Here are a few simple reasons why John Edwards is the man who we absolutely need to get the democratic nomination:
What is wrong with this country is a lot more than a badly handled war. A lot of people have a sense that we have drifted radically towards losing control of our democracy itself and they are right. There has always been undo influence by big money but until recently it has never succeeded in practically dismantling government-by-the-people. Every single problem we face as a nation is stymied by the money interests that have bought up Washington. If you think these problems can be handled with the present system, forget it. When lobbyists for corporate America are writing laws across the board that are supposed to regulate their own industries there is little hope. When the media is owned by just a few huge interests and they attempt to anoint candidates that are part of their club, there is little hope. When we as citizens are losing our rights to privacy more and more every day and even Democrats in Congress are trying to help phone companies break the law by spying on us, there is little hope.
Republicans have swallowed hook line and sinker the idea of farming out as much of the public sphere to the private sector as possible and we are in danger of losing any sense of having a common destiny, a shared public good or a competent government. Everyone will be in it for themselves, if they aren't already.
America is becoming a country of enclaves -- rich and guarded or poor and shoved aside. The middle class has no real solid ground under their feet, no sense that they can take a breather at any time. One misfortune, one unforeseen illness, one unforeseen layoff because of outsourcing, one sustained spike in gas prices and you aren't middle class anymore -- you're in the struggling class.
I'm not against economic development at all -- I just don't want to see a total domination by big business over every part of American life. There has to be a balance between public good and private interests- we need both.
So why John Edwards? Because he is a politician in the Teddy Roosevelt sense. He is not against making money -- or other people making it -- but he does see clearly that the game can become lopsided and needs to be checked at times in the interests of the little guy. I think he also sees that there is more to being an American than making money, that we are a people making a common destiny together (or used to be), even though it's contentious at times. He is also a man who takes personal responsibility seriously, which is important as that would permeate any policies he proposes. We need a president who has been self-reliant, who has been successful in private life, and who has a fighting instinct. TR had a hell of a fight to accomplish what he did -- but he fought hard and won and we've had a far better country for it. John Edwards is also a man along those lines.
What about Clinton and Obama?
The negatives about Clintonn -- we all know what they are. She is a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America. Her vaunted experience is only in witnessing the experience of her husband (she's been a cautious, mediocre senator) and she seems to have no real conviction other than ambition (I have the feeling Edwards is running not just out of ambition but because he genuinely feels he can make the country a better one and is pushed by the idea of public service, along the lines of TR and JFK). Aside from that, I do not want to see a dynastic presidency develop, if it hasn't already, with decades of Clinton/Bush trade offs. It's a horrible precedent to set. Nothing will really change for the better under a President Clinton, just a few minor adjustments to what we have now.
As for Obama, he is nothing but blind ambition. He has shirked many of his responsibilities in the Senate so that he could run for President. His whole campaign is built around the 'cult of personality' -- it's all about him. His story, his phenomenon, his 'savior-like' quality. And he thinks he's going to 'sit down and talk' with the opposition and 'get things done.' News for Obama -- whoever is elected will sit down and talk with the opposition -- they'll have to. That's nothing new. But his emphasis on this supposedly enlightened method tells me that he'd be eaten alive. If anyone remembers correctly the Republicans were all about 'cooperation' after the 2000 election, and after 9/11, but what that meant was that Democrats were the ones that had to completely compromise. Republicans did not budge, not an inch when they had power. So to think you'll have some nice committee meetings (of course, Obama has skipped most of his so far) where things will work out, you might be right: they'll work out in the favor of the moneyed interests. Obama doesn't have the gravity of heart to handle the presidency. He's a great motivational speaker, though.
So we need Edwards. This country needs a president who is not against private enterprise or personal success but understands where to draw the line when the public good is threatened. We need a president who has got the fight in him to see it through and doesn't have anything to prove (Clinton and Obama will always have something to prove and that will always weaken them in a fight). We need a president who truly has been on both sides of the tracks and feels from the gut the pull of public service, not just blind ambition. John Edwards is that man.
Folks if you'd just be honest with yourselves you will see that you finally have a progressive candidate who is not only good on the issues but is a winner. You don't do what Edwards did against all the odds because you are a lousy candidate. You have to be a great candidate with a vision for America that resonates with voters in order to beat back two rock star candidates who have outspent you and gotten far more media attention.
I left the names of Edwards, Obama & Clinton off in the earlier part of my post for a reason. I thought it might help some people look at the facts rather than the spin. I think that some people lose all sense of reason when they see the candidates names. Instead of focusing on the facts they pick their candidate or stick with a candidate based on a perception they have of them regardless of whether their perception is true.
We really do have a chance in this election to have a great candidate who is strong on our issues and who can win if we are willing to let our brains pick our candidate rather than have the media and entrenched interests manipulate us into picking a dud that can't even buy their way to a victory.
1. No vice-presidential candidate on a losing ticket (Kerry-Edwards, 2004) has won the presidentail contest, going as far back as the second world war.
2. Edwards on the 2004 Democratic ticket could not even win his own home sate of North Carolina. If the people who know you best won't vote for you, what chance do you have in a general election?
3. When you cut through all the fluffy stuff, Edwards' only real "asset" is that he is the traditional White guy among the top Democratic contenders. Some of his supporters have admitted as much here. Problem is, they are saying vote for him because he is the usual. In other words, those who fear change most tend to move towards Edwards. That is a fair position to take. But do not at the same time say that he is the one to change the mess in Washington, when you prefer him because he is "the usual"..
If people agree that this country really needs to change for the better right now, there is only one real choice among the top-tier Dems. That is Obama, who has the smarts and actually has an extensive track record in successfully bringing about political change at the local, state and federal levels. He's the only one that passes the Truth-in-Labelling test.
Many, many Democrats need to read this.
Go John, Go!
Of course with so many of the rest working so hard to prove they don't deserve to be dog catcher much less president I know I may have to scratch a few more off my "hold your nose and vote for them" list before this is over.
Repugs will line up to vote against Clinton or Obama. They will carpool to the polls to stop a Clinton or African American from being president. And, they would stay home with their disillusionment if Edwards were our candidate. Hell, some of the repugs might even vote for the blond haired, blue eyed, all American boy.
Don't we want to win?
Why? Because they can unload on him bigtime. He's a lawyer and a trial lawyer at that, and people hate lawyers. And then there's the opportunistic way he seemed to exploit his wife's cancer as a way of raising money for his campaign. In fact, the right-wing bloggers I've read are already pouncing on him for that.
Then, there's the John Kerry 2004 connection. Yeah, they want him baaaaaad.
So, while on paper he looks good (to you), it'll never work.