“There is a lot John and I have in common. I will be a fighter, and I intend to ask John Edwards to be a part of anything I do in the White House.”
As of this moment, I still plan to vote for John.
If he does endorse before I vote, I will listen to and consider what John Edwards has to say, and I will take it very seriously since I will have to assume any candidate he endorses has made a serious commitment to his issues, but I have one thing to say right now.
John, if you or Elizabeth are reading this, I want you to know that I would have great difficulty voting for a candidate who doesn't have a real universal health care plan, with or without your endorsement, and that the celebrity hype surrounding our remaining candidates makes me not hopeful for our country, but frightened that we do not vote for rational reasons.
There's one major reason that I haven't been able to get behind either the remaining candidates since John Edwards dropped out of the race, and you can read a summary of it here. It is the most comprehensive and smartest platform I have ever seen a presidential candidate put forward. It also comes with the rare understanding that there are certain problems, such as corruption of our government by corporate special interests, that currently stand in the way of any real reform on any other issue.
My own top concerns are as follows, although which one takes precedence varies depending on the day:
1) Universal Health Care. 2) Stopping Global Warming. 3) Ending Poverty. 4) Restoring Democracy in the United States. 5) Removing the Corrupting Influence of Corporate Money from our Government. 6) Ensuring Verifiable and Democratic Election Results. 7) Reforming the Media and Guaranteeing Net Neutrality. 8) Ending the War and Preventing Future Wars.
To one degree or another, John Edwards addressed every one of these issues during the course of his campaign. On most of these issues, he was the first candidate, or sometimes the only candidate, to address them, and furthermore, he understood and could articulate the interrelatedness of all these problems.
There is now a widespread acknowledgement, even among the slow-witted punditocracy, who should have noted it BEFORE John Edwards dropped out of the race, that Edwards set the agenda for the Democratic Party and its candidates in this election. His is the original vision, and the deepest understanding of that vision. The other candidate's platforms are truly but pale imitations.
I miss his voice. I miss it sorely. Probably almost nothing could convince me that John Edwards was not the best person to lead our country at this time. He should have been our president. This is why, barring a statement from Edwards himself that changes my mind, I am casting my vote for him tomorrow in Maryland.
From NBC's Mark Hudspeth and Mark Murray When asked about the AP report that Obama and Edwards meeting is not happening today, the Obama campaign told us to talk to the Edwards camp. However, when pressed, they said it wouldn't be inaccurate to report that the meeting will not happen today or tomorrow.
A source close to Edwards confirms that the meeting has been canceled. But the source doesn’t know the reason behind it; it could be something as simple as a scheduling conflict.
John Edwards spoke today at the NAACP's King Day rally at the Dome on the grounds of the state Capitol in Columbia, South Carolina. He spoke passionately about the importance of speaking out for all the disenfranchised in our society. He emphasized that all of us are in this together, and that we can no longer stand silent in the face of oppression.
UPDATE: See letter to John Edwards from MLK III at the end of the diary.
Edwards speaking today at the King Day rally
“I had the privilege about a year ago of speaking at the Riverside church in Harlem, a place where Dr. King had spoken 40 years ago. He had come there to speak about the war in Vietnam. And the words he used, he said there comes a time in all our lives, where if we stand quiet, if we stand silent when our conscience tells us to speak, that our silence is a betrayal. It is a betrayal of ourselves, it is a betrayal of the country we love so much. Brothers and sisters we can no longer stand silent. We have to speak out and we must speak out together.
“It is time for us to not remain silent about this war in Iraq,” Edwards continued. “It is time for us to bring our men and women home from Iraq. It is time for our voices to be heard loud and clear. It is time that we no longer stand silent because silence is betrayal to 37 million people who wake up every single day in America living in poverty, worried about feeding and clothing their children. This is the great moral issue of our time. It was the central issue, along with equality, in the life of Dr. King.
“Here in South Carolina, we talk about the Corridor of Shame. Brothers and sisters, we must turn the Corridor of Shame into a corridor of hope and opportunity for the people of South Carolina. We as a nation have an opportunity to deal with this great moral issue. So brothers and sisters, my message for today, is that we’re in this today. We are united in this effort to create hope and opportunity, and it is time for us to say enough is enough. We’re better than this. The United States of America is better than this. It is time for us to stand up, speak out, rise up together as one people and create the kind of America that all of us believe in and all of us are fighting for.”
No stranger to the fight for justice and opportunity for everyone, John Edwards has laid out an impressive platform to bring balance and equality and close the income and opportunity gap throughout South Carolina and throughout our whole society.
Guarantee health care for every American and address the shameful racial and ethnic health disparities.
Strengthen schools so every child gets a great education, provide universal early childhood education classes for four-year-olds, and make college more affordable.
End the disgrace of two criminal justice systems and support alternatives to incarceration for first-time, non-violent offenders as well as reentry programs.
Create safe and affordable housing near good jobs, promote economically integrated neighborhoods and crack down on the scourge of predatory mortgage lending.
Protect the right to vote by restoring the right to vote in all federal elections to ex-offenders who have served their sentence and supporting secure and accessible voting ballots for all voting machines.
End poverty in America by strengthening families, help workers save and get ahead, reach overlooked rural areas, and expect people to help themselves by working whenever they are able.
Help small businesses by increasing federal contracting opportunities for minority-owned small business and use the power of the federal government to help small business.
Ensure environmental justice by maintaining access to the courts, disclosing the risks of plants, and enforcing the Clean Air Act strongly across the country.
Enforce civil rights laws by strengthening the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, choosing judges who are committed to protecting civil rights, and appointing officials who vigorously enforce our civil rights laws.
Close the digital divide by establishing a national broadband policy with a goal of giving all U.S. homes and businesses affordable access to real high-speed internet by 2010 and prohibiting telephone and cable companies from discriminating against rural or low-income communities in building their networks.
All of this goes right to the heart of why I have been supporting John Edwards throughout his campaign. Four years ago, he was the one candidate to bring the issue of poverty onto the national stage. He has awakened a desire in our national conscience to do what's right, by relentlessly pushing this issue.
Edwards understands that justice never comes without a fight. We are all in this together, but we need a leader who will stand strong with us.
If you missed his inspiring speech at Riverside Church last January for Martin Luther King Day, here are some excerpts:
We Shall Overcome!
UPDATE:
Today, John Edwards received the following letter from Martin L. King III after a meeting with him at the King Center in Atlanta. PDF
January 20, 2008 Martin Luther King, III President and CEO
The Honorable John E. Edwards 410 Market Street Suite 400 Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Dear Senator Edwards:
It was good meeting with you yesterday and discussing my father’s legacy.
On the day when the nation will honor my father, I wanted to follow up with a personal note.
There has been, and will continue to be, a lot of back and forth in the political arena over my father’s legacy. It is a commentary on the breadth and depth of his impact that so many people want to claim his legacy. I am concerned that we do not blur the lines and obscure the truth about what he stood for: speaking up for justice for those who have no voice.
I appreciate that on the major issues of health care, the environment, and the economy, you have framed the issues for what they are - a struggle for justice.And, you have almost single-handedly made poverty an issue in this election.
You know as well as anyone that the 37 million people living in poverty have no voice in our system. They don’t have lobbyists in Washington and they don’t get to go to lunch with members of Congress. Speaking up for them is not politically convenient. But, it is the right thing to do.
I am disturbed by how little attention the topic of economic justice has received during this campaign. I want to challenge all candidates to follow your lead, and speak up loudly and forcefully on the issue of economic justice in America.
From our conversation yesterday, I know this is personal for you. I know you know what it means to come from nothing. I know you know what it means to get the opportunities you need to build a better life. And, I know you know that injustice is alive and well in America, because millions of people will never get the same opportunities you had.
I believe that now, more than ever, we need a leader who wakes up every morning with the knowledge of that injustice in the forefront of their minds, and who knows that when we commit ourselves to a cause as a nation, we can make major strides in our own lifetimes. My father was not driven by an illusory vision of a perfect society. He was driven by the certain knowledge that when people of good faith and strong principles commit to making things better, we can change hearts, we can change minds, and we can change lives.
So, I urge you: keep going. Ignore the pundits, who think this is a horserace, not a fight for justice. My dad was a fighter. As a friend and a believer in my father’s words that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, I say to you: keep going. Keep fighting. My father would be proud.
I've been away from my home for three weeks. I was in New Hampshire helping the Edwards campaign, then I went to Michigan for Christmas, then I was in Iowa for the caucus. It was a lot of fun, and a lot of hard work. Sometimes it was an emotional roller coaster. Many things happened during that time, but through it all, one thing never changed: I will support John Edwards through the convention and beyond, no matter what.
I was glad to hear him reiterate last night what I first heard him say on George Stephanopoulos’ show: that he plans to stay in through the convention and to the White House. I will support him all the way.
Here's a quote from his speech last night:
Because of those who have called, and knocked on doors, and worked tirelessly on behalf of this cause, this cause to create the America that all of us believe in, because of that, I want to be absolutely clear to all of you who have been devoted to this cause, and I want to be clear to the 99% of Americans who have not yet had the chance to have their voices heard that I am in this race to the convention, that I intend to be the nominee of my party. And I am in this race until we have actually restored the American dream, and strenthened and restored the middle class of America, and so I ask all of you here and all of you who can hear the sound of my voice, the 99% whose voices have not yet been heard in this democracy to join us in this grassroots campaign to create the kind of America that all of us believe in.
This is the first time in my life that I've ever had such utter, unswerving loyalty to a candidate. There are a lot of reasons for it, but I've been struggling as to how to distill it down to the essence so I can communicate the reason to others. It boils down to my principles.
There are certain principles I've held throughout my life, and my support for John Edwards is a vibrant and clear expression of every one of them, because he embodies these principles with his actions and his policies.
Liberty - All Americans, and certainly all American politicians, give at least lip service to Liberty. How many of us really believe in it?
How many of us really believe in freedom of speech, even when we disagree with what is said? How many politicians are willing to show their respect for freedom of speech by being willing to answer hard questions on any subject? John Edwards never tries to silence dissent, and he encourages tough questions.
Edwards is not just passively in favor of freedom of speech, he actively encourages it. Throughout this campaign, he has encouraged bloggers to create political dialogue on the Internet. He has stood up for net neutrality, speaking clearly about the importance of the Internet for our democracy. He has spoken in opposition to media consolidation, even sending a letter opposing media consolidation to the FCC during a public comment period at a time when the FCC was considering adopting rules that would allow further media consolidation.
When you have Liberty, Democracy necessarily follows, since if you are free, you deserve a say in your government. How many of us really believe in democracy, even when we don't like the outcome? How many times have you been told that you have to fall in line and support the front runner, even if you disagree with them? How many times have you been told to support the person with the most cash, because fund-raising is going to determine the outcome? These are profoundly anti-democratic sentiments, but some I've heard them repeated a lot in the past 6 months.
John Edwards has repeatedly stood up for the right of every person to have a voice in this democracy. He has repeatedly stood up for the right of all people to be heard, regardless of whether they have money to give to campaigns. He has supported public financing by taking it himself, and he has never taken a dime from a Washington lobbyist. He is standing up for our right to be heard now, by staying in this race and fighting for the nomination.
Edwards believes in freedom of religion, too. I heard him speak at the Sojourners conference in Washington, DC earlier this year. That was a religious audience, and he didn't pander to them, in spite of the fact that he is religious himself. In fact, he stated clearly that people of all religions and people without a religion all deserve an equal voice in our democracy.
At every turn in this campaign, it seems to me that Edwards has always sought to empower people -- to enfranchise us at a time when we have become so accustomed to disenfranchisement.
Equality - This may be the deepest of my core principles. I haven't always expressed it perfectly, and I haven't even always understood it perfectly, but I know that few things outrage me more than people being treated unfairly and inequitably by others.
I think perhaps a principle takes root more deeply when you have struggled to understand it. I know that when I was a child, the assertion that "All Men Are Created Equal" puzzled me. The first thing I wanted to know was, why was it men? I can still remember my mother telling me that in that case "men" meant all of humanity. Given the sexism of the time when the Declaration of Independence was written, I'm not sure that was really what it meant, but it is certainly the only acceptable interpretation now.
Beyond my concern about the use of the word "men," I was still puzzled. Surely some people are more intelligent than others, some people are more attractive than others, some people are more healthy than others, some people are born with more wealth than others. So what does it really mean?
The answer that I have come to, and which I have stuck with, is that the statement "All of Humanity Is Created Equal" is true at a spiritual level. Regardless of their personality, gifts, or abilities, each person is born with equal worth. Each person has the same rights by nature or, as the Declaration says, each person is "endowed by their Creator with" these rights. In other words, you have basic human rights simply because you exist. Each person is equal to every other person simply because they are human. Nobody is better than another.
I know that John Edwards believes this to his core like I do, because I have seen the way he treats other people. It doesn't matter who you are. You could be a farmer, a schoolteacher, a blue-collar worker, a white-collar worker, a lawyer, a doctor, a senator, a person who is struggling to get by, or a wealthy campaign donor. You could be a woman or a man, you could be white, black, yellow, or brown, or any other color. John Edwards will treat you exactly the same as he treats everyone else -- with utmost respect for your humanity – and no matter who you are, if you’re his opponent, he’ll be tough on you.
I know some will say that if Equality is so important to me, why not support the “first” woman candidate or the “first” black candidate (and I could have sworn I voted for Jesse Jackson in the '80s, but according the media, I must have imagined it). The thing is, when you really see people as equal, you evaluate them on their merits. JRE is the best candidate. His gender and race are irrelevant to me.
Compassion - I think it's rather simple. If you think of all people as being equal, how can you not have compassion for them? If they have as much worth as you do, how could they possibly not merit compassion when they are suffering? To me, compassion goes along with the idea that all are created equal. Equality seems to me to imply that we are all in it together, and therefore should have compassion for one another.
As the candidate who has put poverty back on the national agenda pretty much all by himself, Edwards embodies compassion. And if everyone is of equal worth and deserves compassion, then it seems to me that universal health care is a right. Edwards will give us universal health care.
Integrity - I’m tired of all the lies. I tell the truth. I want a president who will do the same. John Edwards tells the truth. I don’t want to go negative here, but I don’t believe that about any of the other candidates in this race. Time for some truth. I trust John.
Respect for the Earth – This is fundamental. We live on this planet. We need to respect it. It is not to be bartered away to the highest bidder. We need to take care of it.
JRE has the best plan to fight global warming and develop alternative energy and he is the only one of the major candidates who opposes nuclear power. His rural agenda supports family farmers and opposes big stinky factory farms. He is the only candidate to get an endorsement from a national environmental organization, Friends of the Earth Action.
This is the right thing for me to do.
I haven't often had a sense of purpose in my life. I've spent many of my years on this earth wondering what I should be doing. I’ve been relatively successful at times, but I admit that sometimes I have felt rudderless. Not this time.
I saw what kind of man JRE was during the 2004 campaign, and I know he would be a great president for our country. When he got into this race, there was no question in my mind what I needed to do. I have been volunteering on his behalf for just over a year now and for most of that time, I’ve been doing it at least 8 hours a day, 7 days a week.
During these last few weeks and months, I've had a deep sense of peace within myself and a feeling that I was doing exactly what I was put on this earth to do. No matter what happens in this presidential election, I know I have done the right thing by supporting John Edwards. I will always be proud of that.
This is the time to fight with all we've got for the candidate who will really change this country. America needs John Edwards.
For more information... http://www.johnedwards.com/
I think there may be some dispute between supporters of different candidates about who has the coolest celebrity endorsement, but for my money, the best one so far this campaign season is the endorsement of John Edwards today by Harry Belafonte.
Belafonte, who became famous in the 1950s by popularizing Calypso music from the Caribbean, has been a long time human rights activist. Among other things, he worked with the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights movement in the 1960s. He hasn't stopped working for the betterment of humanity since.
The Life of Harry Belafonte
Belafonte with Sidney Poitier and Charlton Heston at the 1963 Civil Rights March on Washington
Like Robeson and other African-American entertainers, Belafonte's success in the arts did not protect him from racial discrimination, particularly in the South of the United States. As a result, he refused to perform in the South of the U.S. from 1954 until 1961. In 1960, President John F. Kennedy named Belafonte as cultural advisor to the Peace Corps. Belafonte was an early supporter of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and one of Martin Luther King's confidants. He provided for King's family, since King made only $8,000 a year as a preacher. Like many civil rights activists, he was blacklisted during the McCarthy era. He bailed King out of the Birmingham City Jail and raised thousands of dollars to release other imprisoned civil rights protesters. He financed the Freedom Rides, supported voter registration drives, and helped to organize the March on Washington in 1963.
In 1968, Belafonte appeared on a Petula Clark primetime television special on NBC. In the middle of a song, Clark smiled and briefly touched Belafonte's arm, which made the show's sponsor, Plymouth Motors, nervous. Plymouth wanted to cut out the segment, but Clark, who had ownership of the special, told NBC that the performance would be shown intact or she would not allow the special to be aired at all. American newspapers published articles reporting the controversy and, when the special aired, it grabbed high viewing figures. Clark's gesture marked the first time in which two people of different races made friendly bodily contact on U.S. television.
And there's a lot more...
In 1987, he received an appointment to UNICEF as a goodwill ambassador. Following his appointment, Belafonte travelled to Dakar, Senegal, where he served as chairman of the International Symposium of Artists and Intellectuals for African Children. He also helped to raise funds, alongside more than 20 other artists, in the largest concert ever held in sub-Saharan Africa. In 1994 he went on a mission to Rwanda, and launched a media campaign to raise awareness of the needs of Rwandan children. In 2001 he went to South Africa to support the campaign against HIV/AIDS. In 2002, Africare awarded him the Bishop John T. Walker Distinguished Humanitarian Service Award for his efforts to assist Africa. In 2004 Belafonte went to Kenya to stress the importance of educating children in the region.
I've been a fan of Belafonte for many years, ever since my mother introduced me to his music when I was probably in junior high school. One year, my sisters and I asked her what she wanted for Christmas, and she told us she wanted a copy of Harry Belafonte's hit record from the 1950s, "Calypso." That was the first time I ever heard of him, and this great album quickly became one of my favorites. I got to see him in concert probably least about 20 years ago now, and it was a wonderful concert!
Since I am a fan of Harry Belafonte, I want to share with you a couple of entertaining videos of him that I found on YouTube. I hope you will enjoy these!
Harry Belafonte on the Smothers Brothers Show
Harry Belafonte on the Muppet Show
Harry Belafonte and Nat King Cole
Belafonte's endorsement of John Edwards today
Here's what Harry Belafonte had to say about John Edwards when he endorsed him today in South Carolina. (Article and Video here.)
Belafonte is a likable, friendly man: one genuinely concerned with people and the state of this country. He says John Edwards is the only candidate also concerned and compassionate enough to try and deal with it.
"I've looked at his platform on education, healthcare, poverty, what young people are going through and I have come to believe he's the best candidate," Belafonte said.
He says all the other candidates talk about the plight of the middle class, While only Edwards talks about the poor.
"I also happen to believe that had he not so forcefully and precisely put the issue of poverty into this campaign, I don't think we'd be talking aobut it as much as we are," Belafonte said.
Belafonte feels Edwards was sincere when he announced his candidacy in New Orleans, saying it showed a commitment to the people devastated by hurricane Katrina.
"I've talked with John Edwards. I've looked into heart and his soul," Belafonte says.
He added that Edwards has the makings of a great president. Belafonte attended a rally with Edwards at the College of Charleston.
Thank you to this great humanitarian, Harry Belafonte, for recognizing and supporting the promise of another great humanitarian, John Edwards.
President Bill Clinton crashed Belafonte’s birthday party, which was taking place as the Democratic presidential contenders battled for the African-American vote. Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were in Selma, Ala., for the 42nd anniversary of the famous voting-rights march from Selma to Montgomery. [Bill Clinton went to Selma to join his wife for the commemoration.]
In his remarks, Clinton toasted Harry: “I was inspired by your politics more than you can ever know. Every time I ever saw you after I became president, I thought that my conscience was being graded, and I was getting less than an A. And every president should feel that way about somebody as good as you.”
I asked Harry how he felt about Clinton showing up: “I’m very flattered, OK, but I’m mindful of all the things that need to be done.” In his succinct reply, a lifetime of struggle remembered, a keen-edged skepticism. “He knows what I think. He said I didn’t give him an A.” I then asked him about both the Clintons and Obama going to Selma.
“We are hearing platitudes, not platforms. What do they plan to do for people of color, Mexicans, for people who are imprisoned, black youth? What are their plans for the Katrinas of America?”
Today, John Edwards received the coveted endorsement of Congressman Bruce Braley of Iowa's first district! Congressman Braley is one of three Democratic Iowa congressional representatives, and the first to give his endorsement in the presidential race.
Edwards has also launched a new ad to begin airing today in New Hampshire.
Iowa
Today in Waterloo, Congressman Bruce Braley is to endorse John Edwards for President.
"Today, I'm proud to endorse John Edwards for president," said Braley.
"Throughout this campaign, on issue after issue, John has proposed bold ideas to end the power of special interests in Washington and restore our government to the American people. John is the only Democratic candidate who grew up in rural America, and he has most specific, most progressive and most far-reaching ideas. I truly believe he is the best Democratic candidate to lead us to victory in 2008. With his leadership, I believe we can make his vision of One America a reality."
Congressman Braley is the first of three Democratic Iowa Congressman to announce an endorsement for President. This key endorsement builds on the support Edwards continues to gain in the state. As Jonathan Singer suggests:
First off, this could be the big piece of news in the statewide media Tuesday, and perhaps more importantly it could prompt the national media to remember Edwards, who they have been perhaps too quick to forget given their focus on the scuffles between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. What's more, a Braley endorsement could bring some of the organizational support and expertise that helped put Braley in Congress last fall. All in all, tomorrow should be a good day for the Edwards campaign.
Congressman Braley worked his way through school, as John Edwards did and has a history of fighting for workers' rights.
Braley was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2006 and represents Iowa's first congressional district. He serves on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure where he is Vice-Chairman of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit. He also serves on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on Small Business, and is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Contracting and Technology.
Edwards stated that he is "honored to receive Bruce's endorsement" noting that, "He is a true leader and a strong voice on behalf of Iowa's families. Bruce is committed to ending the power of special interests and making sure all hard-working Iowans have the opportunity to work hard, get ahead, and leave their children a better future. I look forward to joining with Bruce to change our country."
In conjunction with this endorsement, Edwards kicks off his "Building a Better America" week. He will highlight five key planks in his platform:
- Universal Health Care: Edwards will create a true universal health care system that covers everyone in America, brings down costs, and creates more choices and security.
- Good Jobs: Edwards will invest in the good jobs of the future by creating a new energy economy based on clean, renewable energy, rejecting failed trade deals in favor of new smarter trade policies, and eliminating tax incentives for corporations to invest overseas.
- Excellent Schools: Edwards will invest in teachers with higher pay and a new National Teachers University, overhaul No Child Left Behind, and invest more to turn around struggling schools. His College for Everyone initiative will let everyone work their way through college.
- Affordable Housing: Edwards will help families save for a downpayment with a new Get Ahead tax credit, create 1 million housing vouchers to let families live where they choose, build more economically integrated housing.
- Strong Families: Edwards will work with states to offer eight weeks of paid leave to new parents and workers with serious illnesses in the family. He will also create a universal Great Promise program of early childhood education and more than double the child care tax credit.
The Iowa caucus looks like a dead heat in just about every poll recently, no matter which candidate is leading by a couple of points. The Iowa caucuses notoriously hard to poll, however, and one of the reasons is second choices.
If a candidate does not get 15% of the support in a particular caucus location, his or her supporters must choose another candidate. This makes second choice is a major factor, so I think it's good news for Edwards that he seems to be leading by a wide margin as a second choice for many voters in a recent Rasmussen poll.
In terms of second-choices in Iowa, John Edwards tops the list of candidates. He is the second choice for 28% of likely caucus participants. Obama is the second choice for 18%, Clinton for 16%, and Richardson for 15%.
At this time in 2003, Howard Dean was widely expected to win the Iowa caucus. Will Hillary Clinton be the next Dean?
New Hampshire
In New Hampshire today, the new John Edwards ad, "Together," begins airing. In the ad, Edwards explains that he believes you can't get universal health care by giving drug companies, insurance companies, and their lobbyists a seat at the table. Edwards asks
"Anybody who argues that every American is not entitled to health care, I want them to explain to you: What child in this country is not worthy of health care?"
On Friday, I went to the DNC Fall Meeting with a friend of mine to see John Edwards. It was an adventurous, though not altogether pleasant, kind of day. Here's my story of a trip to a political event that was unexpectedly eventful. I'll also discuss John Edwards' and Barack Obama's very different approaches to change.
The event on Friday was supposed to be in Baltimore, which would have been convenient for me, but the workers at the original hotel location were on strike, so the DNC moved the location three weeks ago. I say kudos to the DNC for respecting the picket line, and I hope last minute planning helps explain some of the chaos at the event.
My friend Scott and I got up super early to drive to Tysons' Corner, VA, outside DC for the event. Neither of us are morning people. Such dedication!
When we arrived, there were already quite a few people waiting outside, but we were immediately greeted by friendly Edwards staffers. Unfortunately, we had to wait in line for hours; about half of that time was spent standing outside in the cold.
We were told the ballroom access would be first come first serve, and there was only room for maybe 150 supporters (in addition to the DNC members who had a guaranteed seat). There were a whole lot more than 150 guests of the various campaigns there. I kind of think each of the major campaigns had that many of their own supporters there, actually.
The event seemed disorganized. All the major campaigns had a lot of supporters there, including a lot of people from the mine workers union for Edwards. It seemed like the campaigns must have been told they could bring a lot more guests than would actually fit in the room. This could have been because of the change of venue, I guess.
I had heard that they were going to let in about 150 people, but unless they were getting them from somewhere else other than the line we knew about, I don't think they did. I think we would have been in there if they had. Most of the Edwards supporters that were there early, as well as certainly any that came at all late, like some other friends of mine did, were not let into the event. They pretty much cut off the number of people they were letting into the ballroom when they got to the mine workers for Edwards, who were standing a few feet in front of me and my friend.
They let the next couple hundred people into an overflow room, where there was a TV. Some of the Edwards supporters ahead of us, many of them mine workers, had been taken out of the line by one of the Edwards staffers to go and shake hands with John when he arrived. We didn't really know that was what was happening until later, or I would have tried to follow them. So they were no longer with us, and we ended up in a room with mostly Obama supporters and a few Edwards supporters.
There were a lot of Edwards supporters in total at the event, but a few were let into the ballroom, judging by what I saw later on C-Span, a big group got out of line to go shake hands with John (but they were told they could not get into the overflow room if they got out of line), and then another fairly big group were let into the overflow room, so we were all split up. Anyway, our numbers were a lot bigger than they looked on TV.
There was a big TV in the overflow room, so we were not happy that we had driven all that way and stood in line all that time to watch something on TV that we could have seen on C-SPAN.
Then it gets worse.
Howard Dean spoke at the beginning, briefly. Then someone came up to introduce Richardson, and then the sound for the video system cut out. Richardson was talking, but we weren't hearing a thing! There was nearly a riot in the overflow room. I am not kidding you. It was ugly. People were chanting "fix the sound! Fix the sound!" Any of the hotel staff that came in the room to try to do that were getting yelled at by some people. We missed all of Richardson's speech.
When John's speech started and the sound was still not fixed, what was already verging on a riot kicked into a higher gear. Keep in mind everyone had been made to wait for hours, much of it outside in the cold, for something we could have watched at home on C-Span already, and now we couldn't even hear it. Some people walked out, but we stayed, hoping they'd get the sound fixed.
I kept thinking that if John Edwards knew what was going on in there, he would definitely come in after his speech and say hello to people. I had no way of knowing if he knew that, though.
Eventually, one of the Obama supporters sitting near me stood up and told people that she had just asked one of the DNC people very nicely to please try to send the candidates in after their speeches, because a lot of people had come to see them and waited a long time. That was when it dawned on me that I knew some of the Edwards staffers and there was no harm in at least asking a favor.
I went out in search of a friend on the Edwards staff and found him by the Edwards table. (To clarify, I do not work for Edwards. I'm just an enthusiastic volunteer.) I took my friend's hand and said something like "there are a lot of people in the overflow room, some of whom came just to see John, and now we can't hear his speech, and everyone in there is pretty upset right now. Is there any way that John can come in and at least say hi to people after his speech?" My friend sent a text message to someone, and he and the other man at the table told me that if it could happen, it would. I thanked them and went back in the room.
By then, they had fixed the sound at least enough to hear what John was saying, though the quality wasn't great. We heard maybe about the second half of John's speech, which was excellent, although I had to wait until I got home to watch the whole thing, in the video below.
Here's just a short excerpt from his speech that gives a small taste of his passion for this fight for change:
This is bigger than politics. Bigger than any candidate or political party. Because the truth is that it's not just Republicans who built this wall. Democrats helped too. Too many politicians from both parties are choosing self-preservation over principle, compromise over convictions.
"You have a choice in this election. You have to decide what kind of person you want as your next president. Do you want someone who is going to pretend that wall around Washington isn't there, or defend the people who helped build it? Or do you want someone who is going to lead with conviction and tell you the truth, and have a little backbone? Do you want someone who is going to hope that the people who spent millions of dollars and decades building that wall, and have billions more invested in keeping it up, are going to be willing to compromise, to take it down voluntarily? Or do you want someone who is going to stand up to those people and fight for your interests, when the chips are down, when your backs are against the wall, every single day?
"We have a choice in this election. We can keep trying to shout over that wall. We can keep trying to knock out a chink here and there, to punch little holes in it and hope our voices get through. We can settle for baby steps, half-measures and incremental change, and try to inch our way over that wall and toward a better future. Or we can be bold and knock it down.
The speech was all about tearing down the wall around Washington, and it seemed like we were at that moment experiencing another facet of that metaphor, by being kept out in a separate room where we couldn't even hear what was going on at first. His speech was met with enthusiastic cheers by most everyone, including the Obama supporters.
We only had to wait for a very few minutes after John's speech, and sure enough, he came in and shook hands with as many people as he could reach. Everyone cheered a lot when he came in and while he was there. I think it helped make everything a bit better for all the people in the room. I got a beautiful big smile, a handshake, and a "hi darlin'," which was nice.
He stood up on the platform and waved and thanked people for coming. He didn't stay too long, but Obama's speech was starting soon and I suspect he didn't want to be rude and talk over it. I was having problems with my camera, so my photos all turned out bad, but here's one I downloaded from the Edwards Flickr site (from that day, but not the overflow room).
Then Obama spoke, and by then he had gotten the message that people in the overflow room were pretty frustrated, so he gave a shout out to the overflow room. That was very well received, especially since most of the people in the room were Obama supporters. I was ready to leave after seeing John, but the Obama supporters there had been very nice during John's speech and when he came in the room, so Scott and I felt an obligation to be nice to their candidate.
Obama gave a good speech, but digging below the surface of sweet rhetoric, I didn't like some of the things Obama said in his speech. Honestly, he is far too conciliatory for me. (I could not find a transcript of his speech, but I always think he talks far too much about "bringing the country together" and bipartisanship.)
After the past 7 years, I want someone who will take the Republicans and the corporate interests on and fight them. I don't want someone who will try to make nice with them. Negotiations are a necessary part of politics, but you have to start from a position of strength, not a position of compromise.
You can't settle for less before you even get started negotiating because you think you won't get what you really want. Obama's health care plan, which is not universal and would leave up to 15 million people uncovered, is a great example of how NOT to achieve change.
I think this is the essential difference between the approaches to change that John Edwards and Barack Obama are taking. John is a fighter who will take them on. Obama seeks compromise, negotiation, and reconciliation, as evidenced both by his speech yesterday and by the "Carry" ad he's been running in New Hampshire and Iowa, which touts his bipartisanship.
Contrast that with this Edwards ad from Iowa:
Obama spoke in his speech about attracting Republicans and independents. I want to draw a distinction here between a candidate who entices Republicans and independents because he seeks compromise with them (Obama) and a candidate who appeals to Republicans and independents because he takes a strong stand and offers a bold vision and leadership on problems that affect them too (Edwards). After the recent Republican debate, one of the undecided Republicans in CNN's focus group said she would support Edwards (the most progressive major Democratic candidate) because at least Edwards has ideas.
I know which one I want in the oval office and which one I think will work, and that is John Edwards's more confrontational approach. It's called backbone, and we Democrats have been looking for it for a long time.
I think Obama may very well be a nice guy with good intentions. That isn't the point. What we need now is a fighter. We need someone who has taken on corporate interests and won consistently, and that's John Edwards.
The Obama supporters in the room, however, were really enthused by the end of his speech. One woman, obviously thinking I was far more impressed than I actually was, because of my polite cheering, I guess, asked me if I was thinking about switching. I told her absolutely not.
Obama made his supporters wait quite a long time, but when he did come in, he got mobbed. Scott managed to reach over a lot of people and shake Obama's hand, but I was keeping a bit of distance between myself and the thick of the crowd. I have been in one or two intense crowd situations and crowds can freak me out a bit if I feel it will become difficult to move.
Obama gave a short pep talk and then left, and I think most of his supporters followed him, because the room cleared out quickly.
Scott and I stayed and chatted for a long time with a very nice woman next to him, who I had assumed was an Obama supporter, but it turned out she was undecided. She was concerned about electability, so I talked to her about the fact that John seems to be the most electable Democrat based on head to head matchup polls, and also about some of the reasons why I like Edwards more than Obama.
Since all the Obama supporters had followed their candidate, I didn't have anyone trying to argue with me while I pointed out the flaws in Obama's health care plan (the major one is it's not universal) and pointed out why John would be so much more aggressive in pursuing a progressive agenda (because, as I said above, you can't start from a position of compromise). I also told her about his 80 page booklet on policy and where she could download it. She was definitely listening, so that was a good score! I don't know for sure that she will end up supporting him, but she was very receptive.
After we were ushered out of the room by hotel staff trying to clean during the break between sessions, we saw Kate Michelman near the Edwards table, and I blurted out "Kate Michelman! Hi!" She looked like she recognized me, which she probably did since I've been in a small group where she spoke before, and she greeted me like she knew me, but it occurred to me later that she probably had no real idea who I was. Anyway, she was very nice.
After that, Scott and I were both just about weak with hunger, so we found the nearest tolerable restaurant, which turned out to be Panera Bread. Guess who we ran into there? My friend from the campaign staff! He came right up to me and gave me a hug, and we chatted for a little bit. Really nice guy. He was really very appreciative of the fact that he always sees me at Edwards events.
Anyway, so then we drove home through a lot of traffic, only finding out about the Hillary campaign hostage situation when we got to Scott's house. Like I said, strange day.
It was nice of Edwards and Obama to both come in and greet the people in the overflow room, though, so that made up for the other weirdness of the day quite a bit. Both men seem like nice people. I just prefer John's strong confrontational approach. We need someone to stand up for us. We need someone to help us tear down the wall. We need a fighter.
Welcome to tonight's Edwards Evening News. Today, the Edwards campaign unveiled the America Belongs to Us campaign with a goal of getting one million voters to sign a pledge not to vote or caucus for any candidate who takes money from lobbyists and PACs. America belongs to all of us, and we're taking our country back! Click the image to sign the pledge.
Here's more on why America Belongs to Us from TomP's diary earlier today.
The "AMERICA BELONGS TO US" 2008 Pledge and website was anounced today by the Edwards campaign.
Lobbyists have taken control in Washington and America’s hard-working families pay the price. They've stopped universal health care. They've secured unfair and unsafe trade deals that have cost America good middle-class jobs. They've left our children at risk from unsafe toys. They've sabotaged clean energy legislation that would address global warming. And they've squashed efforts for cheaper generic prescription drugs. Enough is enough. America belongs to us.
If you want real change, Sign the Pledge:
Because I believe we need real change in America and an end to the broken system in Washington that works for special interests and not us, I pledge not to vote or caucus for a Democratic presidential candidate that accepts campaign contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs.
Edwards Walks the Picket Line with Striking Writers in New York
Yesterday, John Edwards walked the picket line in New York with striking members of the Writers Guild of America East. This is the second time during this presidential campaign that he has walked the picket line with striking workers, as Miss Laura pointed out in her front page diary earlier today. (It's definitely not the first time that he's showed up to support union workers, however, having participated in nearly 200 union events over the years.)
"We need true universal health care reform that covers every single man, woman, and child in America. It is wrong to leave anyone without the care they need. A universal system will work better for all of us – delivering better care at lower cost.
"Barack Obama's plan leaves out 15 million people. The truth is that some people will choose not to buy insurance even though it's affordable, knowing that the rest of us will pay for their emergency room visits.
"But it is just as bad to say that everyone will have insurance without a plan to get there. Hillary Clinton says her plan will cover everyone through a 'mandate' but does not provide even the most rudimentary idea much less a detailed plan of how this 'mandate' would work. To get fundamental change in our health care system, we need a fundamental change in our politics. That starts with being clear and direct about what we are going to do and how we are going to do 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.
Later today, John Edwards will announce the specifics of how his mandate works. And they're quite good. Whenever you come into contact with the health care system, or whenever you pay your taxes, you will be asked to provide proof of insurance, presumably a policy number or some similar identifier. If you cannot, you will automatically be enrolled in either a public plan that you qualify for (like Medicaid or S-CHIP) or the cheapest plan offered by his Health Insurance Market. Bills will then get sent out, and if they're not paid, will be collected just like the government collects on student loan debts, or taxes, or anything else, using tools up to and including collection agencies and wage garnishment. (It's notable, here, that Edwards doesn't shy away from saying what his stick will be.)
In this way, Edwards' plan is much less an individual mandate and much closer to a government mandate. The burden is less on the individual to seek new insurance and more on the government to simply enroll them in it. From there, they can opt in to a different insurer if they so choose, or simply stay with their default plan. It's a smart and efficient way to move towards universality, and, for now, it puts Edwards ahead of both Obama and Clinton on the substance of the policy, and the speed with which he presented it to the public.
John was relaxed and joked with all of us and he thanked us for our patience, hah...like it was an effort to see and listen to him...not.
I won't tell you what the ad was about as you will see it for yourselves in a week or two.
After the camera men were through, they took pictures of JRE just talking to the crowd, no sound, and it wasn't about politics, just ordinary people talking about this and that. I did ask JRE that when he won the Iowa caucus, would he wait for me to get to the celebration before he made his VICTORY speech... and he said for all to hear... Count on it!
I wanted to share this event with all of you to let you know that JRE is our man for President and that he is powerful and he will stand with us and for us to make America ours again.
UPDATE: Terre also tells me that Keith Olbermann will be interviewing John live from the campaign trail tomorrow on Countdown on MSNBC. Couldn't find confirmation on his web site, but anyway, Keith is always worth watching!
Also tomorrow:
John Edwards will deliver remarks to the Iowa City Foreign Relations Council Nov 29, 2007 6:00 PM Hotel Vetro 201 S Linn Street Iowa City, Iowa Click here to RSVP
Welcome to your Edwards Evening News! I just got back from a weekend volunteering for the Edwards campaign in New Hampshire, so tonight we have my special report from the Granite State. I'll tell you about door-to-door canvassing, making phone calls to voters, putting up a really large sign, and a visit to a house party for Elizabeth Edwards. All this, and the rest of the Edwards news, in tonight's EENR.
Manchester, New Hampshire City Hall
Road Trip to New Hampshire
This weekend, I finally got around to going up to New Hampshire to volunteer for the Edwards campaign. For the past couple of months, I have been meaning to do this, but I kept trying to plan it around an event. The trouble was, I would find out about the events three or four days ahead of time, and by then I would have other plans. Eventually, I had to just plan a trip to New Hampshire when it was convenient for me, and hope there would be an event I could go to. Everything worked out just fine, and on Sunday night I got to go to a great house party with Elizabeth Edwards!
On Saturday and Sunday, I spent most of each day canvassing neighborhoods in Manchester. I went out with other volunteers or Edwards staffers to knock on doors in specific neighborhoods assigned by the campaign. The plan was to try to talk to voters about their choices, answer any questions about Edwards, and at least leave some literature, whether or not they were home. I estimate that I personally knocked on about 150 doors over the weekend.
Front of campaign literature
Most people were not home, but of the voters I did get to talk to, almost all of them were undecided. Based on this experience, I would say that if anybody tries to suggest to you that a particular candidate has New Hampshire sewn up, they do not know what they're talking about. Most voters simply have not made a decision yet. Those voters I spoke with seem to be taking their responsibility as New Hampshire voters very seriously and still pondering the possibilities. Among the few voters I talked to who had made a decision, they seemed as likely to be supporting JRE as anyone else.
Manchester, New Hampshire is a very nice small town that presidential candidates just happen to spend a lot of time in. At first glance, it seems quite normal, but it does become a bit strange when you realize that almost everyone in town seems to have had some sort of contact with a presidential candidate.
For example, I found a great Mexican restaurant, Consuelo's Taqueria, which had the best burritos that I've had since I lived in California. I really miss getting good Mexican food, so I ate there twice. The people that work there are very friendly, and I had some great conversations with them, and in one of those conversations I found out that Bill Richardson just happened to have stopped in there and given a speech recently. Everyday happenings in Manchester, New Hampshire!
On Sunday morning, I had breakfast at the Merrimack Restaurant, which happened to be about the only thing open, but which is also a favorite campaign stop for candidates. They have the wall and the paper menu complete with caricatures of the current candidates to prove it.
I thought the party at the next table were just a bunch of tourists from New York until the camera crew arrived. They had mentioned Rudy Giuliani quite a bit and 9/11, but it took me a while to realize they were actually a group of firefighters who think Giuliani did a terrible job before and during 9/11 and they have formed a group opposing his nomination. I had seen their web site before, and I think I recognized one of the men at the table from this video. Everyday happenings in Manchester, I tell you.
On Sunday and Monday in particular, I spent quite a bit of time with a couple of the Edwards staffers, because I went out canvassing with them. One of them mentioned to me that campaigns always reflect the candidates, and I have to agree, because everybody that I've met on the Edwards staff is really nice. I enjoyed meeting them and talking about the campaign.
Sunday night I drove out to Hampton Falls near the coast to attend a house party for Elizabeth Edwards. Elizabeth was speaking at an old farmhouse that was built in 1753. I could tell it was really old as soon as I walked in. It had gorgeous wood paneling, fireplaces, and low ceilings throughout. Tracy, the owner of the house, told us it was built in 1753. I have not been in very many houses in this country that are older than the nation itself.
Elizabeth spoke for about 15 minutes and then took questions for perhaps another hour. She answered the questions in great detail, usually speaking for more than 10 minutes on a single voter's question. As usual, she was charming and direct and I'm pretty sure she convinced a number of undecided voters to support John. I spoke to one woman afterwards who for sure had decided to support John after hearing Elizabeth. I also overheard someone else saying they were moving closer to the Edwards camp after the event.
I took video of the event, but my camera battery died toward the end of it. The video I have is a little less than an hour long. After the battery died, she also answered a question on restoring our relationships with the rest of the world. I wish I had been able to record that, because her answer was really good. Here's my video of the event:
Here's a shorter clip from the same house party of Elizabeth answering a question about John's rural policy. This video was taken by a campaign staffer:
We hear that Elizabeth is a regular reader of Edward's Evening News, so Elizabeth, if you are reading this, hi there! I'm sorry that I didn't get to speak to you after the event, however, I thought it was more important for you to speak with New Hampshire voters, so I stepped back to let you do that. You certainly seem to have made a good impression.
On Monday, I went back to the campaign office to make phone calls. This proves that I am really dedicated. Making phone calls is probably almost my least favorite thing in the entire world. I think I made about 150 of them.
The purpose of the phone calls was to invite people to come hear John Edwards speak in Manchester on Monday the 26th. If you will be in New Hampshire on that day, he will be speaking at the Millyard Museum at 7 p.m.
I think people in New Hampshire must be really nice, because very few of them were upset at me for bugging them with a political phone call. Or maybe it was just because I was inviting them to see John Edwards, which quite a few of them were very excited about.
In the afternoon on Monday, I went out and did more canvassing with one of the staffers. As you might imagine, even fewer people were home on Monday afternoons than had been on the weekend.
In the evening, we had the pleasure of putting a really big sign on the fence in front of a supporter's house. It's on a very busy street, so it will be seen by a lot of people! Doesn't it look great?
That's about it for my weekend in New Hampshire! I really enjoyed the chance to go and help out with the Edwards campaign, and if you can travel to one of the early states, I encourage you to do the same. You can sign up to do that right here!
More of Tonight's Edwards News
New Hampshire Primary Set for January 8th!
New Hampshire has finally decided on it's primary date and the winning date is January 8th. Here's John's statement on that:
“I am pleased that New Hampshire will retain its rightful place as the first-in-the-nation primary. I applaud Bill Gardner's work to protect New Hampshire's significance in our nominating process. The New Hampshire primary is critical because voters in New Hampshire take their responsibility seriously: they listen to the candidates, look them in the eye, ask them tough questions and size them up. In New Hampshire, ideas truly matter more than money and that is precisely why this is anyone's race.
“I look forward to campaigning across New Hampshire during the final weeks of this campaign. I have spent time in living rooms and town halls in every corner of the state and everywhere I go, I hear from voters that they're looking for real, meaningful change in Washington next November. From now until January 8, I look forward to continuing to meet with voters to talk about my plans to shake up Washington and restore the power of government to the hands of regular, hardworking people.”
Edwards Announces Policies for Fighting Hunger in America
Tomorrow many of us will get together with family and friends and most likely eat WAY too much. But there are a growing number of hungry people in America. At this holiday, when the emphasis is so much on food, be thankful if you have enough to eat, but also, please do what you can to help your neighbors who may be going hungry.
1. Pass a Farm Bill with Strong Nutrition Programs: The nutrition programs in the Farm Bill are critical to increasing food security in America. Just two programs – food stamps and the Emergency Food Assistance Program for food banks – help about 25 million Americans a year each. Unfortunately, federal funding has not kept pace with growing need and rising costs. Last week, Senate Republicans used a filibuster to block the farm bill, sending Congress home for Thanksgiving without helping overtaxed food banks or hungry families. Edwards believes that Congress should quickly pass a strong and fair farm bill with robust funding for federal nutrition programs and President Bush should sign it. [ASH, 2007]
2. Get Food Aid to More Eligible Families: Food stamps – cash assistance averaging only about $1 per person per meal – help families purchase food and provide nearly a two-to-one benefit for the local economy. But one out of every three eligible families is not enrolled in the program, including millions of families who visit food banks and other community food services. Edwards will expand a pilot program, Express Stamps, which provides online enrollment kiosks at local food pantries. He will expand alternative hours at food stamp eligibility offices so that working families can enroll without missing work. To modernize eligibility and benefits, Edwards believes that Congress should quickly pass reforms to raise the minimum benefit level (which has remained at $10 since 1977), allow families to deduct their actual child care costs and protect families with modest retirement or education savings so they do not have to chose between putting food on the table and their longer-term need of preparing for the future. [CBPP, 2007; USDA, 2006 and 2007]
3. Provide Healthy Meals for Children: The 12 million American children who go hungry are 90 percent more likely to be in fair or poor health, have 30 percent higher hospitalization rates, and have lower test scores, attendance and other academic indicators. As president, Edwards will ensure robust funding to meet the nutritional needs of low-income school children through school breakfasts, free and reduced lunches, after-school snacks, fruit and vegetable programs, and the critical but under-used Summer Food Program. [Cook et al., 2004; Frongillo et al., 2005]
4. Strengthen Food Support for Seniors: One in six low-income elderly families does not have a regular, reliable source of enough to eat. President Bush has repeatedly proposed eliminating funding for the critical Commodity Supplemental Food program, which delivers nutritious food packages to nearly half a million seniors in 32 states and two Indian territories. Edwards will strengthen support for this program and expand other supportive services including Meals-on-Wheels for seniors and people with disabilities. [CBPP, 2007]
5. Address the “Heat or Eat” Crisis: Nearly half of the families served by the nation’s food banks have been forced to choose between paying for food and paying for utilities or heating fuel. Without assistance, even more families will struggle with this winter’s anticipated record home heating prices. Today, Edwards called on President Bush and Congress to fully fund the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program — nearly doubling it to $5.1 billion – and adjust the standard utility allowance in food stamp eligibility rules to reflect soaring prices. He will help states implement new low- and no-interest consumer loan programs through states and non-profits and double the funding for weatherizing homes. He also has a plan to fight rising oil and gas prices by creating energy competition, reducing speculation in the oil and gas markets, and bringing down demand through greater building conservation, fuel efficiency and access to renewable sources. [ASH, 2006; EIA, 2007]
6. Support Food Access in Every Neighborhood: Wealthy neighborhoods have over three times as many supermarkets as non-wealthy neighborhoods. Small corner stores are usually more expensive and offer less nutritious food. Food-insecure families in rural areas often face high transportation costs to reach the nearest food pantries. As president, Edwards will launch a public-private partnership to bring fresh, nutritious food to new neighborhoods. He will create a national food access map that identifies neighborhoods lacking grocery stores, emergency food banks and regular access to fresh produce. His new Healthy Neighborhoods Seed Fund will offer needy communities challenge grants for projects including full-service supermarkets, community gardens and food stamp-friendly farmers’ markets. [PolicyLink, 2005
Today, the Edwards family delivered food to a local food bank.
Presidential candidate John Edwards declared Tuesday night that he would not back down in his quest to defeat the powers that he says have corrupted Washington, D.C.
"If you're considering caucusing for John Edwards, you know what you're gonna get because I'm gonna shake that place up," he told hundreds of Iowans packed into the auditorium at Des Moines' Roosevelt High School.
The former North Carolina senator gave one of his most emphatic speeches of the year before a crowd that had gathered partly to hear musicians Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne sing on his behalf. The musicians weren't the only ones drawing standing ovations. The audience cheered and whistled when Edwards called for their help in fighting to get the country back on track.
A voter asked him whether he had the management experience to lead the country, given that his professional background mainly consisted of confronting rivals as a trial lawyer. Edwards retorted: "Hell, yeah, I'm confrontational."
Earlier today, NCDem Amy had a terrific diary on Jackson Browne and Bonnie Raitt on the campaign trail with Edwards. I wish I had been there!
John Edwards released a statement today about Hillary Clinton's newest slogan (video):
“The war in Iraq isn’t even history yet, but the Bush Administration is repeating the march to war with Iran – and they’re getting help from a person who should know a lot better – Senator Clinton.
“On Saturday at the Iowa Jefferson Jackson dinner, Senator Clinton unveiled her new campaign slogan to ‘turn up the heat’ on the Republicans.
“Well, somebody will have to tell me how you ‘turn up the heat’ by voting with Bush, Cheney and the neocons on their path to war with Iran. Because I don't believe that's turning up the heat – I think that's giving them exactly what they want.
“Senator Clinton had her chance to stand up and she chose not to use it. Our nation needs leaders who have the strength and backbone to fight the president on his march to war with Iran – not quicken the pace.”
This quote highlights number 5 of Clinton's 5 P's. The Politics of Pretend. Pretend to be a progressive. Pretend to be a leader. Pretend to stand up to the Republicans. Pretend Kyl-Lieberman is all about diplomacy.
Clinton: My understanding of the Revolutionary Guard in Iran is that it is promoting terrorism. It is manufacturing weapons that are used against our troops in Iraq. It is certainly the main agent of support for Hezbollah, Hamas and others.
And in what we voted for today, we will have an opportunity to designate it as a terrorist organization which gives us the options to be able to impose sanctions on the primary leaders to try to begin to put some teeth into all this talk about dealing with Iran.
We wouldn't be where we are today if the Bush administration hadn't outsourced our diplomacy with respect to Iran and ignored Iran and called it part of the axis of evil. Now we've got to make up for lost time and lost ground...
Edwards: But I want to come back to a discussion that took place a few minutes ago to make everyone understands what Senator Gravel is talking and Senator Clinton was talking about. Because there was a very important vote cast in the United States Senate today. And it was, basically, in a resolution calling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.
I voted for this war in Iraq, and I was wrong to vote for this war. And I accept responsibility for that. Senator Clinton also voted for this war.
We learned a very different lesson from that. I have no intention of giving George Bush the authority to take the first step on a road to war with Iran.
And I think that vote today, which Senator Biden and Senator Dodd voted against, and they were correct to vote against it, is a clear indication of the approach that all of us would take with the situation in Iran because what I learned in my vote on Iraq was you cannot give this president the authority and you can't even give him the first step in that authority because he cannot be trusted.
The Real News has some questions they would like to ask Senator Clinton, and if you think this is just putting some teeth in diplomacy, this video cites a few facts you really ought to know.
Clinton: I prefer vigorous diplomacy. And I happen to think economic sanctions are part of vigorous diplomacy. We used them with respect to North Korea. We used them with respect to Libya.
And many of us who voted for that resolution said that this is not anything other than an expression of support for using economic sanctions with respect to diplomacy.
Edwards had this to say about Clinton's Yes vote on Kyl Lieberman during the Democratic debate on October 30th:
Edwards: Well, I just listened to what Senator Clinton said and she said she wanted to maximize pressure on the Bush administration. So the way to do that is to vote yes on a resolution that looks like it was written, literally, by the neo-cons.
I mean, has anyone read this thing? I mean, it literally gave Bush and Cheney exactly what they wanted. It didn't just give them what they wanted. They acted on it.
A few weeks later, they declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, and -- this is going to sound very familiar -- remember from Iraq? The prelude to Iraq? -- proliferators of weapons of mass destruction.
The way you put pressure on this administration is you stand up to them; you say no.
A lot of us on this stage have learned our lessons the hard way, that you give this president an inch and he will take a mile. And this is about such an important issue, and we have to stand up to this president. We need to make it absolutely clear that we have no intention of letting Bush, Cheney or this administration invade Iran because they have been rattling the saber over and over and over.
And what this resolution did, written literally in the language of the neo-cons, is it enables this president to do exactly what he wants to do. He continues to march forward. He continues to say this is a terrorist organization. He continues to say these are proliferators of weapons of mass destruction.
How in the world is that -- Democrats -- we're not talking about Republicans now, Chris and Joe -- Democrats standing up to this president and saying, "No, we are not going to allow this, we are not going to allow this march to war in Iran"?
Way to turn up the heat, Senator Clinton! The problem is, we want Democrats to turn up the heat on the Republicans NOT Iran.
After the debate, the Clinton campaign claimed the other Democrats had "piled on" Senator Clinton. Her campaign sought to paint her as the victim of an attack. Some people claimed this "attack" would backfire on the other candidates, and Edwards in particular, apparently thinking that people would sympathize with Clinton's inability to answer the tough questions she was asked.
The New Republic, in an article wittily if bizarrely titled "Edwards's Scissor Hands," has a very interesting take on how Edwards's experience as a trial lawyer has taught him how to read a jury or an electorate. (Emphasis mine.)
It was hard not to think of this passage on a brisk morning last Friday in Cheraw, South Carolina, as Edwards warmed up a crowd of some 200 locals. A few days earlier, Edwards had led the Democratic field in its first thorough grilling of Hillary Clinton--at one point urging her to shift from general- election mode to "tell-the-truth mode." Now he was eager to revisit the moment. "I want to start by saying a few words about the debate that took place in Philadelphia a couple of days ago," Edwards announced. "You know, I have a really simple rule: When you get asked a yes or no question, you can't answer yes and no. That doesn't work. ... We certainly can't afford to have a Democratic nominee who does that." The crowd chuckled, then nodded along in approval.
Though Edwards was the debate's consensus winner, the distinction had come with a caveat: What if he'd unwittingly turned Clinton into a sympathetic victim? It was a reasonable question, but one that ignored a key biographical detail: Having spent two decades doing rhetorical battle in some of the most hostile courtrooms in North Carolina, with juries ready to punish the slightest hint of overreach, Edwards arguably has a better feel for how voters will react to his words than any candidate in recent memory.
"There are a lot of people that the jury doesn't want to see you pound on," Edwards told me later. "What happens is, psychologically, they'll put themselves in the shoes of the witness. And you don't want them to do that." Then he picked up on the analogy between a trial and a campaign: "Tough is fine. Juries don't mind you being tough. Voters don't mind you being tough. ... If you're being factual and you're giving them information that's defining their choices, nobody's offended by that."
UPDATED: The Peru FTA's Expanded Giant Sucking Sound Just Got Louder
In a few moments, I will sign three agreements that will complete our negotiations with Mexico and Canada to create a North American Free Trade Agreement. In the coming months, I will submit this pact to Congress for approval. It will be a hard fight, and I expect to be there with all of you every step of the way. We will make our case as hard and as well as we can. And though the fight will be difficult, I deeply believe we will win. And I'd like to tell you why: first of all, because NAFTA means jobs American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement.
Well, that didn't work out so well for us, did it? In fact, third party presidential candidate Ross Perot was more accurate when he described NAFTA as a "giant sucking sound." So what's up with the Peru Free Trade Agreement currently being pushed through Congress? Is it more of the same?
"Unlike NAFTA and CAFTA, the Peru Trade Agreement includes real, enforceable labor and environmental protections," Obama spokesman Jen Psaki said.
"Speaker Pelosi and Congressmen Rangel and Levin deserve credit for fighting hard for these provisions, and Barack Obama supports their efforts to make sure that our trade policies help American workers, not just big corporations," Psaki said.
Sound familiar? You might even say it...
means jobs American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement.
(Bill Clinton on NAFTA again.)
I've got three words for this expansion of NAFTA: Growing Sucking Sound.
So what has Hillary Clinton, the spouse of the man who gave us NAFTA, said on this new free trade agreement? Crickets.
"For decades, our leaders in Washington have pursued trade policies that have devastated communities like the ones I grew up in. Take NAFTA - it was supported by insiders from both political parties, but it has cost us more than 1 million jobs. Now, at a time when American families are terribly concerned about job losses and a weak economy, our Congress is about to vote on expanding the NAFTA-free trade model to Peru.
"The Peru deal will continue the trade policies that have long failed our workers and cost American workers their jobs. It's time to show some guts and backbone, stand up and oppose this trade deal, and demand trade policies that put families and workers first. I urge members of Congress to vote against this deal today.
"The fact that the Peru trade deal is supported by a bipartisan group of insiders, including George Bush and senior officials from the first Clinton Administration - many of whom are now lobbyists, corporate lawyers, and business consultants - should be proof-positive of why members of Congress should join with me and oppose this deal. The benefit to corporate lobbyists from both sides of the political aisle will come only at the expense of hard-working families.
"Senator Obama has chosen to support this bad deal. I strongly disagree with his position, but at least he has taken one. Senator Clinton, on the other hand, has refused to take any position. I urge Senator Clinton to publicly announce, today, her opposition and join with me in encouraging members of Congress to vote against the Peru trade deal."
Edwards is Right, Obama's Wrong, Clinton's Useless
As Illinois Congressman Phil Hare, a former textile union leader who has led the fight against the Bush-Pelosi line, notes: Peru is currently threatening striking miners with the loss of their jobs if they do not return to the mines. That's not protecting the rights of workers. Indeed, says Hare, "The striking miners were fighting for, among other things, an eight hour work day. In addition, we recently learned that there are 2 million children working in Peru, many in these very same mines."
"Is this the progress the supporters of the Peru FTA were referring to?" asks Hare, who adds, "Today's news should serve as yet another wakeup call that the best thing to do for workers both at home and in Peru is defeat this unfair trade deal."
Hare's right. But he needs some allies among the party's leading presidential contenders.
Obama's wrong and Clinton's of no use.
Thankfully, John Edwards is reading the issue right.
"The Democratic leadership, I'm surprised at,"Bruce Raynor, president of UNITE Here, a textile and service employees union, told reporters on a conference call opposing the Peru bill this week. "I think they failed to remember that in the last election many Democrats were elected to the House and Senate on the issue of failed trade policy."
TheMiddleClass.org from the Drum Major Institute has this to say about this bill:
The Middle Class Opposes. Increased international trade can contribute to economic growth, but the way trade rules are formulated in agreements like this means that the benefits of trade are distributed unevenly, ultimately undermining the middle class and aspiring middle class in both the U.S. and the nations it trades with. A central problem is that the Peru trade agreement empowers businesses and investment capital to cross international borders more easily, providing a decisive advantage over working people who are not so internationally mobile and whose rights are not equally well protected in all of the nations covered by the agreement. This imbalance of power creates incentives to move U.S. jobs overseas and puts downward pressure on the wages of American workers as they are placed in more direct competition with poorly-paid, disempowered Peruvian workers.
I'm glad to see that my presidential candidate, John Edwards, is once again taking the right position and leading on an issue where the other major Democratic presidential candidates are either taking the wrong position, or failing to lead. Edwards has been outspoken and clear on his position on this and just about every other issue. This reminds me of a quote from Harry Truman:
There is not a single, solitary man or woman in the United States today who can't find out in two minutes where I stand on the important matters like foreign policy, labor, agriculture, social security, housing, high prices, and all the other problems we as a nation have to face.
But there is not a single, solitary man or woman in the United States who has been able, within the last 2 months, to find out where the Republican candidate stands on these issues.
... except that where Harry Truman was talking about Republicans, we are now having a problem finding out where some of the Democratic candidates stand.
Subject: House of Representatives Passage of the Peru Trade Promotion Agreement
House of Representatives Passage of the Peru Trade Promotion Agreement
Statement by Secretary Condoleezza Rice
House of Representatives Passage of the Peru Trade Promotion Agreement
Washington, DC
November 8, 2007
I am very pleased by the House of Representatives' strong bipartisan approval of the Peru Trade Promotion Agreement. The Peru Trade Promotion Agreement's mutual benefits are clear. It benefits U.S. workers and farmers by giving our products the same treatment in Peru that Peru's exports enjoy in the United States. It helps Peru alleviate poverty by creating jobs and economic opportunities, sharing with the people of Peru the benefits of their democracy and open markets. Through the benefits of two-way trade, this agreement will reinforce the foundation of our deep and strong
relationship. The House of Representatives' strong vote for this agreement demonstrates that the United States remains an active and committed partner in the hemisphere.
I look forward to a Senate vote in the near future, and urge Congress to approve the pending trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.
EDWARDS STATEMENT ON HOUSE PASSAGE OF PERU TRADE DEAL
Chapel Hill, North Carolina - Today, Senator John Edwards released the following statement:
"I'm disappointed by today's vote to approve the Peru trade deal and expand the failed NAFTA model that has cost us more than a million jobs. However, I congratulate the 132 members - including a majority of the voting House Democrats - for their courage in standing up and voting against this flawed deal. The vote should be an alarm bell for President Bush: other flawed trade deals, including South Korea and Columbia, need to be improved before they are brought before Congress.
"I believe that American workers and businesses can compete with any worker or company in the world as long as our government stands up and fights for a level playing field. American workers deserve trade agreements that strengthen and maintain, rather than undercut and erode, labor rights, environmental standards and wages.
"While I believe Senator Obama is wrong to give this president authority to risk American jobs with more bad trade deals, at least he has taken a position. Unfortunately, Senator Clinton has still refused to take a position on this proposal. I believe voters deserve to hear the truth and I urge Senator Clinton to join me in calling on members of the Senate to reject the Peru trade deal in the coming weeks."
UPDATE III:
EDWARDS STATEMENT ON SENATOR CLINTON’S SUPPORT FOR THE PERU TRADE DEAL
Chapel Hill, North Carolina – Today, Senator John Edwards released the following statement expressing his disappointment in Senator Clinton’s support for the Peru trade deal:
“I am terribly disappointed by Senator Clinton’s support for the Peru trade deal. At a time when millions of Americans are concerned about losing their jobs and the economy, it is dismaying that Senator Clinton would side with corporations, their lobbyists and the Bush Administration in support of a flawed trade deal that expands the NAFTA model.
“As I have said before, there are real and serious differences in this presidential race, and our stands on this trade deal are another example. Whereas voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and all across America have learned that I will fight for safe and smart trade, now they see that Senator Clinton, by supporting this trade deal, has chosen to follow a very different path.
“It’s time for Senator Clinton to stand up for working Americans and stop defending corporate lobbyists and a broken system in Washington.”
