Skip to main content

On "60 Minutes" last night John Edwards said:

First of all, there's not a single person in America that should vote for me because Elizabeth has cancer. Not a one. If you're considering doing it, don't do it. Do not vote for us because you feel some sympathy or compassion for us. That would be an enormous mistake. The vote for the presidency is far too important for any of those things to influence it.

You can watch the video and read the transcript here.

I agree. Let's instead focus on five reasons to vote for John Edwards that epitomize his candidacy.

First, take a moment and listen to his speech at the DNC Winter meeting. It'll remind you why you're a Democrat:

Five reasons to vote for John Edwards:

1. Restoring America's Moral Leadership in the World

America's leadership role in the world has grown out of our compassion and moral strength, as well as our unparalleled economic and military strength. We can be proud of our long history of using our strength to fight for the freedom of others, but our standing in the world has been badly tarnished. America can once again be looked up to and respected around the world. The first step is by immediately withdrawing 40,000-50,000 troops from Iraq, with the complete withdrawal of all combat troops from Iraq within 12-18 months -- allowing the Iraqis to assume greater responsibility for rebuilding their own country. It also means working to restore our legitimacy by leading on the great challenges before us like the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the genocide in Darfur, extreme poverty, and living up to our ideals in the fight against terrorism.

2. Guaranteeing Affordable, Quality Health Care for Every American

The 47 million uninsured Americans often do not get the care they need. Each year, about 18,000 die as a result. Despite the problems of the uninsured and unnecessarily low quality care, our health care system is the most expensive in the world and insurance premiums have grown faster than wages for almost 50 years. John Edwards believes we need to reform our health care system to provide truly universal coverage - not mere access to insurance - and get better care at lower cost.

3. Eliminating Poverty

Every day, 37 million Americans wake in poverty. Our response to that reality says everything about the character of America. John Edwards has called for a national goal of eliminating poverty within 30 years, with policies rooted in the core American values of opportunity for everyone and responsibility from everyone. We can reach that goal by creating and rewarding work, strengthening families, helping workers save and get ahead, transforming our schools, expanding access to college, breaking up areas of concentrated poverty, reaching overlooked rural areas, and expecting people to help themselves by working whenever they are able.

4. Strengthening America's Middle Class

The backbone of America is its middle class. But middle class families are struggling. Wages have fallen in recent years even as the economy has grown. At the same time, the costs of necessities like health care, child care, and education have grown. President Bush's tax policies have increased the share of the tax burden borne by middle-class workers. Our economic policies must reward work, help families save for the future, and fight the rising costs of middle-class life.

5. Leading the Fight against Global Warming and Our Addiction to Foreign Oil

Our nation's dependence on oil and other fossil fuels is contributing to global warming and jeopardizing our national security. To protect our future, John Edwards believes that Americans must be patriotic about something other than the war. We must act now by investing in clean, renewable energies like wind, solar, and biofuels to create a new energy economy, developing a new generation of efficient cars and trucks, and putting new energy-saving technologies to work in buildings, transportation, and industry.

He addresses all these issues in a speech entitled Transformational Change for America and the World, which I highly recommend you read. I think it demostrates the type of bold leadership this country so desperately needs.

Now that I've given you five reasons to vote for John Edwards, can you spare $5 to donate to the John Edwards campaign?  I've set up a grassroots fundraising page with the ambitious goal of raising $5,000 and have already donated $50 of my own.

Donate $5 for Five Campaign for Edwards

On March 31st the 1st quarter funding drive for all candidates will be over and the results reported shortly thereafter. Let's show the country that the Edwards campaign has broad support.  It's not the dollar amount that is important, but rather the number of people willing to contribute.

Join those of us who believe that tomorrow begins today.

Originally posted to meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:05 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Edwards is the right man (32+ / 0-)

      for this moment, a populist who speaks for the poor, the working class, and the middle class, all of whom are hurting. We need a candidate willng to take on the super-rich and their patrons in Congress.

      Krugman, this morning:

      The main force driving this shift to the left is probably rising income inequality. According to Pew, there has recently been a sharp increase in the percentage of Americans who agree with the statement that the "rich get rich while the poor get poorer." Interestingly, the big increase in disgruntlement over rising inequality comes among the relatively well off--those making more than $75,000 a year.

      Indeed, even the relatively well off have good reason to feel left behind in today's economy, because the big income gains have been going to a tiny, super-rich minority.

      •  Older parents (16+ / 0-)

          I know that in the minds of both me and my wife, we see the growing disparity in wealth since we both have older mothers (80 and 93) who survive on some savings and social security. Their lives  are comfortable but they struggle with health care and medicines. With my mother-in law, we provide out of pocket care for someone to stay with her 24/7 as dementia is an issue. As more parents are aging, the kids are struggling even with very good incomes to keep everyone above the water line. Time for a change.

        Eisenhower- "We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage."

        by NC Dem on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:45:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Some Advice For All (11+ / 0-)

        Yes Edwards is a populist! We all love that. And he is also a very successful and wealthy man through hard work and perseverance.

        And being a populist and wealthy has provided false fodder for the Right who joke about his populism  while being rich himself. You know - the 10,000 sq. ft. house, etc.

        We must combat that because the Right will play on that theme throughout his candidacy.

        One way to do that is to point out other well known wealthy people who are either populists or philanthropic giants. I'm am talking about people like the Andrew Carnegie's, the Bill Gates', the Henry Fords, etc.

        And let's not forget Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal which lifted all of American by it's bootstraps and saved it from the greed and excesses of the Right. No Roosevelt was not a wealthy private citizen but it is his path that Edwards is paralleling in a lesser but as important way.

        There are many of these people throughout history who rose from meager beginnings to become successful. And when they did become successful they gave back to America - particularly to America's less fortunate.

        By pointing out these people when the Right starts beating John over the head with his wealth we can help him push back and negate their false and ill conceived notion. We can show how there have been many wealthy people who like John have given their time and money toward the greater good and how much better off America is for it.

        So do some research. Find two or three of these people and become familiar with the things they did. And when you hear the Right attacking John you will be prepared to slap them back with the deeds of others, many being republicans, who gave back to America and as a result are far better people than those trying to make false talking points.

        "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

        by talex on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:55:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  don't know if it was a typo (8+ / 0-)

          FDR was wealthy. I "googled FDR wealth" and got this info :Howe's first impressions were largely correct. Roosevelt had been born into a class of wealth and leisure. The Roosevelts and the Delanos had long been successful merchants whose descendants enjoyed a prominent place among the "gentry" of the Hudson River. Roosevelt was born in 1882 and grew up in Hyde Park, his family's sprawling estate in New York, as the only child of two doting parents. He was particularly close to his mother, Sara Delano Roosevelt. As was expected of a man of his social standing, Roosevelt received an education in the fashion of English gentry. As a child, he was privately tutored in French and Latin while accompanying his family on tours through Europe

          I'm guessing FDR did not lose his wealth, but am not sure.
          Nice comment BTW :-)

          •  Thanks (5+ / 0-)

            Bad wording on my part. Yes FDR was wealthy but when he brought in the new deal he was President - not a wealthy private citizen.

            But I am glad that you pointed that out. It goes to show that a wealthy President does not have to be a tool of the wealthy. He can actually do his job and look out for the good of all Americans - wealthy and poor - and in the process actually create a middle class.

            "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

            by talex on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:51:36 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well FDR was born wealthy, Edwards earned (0+ / 0-)

              his wealth.
              There is a great deal of wealth built in this country. It just isn't getting spread out to the people who are doing the work. Progressive taxes are needed to help "fix" some of the inequalities created by unbridled capitalism.

              •  OT, FDR's wealth (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                talex

                FDR also depended on his mother's wealth, I believe.

                FDR knew nothing about the real life of ordinary people until he started dating Eleanor and she was doing 'social work' in the slums, took him along, educated him...sensitized him. That, plus his own crippling illness, made him more than just a scion/tool of the elite.

      •  And he's a class act (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        barbwires, machka

        I think his time out of Washington has done him an enormous amount of good, so he is now standing strong on principle instead of triangulating.  Plus, lest we forget, as the fictional President Andrew Shepard said on the American President, being president is entirely about character.  And John and Elizabeth are living their character.  This man and this woman have devoted their lives to the service of those who have the least among us, those who struggle every day to put some bread on the dinner table every night, and those whose voices are too often ignored.

        I am not going to vote for Edwards because his wife has cancer, but part of the reason I will vote for him is because Sen. and Mrs. Edwards has shown this country what family values really mean, what commitment is really about and what the meaning of "in sickness and in health" really is.

  •  The link to the fundraiser didn't work (10+ / 0-)

    But, I love your diary.

      •  I've given before (14+ / 0-)

        But, you inspired me to give a little more.

      •  Excellent diary! (10+ / 0-)

        Yeah the revolution starts now In your own backyard In your own hometown - Steve Earle

        by Sargent Pepper on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:51:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Can you fix the link again or put it in a comment (5+ / 0-)

        I wanted to give to your fund, but it would not work.  Thanks, meowmissy.

        "We don't need to redefine the Democratic Party; we need to reclaim the Democratic Party." John Edwards 2/22/07

        by TomP on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:14:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Let's start with (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SarahLee, mdgarcia, Allogenes, TomP

        Restoring America's Moral Credibility in the World

        Judging from the sentiments where I presently live (outside of North America), we need to re-establish our moral credibility before we can make any claims to moral leadership.

        "You can't talk to the ignorant about lies, since they have no criteria." --Ezra Pound

        by machopicasso on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:37:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Allogenes, TomP

          We will definately be starting at a much more modest place than his stated goal, but when I listen to what he plans to do I'm confident he can achieve it.

          A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

          by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:43:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't doubt it can be achieved, but (0+ / 0-)

            it's going to take a long time to restore (some might say gain) our moral credibility in the world (i.e. more than four years). I'm all for trying, though.

            "You can't talk to the ignorant about lies, since they have no criteria." --Ezra Pound

            by machopicasso on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:13:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  This is exactly my concern (0+ / 0-)

            You are an American (I presume) and from your point of view John Edwards can restore America's moral standing.

            My problem with that is, I don't think that message will sell overseas.

            I do not think America will regain much international stature at all, should we elect as President a Senator who cast a "Yes" vote to give the go-ahead for Mister Bush's War.

            But he apppologized for that!  

            Again, that might make a difference to a partisan American voter.  I don't think it will sound sincere to foreign ears.  I suspect the message heard overseas would be, "Americans didn't learn.  Americans don't really care."

            If that seems harsh, well, Presidential politics is a harsh line of work.

            "A Republic, if you can keep it". Benjamin Franklin, 1787, describing America's new government. "We'll see about that", George W. Bush, Jan 20, 2001.

            by Quicklund on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:15:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  understandable ... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Lying eyes, MJ via Chicago

              We certainly won't be able to convince you overnight, but surely when he pulls the troops out and works substantially to end global poverty and attends to the needs of the people in Africa, that will lighten the world's heart to us?

              A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

              by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:21:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I like pie, but it has to be low-alititude pie. (0+ / 0-)

                If I am offered pie-in-the-sky, I will not getr close enough to eat it.

                I am sorry.  Here is the mathematical odds a President John Edwards would end global poverty:  zero.

                That's a great goal.  Too bad he ain't gonnna make it happen.  Reality has a habit of intervening in grandiose plans such as this.  I myself do not find pie-in-the-sky rhetoric very persuasive.  

                May he and his wife enjoy years of happy, productive life.  May they continue to play significant roles in the Armeican dialogue.  Just give me a different choice for President, please.

                At any rate, as you can tell, the "vote thing" is not going to go away.  I do not wish to generate a comprehensive anti-Edwards debate in your pro-Edwards diary.  My goal is to stress that pesky "vote thing" is such diaries.

                Because, "the vote thing" really, realy, really does matter.

                Nice diary though.  Keep contributing to the dialouge, please.

                "A Republic, if you can keep it". Benjamin Franklin, 1787, describing America's new government. "We'll see about that", George W. Bush, Jan 20, 2001.

                by Quicklund on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:36:59 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  should he not try? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  machka

                  If nobody can put an end to poverty, should we then just give up?  

                  Just because something may be impossible, doesn't mean we shouldn't aspire to it.  I want someone to inspire us to achieve beyond our our percieved limits.

                  If Edwards isn't the right candidate for you, then I certainly respect your right to support someone who does. Democracy is a wonderful thing.

                  A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

                  by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:48:27 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Moving goalposts (0+ / 0-)

                    I suggested that Senator Edward's election to the Presidency would not be seen favorably in foreign nations.  

                    You countered that a President Edwards would indeed be seen favorably, once he ended global poverty.

                    My comment was that this was quite unlikely to occur, to employ teh rhetoric of understatement, that this promise is a pie-in-the-sky promise.  Since this thing simply would not happen, we are back to my point.

                    Senator Edwards is not a good choice for President, because he does not represent that clean break with the past America needs.

                    This is nothing to do with should we try to eliminate poverty or not.  Of course we can try to do that thing.  Perhaps Senator Edwards can help do such a thing from a Cabinet post?

                    "A Republic, if you can keep it". Benjamin Franklin, 1787, describing America's new government. "We'll see about that", George W. Bush, Jan 20, 2001.

                    by Quicklund on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 06:55:54 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  That's not what I said (0+ / 0-)

                      You countered that a President Edwards would indeed be seen favorably, once he ended global poverty.

                      No, I said "when he pulls the troops out and works substantially to end global poverty and attends to the needs of the people in Africa, that will lighten the world's heart to us?"

                      That, is a QUESTION. I did not assert at all that the world would see us favorably once he ended global poverty.  I ASKED if he worked substantially to end global poverty [note, I did not say he would end it] - would it not lighten your heart toward us? I also mentioned pulling out of Iraq, which he also intends to do.

                      Instead of answering, you just insist that ending global poverty is impossible and because you don't like the rhetoric, you conclude that the rest of the world would not like him as choice of president.

                      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

                      by meowmissy on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 06:54:34 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I am an American, so I am part of your "us" (0+ / 0-)

                        My heart is heavy because I know as a citizen of a democracy, our criminal war against Iraq is partially my fault.  I would trade everything I own to change places with John Edwards on that day he cast a yes vote to give George Bush his little fantasy war.  So I do not admire a man who had the chance to stand up, to display personal courage, to throw away his political career if need be, in order to stand tall when it counted - and who caved on the side of his own political ambition.

                        He made his choice.  Now, likeSenator Clinton, he shall reap the political self-destruction expidiency has sown.

                        History does not call upon a person often.  When History called upon John Edwards to choose bravery or political expediency, Senator Edwards chose expediency.  I wish I had had the chance History bestowed upon Senator Edwards.  But all I have is the chance to withhold my vote from political cowards.  I shall make use of this opportunity.

                        Do I think that if a President Edwards worked to end global poverty would that improve America's image in the world.  Sure.  How much?  Tht's harder to say.  What are the odds global poverty would be reduced so dramatically that the world would forget America brought death to as many as a million Iraqis for no justifiable reason?  Zero.

                        How, exactly, does John Edwards propose to redistribute global wealth in a 4 year term?  Does he plan something Lennisist, such as prohibiting ownership of private property?  No, of course he isn't.  And even if he did,  American elites would convert their wealth to Yen, Yuan, or Euro and the wealth would remain theirs.

                        So I am offered pie-in-the-sky as an offset against Senator Edwards' very real 2002 decision to place his personal political career over national interest. I reject the pie-in-the-sky.  

                        Senator Edwards already had an opportunity to run for the Vice-Presidency.  He was part of a ticket that failed to defeat the worst President in American history.  Is the Democratic Party so berifit of talent that it must compromise on one-time loser?  I don't think so.

                        Your opinion obviously differs.  These things happen.

                        "A Republic, if you can keep it". Benjamin Franklin, 1787, describing America's new government. "We'll see about that", George W. Bush, Jan 20, 2001.

                        by Quicklund on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 10:11:24 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

    •  You can contribute at JohnEdwards.com or (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      machka

      by calling the Chapel Hill headquarters at 919 636-3131.  I gave all I could about an hour ago after recieving an e-mail from the campaign. Show him the money! And by doing so show the political world that his campaign is going strong.

      Great diary.  

      "He that sees but does not bear witness, be accursed" Book of Jubilees

      by Lying eyes on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 01:40:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nice summary. (19+ / 0-)

    I'm on board. How refreshing to be inspired for a change; people could get used to that, methinks.

    In New York, we eat wingnuts for breakfast. And we blog, too.

    by MBNYC on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:10:42 AM PDT

  •  Excellent, thoughtful diary (17+ / 0-)

    Youre inspiring me to finish my "Why I support Edwards" dairy.

    This is the way one of these diaries should be written.  Very well done.

    Blue Indiana -- I support John Edwards in 2008

    by BWasikIUgrad on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:11:11 AM PDT

  •  More Info ... (50+ / 0-)

    I know I'm not as eloquent as some of the other Edwards supporters and much of this was taken directly from the Edward's site, but Edwards is a candidate who really speaks for himself.

    Here's a few more details:

    Ending poverty in America within a generation

    Restoring America's Moral Leadership by fighting worldwide poverty.

    Universal Health Care through shared responsibility

    A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

    by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:12:43 AM PDT

  •  ROAR! meowmissy, ROAR !! (18+ / 0-)

    I am standing up!!!

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -E.Burke Women, Get It Now: HPV Test

    by ezdidit on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:13:08 AM PDT

  •  This quote from the Transformational Change for (18+ / 0-)

    America and the World speech really hits the nail on the head:

    To lead the world in addressing the challenges of our century, America must restore our moral authority.

    Restoring our moral authority isn't just about feeling good about ourselves. When the world looks to America for leadership, we are stronger and safer, and so is the rest of the world.

    Restoring our moral authority means leading by example, and making clear that hard challenges don't frighten us, but call us to action.

    That certainly does not sound like anything the current administration is worried about.

  •  Another poster described John and (17+ / 0-)

    Elizabeth Edwards as possessing "The power of authenticity". Once I read it, I knew that it described my feelings towards the Edwards' to a T.

    This country would be lucky, indeed fortunate, to have people of their wisdom, courage, vision and humilty residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. I just hope a majority of the country is perceptive enough to see what many of us here see about the Edwards.

    Good diary Meowmissy.

    American Idol is quickly replacing religion as the opiate of the masses.

    by MadGeorgiaDem on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:21:29 AM PDT

  •  One reason not to (10+ / 0-)

    He voted to authorize the war. On Friday, October 11, 2002, John Edwards, along with 28 other Democratic Senators enabled this administration to plunge this nation in a never ending nightmare. On the evening of October 11, 2002, I vowed that I would never support any democrat who voted for this war if they campaign for president against those who did not vote for the war. Bill Richardson, Barak Obama, and yes, Dennis Kucinich did not. I sincerely like Edwards, however, even though he apologized and had his mea culpa moment, a vow is a vow. There are many of us who swore that night, as for me, I cannot go back on my vow. If he or the probable nominee Hillary Clinton gets nominated, I will vote for them in the general.

    •  I accept this (13+ / 0-)

      I think this a very good comment speaking to your personal decision.  We disagree - but I think we can, and we can move forward.

      Blue Indiana -- I support John Edwards in 2008

      by BWasikIUgrad on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:29:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  OK, OK (8+ / 0-)

      You can be rigid in your beliefs...in the primary.  But, like you, I will vote for the Democratic nominee.

      (-7.75, -7.69) No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up - Lily Tomlin

      by john07801 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:33:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Gosh ... (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jxg, stevej, Quicklund, Allogenes, Democrat

        OK, OK. You can be rigid in your beliefs...in the primary.

        Gosh, that's darn generous of you, giving tazz permission to to be "rigid" enough to keep his vow.

        "Sunlight is the best disinfectant." -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

        by Bearpaw on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:18:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  How dare you tell someone how they can vote! (0+ / 0-)

        We all have to make a choice about who we will vote for and where we will draw a line in the sand and not cross. Some Americans believed that the war in Iraq was a great idea and we should do it. Some Americans still believe this and will vote for the candidate that supported the war. Other Americans believe that the war in Iraq was a bad idea back in 2002 and they have been proven correct. Some Americans didn't support Kerry because he didn't support the war, while others didn't get very enthusiastic about him because he voted for the war.

        A great many of us made the same "rigid" promise to not vote for supporters of the war that BWasikIUgrad made. Some others of us also made a pledge to not vote for any candidate in any election that had the poor judgement to vote to use force in Iraq. Some voters will stay home since they don't see any viable candidate for them to vote for that represents their view, from the beginning, against the war. We will all have to see what happens from now until November next, but we should all realize that there is a significant, and growing, "end the war in Iraq" vote, and that some of these voters are going to choose to not vote for Edwards or Hillary or Biden in the general election because of that vote they cast in the Senate. And our choices in the primary could decide the election against the Democrats if we nominate a candidate that voted for the war.

        Get used to it and don't go trying to tell others how they CAN vote, but instead show them how they SHOULD vote.

        My new Unitarian Jihad name: PURITY TROLL OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

        by Democrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:51:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Whoa! Try the decaf! (0+ / 0-)

          I know you're not suggesting I'm for the war...

          I'm not telling anyone to do anything.  I was agreeing with the poster's conclusion that a Democrat must be elected.  

          Anyone who would "stay home" or refuse to vote has no right to complain.

          (-7.75, -7.69) No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up - Lily Tomlin

          by john07801 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:04:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  ditto (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jxg, Miss Blue, Sam I Am, mdgarcia, Allogenes

      Not only did he vote for it, he was a co-sponsor. But he definitely gets my vote in a general as well.

      Barack Obama 08
      It's says a lot about conservatism when they have to add "compassionate" to it

      by jj32 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:49:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Co-Sponsor!?! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jj32, Quicklund

        I forgot he was a co-sponsor! What an idiot! I can't believe the poor judgement that he showed at that time and now would have to think about it long and hard before I could cast a vote for Edwards.

        My new Unitarian Jihad name: PURITY TROLL OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

        by Democrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:53:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The others are not perfect. (16+ / 0-)

      Edwards is the best choice for me because there are more in the + column than in the - column.

      One vote on Iraq doesn't come close to negating all the rest of his worth.

    •  You're left with Kucinich then (0+ / 0-)

      because Richardson probably would have voted for it if given the chance, and Obama doesn't know how he would have voted. Kucinich is the only candidate who really voted against it.

      •  Obama said at the time that he (0+ / 0-)

        would have voted against it. I think that is pretty strong. (Check Youtube for video of his comments at that time.)

        Also, Al Gore came out with strong policy speeches against the war before the vote. If he were to enter the race that would be another option.

        I'm not disagreeing with you, but why do you say that Richardson probably would have voted for it? Could you back up this statement?

        Also, Mike Gravel would be another candidate that was against the war from the beginning.

        My new Unitarian Jihad name: PURITY TROLL OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

        by Democrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:08:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well (0+ / 0-)

          I know Obama voiced opposition to the war, but that doesn't mean he would have voted against that bill.  He probably would have, but we don't know for sure. Richardson, on the other hand, was clearly a supporter of the war.  

          Here's a link to one of his appearances on CNN in Decemeber of 2002:
          http://transcripts.cnn.com/...

          Here's what he said:
          "I say that if the inspections don't produce what everybody knows, then I think the administration is going to move forward with plans for military conflict and I, for one, would support them."

          He went back on CNN a couple months later to talk about how best to get France on board with the war, so it's clear that he was on board himself at that point.
          http://transcripts.cnn.com/...

          •  To be fair... (0+ / 0-)

            the Governor believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.  During that interview, however, he stressed that the inspectors should be given the latitude to determine that.  He talked about giving them time to do their jobs & not pressuring them.  His proposed approach was a careful one.

            Bush, on the other hand, rushed to war w/out giving inspectors the time they needed.  If the Governor had had his way, the inspectors would have uncovered what we know to be true--that Saddam had no stockpiles--and we would not have had any reason to invade.  

            •  Read what Richardson said again (0+ / 0-)

              He said "if the inspections don't produce what everybody knows", where "what everybody knows" stands for Saddam having WMD.  Like you said, Richardson believed Saddam had the WMD.  Failing to find them would have just meant that Saddam was hiding them and that an invasion was neccesary.  
              Also, Richardson said he wanted to give the inspectors 1 month.  Bush gave them almost 3 months, so he was actually more cautious than Richardson.  

    •  Please Consider (8+ / 0-)

      I took the same vow in 2002.  I just had a discussion about it last night with DemocraticLuntz.  

      But the future of the country is just too important.  

      I would love to see an Edwards/Richardson ticket.  I love Richardson for his foreign policy acument, but let's face it - are you more likely to be attacked by Al Qaeda, or lose your job/home/healthcare?  

      Actually, there is no reason why we cannot make the poor and working class a part of America again, and repair our image in the world and win the war on terror.  I think and Edwards/Richardson ticket would do that.

      •  All the candidates would make a good president (0+ / 0-)

        and Edwards is only one of them. I will not have a problem if any of them are nominated, except Kucinich. However, as to your Edwards/Richardson ticket, I would rather see a total ticket of color, Richardson/Obama, Obama/Richardson. Until the convention, I am going to play the antithesis of the past 220 years. No WASP men for president. I don't have anything against White Anglo Saxon Protestants mind you, but it's about time for something different.

        •  Diversity is a wonderful goal (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MadGeorgiaDem, Allogenes, Predictor

          But your comment could be construed as a bit prejudiced.  The color and/or gender of the candidates is not paramount to me.  Ability and qualification are.

          While I would love to see a minority become president one day, I won't rule out "WASP men," or any other demographic.

          •  Speaking as a WASP male who (0+ / 0-)

            is married-with-two-children and lives in a 4 Bedroom-2.5 bathhouse in a "nice" suburb,

            We need SOME diveristy on our '08 ticket; Obama-Richardson or Edwards-Richardson would do nicely.

            My Candidate's 10-point plan is less eye-glazing that Your Candidate's 10-point plan

            by Sam I Am on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:36:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Voting for a candidate BECAUSE of skin color (0+ / 0-)

          is JUST AS RACIST as voting AGAINST a candidate because of skin color.
          Maybe the GOP will vote for Rice/Gonzalez to get the votes of people who think like you.( Or maybe Colin Powell, who used to be competant and trustworthy)
          The Gender/race barriers WILL be broken soon. I want a candidate who can win, AND govern well.
          BTW I really doubt any of the GOP'ers I mentioned will be on the ticket, or even interested in being on the ticket.

          •  I am a man of color. (0+ / 0-)

            And it is my option as a man of color to vote for 2 very good men who are not WASP just like 99% of WASPs have voted for WASPs over the past 220 years. Now how is what I do racist and the 99% of WASPs over 220 years not?

            •  Yes what you said is racist. (0+ / 0-)

              And MAYBE those WASP's were ALSO racist.
              2 wrongs don't make a right.

              You did not say you wanted to vote for the people who were most qualified, most electable, had the best leadership qualities, etc.
              MLK said judge on the content of ones charecter, NOT the color of ones skin.

              •  I believe those two men are the most qualified (0+ / 0-)

                especially Richardson.

                •  that's NOT what you said, and I'll quote you: (0+ / 0-)

                  "I would rather see a total ticket of color, Richardson/Obama, Obama/Richardson. Until the convention, I am going to play the antithesis of the past 220 years. No WASP men for president. I don't have anything against White Anglo Saxon Protestants mind you, but it's about time for something different."

                  •  You quote me right (0+ / 0-)

                    I don't have to defend how I feel after 71 years of having only white men as choices to control and dominate this country. Sorry, Latinos and African Americans have favorite sons and daughters too. If that's racist, I'm guilty.

                •  Voters can use whatever criteria ... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  tazz

                  they want when judging who they wish to be President. Diversity is a perfectly reasonable one in my opinion.

                  I look forward to working with everyone in supporting whoever becomes the nominee.

                  A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

                  by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:15:27 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Kucinich? (0+ / 0-)

          What's wrong with Kucinich that would make him, in your opinion, not a good president?

          Would it be his vote against the war or something else?

          My new Unitarian Jihad name: PURITY TROLL OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

          by Democrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:10:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Governor's Domestic Achievements (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HarveyMilk

        As Governor, Bill Richardson can say something none of the other candidates can:  he's actually done something about all of those issues.  

        Here's a snippet:

        In this Legislative Session, Bill forged compromises and pushed through initiatives that helped the economy, education, and working families. They included:

        Raising the minimum wage to $7.50 per hour over the next two years.
        Cutting taxes for working families, returning $52 million to low and middle income families and eliminating taxes on the salaries of active duty military.
        Raising teacher salaries 5%, expanding the state's pre-kindergarten program by 73%, and passing $191 million for modernizing schools.

        Bill's ongoing commitment to environmental protection and ending global warming was front and center in his most recent slate of accomplishments:

        As part of his "Year of Water" agenda, Governor Richardson fought for new legislation that provides almost $17 million for river restoration and protection, payment for Indian water rights, expanding clean water supply systems into underserved parts of the state, and additional support for New Mexico's Strategic Water Reserve.
        New bio-diesel targets and clean energy tax credits that will directly reduce New Mexico's greenhouse emissions.
        All this is in addition to the energy reform and environmental protection laws Governor Richardson signed last week that would require New Mexico utilities to produce 20% of their energy from renewable sources by 2020.

        Read more here.  

        I think we can agree that a ticket with Richardson and Edwards would be superb, even if we don't agree on the order!

    •  why itwas OK to vote for AUMF (0+ / 0-)

      REMEMBER, voting for the Authority to use force is NOT the same as being for the war. 2 analogies: Giving GWB keys to a car doesn't authorize him to drunk drive. And under current affairs, being given the authority to issue supoenas to Miers and Rove is NOT the same as issuing supoenas. It's called NUANCE. It is REASONABLE to give the president authority to use force (as a means of coercion). It was not reasonable to USE the force.
      Now many will say GWB is so incompetant that he should never have been given the authority. But I don't think his extreme incompetance was evident at the time of the vote.

      •  I disagree. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Quicklund

        Your argument doesn't hold up. At the time of the vote we knew that it was an authorization to go to war and those that had good judgement voted against the war. If it was only for the purpose of coercion then we should happily pass resolutions to use force against Iran, North Korea and probably China for that matter.

        My new Unitarian Jihad name: PURITY TROLL OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

        by Democrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:13:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  my argument DOES hold up (0+ / 0-)

          to many people. You are free to say it doesn't. I gave two decent analogies. Here's another-giving someone a right to carry a concealed weapon doesn't give someone the right to use it wantonly.
          Although I think the war was the wrong choice, it COULD have been executed to have a positive outcome.

          Iran, N Korea, and China can all fight back. Iraq was picked BECAUSE their military was so weak, they wouldn't want to risk being attacked. Because the other 3 can fight back, a US resolution to use miltary force could easily instigate us being attacked.

          •  3 Reasons (0+ / 0-)

            There are only 3 reasons that anyone voted to use force in Iraq.

            1. They supported the war.
            1. They were pandering for votes. (IMO this is what Edwards did. I would like to hear him admit it and apologize for it before he were to get my vote.)
            1. They actually believed the White House and Bush and Company. (Which would include your argument by the way which is "We need to give the President the Power to invade them in order to use diplomacy." Other things which fall under this are believing the intelligence (although not one Senator actually took the time to READ the actual intelligence!))

            In any of these three scenarios the candidate lost my vote from the beginning.

            If they actually thought that the war was justified and supported it (Think Lieberman here.) then they lose my vote.

            If they were pandering for votes they lose my vote. (Kerry and Edwards both did this in my view, although this is hard to prove since noone ever admits to pandering for votes now do they?)

            If they fell for the BS coming from the White House then they lose my vote. 22 Democratic Senators and 1 Republican Senator were able to see what was really going on AT THE TIME and they will be the people that deserve my support and they will be the people that receive my support. If you were in the Senate on that day and weren't able to put 2 and 2 together then you do not have the judgment I require of someone that I think would make a good Chief Executive of our country.

            I remember when the vote was happening and people were trying to say it was only so the President could put more pressure on Saddam. The President had all the pressure he needed and more (remember the no-fly zones?) at the time and there was no NEED to give him the power to go to war. If required the House and Senate could have passed a war powers resolution very quickly whenever it was needed to actually invade Iraq. Some of us think that what the legislation actually says is what the legislation is actually about. War powers should be a last resort and should be voted against unless you really think we should invade. War powers should not be used to enhance your none beligerent diplomacy.

            "I want to stand as close to the edge as I can. Out on the edge you see all the things you can't see from the center." K. Vonnegut

            by Democrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:08:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tazz

        I have not been naieve enough to believe this argument for decades.

        If John Edwards really did not understand what he was doing when he cast his vote to approve Mister Bush's War, then he eleiminates himself from contention by reason of gross political incompetence.

        "A Republic, if you can keep it". Benjamin Franklin, 1787, describing America's new government. "We'll see about that", George W. Bush, Jan 20, 2001.

        by Quicklund on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:24:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  If he's the D nominee, OK (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Democrat

      Man, he is so last on my list of running Dem. candidates.

      I trust my gut and my gut says that this is a guy who oozes fake sincerity. I can't stand him. His ideas are good, mind you, I just can't stand the man.

      I don't trust his judgment.

      ___
      To achieve the impossible, it is precisely the unthinkable that must be thought.
      ~Tom Robbins

      Conlige suspectos semper habitos

      by Marcus Junius Brutus on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:58:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was a bit suspicious, too (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        barbwires, Lying eyes, machka, TomP

        until I saw him in person. He's the real deal. I think his good looks turn some people off, make him seem fake. Also, I see a great deal of growth since the presidential campaign. He has a new attitude. Something like, "I'm going to tell it like it is and spin be damned." He answers questions immediately and with conviction, with a yes or no when appropriate, always looks a questioner in the eye. At a book signing appearance before he announced his run, he said, "We need a president who'll ask us to be patriotic about something other than war." I was hooked.

    •  He has also admitted publicly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TomP

      that he was wrong.

  •  You got me, Missy. (18+ / 0-)

    Matched your $50.00.  Also recommending.  Hope you reach your goal before noon!

  •  Great reasons John Edwards it the right choice (9+ / 0-)

    for 2008!

    All the way to the Whitehouse!

  •  My primary reasons are #3 and #4 (14+ / 0-)

    If we don't fix the economy and jobs for the average guy in the suburbs and small towns we will never resolve too many other issues.

    Economic infrastructure is the key to almost every other issue. We also need to assist other countries, such as Mexico, build infrastructure and their economies so that their citizens can build safe and economically secure family environments as well.

    Sanity will be restored as soon as I find the back up tapes!

    by SallyCat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:54:42 AM PDT

  •  I won't be pushing for his (7+ / 0-)

    nomination, I don't think, but I confess the way he has handled the last week plus the seriousness of his policy proposals have made me much more inclined to be enthusiastic about working for him if he gets the nomination.

    Democrats: Cleaning up Republican messes since 1933.

    by DCDemocrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:55:12 AM PDT

    •  Same here (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCDemocrat

      ...his bobble on the blogger flap left me wondering if Edwards realizes that we "lost" the last two presidential elections--and nearly lost our country in the process--because our candidates did not bring out and swing a baseball bat at their critics when necessary.

      If Edwards is finally finding his bat, I will feel better about his candidacy.  I think he'd make a fine President--but you have to win the election to get the chair.

      Rubus Eradicandus Est.

      by Randomfactor on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:14:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Typical Edwards supporter! (34+ / 0-)

    Spends all his/her time talking about what Edwards wants to do without once stopping to criticize and tear down the other candidates! It makes me so angry!

    (snark, of course)

    "And the left side of my brain looks at the right side of my brain and says, 'It's dark in here, and we may die.'" --- Lewis Black

    by droogie6655321 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 07:59:45 AM PDT

  •  Glad you made the Rec list! (11+ / 0-)

    I love these type diaries!

  •  I will be pushing for his nomination (13+ / 0-)

    because I am sick of fake candidates and their political hacks trying to use innocent Americans in their political games.

    I find it incomprehensible that anyone cannot see what John and Elizabeth mean to America. They're the life raft for a nation adrift in lies, schemes, and quick money scams. With John and Elizabeth there's hope, there's finally an end to an abusive corporatist government.

    I see no other viable option for the people.  

  •  I hope I'm right... (13+ / 0-)

    ...about Edwards. I'm a 2008 supporter of Edwards after having him as my second choice in 2004. I absolutely love what he says about poverty and economic class, as I feel that the Democratic Party in general abandoned these issues in the late 1980s and 1990s. His record going up against corporate power as an attorney speaks for itself. I just hope he doesn't try to "triangulate" like I think other candidates do.

    "...if my thought-dreams could be seen, they'd probably put my head in a guillotine...." {-8.13;-5.59}

    by lams712 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:03:38 AM PDT

    •  may I ask (0+ / 0-)

      who your 04 choice was?

      •  My first choice in.. (8+ / 0-)

        ...2004 was Dennis Kucinich. Before you make fun of me, I just want to say that I basically agreed with DK on the issues (I still do)and that there was a lot of overlap with DK and JRE (and still is). One of the main reasons I didn't support Edwards was that he voted for the Iraq War. I appreciate the fact that he apologized for it and refused to blame others for it (unlike other candidates).
        I lived in North Carolina from 1995-2001 and Edwards 1998 upset victory was a great moment. Even back then I never felt he was a phony populist like other southern Democrats.

        "...if my thought-dreams could be seen, they'd probably put my head in a guillotine...." {-8.13;-5.59}

        by lams712 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:24:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Great diary (13+ / 0-)

    His focus on eliminating poverty is what seperates him from the others.  For me, though, the most important reason is that he's the only Democrat who can win in 2008.  He can compete everywhere, including the South.  Obama can't say that.  Hillary certainly can't.  

  •  Excellent diary, (15+ / 0-)

    meowmissy.

    Those are good reasons indeed!

    "We don't need to redefine the Democratic Party; we need to reclaim the Democratic Party." John Edwards 2/22/07

    by TomP on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:10:07 AM PDT

  •  Hit me up on Wednesday (15+ / 0-)

    Right now we are paying an unexpected dental expense so we are a bit tight on cash but on Wednesday I can donate.

  •  Thanks (10+ / 0-)

    for the 5 reasons & a good diary

    Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official... ~Theodore Roosevelt

    by Pam from Calif on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:18:49 AM PDT

  •  I just gave (19+ / 0-)

    $15 dollars to Edwards (plus 1.50 for ActBlue).
    His policy platforms are by far the most specific and the most far reaching of any of the Dem candidates.  I'm really glad he's in the race, and he needs to have strong fundraising numbers for the first quarter (which ends March 30).  So if anyone is considering donating, do it before March 30!!

  •  Edwards is the real deal (18+ / 0-)

    This country hasn't seen a politician of this type in a long long time, and the comparisions to Kennedy come all too easily.  I was an Edwards supporter in '04 and an even stronger one today.

    A man that embodies all the values progressives hold dear, can truly bring integrity back to the executive branch, and more charisma in his little finger than in the entire Bush administration (which is just a plus).  He's not a political outsider (he was a US Senator, he knows the reality of how this game is played), but he is by no means a political insider, and while Obama and Hillary are content to rip at each other I'm perfectly happy to watch Edwards slow and steady rise in the polls.

    Its time for something different, its time to return to a focus on those values that made the Democratic party great, the true prupose of American government, that government is here to serve the people, and the first people it needs to serve are those among us who are least able to take care of themselves.  That is what Edwards offers.

    This rant brought to you by basic frustration with the political status quo (the letter D and the number 51) ... I wasn't even planning on signing on right now, was just taking a quick 2 minute break to see what was on Kos.  Signing off.

    If we are to keep our democracy, there must be one commandment: thou shall not ration justice -- Judge Learned Hand

    by Todd42873 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:24:25 AM PDT

  •  Edwards' stock is definitely rising. (8+ / 0-)

    Of course, all the Democrats are light years better than our present Commander in Chimp, but I'm leaning closer to voting for John Edwards day after day.

    D.I.E.B.O.L.D.: Decisive In Elections By Ousting Liberal Democrats.

    by Archangel on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:32:18 AM PDT

  •  This is still my favorite John Edwards quote... (19+ / 0-)

    He said this in front of an audience of farmers and other rural Iowans at a county fairgrounds in the fall of 2003.

    The rest of the world already knows we're strong militarily and economically. They don't wonder about that. What they wonder about us is: Do we care? Do we care about anybody else but ourselves?

  •  Not an Edwards supporter... (16+ / 0-)

    but this is a great diary.   I'm really happy to get online today and see several pro-Edwards diaries of this sort.  I was beginning to despair that we were already heading down the Dean-Clark flame wars path this early...

    •  I've been concerned ... (9+ / 0-)

      about that as well. I'm afraid some bickering between supporters will likely continue, but hopefully we can be more positive about our candidates and focus on why people should vote for Democratic candidates over the Republican ones. We've got a good slate this year.  I'm proud of what our party has to offer.

      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

      by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:47:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Good comment, roshomon. (8+ / 0-)

      You, me, AdamB, and others can do what is possible to keep tensions down.  

      Unfortunately, there is a war going on between Dave Montoya and some folks in Dave's diary now.  He and clammyc, of all people, are into it.  Clammyc is not even a big Edwards supporter, but he asked David for evidence to support Dave's accusations.  Clammyc is a long term kossak and he is in the right here.

      It might help if some Obama folks step in and calm things down.
       
      I put Adam B's comment up from yesterday that was so good.  Brklyngirl also did a real good job as an Obama supporter to calm things.

      "We don't need to redefine the Democratic Party; we need to reclaim the Democratic Party." John Edwards 2/22/07

      by TomP on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:53:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here's a reason: (14+ / 0-)

    At the announcement event in New Orleans, I called out a question during the Q and A:

    "You talk about restoring America's moral credibility.  Does that include joining the International Criminal Court?"

    But what impressed me was his answer to my question on the International Criminal Court.  With no hemming and hawing, no mealy-mouthed "That's a complicated question," he flat out said, "Yes, we need to join the Court.  It's important to show our moral leadership."  How refreshing to hear a candidate actually stand up and declare something.

    Diaried at the time.

    Seeing his appearances since then, I've been impressed over and over by the same forthrightness.  The guy just says, "Yes," "No" or "I don't know."  Like he actually believes something.  I really like that.

    Nanotechnology can take atmospheric CO2 and make diamonds and fresh air.

    by Crashing Vor on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:41:38 AM PDT

  •  I'm in for 50 (10+ / 0-)

    I confess I was going to do it anyway, but you got me to click through. Good effort. I may give to Obama too, but I'll wait until next month and see where things stand then -- I have been really positive about Edwards for a long time and was sold by his being out front on other issues and how he is pushing all the others to be clear and to act (e.g., on universal health care).

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:43:41 AM PDT

  •  No fair using that video (9+ / 0-)

    You shoulda known it would make me all emotional... (pause to regain control)... I'm starting to think Edwards really is the guy we need.

  •  Sorry, can't do it. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Allogenes

    I like Sen. Edwards a lot and will happily support him if he is the Dem nominee. But the Democrats will be making tha BIG mistake if they don't take advantage of the best candidtate since 1960. As one of my favorite polticians, Sen. Bill Bradley, said about Barack Obama in Sunday's New York Times:

    Right now, I suppose Obama is extremely impressive to me. He is in a cultural skyrocket, a vertical ascent....  It’s not just charisma, because he has touched something very deep that had been waiting to be touched for a long time — returning idealism to a central focus of our politics. I tried to touch it in 2000 and didn’t make it.

    Keep your eyes on the prize.

    by Better Days on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:47:59 AM PDT

    •  I respect your choice (5+ / 0-)

      Likewise, if Obama is the nominee I'll happily support him.

      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

      by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:49:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wish I could say the same about (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cosbo, TomP

        Sen. Clinton. There is no way I will happily support her. I will vote for her if she is the nominee, but she will not get my time or money.

        By the way, my wife calls Edwards/Obama "The hottie ticket."  

        Keep your eyes on the prize.

        by Better Days on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:05:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  he is biased (10+ / 0-)

      but this is what David Bonior has to say about John Edwards.

      I haven't seen someone as a national figure do as much on workers' rights and poverty in my lifetime. That includes Bobby Kennedy and people in politics in the ‘60s. He helped organize people in probably 85 different actions, from hotel workers to university janitors to people who work in buildings and factories. He was out there demonstrating, marching, picketing, writing letters to CEOs, demanding that [workers] have the right to organize and represent themselves. He started a center on poverty and became the director at the University of North Carolina. He traveled the country and was a leader in getting a minimum-wage bill passed in eight states….That means a lot to me.

    •  See I feel totally opposite (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sobermom, Predictor, TomP

      I really wanted Russ Feingold this go around and that was not to be.  But after all these years, there is something about Obama that reminds me of the politician in Stephen King's book, "The Dead Zone."

      I don't trust him at all. And nothing he says "touches me."  I wanted to believe.  I tried.  But my intuition just gives me that Dead Zone feeling and I am watching, and listening, but not trusting yet.

      •  Read (0+ / 0-)

        Read Obama's first book. I became a big fan of his after I read this book in 2004. He is the real deal. He could have easily taken his Harvard Law degree and made millions. Instead he became a community organizer and public servant.

        Keep your eyes on the prize.

        by Better Days on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:07:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree. I am only (0+ / 0-)

          up to the point in his book where he threw a party and is starting to do drugs and wisely chose not to use heroin...but I already am convinced he has what it takes. he's just got a unique perspective and he is so uniquely American...as a multicultural person, I really relate to Barack Obama.

          Read "Dreams of My Father." It's a phenomenal book.

          Da me mojo
          -6.63, -5.95

          by missreporter on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:01:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I supported Bradley in 2000, but (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sobermom

      I was pretty mad that he seemed to lay down with hardly a fight against Gore. I gave him money, a lot of money for my grad student budget, and his campaign went nowhere.

      I don't have anything against Obama, but I know Edwards is a fighter, I like his stands on the issues, and I like the domestic policy priorities he has set.

  •  Thank you MeowMissy for a great diary. (10+ / 0-)

    For all of us Edwards supporters, and I am one, this entire race could well come down to this week.

    I hate the way the system has become, being entirely dependent on money raising and the reporting of dollar figures raised.  But unless and until congress enacts public funding of campaigns I guess the media "opinion makers and opinion shapers" will forever be in the powerful position of annointing front runners and "close seconds" by reporting on 1st Quarter fund raising totals, and then writing the headlines they see fit to write.

    The headlines which I would like to see written next week are that John Edwards surprises the field by coming in 1st in total fundraising (probably not likely, if you believe everything written so far about Clinton's campaign fundraising).  Or a more possible (I believe) headline, John Edwards surprises the field by coming in 2nd, just ahead of Obama.  If that headline is written, then it is a whole new race.

    However, if the headline is, for example, Clinton $40 Million, Obama $30 Million, and Edwards $15 Million, (or something like that), then the media are more than likely going to write Edwards out of the headlines permanently.

    So it does seem to me, that it all boils down to the rest of this week.

    Somehow, someway, we all need to dig deep and send whatever donations we can to JohnEdwards.com, and we need to do it this week.

    "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed." Abe Lincoln

    by mdgarcia on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:52:56 AM PDT

  •  Do the people still count in America (6+ / 0-)

    That is the overarching issue. It is possible to win without the support of the big money folks?

    fact does not require fiction for balance

    by mollyd on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:53:34 AM PDT

  •  You posted five things he's said (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jxg, snout, Democrat

    And of course nothing that he's done.  Actions speak louder than words, and I still don't see how Edwards isn't all talk.

    I'll take the community organizer over the trial lawyer any day of the week.

    "Even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat." - William Sloane Coffin, Jr.

    by Nasara on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:53:58 AM PDT

    •  I would (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BWasikIUgrad, TomP

      reccomend not going down that path.  none of us will come out smelling very good.

      •  Politics smells... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jxg, snout, Democrat

        Get used to it.  If I see a diary on the Rec list championing Edwards, I'm gonna challenge it.

        Part of the reason I've become an Obama supporter is because of the ridiculous level of adoration pouring onto Edwards from this site. I still haven't seen anything he's actually done in the past three years, besides run for President again.

        "Even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat." - William Sloane Coffin, Jr.

        by Nasara on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:19:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  since you started (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cosbo, sobermom, LawGator, TomP

          should we delve into Obamas record of achievement?  I would absolutely love to do so.  We can talk about his position on Tort Reform, or as I refer to it, his willingness to destroy our right to sue.  Or, we can talk about his vote against withdrawl, when he refused to stand with Kerry and the other dozen or so senators.

          Seriously, his record in the Senate is abysmal.  Now, I am willing to look past that because he is talking about a new way of conducting politics.  And to truly challenge the establishement you have to be willing to ignore their game, and therefore watch as few of your ideas are adopted until you gain real power.  But, if accomplishements are your litmus test and Edwards hasnt done enough I suggest you support Richardson, because if Edwards hasnt done enough than Hillary and Obama havent either.

          •  Histrionic much? (0+ / 0-)

            Abysmal?  Well, then, I'd say we can discuss Obama's history before as a state senator, supporting education and health care for minors.  Or his experience as a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago.  Or, if we do want to talk about his "abysmal" Senate record, why not...(randomly grabbing out of the hat and I come up with) fighting to end no bid contracts in Katrina affected areas by co-sponsoring legislation with Tom Coburn (eek!).

            There are a plethora of issues we can discuss, and Obama has acted on many of them.  Edwards record, however, stopped being relevant in 2004 when he exited public life, which makes him sort of a has been.

            As for Richards, I did support him for a strong week or two...until I saw that he didn't have what it takes to be the anti-Hillary.  Which is what we really need right now and which is what I'm looking for most.

            "Even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat." - William Sloane Coffin, Jr.

            by Nasara on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:40:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Edwards didn't exit public life ... (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sobermom, machka, Blue South, TomP

              stopped being relevant in 2004 when he exited public life

              I listed a few of the things he's done since leaving office in 2004 all of which were a continuation of public service.

              I have great respect for Obama and the rest of our candidates.

              A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

              by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:51:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  I'd point you to (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sobermom, machka, meowmissy, TomP

          The Poverty Center in NC that Edwards started.  Edwards extensize abroad travels, particularly to Dafur.  His extensive campaigning for Democrats in 2006.  His detailed Universal Healthcare proposal.  His Iraq War proposal involving 40,000 troop reduction by the end of this year.

          How do you distinguish "ridiculous adoration" and simply those who suppor the man and his policies?

          And seems like a foolish reason to support Obama - because all the other kids like Edwards.

          Blue Indiana -- I support John Edwards in 2008

          by BWasikIUgrad on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:33:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Why? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FoundingFatherDAR, TomP

          "If I see a diary on the Rec list championing Edwards, I'm gonna challenge it."

          Who appointed you as the arbiter of what people should think about the candidates? More importantly, who annointed you with the mission of challenging recommended diaries on JOhn Edwards? Get real. While you're at it, get a life.

          "The Lord loves a working Man; Don't trust Whitey; See a doctor, and get rid of it."

          by FischFry on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:37:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What? (0+ / 0-)

            He is only presenting his opinion, just like the diary writer. Are you saying that it is not alright to have an opinion different then your own on DailyKOS?

            My new Unitarian Jihad name: PURITY TROLL OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

            by Democrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:18:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, I'm saying it's ridiculous to.... (0+ / 0-)

              Ridiculous to dedicate oneself to going in to rip any recommended pro-Edwards diary. Not only is it incredibly closed-minded (it's not even an opinion at that point, it's just a knee-jerk, unthinking reaction), and an almost juvenile attitude, it's just a ridiculous thing to want to do. Why not read the diary and see if one might learn from it -- rather than look to interrupt discussions among Edwards' supporters, to go in and pick fights with them.

              "The Lord loves a working Man; Don't trust Whitey; See a doctor, and get rid of it."

              by FischFry on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:58:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Uhm, I'm Time's Man of the Year (0+ / 0-)

            I guess you didn't see that issue.

            "Even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat." - William Sloane Coffin, Jr.

            by Nasara on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:41:05 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  fair enough (7+ / 0-)

      Here are a few of the things he's done:

      He was Director of the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at UNC which focused on solutions in addition to research on poverty issues.

      He set up a pilot project in North Carolina called "College for Everyone" to help students afford to go to college.

      He's worked with various labour unions across the country - inluding joining them on the picket lines.

      He traveled to Uganda to bring attention to the humanitarian crisis there when much of the US was ignoring what is going on in Africa.

      He's made his campaign and his home carbon neutral.

      He was co-chair of a task force for the Council on Foreign Relations about U.S. Policy towards Russia.

      Chuckles1 has a good diary on the legislation he worked on while he was a Senator:

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

      by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:26:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And y'all can see my diary (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sobermom, machka

        on Edwards, 2004-2006 at http://www.dailykos.com/...

      •  YOu're forgetting all the good he did before (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sobermom, machka, TomP

        As a crusading trial attorney. Yes, he's done a lot of good since leaving office -- in terms of organizing communities, he's certainly accomplished more than Obama did in his days as a community orgnaizer, but he had the unfair advantage of being the former VP nominee.

        So, let's just look at what he accomplished before he took office. He was a crusading, and very successful personal injury lawyer. The most successful in North Carolina - ever. He even was recognized with the Association of Trial Lawyers of America's national award for public service.

        "The Lord loves a working Man; Don't trust Whitey; See a doctor, and get rid of it."

        by FischFry on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:49:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I had a nasty comment, but... (0+ / 0-)

          I won't share it.  Let's just say that I think people's perceptions of trial lawyers aren't quite as positive as you would suggest.

          Everything that Edwards has done since '04 just seems geared for him to look relevant for another run this cycle.  No matter how many centers he started or speeches he made, I still would have respected him a lot more if he had taken some time off to, say, work for a year in the Raleigh Public Defender's Office.  He should have pulled a Gore.

          "Even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat." - William Sloane Coffin, Jr.

          by Nasara on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:05:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Public defenders aren't trial lawyers? (0+ / 0-)

            Actually, the same people who don't like trial lawyers also don't like public defenders. You may be the rare Democrat who believes that legal assistance should be available to those accused of crimes (as well it should) but that low-income victims of corporate abuse or serious injury should not have access to expert representation because they cannot afford to pay high hourly fees.

          •  He did pull a Gore (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            meowmissy

            Gore made fighting global warming his bag -- and it's made him very wealthy, I might add. Gore was uniquely positioned to do that, because of his long record on the issue.

            Edwards spent his time out of office developing his Poverty Center, documenting understanding and fighting poverty. Edwards was, perhaps, uniquely qualified to do that, after his campaign for President which was focused on highlighting the "Two Americas."

            I'm not saying Edwards' cause or his behavior is more noble than Gore -- that would be just a silly comparison, diminishing what both have tried to do. But, you said he "should have pulled a Gore." I think he did -- parlaying his particular expertise into a broader cause and organization focused on his primary area of concern -- taking his public campaign into his private years.

            So, what is it he didn't do that he should have -- that Gore did? I like Edwards -- a lot. I would prefer a candidate Gore, primarily because I think he is the one person who has the necessary stature on global warming to really make a difference. If Gore does't run, I'll be very disappointed. On the other hand, if he doesn't -- Edwards would be the man for the job -- of the Democratic candidates, he is the most vocal on the issue, and the only one laying out specific policy goals.

            "The Lord loves a working Man; Don't trust Whitey; See a doctor, and get rid of it."

            by FischFry on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 02:55:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  this is bullshit. Utter bullshit (0+ / 0-)

              it's made him very wealthy

              Gore gave thousands of free slide shows. The proceeds from both the movie and the book are going towards the cause (such as the training project), 100%.

              •  You misunderstand my point (0+ / 0-)

                Gore has achieved a certain stature, and reputation for integrity, in no small part because of his campaign on the environment. As a result, he has been invited on to corporate boards (paid salary and in stock options that have turned huge profits), and into major ventures, which have been quite lucrative for him. He also commands a pretty penny for some speeches -- not as much as Bill Clinton, but he does OK. This is a guy who was ont particularly rich when he left he White House seven years ago -- as Tipper has said they used to worry about paying for their kids' education. Now, they're multimillionaires. I don't begrudge him a single dollar -- more power to him. Just noting that he has become quite wealthy since going into private life, and isn't from the salary he got paid to teach at Columbia.

                "The Lord loves a working Man; Don't trust Whitey; See a doctor, and get rid of it."

                by FischFry on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 08:25:35 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Gore was a Vice President of the United States (0+ / 0-)

                  and an able one at that. That alone makes brings him the credibility to be invited to be part of corp. boards and lecture circuit.

                  it's therefore false claim to say that his environmental advocacy makes him rich. please stop saying that.

                  •  Of course, Dan Quayle (0+ / 0-)

                    Is in huge demand on the lecture circuit -- must be sitting on dozens of corporate boards. The difference between their tenure as Vice-President is Gore didn't misspell potato. There is no such thing as an able Vice-President. You can be a competent Presidential adviser, but that's not even something you can point to -- it's not part of the job description, and it's pure speculation. It's his post VP stature that has made him so popular...and wealthy. He does get some props for nearly being elected President, but he also has incredibly high negatives as a result. Most of his respect comes from his environmental advocacy.

                    "The Lord loves a working Man; Don't trust Whitey; See a doctor, and get rid of it."

                    by FischFry on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 11:56:03 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for the nasty (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sobermom, machka

      My day isn't complete unless I've clicked on some unsolicited nasty comments.

      Since we're going back to their careers prior to entering politics -- I'll take the crusading trial attorney who took down the biggest, vilest, most criminal corporate syndicates in the nation's history. Let me know what Obama accomplished in his years of community organizing.

      "The Lord loves a working Man; Don't trust Whitey; See a doctor, and get rid of it."

      by FischFry on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:35:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Give someone who knows how to FIGHT (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sobermom

      the big business bastards on our behalf any day of week. It's clear to me that Edwards understand what kind of evil, greedy bastards are running the country and is will to take them on. Obama seems more likely to reach across the ailes. And while I understand that we need both, frankly I want the guy who can defend us the best. Obama will negotiate. Edwards got our backs. And that's real difference that I see. Check out this article and see who has the least buds in D.C.

      http://thehill.com/...

      That said: I strongly support an Edwards/Obama ticket. There are several ying/yangs that work well for me there.

  •  The thing is... (0+ / 0-)

    Edwards can't guarantee quality healthcare for all.  Nor will he eliminate poverty.  I'm glad that he stands for those things, but ultimately standing for the right things is only part of the battle.  The other part is being politically skillful enough to build a coalition that gets them done.  That's where I waver a bit on Edwards.

    A lot of the discourse here regarding candidates is essentially, "candidate "x" is on record supporting a chicken in every pot, but "y" supports 2 chickens".  Certainly it is important to know what our candidates stand for, but if "x" can deliver one chicken and "y" can't deliver any - which one is more worthy of your vote.

    I respect John Edwards immensely.  The quote in this diary about Elizabeth's cancer is typical of his excellent character.  But I'm not sure I buy his ability to deliver on his ideals.  Nothing I've seen of him thus far gives me confidence in his ability to make sausage.

    Just saying...      

    •  Who else is even trying? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TomP

      John Edwards is setting goals and that's what you do when you want to achieve a dream. You may miss the mark a little but look at what the end result will be. If we only meet half his goals on poverty, how much richer those peoples lives will be.

      •  Others are... (0+ / 0-)

        Edwards isn't the only Democrat to talk about poverty or healthcare.  He may talk about it better or with greater frequency than most, but he isn't the only one who does so.

        Unfortunately there is no guarantee that Edwards ould hit even half of his goals on poverty.  Every President campaigns on an issue that they end up abandoning.  Bill Clinton promised health care reform and was unable to achieve it.  Dubya promised his supporters Social Security reform and was soundly defeated.  Goals are just goals.  I don't put all that much stock in them.  And the more they lean to one side of the political divide ot the other, the less likely they will ever be realized.

        It is unfortunate, but it is true.

         

  •  "elections 2008" tag corrected (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sobermom, vassmer, meowmissy, TomP

    "elections 2008" changed to the standard "2008 elections"

    "president" and "primaries" tags added, (also standards for presidential candidate diaries).

  •  Thank You! (8+ / 0-)

    From an Obama supporter, I appreciate a POSITIVE diary about one of the candidates that DOESN'T rely on tearing the others down!

    Cheers!

  •  Tell me one 2008 candidate.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mindfuless

    ...who isn't for these things.

  •  Ok, you caused me to donate again, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sobermom, desmoinesdem, machka, TomP

    excellent diary for an excellent candidate, by the way.

  •  I'm strapped! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    machka, meowmissy, TomP

    Already gave him $100 this month and pledged $50 a month through the primaries. If he gets the nod, I'll pledge through November. Great diary though!

    "Soldier" and "liberal" are not opposing terms.

    by RockRichard on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:30:52 AM PDT

    •  Thanks! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sobermom

      Thank-you for your generousity!  I realize many here have already donated and that some may not have the budget to donate at all, but I wanted to provide some positive encouragement to those who are willing and able.

      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

      by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:12:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Edwards stated he doesn't want illness exploited (0+ / 0-)

    This diary begins with a quote from John Edwards saying you shouldn't vote for him just because of his wife's illness.  Then the diarist proceeds to list talking points for John Edwards.  It seems to me that this format defies Edwards' own sentiment expressed in the quote.  It's exploiting the illness by saying that since we're on the subject of John Edwards here's a flattering presentation of his issues, despite the sympathetic and unrelated circumstances that brought him up.  This diary should have ommitted the quote referring to cancer and merely presented the Edwards talking points and then we could have an open discussion of his candidacy on the issues.  This presentation as it stands encourages some of the cyncism such as Katie Couric demonstrated.

    •  I agree, there are far better reasons to vote for (0+ / 0-)

      Shut up. Go vote for Hillary or something.

    •  What? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      machka

      How did you come to that conclusion.

      "By being a diary about why to support Edwards independant of the cancer issue it only lends to people supporting Edwards because of cancer..."

      Did I read you right?

      Blue Indiana -- I support John Edwards in 2008

      by BWasikIUgrad on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:09:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  that's not my point (0+ / 0-)

        The diarist is not encouraging people to support Edwards because of his sympathetic situation.  However, the diarist does mention Edwards' sympathetic situation to introduce campaign talking points.  Supporters should be wary about the cynicism they invite when they conflate Edwards' recent personal circumstances and his campaign platform.  

        This is a delicate issue.  I know Edwards' quote seems to call for a discussion of his campaign issues but those discussions will happen anyways.  Framing such a discussion by that very quote contradicts Edwards.  

        This diary should be split into two diaries.  One should only be about Edwards quote saying he doesn't want sympathy votes.  The other diary should only be about campaign talking points.  There's an irony when they are combined.  If Edwards doesn't want sympathy to affect his votes then supporters should not introduce talking points by mentioning his sympathetic circumstance.  That occurs in this diary, and even Edwards, according to the sentiment of his quote, would call foul.

    •  I'm honoring his wishes ... n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sobermom, TomP

      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

      by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:16:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tom Petty Sums up the Edwards Well (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sobermom, Lying eyes, jezlin, TomP

    Lyrics to "I Won't Back Down"

    Well I wont back down, no I wont back down
    You can stand me up at the gates of hell
    But I wont back down

    Gonna stand my ground, wont be turned around
    And Ill keep this world from draggin me down
    Gonna stand my ground and I wont back down

    Well I know whats right, I got just one life
    In a world that keeps on pushin me around
    But Ill stand my ground and I wont back down

    Hey baby there aint no easy way out
    Hey I will stand my ground
    And I wont back down
    No, I wont back down

    No, this is not an intellectual response, but seems to me the Edwards have a lot of character, backbone,  heart, and they are darned quick learners.   I like it that their campaign has more substance at this juncture.

    The world is watching, and they are waiting for us. And they are waiting to see what we're made of." John Edwards

    by benny05 on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:41:06 AM PDT

  •  I resonate (6+ / 0-)

    with the populist message of Mr. Edwards, having walked his talk.  I have not yet decided to pledge all of my support to the Senator, however out of the announced canidates, he will get my supoort and money.

    I just gave on friday, let me go check my accounts now...

    Meow-great diary- if I was wavering in my support, this diary might have tipped me.

    changing missouri one vote at a time -6.25/-4.21

    by jezlin on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:48:52 AM PDT

  •  He should explain his '01 bankruptcy bill vote (0+ / 0-)

    If he loves working people so much, why did he vote for that terrible bill?

    What kind of bankruptcy relief proposals does he now have for families driven into bankruptcy by sky-high medical bills?

    And, even if there were universal health insurance, many families affected by serious illness would still be driven into bankruptcy by illness-associated costs other than medical bills. What would Edwards do for those families?

  •  Edwards is the real deal (6+ / 0-)

    He is honest, smart, thoughtful, substantive and clearly dedicated to public service. And there is Elizabeth who is truly a wonderful partner in all possible meanings of the word.

    That probably disqualifies him in the eyes of the Corporate Media...

    So it is for us to do our best to expose as many voters as possible to who John Edwards really is and what he stands for.

    If there is no justice, what are kingdoms, but vast systems of robbery? - St. Augustine

    by nailmaker on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:05:23 AM PDT

  •  Problems with Edwards (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NotGeorgeWill

    I want to believe in him. I really do. I have a hard time doing so for someone who voted for the Iraq war, PATRIOT Act and possibly the '01 bankruptcy bill (haven't verified this) as someone up thread pointed out.

    Then again, he's saying the things Democrats have been afraid to say for years. From the rhetoric it seems like he's running the kind of campaign that could transform the landscape of American politics for decades. 2008 will provide a unique opening for Democrats. The country will be so tired of the Republican brand and Republican presidents that we could see the ascension of a true populist. I want to believe Edwards, but his votes are keeping me at a distance.

    "Party like a rock star, hammer like a porn star, rake like an all-star!"

    by crazymoloch on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:09:00 AM PDT

    •  He's said he was wrong. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sargent Pepper, TomP

      Hillary voted for the war and won't apologize.

      Obama wasn't even in the Senate to make a vote. Had he had all the pressures that Edwards had....in a red state, by the way..he may have voted for it too. A speech OUTSIDE the Senate does not necessarily mean that he wouldn't break under pressure.

      I guess all you have is Kucinich, who voted against the war, Patriot Act, etc. Fat chance at him becoming President.

  •  #3 Solves 99% of all that ails the globe. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sobermom, machka, TomP

    That's why I'm 102.8% Edwards.

    Yes, his opponents all are sparkling with their own set of qualities, so don't yell at me ;)

    Excellent Diary Today, meowmissy!

    "Let's put a shoe in there!" ~ Haywood Nelson

    by nowheredesign on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:15:47 AM PDT

  •  Not completely decided (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sobermom, TomP, RickTheDog

    I am leaning very heavily toward Edwards at this point.

    Time waits for no one, the treasure is great spend it wisely.

    by mojavefog on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:26:25 AM PDT

  •  More reasons to support Edwards: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP

    John Edwards
    "Edwards, as a populist Southerner, would pose the greatest threat to our electoral base in the South and West."

    "When the Democrats nominate a Southern white Protestant, they usually win the presidency."

    http://politicalwire.com/...

    Yeah the revolution starts now In your own backyard In your own hometown - Steve Earle

    by Sargent Pepper on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 10:47:52 AM PDT

  •  I still don't understand (0+ / 0-)

    his ideas about health care.

    I saw him the other day, and my heart actually leaped because he said he stood for "universal health care," which was the first time I heard him say anything other than "universal health insurance."

    But I've read the links provided here, and I'm still not impressed.

    His ideas about health care are still not enough. He's still calling for insurance for everyone, not CARE. He's still tying it to employers. He's still talking about TAX CREDITS for cripes sake. Why doesn't anyone get that tax credits only work if you do your taxes a certain way.

    I have two grown children. They grew up during the era when you were supposed to be able to deduct many thing related to having children. We were never more than lower middle class, or lower class, one child qualified for Medicaid, we were on Food Stamps for a while, and we never, ever qualified for any of those credits -- not Earned Income, not child care credit, not anything -- because we never itemized.

    So, prove to me somehow that I will have health care if Edwards becomes president, not insurance, which I ALREADY HAD and still couldn't use.

    Help me here. I like Edwards way more than Hillary or Obama, but he still makes no sense on health care.

    •  my understanding ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TomP

      My understanding is that with a tax credit, it is treated as a payment already made towards taxes owed and for those who don't owe taxes it would be refunded.

      This is different from a tax deduction where only people who itemize their taxes can take advantage of it.

      You don't have to itemize for the EIC.

      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

      by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:35:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not trying to be contrary (0+ / 0-)

        but I still wasn't eligible for EIC according to the way I did my taxes. If you have to hire a tax attorney or a CPA to figure it out for you, what's the use?

        And you didn't answer my question.

        How can I be sure that voting for Edwards is going to give me health CARE. I had insurance, paid all the premiums for years, and it didn't matter. I couldn't afford to use it when I needed to.

        I know I'm not a tax expert, but giving me a credit, which reduces my tax bill, is not going to generate money to pay my insurance premiums if I don't get a refund. This is all just so much paper shuffling to me. Moving money from one line to another doesn't pay the insurance and medical bills that come up all year long.

        Once again, it seems the very poorest and the very richest will be able to afford care. The rest of us...not so much.

        •  I understand (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          machka

          I'm sorry, but I'm not able to provide a full answer to your question as I've not studied it enough to address all the issues you raise, but since you brought up the issue of credits I knew it would be refundable for those who don't owe taxes.

          Here's the plan:

          http://www.johnedwards.com/...

          Here's an excerpt that I think may be most relevant to the questions you asked:

          First: Business Responsibility. Businesses have a responsibility to support their employees’ health. They will be required to either provide a comprehensive health plan to their employees or to contribute to the cost of covering them through Health Markets. In return, the Edwards plan will make it easier for businesses to offer insurance by reducing costs and creating new choices. Covering all Americans will eliminate the cost of uncompensated care. Businesses can also choose to purchase care through Health Markets, which will offer quality plans at low prices and with minimal administrative burdens.

          Second: Government Responsibility. Government also has a responsibility to help families obtain insurance. Families cannot be left on their own. To help make insurance affordable, Edwards will:

          • Offer New Health Insurance Tax Credits: Edwards will create a new tax credit to subsidize insurance purchased through Health Markets, making premiums affordable for all families. The  tax credit will be available on a sliding scale to middle class families and refundable to help families without income tax liability.

          • Expand Medicaid and SCHIP: Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) play essential roles in helping low-income Americans getting the health care they need. Edwards will strengthen the federal partnership with states supporting these programs, committing the necessary federal resources to allow states to expand Medicaid and SCHIP to serve all adults under the poverty line and all children and parents under 250 percent of the poverty line (about $50,000 for a family of four).

          • Require Fair Terms for Health Insurance: Edwards will require insurers to keep plans open to everyone and charge fair premiums, regardless of preexisting conditions, medical history, age, job, and other characteristics. No longer will insurance companies be able to game the system to cover only healthy people. Several states – including New Jersey, New York, and Washington – have led the way on similar community rating and guaranteed issue reforms. In addition, new national standards will ensure that all health insurance policies offer preventive and chronic care with minimal cost-sharing.

          • Secure the Health Care Safety Net: Even in a system of universal coverage, a health care safety net including public hospitals, clinics, and community health centers remains necessary. Public hospitals are critical for valuable trauma and emergency care, to respond to a public health crisis or bioterrorist attack, and as the backbone of our medical education system.

          Third: New Health Markets. The U.S. government will help states and groups of states create regional Health Markets, non-profit purchasing pools that offer a choice of competing insurance plans.
          At least one plan would be a public program based upon Medicare. All plans will include comprehensive benefits, including full mental health benefits. Families and businesses could choose to supplement their coverage with additional benefits. The markets will be available to everyone who does not get comparable insurance from their jobs or a public program and to employers that choose to join rather than offer their own insurance plans. The benefits of Health Markets include:

          • Freedom and Security: Health Markets will give participants a choice among affordable, quality plans. Americans can keep Health Market plans when they change or lose their jobs, start new businesses, or take time off for caregiving.

          • Choice between Public and Private Insurers: Health Markets will offer a choice between private insurers and a public insurance plan modeled after Medicare, but separate and apart from it. Families and individuals will choose the plan that works best for them. This American solution will reward the sector that offers the best care at the best price. Over time, the system may evolve toward a single-payer approach if individuals and businesses prefer the public plan.

          • Promoting Affordable Care: Health Markets will negotiate low premiums through their economies of scale so they can get a better deal than individuals and many businesses can get on their own. Health Markets will also hold down administrative costs by reducing the need for underwriting and marketing activities (two-thirds of private insurers’ overhead), centrally collecting premiums, and exercising leadership to reduce costs on billing practices, claims processing, and electronic medical records. Finally, they will be able to work with insurers to adopt cost-effective approaches to health care like preventive care and to collect the data necessary to drive quality improvement. [Woolhandler et al, 2003]

          • Reducing Burdens for Businesses: By assuming the administrative role of negotiating benefit plans with insurers and collecting premiums, Health Markets will minimize administrative burdens for participating businesses and other employers. Businesses that opt into the markets will only have to make financial contributions to the cost of covering their employees through markets, similar to their role in Social Security and Medicare.

          Finally: Individual Responsibility. Once insurance is affordable, everyone will be expected to take responsibility for themselves and their families by obtaining health coverage. Some Americans will obtain coverage from public programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP and others will get coverage through their jobs. Other families can buy insurance through the regional Health Markets. Special exemptions will be available in cases of extreme financial hardship or religious beliefs.

          The emphasis on shared responsibility builds on Edwards’ past proposals to insure all children through shared responsibility and contain health care costs. In 2004, his plan would have made children’s health insurance affordable and required parents to purchase coverage for their children. Today, he proposes to expand that approach to make coverage universal.

          A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

          by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 12:56:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Actually under current law (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      meowmissy

      you don't need to itemize to get deductions for child care, or credits for EIC or additional child credits. As Meowmissy said from what I understand of Edwards plan it would be a credit (not a tax deduction - big difference). A credit would either offset taxes you owe or come back to you as a refund.

      •  As I said, (0+ / 0-)

        it didn't work like that when my kids were little. Or if it did, it was so poorly explained that it was incomprehensible to anyone but a tax attorney. Perhaps tax laws have changed.

        And again, if I get a credit to pay for my "insurance," and I get no refund from the taxes I file on tax day, what benefit is it to me? I still have to come up with the money to pay for the insurance premiums, as well as any co-pays or out-of-pocket expenses. When you have nothing to start with, where does the money come from?

        There seems to be an assumption that those premiums aren't due until one has the money to pay them in hand. And what happens when you can't pay them? Does your insurance get cancelled? Do you get transferred into the pool of people who are already helped financially because they are poor? Are you made to pay a penalty?

        Honestly, I have been so screwed over by taxes and insurance in my life that I don't trust anyone associated with these things. None of this sounds like it's going to do anything to help me. Sorry if that sounds self-centered, but there isn't anyone else worrying about me, so I have to. And if this doesn't make sense to me, who has two college degrees -- but neither in tax law, how is someone with a high-school education supposed to understand it?

        Bottom line: I don't see this making me any better off when it comes to accessing health CARE. All this does is mandate insurance payments for everyone.

        •  ah ... (0+ / 0-)

          The system must have changed because the forms I've seen for EIC are fairly straight-forward.

          It looks like people can either get more affordable private insurance or be part of a public program similar to medicare.

          In addition Medicare and SCHIP will be expanded to cover more people than it does currently.

          A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. - Benjamin Franklin

          by meowmissy on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 02:27:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  We Need More Diaries Like This (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sobermom, machka, TomP

    This diary epitomizes the positive, issue-oriented, inspiring commentary we should be seeing from supporters of all the Dem candidates.  I have not decided whom to support during the primaries, but this diary makes me look harder at Edwards.  Poverty, health care, peace, environment, education, and empowerment are the issues that resonate with me.  Many of those issues are strengths of Edwards.  Nice work, meowmissy!

    A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. - Aristotle

    by DWG on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:19:31 AM PDT

  •  This diary earned $101.01 for Edwards, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    machka

    and that's just from me!

    I've been resisting the temptation to contribute this early, but by John, this week I just had to.

    Edwards said,

    ... there's not a single person in America that should vote for me because Elizabeth has cancer.

    Well, I can't vote right now anyway, but I can SEND MONEY! That's how I can help.

    Stay in the fight, John. Keep telling your story. Keep telling the truth. That's what America needs right now.

    Go John & Elizabeth!

    Molly Ivins wanted WHO for President? But WHY?

    by Positronicus on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 11:57:17 AM PDT

  •  Great diary, suggestion to add more links (0+ / 0-)

    excellent diary, maybe under each section add links to his plans, like his health care plan, plan to end poverty, plan on global warming and reducing energy dependence, and plan for Iraq. I'd grab the links now for you but can't (at work).

  •  How is this different? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NotGeorgeWill

    You could say the same thing for Obama and Clinton.  They all support these same positions give or take a few nuances.  Edwards is great and if he wins the primary, I will be glad to vote for him.  However, there is something intangible lacking in him that I can't put my finger on.
    Great guy, great comittment, great ideas!

    President?  I'm not convinced.

  •  6. Because he walks on water? (0+ / 0-)

    Judging by all the troll ratings that I've seen dished out today for mildly critical comments, I have to wonder if we shouldn't elect John Edwards to a higher office than President of the United States.

    •  I suppose you think (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      clammyc, machka

      taht is funny.  If you agree with Dave Montoya, I feel sorry for you.

      ClammyC was right about Dave's comments.  We put up with those kind of comments for a long time in diaries about John Edwards.  Clammy is not even an Edwards supporter; at most, he's a leaner.

      "We don't need to redefine the Democratic Party; we need to reclaim the Democratic Party." John Edwards 2/22/07

      by TomP on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 02:03:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  OK meowmissy (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Carolina Grl, meowmissy, TomP, Pink Lady

    I gave 10.08 (.08 for the '08 elections and for the netroots).  I'll be giving more, but right now that's all I can afford.  Thanks for the inspiration!  Reminds me of the Dean days....sigh.

  •  Raising the Bar (0+ / 0-)

    John Edwards is raising the bar while congress is lowering it

katiebird, Nazgul35, Bill in Portland Maine, Observer, Sally in SF, natasha, coturnix, roonie, Iddybud, talex, Neil Sinhababu, lrhoke, Nancy in Berkeley, cosbo, philgoblue, Danno11, MeanBoneII, ScientistMom in NY, bdtlaw, KumarP, baffled, ThirstyGator, HarveyMilk, NCJim, sobermom, Meandering Fox, SallyCat, catchawave, expat germany, deaniac83, strengthANDwisdom, RubDMC, bara, redwagon, SamSinister, petercjack, kansasr, Mlle Orignalmale, KMc, Stumptown Dave, Scoopster, mbair, roses, Miss Blue, Getreal1246, danthrax, DemInPa, jzso, BmoreMD, casperr, Nina, zachwalker, desmoinesdem, roselynde1, Black Maned Pensator, sommervr, lcrp, Sargent Pepper, BWasikIUgrad, TheJohnny, bwintx, sfluke, vacantlook, BrianVA, snowbird42, rickroks, rapala, sarahlane, Leslie H, ichibon, Todd42873, asskicking annie, Marching Orders, Independent Musings, chuckles1, PBen, ThunderHawk13, stagemom, lorelynn, boofdah, flubber, Pam from Calif, nailmaker, washingtonsmith, ladylib, jcitybone, machka, annefrank, libbie, nanobubble, FightTheFuture, benny05, jct, cloverdale, MadGeorgiaDem, ThaliaR, Icy, jsamuel, virgomusic, BlueInARedState, Provgressive, bluebrain, Junior Bug, zigeunerweisen, MJ via Chicago, palmbeachlefty, funluvn1, Crashing Vor, DJShay, Boulderinionian, Pager, nowheredesign, edgery, droogie6655321, nannyboz, bstotts, Jay D, jezlin, Carolina Grl, Larry Kissell, One Pissed Off Liberal, sarasson007, Boxer7, john07801, anotherdemocrat, donnamarie, Cronesense, Quinton, SharonColeman, Harmonious, godislove, Positronicus, mdgarcia, Allogenes, America08, edsbrooklyn, david mizner, sjtaylor, NCDem Amy, operculum, DWG, dissonantdissident, joyful, Blue South, College Progressive, Canyon Lefty, Junglered1, okrahoma, MaskedKat, cececville, Spedwybabs, Predictor, TomP, Red no more, AJ WI, Drojer, AlabamaProgressive, Chacounne, zashvil, inevitibility, okamichan13, RickTheDog, RockRichard

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site