Blog Writer, "Mainiac", Analyzes Media Coverage of John Edwards Campaign and Receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award

Recipient of Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award





Cross-posted from John Edwards 08 Blog


http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2008/1/9/204413/6259#19

"Stopping Edwards"

by Mainiac in Diaries Feed of Mainiac's Diary
1/09/2008 at 8:44 PM EST

in John Edwards Blog/Diaries, at:

http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2008/1/9/204413/6259#19

With the presidential contest heating up, Iowa and New Hampshire behind us,
JRE has managed to stay in the chase even though the media has ignored his campaign, focusing on a Clinton-Obama matchup.

The reason for ignoring Edwards is that corporate leaders want to insure that the major parties will nominate candidates who can be relied upon to protect and foster their interests. With his challenge to their power, Edwards does not fit their
qualifications.

In the 2004 primary, the corporate-owned media used a lot of ink and airtime to help take down Howard Dean in Iowa and persuade voters that the Democratic candidate who had "electability" was John Kerry.

This year the media wasted no time in getting on the case. Long before a caucus was held or a vote cast, they narrowed the Democratic field to two, offering us the unprecedented choice of a white woman or a black man as the next president.

Even though she has the highest negatives of any Democrat, Hillary Clinton
was an obvious pick because of her name recognition and fundraising ability.
Barack Obama needed more of a media buildup before being showcased in this
matchup. Less than a month ago, Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist,
wrote, "According to a recent survey by the Project for Excellence in
Journalism, Mr. Obama's coverage has been far more favorable than that of
any other candidate."

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Clinton and Obama far
outstrip their Democratic rivals in contributions received from donors in
such industries as securities and investments, hedge funds, private equity,
commercial banks, pharmaceuticals and health products, education, computers
and the Internet. Hillary leads all of them in contributions from lobbyists.
Edwards, a trial lawyer, joins the two at the top only in the category of
contributions from lawyers and legal firms. Chris Dodd led all Democrats in
contributions from the insurance industry before he and Joseph Biden bowed
out of the race after Iowa.

It's not surprising that media outlets paid little attention to the fact
that in November, while Edwards spoke out against the Peru Free Trade
Agreement -- one of the NAFTA babies that the Bush administration has been
fast tracking -- both Obama and Clinton said they supported it.

This spotlight on Clinton and Obama is essentially a "stop Edwards" move.
Interestingly, a CNN poll revealed last month that Edwards was the only
Democrat who could win against any of the Republicans. What's more, Edwards
managed to finish second in the Iowa caucuses, ahead of Clinton, despite
being dismissed by the media and outspent by his two key opponents. When the campaign headed into New Hampshire, the media treated Edwards' second plan finish as if it never happened.

The Federal Election Commission also seems to be doing its part to stop
Edwards. After he opted for federal matching funds, the FEC voted last month
to not match contributions made to Edwards through Act/Blue, a political
action committee that handles contributions for many Democrats nationwide.

Why has Edwards been targeted in this fashion? For one thing, he offers a health care plan that can morph into single-payer if enough Americans choose the expanded and improved Medicare option. He has shown his commitment to unions by walking picket lines over the last three years and he promises to make union organizing easier. As president, Edwards has said he wants to repeal tax breaks for the wealthy while increasing the minimum wage again. He wants to shift our foreign policy from unilateralism to more cooperation with other nations, with more foreign aid shifted to assist the world's poor. Unlike Obama and Clinton, he does not believe that nuclear power should be part of the mix to decrease dependence on fossil fuels.

More important than any of these is Edwards' call to end the chokehold that giant corporations have on our government. No wonder a senior Republican strategist recently commented on national television, "Edwards is the one that we fear the most."

Michael Duby, Winner of Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award

Recipient of Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award














Advocate of Transformation

The Substance of Transformation

user icon michael duby in Arguments & Analyses Feed of
12/22/2007 at 9:14 PM EST

Cross-posted from John Edwards 2008 Blog

The American people must rise up and seize the historical opportunity to impact the direction of our country. Domestically, the three major difficulties confronting working families are lack of universal health care, income disparity and unfair trade policies.

"It's time we honored work in this country, not just wealth." - John Edwards

Above and beyond the statements of progressive policies, John Edwards is the candidate committed to truly and steadfastly advocate and "fight" for the nation's (mostly working) people of low-income and the 47 million Americans who desperately need health insurance. The big insurance and drug companies will need serious persuasion to allow the implementation of universal health care that is a fundamental right recognized in all other advanced economies and societies. Our present system is a structural hindrance to the well-being of the American labor force.

In a country of 300 million, 300,000 at the top make more income that the bottom 150 million of America's earning taxpayers. The Bush administration provided additional tax cuts for these super wealthy in an amount that would essentially pay for universal health care. Over the past 20 years, 40 percent of income growth has gone to the top one percent while wages for the bottom 90 percent have remained stagnant. This represents the greatest income inequality in this country since 1928.

This reality is due to the combination of unfair tax practices, ill effects of unbalanced globalization and trade policies that mostly enrich multinational corporations, but certainly not workers. It is well known and recognized that John Edwards is for strong labor and environmental standards and against illegal subsidies and currency manipulation. He is also for rigorous enforcement of trade agreements, not just negotiation.

The third major obstacle to American working families is unfair so-called "free trade" agreements. Edwards has the most specific proposals of any candidate to restore tax fairness, to enhance competitiveness and job growth, and to re-negotiate trade agreements so they are once again fair. In the breadth and detail of his proposals, John Edwards differs substantially from the other candidates. Only Edwards has advocated a fundamental standard for "Smart Trade" deals: Will the agreements benefit working families, not just multinational corporations?

The Economic Policy Institute ("EPI") recently underlined the concern about the growing impact of unfair trade agreements and practices on America's working families. EPI concluded that 25 to 30 million American jobs - about one in five American jobs in states all across the nation - are at risk for being offshored over the next decade. These are not just manufacturing jobs; EPI reports jobs most at risk are those requiring at least a four-year college degree. Those workers and their families will be substantially more secure with Edwards as chief executive.

The lobbyist-dominated system and practical realpolitics of Washington contribute to lack of universal health care, disadvantageous trade deals, cheap foreign labor, illegal foreign subsidies and foreign currency manipulation. American workers are being incrementally devastated. The American middle class is being pushed down and they know it. "It's time we honored work in this country, not just wealth." - John Edwards /


The Substance of Transformation :: 1 Comment :: Post a Comment
Other blogs commenting on this entry

Display Comments: [ Flat | Nested ] [ Oldest First | Newest First ]

Wow, just a fabulous statement! (none / 0)

What a good piece of writing, Michael. You hit a homerun!!

So, may I nominate you for my karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award and repost this with the announcement on my blogspot site at www.passionateprogressivepatriot.blogspo t.com

Karita Hummer

"Why This African American Woman supports John Edwards" by huskers4edwards receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award

Recipient of Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award



Why This African American Woman supports John Edwards huskers4edwards in Diaries 12/20/2007 at 9:09 PM EST


Myself and fellow Nebraska Democrats at a meet and greet with Senator John Edwards at the Slow down in Omaha Nebraska July 07
With just a couple of weeks before the election season heats up, I find it neccessary to express why I am supporting Senator Edwards for President.

As a young African American woman I have had my fair share of Obama and Clinton Supporters question my sanity.

Why aren't you supporting the Brother some ask or don't you want to see a woman break the ultimate glass ceiling.

The Obvious answer is yes and yes but, this race is bigger than historical first. This race is about who is most qualified to lead. I believe that person to be Senator John Edwards.

His message to be the president who works for all Americans resonantes with me. I am a single mother of three and I can tell you from first hand experience that we need to have a serious discussion in this country about poverty.

We need to drastically alter the way we define poverty and begin to humanize our poor and working poor. America needs to work for all americans and not just the wealhty few.

Senator Edwards does not score any political victories by talking about poverty. In fact many political pundits say his message of two americas is a few decades too late but that is why I support Senator Edwards candidacy.

Senator Edwards realizes that America works best when it works for everyone. He has also impressed me by not accepting PAC money.

Some see it as a political stunt or even political expiedency given the buckets of cash pouring in from the Clinton and Obmama campaign.

While, there may even be a hint of truth to the fundraising strategy. It is still a calculated risk and it shows that Senator Edwards is willing to do what is right as our potential nominee rather than what is politically expiedient.

So for me supporting someone who has a vision, someone who wants to represent all americans, someone who has compassion for the least amongst us and someone who can lead, is far more important than making history.

That is why this African American Woman is supporting Senator John Edwards for President.

"So What Did Obama Do?" by grannyhelen receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award

Recipient of Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award


So What Did Obama Do? grannyhelen in Diaries
12/20/2007 at 9:28 AM EST

Cross-posted from John Edwards 08 Blog

http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/12/20/9295/3348

As long as he's opened that door, The New York Times has decided to step right on through it. And you'll be amazed - in the Illinois senate he reversed himself from his current track record.

He showed up.

The problem is, he didn't want to make a decision once he got there.

From the article: (link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22335739/)

"In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature -- to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.

In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted "present," effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator..."

Now in fairness, Camp Hope has tried to defend this record, saying it was part of a strategy. The article points to 36 times Obama voted "present" alone or with a group of less than six. Fifty-plus times it looks like he was "acting with other Democrats as a part of a strategy".

At issue, really, is whether he abused the "present" vote. From the article:

"...If you are worried about your next election, the present vote gives you political cover," said Kent D. Redfield, a professor of political studies at the University of Illinois at Springfield. "This is an option that does not exist in every state and reflects Illinois political culture."

And that seems to be what he did on the bill highlighted that would allow juveniles to be tried as adults.

I'm bringing all of this up because it seems that Camp Hope HQ is trying to insinuate that John Edwards's entire life experience - from litigating multinational corporations and big insurance companies in the cause of making injured people whole, to speaking out against Bill Clinton's impeachment, and even his personal battles of dealing with the death of his child and having a spouse with terminal cancer - amounts to nothing. Nada. Zilch.

"What have you done?" Arrogantly echoes through the halls of Camp Hope.

Well, when the going got tough what did Obama do? Chose a political duck-and-cover, assisting the bad by not helping the good. And he continues that courageous tradition of caving by voting to fund the war he so valiantly talked about opposing, and selling out working people by being a vocal proponent of the Peru Free Trade Agreement.

In the age of obfuscation and signing statements, that's the last kind of leadership we need in the White House.

Give me a leader who will at least stand up and take responsibility for all of his decisions, even the wrong ones. Give me a leader who can admit when he's wrong and work like heck to right that wrong.

I'll take that any day of the week over someone who wants to hold hands by the campfire, vote "here" when the tough decisions need to be made and who will actively work to continue an injustice that he knows is wrong.

These are trying times that call for a tough leader, not a political compromise.

John Edwards is that tough leader. Let's get him into that oval office. Now.