You are herecontent / ANTE UP FOR JOHN EDWARDS!!

ANTE UP FOR JOHN EDWARDS!!


The instant it was reported that John Edwards placed second in the Iowa caucus, I ran to my purse, grabbed my wallet, pulled out my credit card, and donated to the Edwards campaign. Not for the first time. And likely for not the last. I don't have much money to give, but with this nation in peril, it's necessary. There's too much to lose if I don't ante up. America NEEDS John Edwards!!

After my little donation, this is the message I got:

Dear friend,

Thank you so much for your support. I never accept any money from lobbyists or PACs, so our victory depends on people like you pitching in. And that's the way it should be. Your contribution will enable us to reach out to voters in living rooms, town halls, and on the airwaves. You're helping us build support for transformational change in early primary states and across the country. Everywhere I travel, Americans are ready to join you and me in the great work ahead. To bring our message of real change to voters, we need offices in cities, organizers on the ground, and outreach materials to send in the mail. Yes, the work of a national campaign comes at a cost, but truly changing America offers a far greater reward.

Thank you again for making all of this possible.

Sincerely,
John Edwards

These lines in Edwards' response:

"I never accept any money from lobbyists or PACs, so our victory depends on people like you pitching in. And that's the way it should be."

speak rarefied truth to power. That is way it should be, and how it really is for candidate Edwards, but not for Clinton and Obama who benefit nicely from corporations. Particularly from mainstream media who promote them. Were it not for countless broadcasts attracting money for their campaigns, the Iowa caucus could have gone to John Edwards - the underfunded fighter corporate media wants to silence.

For those who would say, "but Mitt Romney outspent Mike Huckabee by MILLIONS and Huckabee still won Iowa," I say: Huckabee didn't defeat Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney defeated himself. Romney's own self-centered air of entitlement, along with righteous public enmity toward corporate CEO's, defeated Mitt Romney. Huckabee is still a fundamentalist buffoon whose penchant for hunting metaphors are as bad for America's world image as Bush's "Bring 'em on!" Come November, neither Huckabee nor Romney will prevail. This I would bet on.

The candidate who should prevail this November, if America is to prevail, is John Edwards. He is the only candidate who can BATTLE the corporations and end the avarice that is decimating this nation. CEO punditeers, pulling the strings on media pundits, pull their mouths shut so they're silent on Edwards. It's corporate pundit theatre. Like media silenced the naysayers on the lies about Iraq, it silences the "YAYsayers" on the truth about Edwards. Corporations know that Edwards can defeat them. They don't want him to beat them! They don't want him to win!

America and Americans NEED John Edwards. They need a fighter. Barack is a lovely man, but he lacks Edwards' FIRE to rescue homes from foreclosure. Obama's a brilliant man, but he's not a scrapper like Edwards to get Americans back their jobs. Obama's a gifted man, but he's not pugnacious like Edwards to whip Congress into shape. Obama's distinguished, but his fists aren't clenched and his jaw isn't set to wrestle America from the clutches of greed. Edwards knows that the greed-mongers won't voluntarily relent. They will need to be beaten. As nice as Obama seems - as genteel and as dapper - he's not the fighter America needs. He's not America's scrapper. Not now. Not yet. Obama has organized communities, but that's different from subduing moguls. This is the domain of John Edwards.

The only obstacles that can take John Edwards out of this race are money, pressure from the corporate controlled Democratic Party to withdraw, and strung along pundits who will swear that John Edwards is finished. Those who know the sleazy methods of Rahm Emanuel, Chuck Shumer, and Nancy Pelosi, know the Democrats will be leaning on Edwards to bow out. Their corporate buddies will be pushing money on Obama and Clinton more than ever to keep them viable over Edwards. For greed-ridden corporations, the mantra is "A-B-E: ANYONE - BUT - EDWARDS!"

But for Americans who understand how deep the decay of our democracy is, the true mantra is "O-J-E: ONLY - JOHN - EDWARDS!"

For Progressives who deal with a Congress immune to reason, public sentiment and the Constitution, the difficult fight is clear. Corporate favors, earmarks, and unlimited terms have perverted electeds. They're buoyed by infallibility and self-importance. They're stalled in Larry Craig's immutable wide-stance. They're partners in the greed Edwards speaks of. These are not surface problems. They are multi-layered. They transcend industry and geography. They're endemic to farms, homes, banks, prisons, realty, energy, education, trade - EVERYTHING! To bail out America from the grip of these deviates will take more than charisma. It will take grit. That's not to say Obama can't fight. It's just not certain that he will.

The fight America needs today is the mission of Edwards' life. It's not his stump speech. It's his calling, and he's prepared to take it on. America's next President needs fire in his belly. Edwards is on fire. Obama's just on simmer.

The path to Obama's victory wasn't torched by his own fire. It was stoked by the adulation he received at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 - less than 4 years ago. It was reinforced when he traversed the nation in his first run for Senate and met more adoring crowds who moved him with their adulation. His decision to run for President was inspired by the opinions of others - not by his opinion of himself. He said so when he entered the race. Now he's a well-honed campaigner. A man of words. But it will take more than words to heal America. It will take FIGHT! Obama's ready to speak. But I don't think he's up to this fight. Not this one! Not yet!!

I'm also not certain he can't be seduced by power. The Clintons were, and continue to be. Here's an excerpt from a Harpers profile of Obama from November 2006: (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/11/0081275)

"Yet it is also startling to see how quickly Obama’s senatorship has been woven into the web of institutionalized influence-trading that afflicts official Washington. He quickly established a political machine funded and run by a standard Beltway group of lobbyists, P.R. consultants, and hangers-on. For the staff post of policy director he hired Karen Kornbluh, a senior aide to Robert Rubin when the latter, as head of the Treasury Department under Bill Clinton, was a chief advocate for NAFTA and other free-trade policies that decimated the nation’s manufacturing sector (and the organized labor wing of the Democratic Party). Obama’s top contributors are corporate law and lobbying firms (Kirkland & Ellis and Skadden, Arps, where four attorneys are fund-raisers for Obama as well as donors), Wall Street financial houses (Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase), and big Chicago interests (Henry Crown and Company, an investment firm that has stakes in industries ranging from telecommunications to defense). Obama immediately established a “leadership PAC,” a vehicle through which a member of Congress can contribute to other politicians’ campaigns—and one that political reform groups generally view as a slush fund through which congressional leaders can evade campaign-finance rules while raising their own political profiles.

Edwards, on the other hand, is not seduced by wealth and power. He achieved both long ago by defeating corporate power - not succumbing to it. This isn't to say that Obama would cave in or sell out - but look what happened to Bill Clinton. First he was the "hillbilly" in DC who was beaten by the system. Now he's a central part of it. But Edwards remains an outsider who deplores the corporate greed. Battling corporations is the mission of his life - and his life has truly been that mission.

At this historic time - one I have awaited for decades - when a black American has the chance to be President - I wish I could be pleased that the Presidency could be his. At another time, if the nation wasn't in such dire straits and didn't need a tested fighter so badly, I'm certain I would be. But that time is not now. To fight THIS FIGHT, one must be tried, tested and steady. Obama at this time in his young career, isn't ready. He would make an excellent Vice President to fight beside John Edwards to defeat the Karl Roves and corporations. Then after a successful 8 years, at age 54 - the same age Edwards is now - Barack Obama would be first in line to be President. But for now, America and the world need a scrapper - and that scrapper is John Edwards.

To stay in the race, John Edwards will need money. So please, America, ante up!!! Keep John Edwards in the race.

(For further perspective on Obama versus Edwards, check out this Democracy Now interview from Friday, January 4th, with Edwards supporter and long time activist/actor, Danny Glover: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/4/after_iowa_a_roundtable_discussion_on

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ever heard of Dennis Kucinich? Yeah, he's the guy that Edwards stole the phrase "Two Americas" from, out of "A PRAYER FOR AMERICA" by Dennis Kucinich. LOOK IT UP!!!

Kucinich has NEVER taken A NICKEL from lobbyists, PACS's, or corporations...EVER! Can your pretty boy, John say the same? Oh! He's seen the light?!!!

You and most of American political writers AND sleeping, "program-me-please" voters disgust me!!!

How convenient anonymity is!!

Yes, I have heard of Dennis Kucinich. And written about him quite positively - as you should know - since you're so aware of writers.

Kucinich is the guy who doesn't endorse other progressives when they run for Congress - like Marcy Winograd in 2006 against Jane Harman - the same Jane Harman who just gave us the Homegrown Terrorism (HR 1955) bill. Marcy is one of the most brilliant, courageous and moral people I've ever met. She and the other progressive candidates from 2006 whom Kucinich didn't endorse - which I believe was all of them - would have made a powerful presence in Congress - perhaps more powerful than Kucinich - quite possibly why he didn't endorse them. Could it be that our progressive star doesn't like competition for the progressive limelight??

Hmmm... Has Dennis endorsed Cindy Sheehan against "Impeachment Is Off The Table" Pelosi?? The answer is NO!! How 'bout giving that some thought!!!!

I love Dennis' policies. Too bad he doesn't want to pave the way for fellow progressives in Congress who can help him promote them. Huh... D.R.???

I can't remember when it was, I think after the first time he introduced the articles of impeachment - they took turns doing a speech outside the capitol building.

The thing is, Edwards is not trustworthy. He is in a lot of trouble for his campaign finance fraud in 2004, he plans to make Health Insurance MANDATORY - in fact, here is an excerpt from his own statement on his plan:

"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."

What? did he say collection agencies and wage garnishment for Americans that can't afford to pay insurance premiums?

He sponsored the patriot act and voted for the war (sorry, apologies don't count when hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost because he "made a mistake", at least it doesn't count with me). He also voted for CAFTA and is now putting down the outsourcing of jobs, etc..

He's just too contradictory for me and I'm afraid he won't implement any of his cherry-picked rhetoric if elected.

Go Kucinich '08! kucinich.us

I like Edwards too, but my vote is for Kucinich, as long as he remains on the ballot, regardless of whether he has a chance to win. He had the sense and the courage to oppose the war during a time of 9/11 hysteria. Edwards measured the wind and his constituency and made the safe and disastrously wrong decision. Why not the best?

At Least John Edwards apologized to americans about this war for the iraq war and he said he regets it and he's gonna live with it for the rest of his life.

Just Like Bill Clinton when he told the truth about his affair with monica lewinsky and he regrets it.

John Edwards forgot to question the outcome of the last presidential election when he and Kerry were elected. I think throwing away an election is a bad precedent to set. If he had challenged the vote in Ohio, he would be vice president right now.

and you've made this wrong statement before. As an active member of CODEPINK for 4 1/2 years, it saddens me that you use the handle, "CodePink" because you don't speak for the organization. The members of CODEPINK I know, are well aware of the smack-down between Kerry and Edwards after the 2004 election. Edwards did NOT want to quit. Kerry bowed out against his running mate's decision to stay on and fight. Haven't you noticed there is NO communication between Kerry and Edwards? Why do you think that is? Or perhaps you DON'T THINK!!

As i said, it saddens me to read your comments so often under the name of "CodePink," that are incorrect and unresearched. Before you make unfounded statements, do your research. These threads are for the dissemination of information - not for disinformation!

We all make mistakes, but when I read yours I have involuntary cringe because others, especially newbies, may think you represent for CodePink. I'm a Code Pinker also, but wouldn't imply I speak for the family of CodePink. Don't want you to feel bad but may I suggest you consider changing your handle to ACodePinker? Just a thought.
To others - Are you Code Pink? See www.codepinkalert to find out.

Sorry, but you are wrong about 2004. Edwards and Kerry had a major knock down about the results. Edwards wanted to fight the total vote, but Kerry overruled him and caved almost immediately. Edwards was furious. Please go back and do some reading and you will find out I'm correct.

This post is correct.

EDWARDS IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE THAT WILL BRING AMERICA BACK TO ITS PLACE OF HONOR AND DEFEAT THE EVIL GREEDY FORCES CURRENTLY RUNNING--AND RUINING--- THIS COUNTRY.

YES, TIME TO ANTI-UP!!!

1. Edwards has the profile of a trial advocate so he is adept at measuring the emotional wind; he was quite effective at realizing the anti-corporatocracy sentiment will be around a long time. But as to leadership on the national and international stage, on what basis would he meet a test and select counselors to assist him in working resolutions. Currently, reportedly his advisers come from the lobbyist community, the very entities he decries.

a. What is the actual logic in his thinking?
b. What did he actually accomplish as a senator? Did he like or dislike the job; he didn't stay long. What kind of diplomatic agreements did he work on? What committees did he work on? What is his opinion of American policies in foreign fields? Does he have one specific change of policy that he has explained as to how it will work?
c. How could he manage the Military, which has now positioned itself thoroughly inside the civil government; what is his background in giving direction to military and who would he coose to assist him? Elizabeth?
d. How well grounded is he in foreign affairs and who are his advisers?
e. To what extent could he take corporations, such as the insurance industry, out of government, such as health care (they are the deep pockets he sues, after all) - he has not signed on to Single Payer Not For Profit, which is the only method which will bring Americans the relief they seek, they say, today? In fact 70-80% of Americans insist that is so.
f. Will he spend his days suing the industries of America or justifying allowing them to continue the pillage?
g. The media reports he has trouble with voters across the South of the U.S. - what do you anticipate will be his vote gathering ability there?
h. Did he decry private industry being able to prejudice the field of candidates, no matter their size, by corrupting the courtesy of debates by picking and choosing which candidates would be heard/seen? Does he have a principle to back up his silence? There is nothing that prohibits a presidential field from being of any size. It is an American political exercise. The air waves belong to the people. How does Edwards stand in light of a licensed entity prejudicing its own license? How does his silence represent his character?
i. How does he stand on the acts that have rolled back American civil liberties? There is no indication he would rescind them. Has he been required to express a position as to these Acts?
j. What is his position on funding wars, military? How will Edwards have the authority to contain a broken CIA with its machinations in the Middle East, including Pakistan, and longtime practice of instituting civil wars, fomenting revolutions and intriguing political assassinations?
k. Specifically, what plan does Edwards have to modify how we live and travel since we are behind speed at reducing our use of fuel oil for travel and our own incomes are retracting under the onslought of rising prices. Who will advise him on a fuel policy, and what kind of track record has he carved out about caring about issues of partnering with the earth and self-denying in the present for stabilization of the earth for the future? Bill Moyers read his stump anti-corporation speech on Jan. 4, 2008 and stated it was straight out of the Dennis Kucinich playbook. Why he borrow from Dennis?
l. How about removing foreign interest money and influence from Congress? Does he have a position on the current anti War Party of Israel sentiment growing widely around the world, including in Israel; so much so a guilt ridden Israelie publisher recently said to Condaleeza Rice (who reportedly didn't note the vulgarity in his remarks) that Israel wanted to be "raped" by the U.S. (in other words, punished big time for what some of the Israelies practicing influence peddling to the max have effected in this country)? The DNC is currently rolling in the same loot which pays for candidates to talk middle of the road but do nothing but be War Party lite candidates, as usual. Edwards avoided tough votes in Congress while he was on the road running for President in '04, and so on. Where is he on all of this - specifically?
l. Have we come to a resolution on the couple John and Elizabeth Edwards, who will occupy the White House? Will voters allow Elizabeth Edwards to speak to them as if she is their teacher?
I have observed the family together. I see pain in the children, as if they can't be heard through the noise to make their desires understood. Will Americans at the end of the day, bottom line, decide to go in the direction of this couple for leadership?

Given the experience of the U.S. with Bill Clinton (not to even mention the Bush desolation), will voters return soon to someone who may not be able to build a strong plan beyond talk. I would grant that Edwards has proven he will prime himself for the adrenaline rush of advocacy daily. But clean out, which is sorely needed now? Where is his history there?

Just a few thoughts as to what we might really need to know more specifically about John Edwards before we think a large percentage of the voting nation will slow down for him.

Limit,
You sound like either an Obama or a Hillary person. Here are some questions for you:
Why has Obama praised Joe Lieberman as a fine and good Democrat as late as a few weeks ago? Why does Obama travel with a homophobic minister condemning gays? What exactly has Obama done to support the troops--he continually votes to give Bush more money or skips important votes like he did in Illinois by continually voting "PRESENT" and not taking a stand.

Hillary is not even worth discussing. Not only her votes on Iraq and her continued votes to give Bush his way there. She also voted for the Kyl-Lieberman Bill--in essence giving Bush the go ahead to attack Iran. She has also stated that she would not hold Bush accountable for his crimes in the last 7 years as America can't look back, but look forward. I wonder if she feels that way about people who murder and should be let go as we shouldn't look back and must move forward. Hillary's pure bullshit, straight from the DLC.

"Limit"--poise those questions for Obama and Hillary and see what your answers are. Try to be honest with your answers if you are capable.

DENNIS KUCINICH FORGET THE CRAP!!! HE GOT IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME!!!

Hello, first i must say that it's about time that the 'code pink' handel was summarily addressed. It's not fair to speak for an organization when you are not entitled to do so...even if we appreciate the 'posts'. I for one expected it.
Next, as a staunch Kucinich supporter i'm having to reassess where my support is going = weither i like it or not, fair or not
DK is not getting a fair shake and he'll be out of the running. i believe the consolation prize is that we might be able to vaporize the DLC = our worst most virulent enemy. If we can circumvent the DLC we have won.
I appreciated the laundry list of interrogatives regarding Edwards and hope he has some answers... i don't believe the author, Limit, was necessarily a fan of Obama or DLcillary.
If Edwards gets it about getting out of Iraq entirely, completely NOW and changing the corrupt foreign policies that have landed us there and everywhere; AND can silence the Military Industrial Complex or at least neutralize it till the next Liberal pres then i can't ask for much more... granted that ending the Arms Trade is paramount to ending the war machines deadly pastime(post cold war).

Darwin26
Viet Nam drafted Combat Veteran WIA '68
Co-State Coordinator PDA Montana
Billings Peace Seeker, member
MPFI, partner
PDA Fair Trade & Impeachment Teams
www.pdamontana.org
www.williamsstudiogallery.com

I have always spoken for myself. But I can see that there is some confusion, so I'll do something about that. Meanwhile, Edwards is probably the lesser of three evils. I tried that one once and I was not satisfied with the results. The bottomline is that if the American people wish to have an empire, they will see it decline. That is just how it is. I doesn't have to be that way. We could rise up non-violently and have a real change. Dennis Kucinich is an establishment candidate who points to change. The others aren't no matter how much they blather on about change.

Think you are also VA, correct? Our DK coordinator might need some help making phone calls. She is in NH now and will be getting back to me shortly. Are you available to make some calls today?
Rain

John Edwards still has one hurdle to cross. I predict that the MSM will go after the John Edwards - Rielle Hunter love affair story ONLY if he looks to be the nominee.

The MSM would prefer to just ignore any sex scandal of a politician (Democrat, that is), but they may have to cover the story when Ms. Hunter puts John Edwards on the birth certificate as the father. Under some state laws, it's the birth certificate that counts for child support, if the "birth father" does not contest it.

Once Rielle Hunter determines that it would be much easier to get child support if John Edwards is listed on the birth certificate, I think that Ms. Hunter will let the story out. She knows about John Edwards' fortune and she want it!!

So, what's this mean? It's my opinion that Rielle Hunter's life could be in danger. John Edwards would do anything to shut her up (and to prevent that baby from being born.) God help her.

this bogus story about Edwards and another woman - you will fail! It's fabricated and you won't succeed.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Speaking Events

2017

 

August 2-6: Peace and Democracy Conference at Democracy Convention in Minneapolis, Minn.

 

September 22-24: No War 2017 at American University in Washington, D.C.

 

October 28: Peace and Justice Studies Association Conference



Find more events here.

CHOOSE LANGUAGE

Support This Site

Donate.

Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.

 

Sponsors:

Speaking Truth to Empire

***

Families United

***

Ray McGovern

***

Julie Varughese

***

Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.

 

Ads:

Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on Ca-Dress.com

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.