View Story | 273 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
It starts with the dignity of all and the need for full employment.
"The answer is to end our reliance on carbon-based fuels." Al Gore, 7/17/08
by TomP on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 02:13:31 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
...with full employment is that the Federal Reserve Bank will never allow it.
I'm for full employment, don't get me wrong, but the Fed will slam the brakes on economic growth if they see us approaching full employment.
I remember back during the Clinton years when Greenspan said that there would need to be at least 12 million people unemployed at minimum to keep the Fed happy. He also started raising interest rates when he felt people "had too much money in their pockets".
Any president who attempts to implement a full employment policy will need to be prepared to yank control of our money supply and control of interest rates from the Fed. Otherwise, talking about full employment is just blowing smoke.
by Rex Manning on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 04:17:59 PM PDT
...but I'm not as convinced as others that Congress could not be persuaded---at some point---to put the money supply in the hands of a Treasury managed central bank. Yes, it would take quite a crisis, perhaps like the one we are beginning to grapple with now.
One would hope that Edwards or Obama or Clinton could be persuaded to consider reaching for the sun and the moon and the stars, but I hold out little hope for either Clinton or Obama. Edwards seems a little more interested in transformational change.
But as you say/imply, in order to eliminate poverty you need to eliminate unemployment, and if you take control of the money supply away from the commercial banking industry, it would be possible to achieve all that John Edwards dreams of.
by James Kroeger on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 04:32:59 PM PDT
...who would actually do it. Or could do it.
I think he would make the case to congress to make the change you suggest.
by Rex Manning on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 04:36:11 PM PDT
To all... this is broken record Kevin here.
Need something more to do? Need more ways that you can help John Edwards to help all of us?
Please help out if you can.
Look for the links at the top of the phone banking page, here: http://www.johnedwardsphonebank.com/ Here is a great tool to use for contacting the media and congress.
Congress.org http://congress.org
Media: http://www.congress.org/...
Kevin
Washington Woman
EENR
by kevin22262 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:38:13 PM PDT
Things are going to get a lot worse before they get worse. ~ Lily Tomlin
by vigilant meerkat on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:48:08 PM PDT
We need someone to repost about the fund raiser along with some other good Edwards info.
My diary DIED! Why, I am not sure.
We need to push this EVERYWHERE today and tomorrow.
Here is what I posted earlier. Bump it up if you can. http://www.dailykos.com/...
by kevin22262 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 06:19:02 PM PDT
Phone banking!
From Tracy Russo http://blog.johnedwards.com/...
by kevin22262 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 06:20:01 PM PDT
I just went over and rec'd it though it may be too late :(
Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley
by sarahlane on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 06:27:51 PM PDT
and signed up to phone bank for John too!
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.
by givmeliberty on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 09:52:56 PM PDT
Because it would make a tremendous difference in this country and go a long way in healing the nation. Everyone is entitled to a job with a living wage. It's not an impossibility. It simply takes the will and the commitment to make it happen.
by vigilant meerkat on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:47:19 PM PDT
Edwards nixes campaign stops for speech WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards canceled campaign events in Alabama and North Dakota to make a "major policy address on poverty" Wednesday in New Orleans, where he launched his presidential bid 13 months ago. Campaign officials said Edwards, who has trailed Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama in recent primaries, does not plan to end his candidacy and will reschedule the two dropped trips. Nonetheless, people close to the campaign said Tuesday's announcement caught them off guard, and some found it perplexing. In a news release, the Edwards campaign called poverty "the great moral issue of our time." In recent days, it said, "national discussion of important issues like ending poverty has given way to sniping and personal attacks between the two front-runner candidates. Ending poverty and fighting for the middle class is the cause of John Edwards' life — and he will urge the nation to refocus on this important issue." Democratic activists have openly speculated that the former North Carolina senator may have to leave the race soon because he has been unable to keep pace with Obama and Clinton in gaining votes, media attention and fundraising. After narrowly edging Clinton for second place in the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, Edwards has fared poorly. On Saturday, he finished a distant third in his native South Carolina, whose primary he won in 2004. Some people close to the campaign said Edwards was disappointed that poverty got little mention in Democratic reactions to President Bush's State of the Union address Monday, and he sees the New Orleans speech as a chance to refocus attention on the problem. These people, who were not authorized to speak on the record, said they had no indication that Edwards planned to leave the race.
Edwards nixes campaign stops for speech
WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards canceled campaign events in Alabama and North Dakota to make a "major policy address on poverty" Wednesday in New Orleans, where he launched his presidential bid 13 months ago.
Campaign officials said Edwards, who has trailed Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama in recent primaries, does not plan to end his candidacy and will reschedule the two dropped trips. Nonetheless, people close to the campaign said Tuesday's announcement caught them off guard, and some found it perplexing.
In a news release, the Edwards campaign called poverty "the great moral issue of our time." In recent days, it said, "national discussion of important issues like ending poverty has given way to sniping and personal attacks between the two front-runner candidates. Ending poverty and fighting for the middle class is the cause of John Edwards' life — and he will urge the nation to refocus on this important issue."
Democratic activists have openly speculated that the former North Carolina senator may have to leave the race soon because he has been unable to keep pace with Obama and Clinton in gaining votes, media attention and fundraising. After narrowly edging Clinton for second place in the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, Edwards has fared poorly. On Saturday, he finished a distant third in his native South Carolina, whose primary he won in 2004.
Some people close to the campaign said Edwards was disappointed that poverty got little mention in Democratic reactions to President Bush's State of the Union address Monday, and he sees the New Orleans speech as a chance to refocus attention on the problem. These people, who were not authorized to speak on the record, said they had no indication that Edwards planned to leave the race.
http://news.yahoo.com/...
by Flint on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 07:32:31 PM PDT
ownership happy is way more important than assuring every American who is willing and able a job to earn the substance to support themself and their family.
Just one more reason to loathe the Congress of 1913, who enacted legislation that gave us both the Federal Reserve Bank and the permanent Federal Income Tax (i.e., the IRS).
Si, se puede cambiar~~Yes, we can change~~Obama '08
by Angie in WA State on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:30:43 PM PDT
There are good reasons so resent the incredible influence that the commercial banking industry has on money supply decisions, but you are profoundly wrong about the Federal Income Tax.
There is simply no better approach to taxation than through a progressive income tax. From The Progressive Income Tax: Theoretical Foundations:
The Progressive Income Tax is widely misunderstood today because people do not realize that it collects money from taxpayers in a way that always preserves every citizen's purchasing power. Each is spared the decline in purchasing power she would otherwise have experienced if only she had paid the tax.
FWIW, you should understand why a national sales tax would be an incredibly regressive way to raise government revenue.
Federal Reserve bank = bad Federal Income Tax = good
by James Kroeger on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 06:13:59 PM PDT
Section II, Paragraph III.
Before you accept modern taxation, see Article XVI, read some of the federalist papers on just why they decided against direct taxation, unless it came in the form of a import duty or other value-added tax.
In a nutshell, the system imposed upon the new nation restricted the government from taxing income producing activities, and restricted it to taxing sales activities.
Modern forms of this system would prohibit or prevent value-added taxation on the basic necessities, such as a first home or apartment, medcial services and supplies and food sold to be cooked or prepared at home.
For the most poor among us, these make up the bulk of the cost of living, and would leave lower income earners with all, or nearly all of their money tax-free (at the Federal level). Thus, requiring no complex tax system to progressively spread the cost of taxes.
I expect to be flamed for my penchant for the value-added tax over an income tax, but I'd love nothing more than to see the IRS become no more than an accounts receivable department.
by Angie in WA State on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:52:57 PM PDT
and give it back to the people. By the way, the Fed has really delegated it to the banks, who make a hefty profit manipulating the money supply.
by Cambridgemac on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 07:08:55 PM PDT
... recession, we have time to move in that direction ... even with strong action now, we are not going to be approaching anything like full employment inside six years. That is time to be able to substantially change the balance of the Fed ... since, after all, the majority of the Fed board of governors are appointed positions.
However, we would need someone like Edwards to push in that direction ... Edwards has economists like James Galbraith, Randy Wray, and Barkley Rosser in his corner ... not the Wall Street "market economists" that The Two Sitting Senators have in their corner.
We also, as I argue in Midnight Oil, have to be building a political movement, because so long as we do not have practice being citizens of a Republic, we will be stuck in a Charismatic Leader trap, passively waiting for deliverance.
Utsukushii kereba sore de ii
by BruceMcF on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:13:45 PM PDT
the problem is how do you get this knowledge into votes, quickly. He will not get the Dem nomination, which is a shame. I do however believe he would be the best VP candidate and then have a legit shot at being a future president. However, Clinton will not pick him and I cannot see Barack either. Too bad.
Social progress can be measured by the social position of the female sex
by iowaworker on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 04:53:30 PM PDT
could result in some interesting deal-making. Don't be too sure about Barack- by joining forces with Edwards he's got enough votes to beat Hillary Clinton.
Edwards could be offered a deal by either candidate, if it was what they needed to win.
IF THAT IS he gets to the convention. John Edwards needs the votes of all John Edwards supporters to have a shot at getting on the ticket. He doesn't need to convert anyone, he just needs the people who already support him and his agenda to vote for him.
by kate mckinnon on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 04:56:53 PM PDT
then you will stick with John Edwards and have faith that John will direct our loyalty and our to their best possible use.
I do believe Edwards when he says that ending poverty is the cause of his life and I will back him as long as he is willing to continue the fight. Who knows, something might happen that will still get him to the White House.
by Lura on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:40:42 PM PDT
With the endorsement of Obama by the Kennedy family yesterday the Obamamaniacs were all over the place calling for Edwards to give up.
Tonight... Clinton just stomped Obama in Florida with a 19% margin. Seems that they just don't think much of Teddy down there, despite another media narrative... complete with Tweety's blathering endlessly about the "torch being passed."
Yes... Edwards has drawn only 15%... but his 15% (or larger by convention time) may indeed be important and be leverage. August is quite a ways off yet.
Edwards supporters... stick to your convictions!
by Flint on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 06:02:03 PM PDT
Do the numbers reflect mail-in ballots or do those get counted after the fact?
If we want peace, why do we give weapons and call it "aid"?
by gdwtch52 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 06:39:24 PM PDT
that the mail-in ballots get counted before the polls.
Republicans: Your history has earned you a new mantra: "War and waste." ~~ Marta Jorgensen (CA-24 in '08)
I am an Edwards Democrat!
by Scubaval on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 02:25:16 AM PDT
quite the battle between Clinton and Obama, and neither of them are "owed" the votes or the loyalty of Edwards supporters. So we'll just see what Edwards decides to do with his leverage, and I trust him to use it wisely. I would prefer that he teamed with Obama, what a beautiful ticket that would be.
I'd sure as hell like to see him up there, putting America to work, providing Green Collar jobs, fixing New Orleans and taking on health care.
We have enough of a mess to actually need two powerhouses on our ticket, and like I have said before, Dick Cheney has really raised the bar (!) for what a Vice President can accomplish.
Frankly, we are going to need everyone's talents, sacrifice and best efforts to recover from the mess left by BushCo.
by kate mckinnon on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 07:30:00 PM PDT
I'm still holding out for Seabiscuit to win the whole thing (yes, I believe in miracles!) but if he doesn't, it will be very interesting to see what happens at the convention. Worst case scenario for JRE: Clinton and Obama could unite and move to the center but that also opens up a chance for Edwards to solidify his place as leader of the "democratic wing of the democratic party". Best case scenario: one or both adopt major parts of his platform.
There's a reason that Al Gore nearly choose Edwards as his VP and Kerry did. And we know (as much as Edwards might object) that he's on Obama and Clinton's shortlists. I am not sure what JRE would or should do if offered the spot and has to deal with party pressure. I know I'm biased, but I think even a clear-eyed person can see that Edwards is the ideal VP candidate for nearly anyone (if they're willing to put up with his independent personality). And yet, I think it would personally very painful to him to have to support Obama's non-universal healthcare or Clinton's lobbyist friends. I think O & C would be smart to want to pair with JRE but I don't know if it would be best for JRE.
Donate to the ACLU. Stand Up for Justice In The Military Commissions Proceedings
by Valhalla on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 07:53:38 PM PDT
That JRE will do what he thinks is best for America. It sounds corny, but I really believe his commitment to the poor, the unemployed, and those without options.
by kate mckinnon on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 08:12:42 PM PDT
of the Democratic Party, which is why John Edwards can't get a voice. I'd go far enough to say that there is no Democratic Party left. It has been bought, moved right, infiltrated from within by corporatist, Rupert Murdock, independents, and Republican defecters through the open primary process.
The two candidates with Ds after their names that are running for President are actually two sitting Senators who keep voting alike and for the status quo. The MSM appointed one of them and annointed the other as our candidates and then proclaimed one of the insiders to be "the" change candidate. When the masses attended the annointed's sermon rally, they immediately signed up for the annointed's spaceship campaign, hanging the appointed in effigy while waiting.
When the media is done toying with them, they will close around Saint McCain and take apart whichever one is left standing. This is how America votes and what has happened to the so-called two party system.
...once you're willing to say whatever it takes to win, you lose. ~~Dean
by dkmich on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 03:32:40 AM PDT
He is doing very well with conservative white men. Why aren't they voting GOP? Why are they "wasting" their vote on Edwards when (1) Dem primary doesn't count and (2) the MSM says JRE has no chance? I believe that there is a huge swatch of conservative white men out there who are ready to be converted to the Democratic party.
It goes without saying that Obama has done great work in bringing young people to the Party and I commend him for it. But I think we have to recognize and find a way to realize Edwards' appeal to conservative white men. And please no one state the ridiculous notion that this is identity politics -- the GOP is full of white male candidates so there's a reason they are gravitating towards Edwards (and also to Obama) that goes beyond identity politics. We can and should expand the Democratic base in every way that we can for 2 reasons: it makes us stronger, and it forces the GOP to move left in order to better compete with us. Part of creating a real Progressive movement must involve moving both parties to the Left.
by Valhalla on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 07:36:36 PM PDT
and want a candidate who is honest
There is just as much horse sense as ever, but the horses have most of it. ~Author Unknown
by VA Breeze on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 09:29:07 PM PDT
Edwards draws heavily in the left wing blogs because of his leadership on the issues.
He gives detailed plans ahead of the pack, that tell what he wants to do, how he intends to do it, how he will pay for it, and in a most "unpolitician like fashions... he puts it in writing in clear plain language with no equivocation.
His values are the core values of the Democratic party since the time of FDR, fighting poverty, secure the safety-net of SS, health care, and the 21st century environmental "clean energy" and "green collar workforce issues"
Having said that though and in talking to a couple of friends who are wingnuts and now are moving to the left... as one put it, "tell me where I can find a candidate that is going to make my vote count as much as some corporate lobbyist?"
Three days later, without any prompting, he told me he likes Edwards.
by Flint on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:56:24 PM PDT
say he isn't catching fire with the public so they are dumping him for Obama. WTF! I will never understand how someone can be totally in love with a candidate one day and bail the next for the other candidate who's policies aren't remotely the same. Jeez! I came late to the Edwards party, my guy dropped out. So I looked for the candidate who came the closest to my guy. John is too tall and much better looking and more populist than progressive, but he IS the closest. Am I unhappy, heck no. I actually think his approach to global warming, full employment and raising the standard of living for the lower and middle class are damned good, much better than the other two. PLUS, he is the only candidate staying on the issues, the message.
ROAD2DC ... IGTNT
by snackdoodle on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 09:12:12 PM PDT
is good looking enough for any two people, though.
I'm a straight woman, and even I can see that.
Welcome aboard the stalwart if currently beleaguered ship of Edwards. :)
Please support .Beyond the Storm: Shadows of the Big Easy
by Magenta on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 09:33:17 PM PDT
been in the Edwards camp from the beginning. The battling Bickersons are fast wearing out their welcome, the last debate John looked like the ONLY serious candidate. This is a good thing.
by snackdoodle on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:16:41 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 273 comments