform.

Now as Kucinich has been gaining ground because his policies are obviously to the benefit of the American people and folks are starting to wake up...Edwards switches his platform to Kucinich and now Edwards supporters not make the claim to stop Hillary we must vote Edwards. Well how about we vote for the guy that got it right the first time??

[ClassWarrior]

33. Can you prove that?

Can you show me links that demonstrate "they were opposites in their platform(s)?" I'm not so sure that's true. But I'm willing to be shown otherwise.

NGU.

[Peace 2008]

35. he was pro war, pro patriot act, pro china trade agreement

I'll look for a link...

[ClassWarrior]

44. That's his Senate record. But I think he'd begun to move into the light...

...by the time of the 2004 election. I think his campaign platform lined up with Kucinich's better than you realize. After all, they pledged their support to one another last time around.

NGU.

[Cronopio]

34. "Well how about we vote for the guy that got it right the first time??"

I intend to, but it's good to actually have more than one candidate speaking the populist message. Even if the candidate flakes out, I can still support the message and the principles.

And Kucinich's regard for Ron Paul is dangerously close to a ideological flakeout, in my book.

Edwards got burned by the corporatist DLC in 2004, and it looks like he's pissed off about it. To me, that's a hopeful sign.

[bobbolink]

46. That "first time guy" dropped poverty.

I'm now voting for the one who speaks out on my behalf!!

"Edwards got burned by the corporatist DLC in 2004, and it looks like he's pissed off about it. To me, that's a hopeful sign."

I think you're right. And sometimes when you learn the hard way, or through pain, your determination is that much stronger.

I see his change of direction as very much like Bobby Kennedy's. Other similarities as well.

[Cronopio]

95. Totally agreed about the Bobby Kennedy connection.

Except for the endgame. Any Sirhan-wannabe that gets anywhere close to Edwards or Kucinich will be rendered off to a private place and taught a very long and painful lesson, followed by video coverage on YouTube.

[bobbolink]

97. Except that it's the corporations that would want Edwards gone,

and you know as well as I do that they are not only very powerful, but are able to find others to do their dirty work, and get away with it.

The sad state of affairs in "the greatest country in the world".

[Cronopio]

98. Agreed, corporate mercenaries for hire are a dime a dozen.

Which is why I suspect that if there are more assassinations of populist politicians, terrorists will start bombing the headquarters of specific corporations.

It's not my kind of game, but I can imagine a resurgence of Weather Underground-type tactics.

[ihavenobias]

63. Dennis wasn't always "right the first time"

DK used to be *strongly* pro-life.

Do I hold it against him? No, because I believe people CAN (sometimes) change their minds and not always because of some hidden, evil agenda (even if they sometimes change in a short period of time as was the case for DK).

But I am now slightly pissed at the "vote for someone who gets it right *the first time*" bullshit from his supporters (and don't get me wrong, I think the guy has a lot of great progressive ideas).

My only point is, people paint him to be the only perfect candidate in so far as he never changes his strong progressive positions:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-carney110102.asp

[bobbolink]

104. EXACTLY RIGHT! There were other things he changed on, also, but I will NOT call him "hypocrite"

as his supporters do to Edwards.

That isn't the way we will save our democracy.

And, if I was as small as some who attack Edwards, I would point out his 3 marriages that he "didn't get right the first time", but I won't.

:evilgrin:

[Two Americas]

75. absolutely

Support Dennis and vote for him. Consider Edwards as your second choice, is all that I would ask, and if you are unable to do that, then stand with the Edwards supporters as your potential allies and friends, and if you are unable to do that, then stand behind the pro-labor ideas that Edwards is expressing.

I hope every politician and every voter in the country "switches their platform to Kucinich" - don't you?

[2hip]

27. I've got only one thing to say --

          Edwards '08 tees!

[Ravy]

41. Nice post! Thanks! K&R

[Kurovski]

42. K&R. (nt)

[bvar22]

43. !

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=B02





The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[JDPriestly]

50. Edwards has mostly received contributions from individuals.

This chart includes his contributions from individuals. As most DUers know, when you donate, you have to state the name of your employer. My donations will be credited to those of lawyers because that is my profession. So, the figure for lawyers includes a lot of individuals like me whose donations are strictly personal and not influenced by or behalf of any corporate or even law firm interest. I remember prior to the 2004 election, several members of the large firm for which I was working, including me, backed Clark and donated to Clark. That does not mean that our firm backed or donated to Clark. It was strictly personal. Many doctors and lawyers like Edwards. That's because he is just so smart and has a professional demeanor. For myself, I also like his positive responses to problems. He even handles people who try to trick him up or put him down with a positive response. Edwards is just the best in my view.

[lisainmilo]

52. I want to clarify JRE donations.

I want people to understand JRE has taken no monies from lobbyist or PAC's

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008


P R E S I D E N T I A L C A N D I D A T E
John Edwards (D)
Former NC Senator; 2004 Presidential Candidate
Edwards is maintaining his steady fundraising pace behind Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, though he has announced that he will be accepting $10 million in public funding-and is encouraging the others to do the same. At the end of the 3rd Quarter, Edwards had $30.3 million, which means he will easily reach the $35 million his campaign originally said he'd need to bring in to be competitive in the early primaries. The former North Carolina senator has vowed not to accept money from registered lobbyists or PACs and only had minimal debt to re-pay after his 2004 campaign.

Total Receipts: $30,329,152
Total Spent: $17,932,103
Cash on Hand: $12,397,048
Debts: $0
Date of last report: September 30, 2007
Totals may include compliance fund receipts


Source of Funds:
(How to read this chart / methodology)

Individual contributions
$30,121,494
99%

PAC contributions
$20
0%

Candidate self-financing
$0
0%

Federal Funds
$0
0%

Other
$207,638
1%



PAC Contribution Breakdown:
(How to read this chart / methodology)

Business
$500
4%

Labor
$6,000
52%

Ideological/Single Issue
$5,087
44%



How complete are this candidate's campaign finance reports?

(How to read this chart / methodology)
Full Disclosure
$17,630,852
(89.0%)

Incomplete
$230,635
(1.2%)

No Disclosure
$1,946,519
(9.8%)



Why (and How) We Use Donors’ Employer/Occupation Information

The organizations listed as "Top Contributors" reached this list for one of two reasons: either they gave through a political action committee sponsored by the organization, or individuals connected with the organization contributed directly to the candidate.

Under federal law, all contributions over $200 must be itemized and the donor’s occupation and employer must be requested and disclosed, if provided. The Center uses that employer/occupation information to identify the donor’s economic interest. We do this in two ways:

First, we apply a code to the contribution, identifying the industry. Totals for industries (and larger economic sectors) can be seen in each candidate and race profile, and in the Industry Profile section of the OpenSecrets website.

Second, we standardize the name of the donor’s employer. If enough contributions came in from people connected with that same employer, the organization’s name winds up on the Top Contributor list.

Of course, it is impossible to know either the economic interest that made each individual contribution possible or the motivation for each individual giver. However, the patterns of contributions provide critical information for voters, researchers and others. That is why Congress mandated that candidates and political parties request employer information from contributors and publicly report it when the contributor provides it.

In some cases, a cluster of contributions from the same organization may indicate a concerted effort by that organization to “bundle” contributions to the candidate. In other cases—both with private companies and with government agencies, non-profits and educational institutions—the reason for the contributions may be completely unrelated to the organization.

Showing these clusters of contributions from people associated with particular organizations provides a valuable—and unique—way of understanding where a candidate is getting his or her financial support. Knowing those groups is also useful after the election, as issues come before Congress and the administration that may affect those organizations and their industries.

http://opensecrets.org/pres08/contribmethod.asp?ID=N00009638&Cycle=2008

[Kajsa]

47. John Edwards speaks for me,too.

He has fought the corporate power players
and will continue to do so.

You tell 'em, John.

:applause:

[WinkyDink]

51. Benazir's courage should shame ALL the Democratic candidates into "radicalized" speech.

Republicans, of course, cannot be shamed.

[MilesColtrane]

53. Average of latest polls finds Edwards squeaking ahead of Obama and within...

...striking distance of Hillary.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html

Statistically though, it's still a three way dead heat.

Only four more campaigning days left.
Good luck to John Edwards and to this country because it needs him.

[RBInMaine]

55. Totally Awesome!

I met Edwards three times in my state in the 2004 campaign. This guy can win, and he has exactly the right message. HE IS THE BEST DEMOCRATIC HOPE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION !! People are sick and tired of being screwed royal by corporate America and their mainly Republican enablers in Washington and around the country. Edwards and Dean are the men to once again make the Democratic Party the real party of the people, and Edwards is the man we need in the White House. He'll give us our democracy back ! SUPPORT JOHN EDWARDS !!

[renie408]

56. Go John! n/t

[ScooterFibby]

57. Go John Go!

He's national-level quality.

[TomClash]

58. I am for him because

he is the only person who recognizes the class war seething under the MSM veneer of "horse-race politics."

[Zorra]

59. Why are any Democrats supporting anyone but Kucinich or Edwards?

Don't you Clinton, Obama, Biden, etc. supporters "get" what John Edwards is saying at all?

If we do not elect a candidate that will make it their top priority to eliminate corporate control of our government,

WE ARE FUCKED, and our kids, and all future generations of Americans, will be doomed to live under total fascism.

There are no nice little pojama people skirtin' the real issue kool-aid, band aid fixes here.

How come so many Democrats don't understand this?
:banghead:

[The River]

60. Good Question

Far too many have been seduced by MSM propaganda
and others are more interested in breaking (perceived)
barriers than they are in making real progress.

[FatDave]

83. I sure wish I knew (nt)

[Swamp Rat]

61. Geaux Edwards!!!

:kick:

[nealmhughes]

62. I am reminded of RFK more and more as well, RFK III, the 1968 version.

It is ludicrous not to believe that a politician as any other person can mature. Was Bobby Kennedy in 1968 other than supericially related to the Joe McCarthy as Kathleen's godfather?

Like RFK, a strong dose of personal tragedy has an odd way of jump starting one's idealism.

[cyberpj]

65. He is my candidate. But if he were to win I would fear for his life. JFK, MLK, RFK, et al...

"they" never let the popular peoples' people live you know. I'm not saying we should cower, just noting the history of "the people" vs. "them" when it comes to those who get too popular with us liberals and the working classes.

Thank you John for speaking the truth! May the Universe bless you and protect you.

[OzarkDem]

66. And I think he'll do it

He's the only front runner who won't sell out once he gets in office.

[fenriswolf]

69. i am a kucinich fan through and through

but edwards is the only candidate i would gladely vote for if he gets the nod.

[Political Heretic]

72. Thank you John. For those who know my story, John Edwards speaks for me.

Thank you.

[lakeguy]

76. wow, i am a kucinich fan but edwards is definitely

growing on me!

[Enthusiast]

78. I fear the right wing power brokers...........

I fear they would kill John Edwards. Just as in Pakistan. It is no coincidence that all the American political figures assassinated have been progressives.

[Lindsey]

79. I truly believe John Edwards

is the real deal. I pray with all my heart that he wins in Iowa. I'm visulizing him as president. Wow, one more week and we'll know the road we'll be on.....

[libodem]

80. I like this guy more and more

[meowomon]

81. And let's not forget who the first lady will be

Elizabeth Edwards rocks! She is a woman we can be proud of. Articulate. Intelligent. And the Edwards' have a REAL marriage. Not a sham one based on politics.

Gee, you think Hillary and Bill can claim that kind of devotion to each other? A candidate's personal life matters to me and I have not trusted Hillary since she supported her philandering husband. Any real woman would have kicked his ass out of her life after his numerous liaisons. Why would I vote for a person who puts politics ahead of integrity? She disgusts me.

Michelle Obama is really great too. Damn, I'm torn. I like the candidates wives more than the candidates.

[rAVES]

84. Excellent message John!

[bread_and_roses]

87. THIS is how all our candidates should be speaking

And that HRC and Obama do not is very telling. Another K & R.

[mdmc]

89. Go Johnny GO!

I'll be down if he can get Kucinich's endorsement.

[ooglymoogly]

90. BIG REC, kr nt.

[happygoluckytoyou]

91. EDWARDS - TOP TEN REASONS TO VOTE FOR HIM

1. WILLING TO ADMIT MISTAKES
2. DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF THEM
3. LEARNS FROM THEM

4. CANT BE ATTACKED BY THE GOP FOR CLINTON CONNECTION
5. BEST L A B O R CANDIDATE IN THE RACE.... AND YOU KNOW THE GOP LOVES CHEAP LABOR MORE THAN GOD
6. WIFE IS COOL, SMART, POPULAR
7. HAS ENOUGH WEALTH TO NOT BE A SLUG

8. HAS THE BEST NUMBERS TO BEAT ANYTHING THE REPUBLICANS LOOK FOR
9. HAS A BACKGROUND IN THE LAW.... UNLIKE THE CURRENT PRESIDENT, THIS ONE WOULD READ AND THINK

10. HILLARY IS GOP LIGHT.... WE NEED A TRUE PRESIDENT OF THE PEOPLE!!!

[EVDebs]

106. And if you want the evangelicals, have them watch John Sayle's Matewan

and pay special attention to the boy preacher (the boardinghouse lady's son) who saves the day with a little help from upstairs.

Last time someone did this they were overturning moneychanger's tables in a temple somewhere !

[snappyturtle]

92. Kick!

:kick:

[CorpGovActivist]

107. Accurate Assessment of America Kick n/t

[Fading Captain]

109. WAKE UP AMERICA

And VOTE FOR A REAL DEMOCRAT!