With Barack Obama's right turn over the past few weeks, since Hillary Clinton dropped out and left him as the only game in town, it further reinforces what I have believed from the start.
I will vote for Obama, but did not support him. That is no secret. I believe he is aligned, just like Clinton (who many alleged I supported), to the corporate, Establishment Democratic Party, and it takes no real effort to see this. I also believe that he takes much of his support for granted, particularly now that there is no alternative. But that does not mean I will be a lemming.
In speaking my mind on the subject, in offering dissent to the established view at this site, I and others have been insulted personally on a regular basis, called trolls, GOPers, and the like. Ironically, Obama praises dissent, but many of his ardent supporters at this site are incapable of tolerating it. So it goes.
But this diary is about something else. So please read on.
Barack Obama's campaign spent at the rate of nearly $1.5 million a day in February as he racked up the victories that pushed him ahead of rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in their chase for Democratic nomination delegates.
Clinton spent about $1 million a day, picking her states and her advertising markets more selectively.
It was a fierce duel fueled by extraordinary fundraising. Obama, the junior senator for Illinois, raised $55.4 million in the month and still had about $30 million in the bank for the primaries going into March, according to his report to the Federal Election Commission on Thursday.
A new year. Time to choose a nominee. I think that John Edwards is the best choice by far. You don't have to agree. As a Democrat and a liberal, I know what he is saying about the system and it's slant away from the public interest is true. Let's forget the election for a moment. Would not most who frequent this site not wholeheartedly agree with what he says? Even Kos seems to have told his community that he with Edwards on the issues and message.
The public must demand change, not just that we try to get along. That does not work in the current state. At best, getting along will likely move progressives down the field a few yards. Ask yourself where are we starting from? Ask yourself who is really playing the defense to a progressive agenda. No matter, the issues facing America and the world don't seem like we can wait.
Democrats stand for collaboration, consensus and compromise. That is a given. It is who we are. Edwards does also, and so do his supporters, ideas to the contrary notwithstanding.
A very short diary in the form of a press release.
This press release illustrates another example of why I support John Edwards, regardless of anything else.
When it comes time to make a decision, Edwards comes down on the side of what's best for people and humanity, setting forth supporting policies of bold, transformational change in which I feel proud to stand behind.
Despite what we see all around us, it's not all about money. That is not the America I care about.
Yes, another diary about John Edwards. But why? Read on.
Edwards continues to show that he is the candidate who speaks most to issues that affect everyday Americans in terms of their welfare and the changes he will bring. However, the media ignores him and puts him in a light that does not conform to reality.
Edwards is ignored? I know, he was the VP candidate in 2004. Everyone must know that. But let's be honest, do Americans really care who runs for VP? Ask the average person who ran with Gore or Dukakis. Some may know VPs who served, not those who ran?
We Democrats are not so on top of things either. We just like to believe we are smarter and know more.
John Edwards took George Bush and the Republicans to task today on the failure of the House of Representatives to override Bush's veto of SCHIP.
He also drew a clear difference with Hillary Clinton in the matter of addressing the needs of rural America and farmers.
This diary simply sets forth his words. Notice how he frames the issues. He tells it like it is, and I feel that he is fighting for the causes in which I believe. Along with the substance of his proposals, this is why I support him. He will take it to the Republicans like no one else. He will make the differences painfully clear. He will bring regular American with him.
The past three days have supplied three excellent examples of John Edwards's commitment to put people before profits. These examples are not completely new themes, but variants of topics he has long addressed. They illustrate the proactive, substantive approach he chooses to emphasize in dealing with real issues and problems. Each shows that, for him, the people's interest will come before the interests of a corporation. John Edwards truly cares about the public welfare as it affects the average person, here in America and across the globe. John Edwards, "professional populist," is a champion of people everywhere.
On this day when a debate goes on about who will or will not use or discuss use of nuclear weapons in Pakistan or against Al Queda, I decided to write a diary touching on a different aspect of the nuclear question, and John Edwards's approach to it, past and present.
Not very long ago, I wrote a diary here about a front page story in the Washington Post on July 9, 2004, entitled, Edwards Sets Self Apart on Foreign Policy; Terrorism Was Top Focus Before Sept. 11 Attacks
The Post article referred to an Op-ed entitled Targeting Terrorism that appeared in the Littleton Observer on August 16, 2001, where Edwards said:
As a member of the Senate Intelligence committee, I've become convinced that terrorism is the most important national security challenge our country will face over the next decade. That is why I am working on new ways to address the threat of terrorism.
Without a doubt, at a time when Bush's head was in the sand, and others were focused on missile defense, Edwards was prescient.
Okay. You won't see this on MSNBC or CNN, or in the NY Times or Washington Post, who don't care about this stuff anyway, just hair and hedge funds. You won't see diary after diary on this subject either. I concede, it's not earth shattering. But it is noteworthy that there's a new issues page at the Edwards campaign web site, and I wanted to bring it to the attention for those who may not know, but who may care.
In America, everyone should have a fair opportunity to realize their dreams, no matter where they came from. John Edwards is running for president to build One America where every American can work hard and build a better life, the same opportunity that Edwards had. At the same time, America's leadership role in the world has grown out of our moral strength as an example for the world, not just our economic and military strength.
By now most people here know that last week John Edwards held a press conference to present his plan to fight terrorism. His theme was that the Bush "Global War on Terror" Doctrine has not made us safer, but is a political strategy used to justify the worst abuses of the Administration. In fact, terrorism around the world is on the rise according to Bush's own State Department. John Edwards believes we need a smart, mission-focused national security policy designed to stamp out terrorists, not a political slogan designed to stamp out disagreement, and he set forth his policy proposals on the matter.
His plan, along with video highlights can be found here, and a transcript of his 5-23-07 major policy address regarding foreign policy can be found here.
Yesterday, John Edwards spoke to the Council on Foreign Relations, and set forth a different vision for American foreign policy based on "Smart Power."
The core of this presidency has been a political doctrine that George Bush calls the "Global War on Terror." He has used this doctrine like a sledgehammer to justify the worst abuses and biggest mistakes of his administration, from Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, to the war in Iraq. The worst thing about the Global War on Terror approach is that it has backfired—our military has been strained to the breaking point and the threat from terrorism has grown.
We need a post-Bush, post-9/11, post-Iraq American military that is mission-focused on protecting Americans from 21st century threats, not misused for discredited ideological pursuits. We need to recognize that we have far more powerful weapons available to us than just bombs, and we need to bring them to bear. We need to reengage the world with the full weight of our moral leadership.
As a former high school dropout, I was originally writing in the process of writing a short diary to bring forth a statement from John Edwards regarding the epidemic of high school dropouts and his proposal about what to do, Second Chance Schools.
Here is his statement in brief:
Our failure to help all of our children finish high school is shocking. As many as one-third of all students drop out of school, and the rates are even worse for poor and minority students. At nearly 1,000 high schools, students have less than an even chance of graduating. Most of these students quickly regret it.
America is about second chances. As president, I will create second-chance schools to help former dropouts get back on track with one-on-one attention and a chance to earn a diploma at night or at a local community college. I will also invest in expanding preschool programs, attracting and paying excellent teachers, and making college more affordable.
NOTE: THIS DIARY IS FOR DEMOCRATIC LURKERS AND THOSE WITH OPEN MINDS. THE REST ARE, OF COURSE, WELCOME TO CONTINUE, BUT THIS IS NOT FOR YOU. JUST SO YOU KNOW.
NOTE: THERE IS A TIMELINE IN THIS DIARY. I ESPECIALLY HOPE YOU READ THE CLOSING CONTEXTUAL REMARKS THAT FOLLOW IT.
This diary concerns Iraq War and the AUMF of 2002, the one John Edwards co-sponsored. I PROUDLY support Edwards.
Many here engage in continual debate about the AUMF and its ultimate responsibility for Iraq, and who is most pure in the matter. WHAT’S MOST CLEAR IS WHO'S MOST UNPURE! Debaters include supporters of candidates or potential candidates who were not charged to vote, yet claim the candidate had better judgment, even as one, Barack Obama, conceded recently in November, 2006, that he did not know what was occurring "inside" the Senate at that time. I believe it's foolish to keep having this debate, a debate fueled by the view of hindsight.
The debate has come and gone. Now is the time for reflection. Yes, the format was terrible. Not much time to deal with issues in detail. Not much chance to get more than a glimpse of the candidates.
Thankfully, there’s hindsight. And aside from Biden’s succinctness, there was one moment in the debate where the top three candidates distinguished themselves without a word being uttered.
Brian Williams:
Second "show of hands" question: Do you believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror?
As everyone now knows, Clinton raised her hand. Obama raised his hand. John Edwards stood motionless, but tall! EDWARDS DOES NOT BELIEVE THERE IS A GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR!
As you will see below, Edwards message is, "WE HAVE MORE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO US THAN BOMBS."
Yesterday, while Barack Obama had his rock star event in Atlanta, delivering goosebumps to thousands, John Edwards did something a lot less flashy, yet significant to show us just who he is. Edwards participated with Step It Up 2007, in a National Day of Climate Action.
Edwards traveled to Florida (and left) as the ONLY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE with a carbon neutral campaign. Running a campaign involves an incredible amount of travel by air, train, and motor vehicle(s). Edwards's actions speak louder than words.
Edwards was in Fort Myers lending support at one of over 1,400 rallies designed to remind elected leaders around the country that Americans are serious about taking meaningful action to combat climate change. Nationwide, I suspect there were many more than 20,000 committed activists involved.
John Edwards today called for a ban on new coal plants lacking technology to capture carbon dioxide emissions.
In a policy speech in San Francisco, he released details of his plan to burn coal cleanly and store its carbon dioxide emissions safely.
"Global warming is not an issue for the future. It is a crisis that demands action from us today. We have the chance to create an energy revolution in our country, but if we're going to have that happen, we have to be willing to take action now. We need to be smart and responsible about how we use coal, so we can leave our children and grandchildren a safer and cleaner planet."
So, why is Edwards able to address a multitude of matters with specific plans and concrete proposals while others, many of whom have larger staffs and resources, do not?
