It seems a full-blown Primary War is under way. That is to be expected when passions are high.
This is OK as long as we all retain the capacity to unite when a Nominee is chosen and the real battle (with the real opponents of a progressive agenda) is engaged.
I am ready to UNITE behind the Nominee and I hope all here are ready to do the same.
Now, I am a partisan in this Primary season. I have announced my support for Barack Obama. I took a long and careful look at our great Candidates and I think he is the best choice to lead my Party and my Country. Others do not feel the same way, but that does not bother me in the slightest.
Questions need to be asked and challenges should be made of all our Candidates. None of them are perfect—Obama included, but I am consistently impressed by him, his policies and his campaign.
I’ve also been very impressed by another Candidate, John Edwards.
Corruption is the reason both Candidates have impressed me.
To the Jump...
Within a few hours the real process will begin. Choices will be made. Votes will be cast and it is quite possible that before I have a chance to vote on February 12 in Maryland a Democratic Nominee will have been chosen.
As of tonight it is a three-way race—especially in Iowa. Despite the polls and anything a supporter might say or do, any of the three could win.
I feel really great about two of these Candidates.
Some of us on Daily Kos pick an issue that we cover almost exclusively. I’m one of those Diarists.
I’ve been following the impact of Washington’s Culture of Corruption for almost a decade. In 2003 I found Daily Kos and almost all of my Dairies over the years have been about the cancerous impact of corruption on our Nation, Government, values and politics.
Tracking the causes behind sweatshops and human trafficking led me into this long journey to explore the dark soul of our politics. Ending the culture of corruption is very important to me.
I am very excited that two out of our top three Candidates are also very serious about ending corruption in Washington.
Obama is one.
John Edwards is the other.
I wish I could say that all three front-runners were just as strong on this issue, but it isn’t true. Senator Clinton has only offered vague rhetoric and a risible Government Reform proposal that will do little to reform, change or end the system of corruption destroying our Republic. Her "plan" is only a list of nice sounding talking points. Her fundraising has been questionable (not a surprise with Terry McAuliffe on board) and then there is the problem of that sweatshop tainted cash that her staff can not seem to find the time to review and return. It was Senator Clinton’s lack of concern about corruption and her lack of action to end it that has led me to oppose her in the Primary.
Still people can change and maybe she will. Maybe she will get serious about ending corruption and offer a real plan that competes with Obama and Edwards on the issue. Maybe she’ll even return the sweatshop tainted cash and then I will be able to feel better about her as our possible nominee.
If she wants to know how to make the transition from where she is now to become a candidate who is serious and credible on this issue, she could follow in the footsteps of John Edwards.
Tonight, he is an aggressive advocate for ending the culture of corruption in Washington. It is his closing argument in Iowa. He is fully on board and (I believe) deeply committed to ending the abuse and holding the many criminals behind the abuse accountable for their actions. I have been thrilled by his passion and I share his anger.
I am glad to see him embrace this issue in this campaign.
It wasn’t always so.
As I mentioned, I have been following the corruption beat for a long time. We all have our pet issues we want the various Candidates to embrace. Ending the Culture of Corruption was mine.
Last Spring I looked into where all the candidates stood on the issue. I listened to their speeches, dug through their Web sites and position papers to see what they said about the issue and how visible the issue was in their campaign.
Back then, Barack Obama was the only one who had woven ending the culture of corruption into the rhetoric of his campaign. It has been a consistent part of his message from the beginning of his campaign. Here is what I wrote about Obama and corruption last May:
Barack Obama
Obama is the only candidate who leads with corruption reform as a core issue. He lists Cleaning Up Washington as one of his top priorities. It is easy to find on his Web Page (I found it called out on the home page). He has also been introducing legislation, such as those detailed on his
Ethics and Lobbying Reform section of his Senate Web site. In the 4-27-07 Debate he was the only candidate to even mention lobbying and ethics reform.
If another Candidate has a stronger stance on Corruption Reform than Obama, I would like to know about it. And if it is true, I would like to know why they are hiding that information from the voters.
Now when pressed, every Candidate (of any Party) will tell you how much they are against corruption. What I was looking for was how they treated the issue in their everyday stump speech. I was looking to see how easy was it to find the issue on their Web Site or position papers. I wanted to see what their actions said about the priority they gave to the corruption issue.
Last Spring, the issue of ending corruption in Washington was not a core part of the John Edwards Campaign. Here is what I found when searched his materials for his stance on the issue:
John Edwards
He may or may not have a stand on corruption, ethics reform and lobbying reform. It is hard to tell. The issue of reform is missing from his list of issues. Now, some diaries on the Edwards Blog mention Abramoff and reform, but the campaign seems to be silent on the issue.
I can only assume that this issue is not that important to his campaign. I hope that I am wrong.
Does anybody know where he stands and why he isn’t talking about it?
A few weeks later I attended the Take Back America Conference in Washington DC. All the Candidates spoke and I watched them make the case for their campaigns to a room full of activists.
As usual, Obama’s wove the issue of ending corruption into his speech (you can watch it here):
We all understand it, even those of us who are involved in politics; we understand that we’ve seen politics in this town become not a mission, but a business. Politics has never been pure, but there’s a sense that over the last several years, the race for money and influence and power has left the hopes and concerns of most Americans in the dust. You’re worried about how you’ll pay for college or health care or save for retirement, but when you turn on the TV or open the newspaper, all you see from Washington is another scandal or petty argument or the persistent stubbornness of a president who refuses to end this war in Iraq. (Applause.) And so we get discouraged. Half of us don’t vote. The half of us who do vote were voting against somebody instead of voting for something.
And as we turn away from this kind of politics and cynicism and frustration, we know what fills the void: the lobbyists, the influence peddlers with the cash and connections, the ones who’ve turned government into a game that only they can afford to play. It’s the pharmaceutical companies that get to write our drug bills while the price of prescriptions skyrocket for the rest of us. It’s the oil lobbyists that get to meet with the same White House that silences the scientists who’ve warned us about the destruction of our planet. You know who I’m talking about. You know who I’m talking about. They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills. They get the access; you get to write a letter. They think they own this government, but we are here to tell them today that our government is not for sale and we are taking it back, right here and right now. (Applause.) We are taking it back.
John Edwards gave a fine speech at the gathering (you can watch it here). It hit on many important issues as he made the case for his Campaign. Missing from his speech was any mention of lobbyists, lobbying reform, corporate and government corruption and fighting to end the system of abuse. On the corruption issue his speech was as silent as his Web site. I walked away disappointed.
In August, I was at Yearly Kos and something had changed. During the debate, Edwards began to focus on the issue. He challenged other candidates for their dependence on lobbyist funding and support. He was changing. He was finding his voice on this issue.
In the Fall, I did another survey of where the Candidates stood on the issue. Several Rasmussen polls had voters naming corruption as their number one concern. I wrote about the poll and where the Candidates stood.
This time Obama was not alone.
Edwards had decided to embrace the issue. He challenged Obama and the others to compete on the basis of who had the best plan for ending the culture of corruption in Washington. Here is how I put it:
After the endless corruption of the Bush Administration and over a dozen years of the Gingrich/DeLay/Boehner/McConnell Congress selling out America, the Republican Party should be synonymous with "corruption". Democrats should have a 30+ advantage on the issue. Instead, we are getting close to even.
Fortunately, it looks like at least some Democrats are paying attention. Obama and
Edwards have offered serious proposals to confront corruption and they are challenging the others in the race, especially HRC.
Reading the transcript of the 10-30-07 Democratic Debate shows that Obama and especially Edwards have realized that corruption really matters to the American people. They are actively speaking to this concern.
As I mentioned, I am very excited that two of our three top Candidates are actively engaged in ending corruption in Washington and that they are asking voters to decide which of them has the best plans and abilities to make this important change happen.
Corruption is a tipping point indicator. Whatever your pet issue is—the War in Iraq, immigration, health care, abortion, security, etc.—corruption can be seen as the cause when things fail. After years of Republican Rule, last November the voters decided to give Democrats a chance. They handed us a broom and said clean this mess up. It was a chance to govern. It was a conditional mandate.
In the 2008 election, perceptions of corruption will impact every race up and down the ticket. Unlike 2006, the main focus will not be control of Congress; it will be control of the White House. The race to the White House will drive the narrative and who our Candidate is will drive the perception of corruption within the Democratic Party.
Obama or Edwards would create the perception of a Party ready to clean house and change Washington. The other front-runner would not. She could follow the lead of Obama and Edwards and seriously embrace the issue, but time is running short.
A better course of action would be for either Obama or Edwards to be our Party’s nominee.
As I’ve mentioned, I have made my choice and it is Barack Obama. I was very tempted by Edwards, but Obama’s consistency of message and action on ending corruption won him my support.
Still, it was a close call and I will be fine if Edwards becomes our nominee.
More important to me than who it is would be that our nominee is somebody committed to ending the Culture of Corruption in Washington.
IMHO we must have a Democratic Nominee who will end clean up the mess. As things stand now, only Obama or Edwards are ready to meet that requirement.
In a few days or weeks, either Obama or Edwards will emerge as the only viable option to Senator Clinton in the Primary season. When I vote on February 12, I will vote for whichever one is still in the race (or Obama if they both are still in it).
In a few hours, things will begin. Choices will be made. Some of us will be pleased. Others will be upset. Regardless of how things turn out, we will need to UNITE!
When the dust settles, I will support the Nominee of my Party—and this includes Senator Clinton.
The stakes are way too high next November to do anything else.
Cheers