[Sen. Brian Weinstein comments below, clarifying that while he likes Edwards, he has not endorsed him. The Democrats mentioned below were announced as being in attendance at the event, and their attendance should not necessarily be construed as an endorsement. -Will]
That was the theme of John Edwards’ visit to Seattle yesterday. In contrast to other Democrats in the race for president, John Edwards made it clear that he’s not interested in half measures.
He’s for universal health care, not “we’ll get to the other 15 million uninsured someday.” He’s upfront about how expensive it’ll be, and how he’ll pay for it (rescind the Bush Tax Giveaway for folks making over 200k a year). Edwards talked about the divide between rich and poor, and how this isn’t good for the health of our country. Whether it’s helping kids go to college, attacking global warming, or the war in Iraq, Edwards did not shy away from straight answers. He did not parse words.
After Edwards spoke, I had the chance to talk to Jenny Durkan, Edwards campaign chair in Washington state. Joel Connelly quoted her earlier this year:
“I will be honest: Hillary has impressed me. But we have seen that movie: It was called John Kerry. I hated the ending,” said Seattle attorney Jenny Durkan.
“I cannot think of a time when a person won the presidency by persuading people they were wrong. That’s what Hillary needs to do — persuade a lot of people who do not like her that they were wrong about her.”
Like I told Jenny, Edwards will help down ticket races in a way few candidates can. Sheriffs and county commisioners from conservative areas will be able to stand on the campaign stage with Edwards in a way they might not with other candidates.
Edwards’ overtly populist message plays well in the pointy-headed liberal precincts of Seattle, but also does well in the rest of the state. In Washington, Edwards gets the support of Democrats from all over the state, from Sen. Brian Weinstein to Sen. Brian Hatfield, from Dick Kelley to Yvonne Ward.
Last but not least… John Edwards is an compelling public speaker. There’s a reason why he went from 2% in Iowa to second place back in ’04. Joel Connelly again:
On the Friday night before Iowa’s 2004 caucuses, Gov. Tom Vilsack hosted a reception in Des Moines for the “bigfoot” pundits.
A gang of journalistic middle-feet, myself included, headed out to nearby Madison County — and witnessed Edwards’ campaign on fire. He packed American Legion and VFW halls with blue-collar crowds like Democrats used to attract.
…and ought to attract again in 2008.
Or you can just set up a 5-10% payroll tax on businesses. Considering that providing Health Insurance to employee’s is somewhere between 15-20% of most small to large companies (small businesses are actually somewhere near 25-30% if they provide Health Insurance) it will be less than what they are currently paying out.
I understand that Insurance Companies will howl when their cash cow is taken away and to that I say Fuck Them! Really, when it comes to public opinion on Insurance Companies it would be fairly easy to trash their commercials. Bring up how they are screwing Katrina victims. Present the mountains of cases where their profit over people have denied coverage on people they were contractually obligated but just had to wait out the person dying and the fact that the family can’t afford the lawyer to force them to pay.
Michael, why tax businesses, or workers. Tax people’s assets. The one truly progressive tax.
Everyone pays the same flat tax, based on their net worth, not on how much they work. The rest of the taxes will be on imports, and goods and services that damage the environment, or people’s health. Fuel, cigarettes etc.
All problems are then solved. Fix the rates on what the government needs to do their job.
Tax wealth not work.
You could tax capitol gains 1.45% for social security, and cover millions of the uninsured.
Their are lots of options besides pouring money into the pockets of people who will deny people life saving care as often as they can get away with.
2:
The problem with that assinine idea is that you would see capital flee the country in droves. People’s wealth has been accumulated with income that has ALREADY been taxed and with assets (that pay real and personal property taxes) that have been purchased with cash and other consideration that has ALREADY been taxed. This Marxist idea of your will NEVER see the light of day under any circumstances.
Its hilarious watching the reptilian hypocrite Edwards talk down to people telling them the system is rigged and the deck is stacked against them, while he lives in a $28 million mansion paid for by suing big corporations. Anyone who falls for his class warfare schtick deserves to hand over their paycheck to the govt.
Dear Mark,
Fuck you!
He worked his ass off to get what he has. Accomplished lawyer, spanked the big bad corporations and you don’t like that. Tough.
Edwards is the candidate that I believe represents the Dems best chance. Let me clarify. Hillary and Obama would both win. Edwards would win by a much larger margin.
Edwards is on my “B-list”. As is Dodd, and as is Obama.
Al Gore remains the sole member of my “A-list”.
Though I hold out little hope that Gore will choose to run, I’m still unwilling to seriously look elsewhere. Or to commit $$ to any of the candidates.
Mark,
You do realize that he represented clients. He collected just a third of the judgment. I know you are math challenged so let me spell it out for you. For every $1 he was paid, his client got $2. He helped a lot of people. You too can go to law school and make your fortune. But then you would actually have to do something….say……study and work.
My Left Foot says:
Dear Mark,
Fuck you!
He worked his ass off to get what he has. Accomplished lawyer,
And you don’t see the utter hypocrasy in him talking down to people and telling them the system is rigged and they have no shot? Puhhleassssse!!!
Golly Carl, what torqued your dick today?
History lesson for you Moonbat!s: Remember when Russia took over Hungary? You do? Damn you be really old. Okay enough comedy.
What did they do…? They took the farms from the big time farmers and killed them and their families. They gave the farmland to the peasants. The peasants cheered. Then if you were an intellectual, store owner or business person they killed you too. All in the name of socialism. Well what happened?
The peasant people on the big farm got their plot of land. They fed themselves. But the people in the big cities didn’t food anymore because the big farmers has their food supply system destroyed by the take over. The stores were left empty because the store owners and their families were killed. They were the beaugoise! So the “government” had to do something. Guess what that was?
They took over the land back from the peasants. Now the peasants lived on the land but no longer owned it. The peasants complained. They were ripped off. “We have our rights”. No the government said, we need to feed the people so they made big collective government farms owned by the government and they had to rebuild all the infrastructure destroyed by the takeover. The peasants now worked for the government, just like they worked for the big farmers. So what changed? Onwership… The socialist government owned it all.
Now tell me Moonbat!s, who on your side is preaching this…? Well………………………………………………… just about all of your candidates except Kucinich. He’s a throwback Waaaaaaaaaaaaay back!
For you idiots who don’t know history you can google search and read all about this. It’s not that hard lefties. For YLB/Clueless and chadt, someone help them find it.
WADR
I am very suspicious of Mr Edwards’ candidacy. Of all the candidates in either party, except I suppose Thompson, Edwards has the least experience in government of any kind. If folks on this blog find Dino’s foundation a sleezy trick .. Edwards has been doing this for quite awhile, running a tax free psuedo institute as a campaign.
He does say impressive things, but that reminds me of read my lips and Nixon. Campaign promises are usually meaningles and in his case more so since he never explains or seem to know how in the real world he would assemble support,
I also think his shots at HRc’s votes on Iraq were cheap shots .. not Rovian but still suggesting a lack of judgement.
As for his lawyer life, to be blunt there IS something wrong with any one who lives off the poor and then gets rich and yet does very little in the way of charity.
If he did run, and the Repricans ran Romney .. hell the reds might win!
% you are the fuckin joke. edwards ha.
edward would give free haircut to those who make 50k and below.
9:
Uhhhhh, what?
Pudwhacker:
As a black man in todays society, how do justify your post about Russian invasion and relating it to anything about Edwards? How do you rationalize your refusal to open your eyes?
Mark,
I see that he was an insider and protected the little guy. He played the game just as you conservatives have laid it out. He beat your ass. You don’t like it. Again, tough!
He is everything that Bush is not. Self made. Well educated. Well spoken and, by all accounts a brilliant man. Bush is, well, the benefactor of a family name and 5 conservative men who voted based on politics and not on the merits of the law. Nothing more.
10
Seattlejew:
How did he “live off the poor”? Without him they had no shot at winning their cases. Are you suggesting he should have forsaken an income for some altruistic ideal? Come on, that is just plain foolish.
I love the john. I have supported im from the start, and I am giving him money today. Fuck Hillary!
3, 4 Mark
Name one poor man running for president. Bonus if it is a Republican.
umm, not “man.” “person.”
I’m not convinced that Edwards has coattails to help candidates in the more conservative areas. I am convinced that Hillary and Obama do not.
I think Richardson would. And like N, I’d probably jump for Gore in a heartbeat.
John Edwards turned the worst bit of junk science about cerebral palsy into huge judgements from doctors. Doctors – you know, people who actually do something productive for society.
Wall Street Journal:
“John Edwards built his career suing doctors and hospitals, claiming that maternity-ward missteps caused newborns to develop cerebral palsy. The theory that doctor error is a common cause of CP was dubious when Mr. Edwards used it to win his cases, from the 1980s to the mid-1990s, and is universally rejected by experts today.”
But he can be amusing –
http://www.imao.us/archives/ca.....facts.html
If you want incremental climate change, RTID is your tax package!
Will, you amaze me.
You are ready to vote with your heart for President, but you can ignore 150 miles of general purpose highway lanes and greenhouse gas because that’s political reality. You’re going to need even more health care if we destroy our planet.
Don’t listen to me Mark. Nader said it. Tax wealth, not work. Even Warren Buffet wants to know why he pays a lower tax rate than his assistant.
Edwards would make a great president, and appears to be addressing real issues, instead of just spouting talking points.
Answer this. Why should people that work to earn money pay a higher tax rate than someone that doesn’t? All money is taxed more than once when it is invested. It is called profits, which is exactly the same as wages. Do you just want to help the super rich keep more so the poor can just pay more, and we borrow the rest from Red China?
Here is another one for you Mark. How about 100% employment? Everyone that wants to work gets a living wage job with benefits? We could easily afford it.
Tax the dividend checks just like wages. One half the problem would be solved.
@16
“Fuck Hilliary” Ewuu… No thanks, I’ll leave that to someone else.
The only fair way to tax is a consumption tax. We should tax all consumables except for food staples and primary residences. This way everyone pays a little but only to the extent that they can afford it.
Richardson seems dead in the water and I’m liking what I hear out of Edwards. The man has balls.
Edwards poked around in the belly of corporate America for years with his legal work and understands, like no other candidate, how corporate America and Government work.
I’m going with Edwards.
@23
Guess not everybody needs light bulbs and soap.
Remember when Russia took over Hungary?
Puddystupid,
You’re comparing this to the current Dem candidates? Not even old MWS would mix apples and oranges anything like this.
Oh excuse me Puddy, my bad!! Of course MWS would do this! You and MWS were the same guy! LMAO!
Yes those were the days when MWS and Puddy would have their little circle jerks..
Like Senator Craig never leaving his stall!
LMAO!!!
@23
Guess not everybody needs light bulbs and soap.
09/20/2007 at 8:09 pm
Yeah, that tax on a $2.00 light bulb sure is a killer.
The only fair way to tax is a consumption tax.
Great Doofus – it starts at 23 percent.
Really fair like – oh Thor Hearne and his phony ACVR. Where is it DOOFUS? Why doesn’t Hearne put it on his resume?
YLB/CLueless@26… and your point is…? You proved it perfectly… you need help googling it.
MWSPuddyIdiot,The point? Something about apples and oranges. Maybe if you feel around the top of your head you might get it.
Don’t scratch your ass though – you might light the methane and go into orbit! LMAO!!
Mark @3: “The problem with that assinine idea is that you would see capital flee the country in droves.”
Well, then, you are an ass. Where would this capital flee to? Somalia(free market paradise)? Russia (Putkinomics)? “Old Europe”(they have universal care already)? Communist China(the last outpost of cronyism)? A good number of large U.S. corporations are coming around to single payer–it would lower their costs, thus making them more competititive. This is a capitalist concept that you appear not to believe in, you fucking rightwingnut Trotskyist.
SJew @ 10: “Edwards has the least experience in government of any kind.”
You are disturbed. Stack Edwards experience up against Lincoln’s or, more recently, Eisenhower’s…the list is long. Your so-called point is worthless. It is so intellectually bankrupt that it was an effort to type this reposte. Your assertion is shameless.
SJew @ 10: “As for his lawyer life, to be blunt there IS something wrong with any one who lives off the poor and then gets rich and yet does very little in the way of charity.”
Since when have you joined with the rightwing scum who decry the source of Edward’s wealth? How dare you? This is another red herring. You should beg for forgiveness for spouting such fucking lunacy.
Carl: Apparently you just don’t it it about the democratic presidential candidates. Take from the rich and give to the poor. What?… no more to take from the rich… oh let’s take from the poor now.
you would see capital flee the country in droves.
Actually it would go to any place with sex tourism: Saipan, Phillipines, Dominican Republic, etc.
Just ask Flush Limpbone.
Rather @ 23: “The only fair way to tax is a consumption tax.”
Yeah, sure. Like the only fair law is one that allows rich and poor to sleep beneath bridges, right? Some fairness.
Republicans: The eternal search of the blind, the rich, and the uncaring for irony.
28
The only fair way to tax is a consumption tax.
Great Doofus – it starts at 23 percent.
No no no. That is what you commies would start it at. Obviosly there would be more than one rate. With the lowest being around 5% amd going up from there. I would tax TV’s the hardest since they should be considered a luxury items. The less TVs we keep out of the poor people’s hands the better off we would all be. Of course what is left of the MSM audience would shrivel up and die. The more I think about this consumption tax the better I like it.
gosh…i have to ask….did roger finally get run over by a car?
13, 31 Proud to be an Arse and Left Foot
I do not hold Edwards’ making a living off of the poor against him, I just find that unimpressive when he chooses to live as well as he does. Edwards ain’t no MLK, Cesar Chavez, or Jimmy Carter,
While I respect a number of folks who tell me they support Mr Edwars, I never seem to hear anything substantive the way I do about Richardson;s work as a diplomat, Biden’s carear ikn the Senate, Obama’s role in Chicago, and Hillary’s role in … well being herself.
His stands strike me as more demagoguery than meaningful. A good example kis the Iraq mess. I am not impressed that he says he would just withdraw troops because either he is a Bush-like idot or he knows that wold be a disaster or he is just blowing smoke rings.
He sky walks a lot .. his health care plan, tax ideas are OK but whey strike me as about as menaingless as any other campaign promise. Nothing very cleve, nothing ver controversial.
Put another way the distance between him and Romney is not much. I think Romney’s stands are convenient too.
@37
“I do not hold Edwards’ making a living off of the poor against him, I just find that unimpressive when he chooses to live as well as he does. Edwards ain’t no MLK, Cesar Chavez, or Jimmy Carter,”
Edwards didn’t make a living off the poor. Edwards made a living off suing some of the largest, richest corporations in America.
Edwards is who he says he is (unlike many Republicans!) and has never claimed to be anything like Carter, MLK or Cesar Chavez.
@36
RR is on vacation.
thanks michael….it just seemed so strange without 1000 comments by the rabbit.LOL.
how about fred thompson?
SJew@37: “I do not hold Edwards’ making a living off of the poor against him…”
Well, yes, you explicity said you did hold this against him. Trying to deny this is simply intellectual cowardice. Apologize or shut up.
John Edwards puts forward good policy proposals in a meaningful framework (“two americas). The others, Kuchinich excepted, put out blather, smoke, and mirrors. If you don’t think his health care plan is “controversial”, then you are simply living in a wierd universe with which I am not familiar.
As far as Iraq goes…the “leave now” position is essentially correct. You are free to disagree. You are not free to pretend that John Edwards doesn’t “mean it”. To do so is to claim you can read his mind.
That makes you a fucking liar.
But for the fear of people like John Edwards, and courts, the corporate crooks would be poisoning, and killing Americans like there was not tomorrow for a penny a share in extra profits.
Since government regulation is non-existent, the courts are the only avenue for the maimed, sickened, and damaged consumers.
Did any of you lose a loved one to Vioxx? Fenfen? Anything else?
I heard about a dude that was one of the loudest supporters of capping lawsuits, and when he got in an accident, he was crippled for life, and could only sue for $250,000. Now he lives on public assistance.
All the cons screaming about handouts, and entitlements, but when they have problems, they are the first in line demanding “help” and things of that nature…..
In a con’s world the poor are only good for one thing. To be used as political pawns in Iraq.
@42
I watched one of my grandfathers die of black lung when I was a little kid. So yeah, I’m a big fan of Edwards.
My first pick would be Richardson, he’s the man with the resume, but Richardson seems to be going no where.
YLB/Cluelesss@33: Funny YOU mention all that in post #33. That was NOT on the top of my list!
In fact… that was not on my list at all…
@41 Proud to be an Ass
First, I am always impressed y folks who try to ake their point by discussing my sex life or offer to have sex with m. BUT ,, cab yiu flesh out the term :fucking liar?” I hae tried asd tried but no image come to mind.
Second. like any other citizen out here i am dependent on the media. Obviously, in your case they have .. or Edwards has communicates something to you that I do not see.
So why should I be fucking impressed that you want to tell me that you got mind fucked by watch Edwards on the fucking tube? Fucking unimpresive argument/
Third. I honestly have nothing whatsoever against Edwars of for him. He made a lot of money as a an attorney> Fine. Rom,ney made a lot of money running the Olympucs and RG was a pretty impressive anti-mafia attorney.
What YOU seem unable to do is give me some fucking reason why I should give a good fuck to Mr..Edwards campaign.
Would I vote for the fucking guy? Fuck yes if he were to run against most of the repricans. The only difference i see between Edwards and Romney os that neother has walked the alk of th spotions they now take,
I am still waiting to he4ar what you think is impressive. Seriously. tell me something he has said that impresses you?
michael…if i had to vote for one of them it would be richardson. but, having said that…he has too many “clinton-cooties” and that’s why he is going no where fast.[he also has all the charisma of a bed bug]and how can we forget clinton KNOWING that richardson was his go to guy to get monica a job?
hillary does not stand a chance. she reminds every guy on the planet of his shrewish ex-wife [or what an ex could be like] and who really wants to listen to her scream like a banshee? she is socially retarded to the max. and ,she has absolutely no experience in anything except being a shrew.
come on! who is going to vote for a woman that threw a book at a secret service agent? you want that hand near the button?
and as a woman i can say this. none of you would be foolish enough to choose your surgeon based on their sex or skin color because you had “never had one that was black or a woman” right? so really…..we want a president based on that?forget obama and hillary…it just isn’t going to happen.
sheesh………
Puddbutter: ‘I have a list…’***
Hey! So did Joe McCarthy! You join Listmasters?
***paraphrasing, not quoting. Don’t get your panties in a bunch.
One thing Hillary has going for her. She knows how to deal with the right wing slime machine. That is worth something. Did you see. Olbermann’s ratings are almost as high as O’Liley’s. Way to go Keith. At least we get a little news every night.
Will,
Is it the policy of horsesass not to post anything substantive about any candidate that actually has the organization and the fundraising to win nationally?
No wonder you post about Edwards and not Obama.
Daddy Love says:
3, 4 Mark
Name one poor man running for president. Bonus if it is a Republican.
I don’t begrudge Edwards for being rich. Hell, I want to be rich too. What I have a problem is him condescendingly telling “the little guy” that the system is rigged against them and they have no shot. As if its not possible to improve ones economic status in life. And by inference, you need Edwards and his big government “solutions” to poverty. If you believed his bullshit rhetoric, it begs the question….how the hell did HE get rich?
I would tax TV’s the hardest since they should be considered a luxury items.
Oh fucking great Doofus. You call us commies and then propose being a nazi. How are poor folks going to watch Faux News then? Typical wingnut – complains about social engineering and then wants to be an authoritarian. Reminds me of the Doofus Voucher school:
8:00 am The gospel hour
9:00 am Limbaugh
10:00 am Faux News
10:45 am P.E. – Marching to war music
11:00 am History – Endless War
12:00 Lunch Break
12:30 Weapons Training
1:00pm Wingnut Math – Zero Taxes = Infinite Gov. Revenues
2:00pm Wingnut blog reading
3:00pm Dismissal
3:00 pm onwards – Watch Faux News till you pass out.
SJ’s Lament @45: “First, I am always impressed y folks who try to ake their point by discussing my sex life or offer to have sex with m. BUT ,, cab yiu flesh out the term :fucking liar?” I hae tried asd tried but no image come to mind.”
I know nothing of your sex life, and could care less. The fact that you have problems with the term ‘fucking liar’ betrays only your lack of imagination.
“Second. like any other citizen out here i am dependent on the media. Obviously, in your case they have .. or Edwards has communicates something to you that I do not see.”
I dunno. I actually watch Edwards’ speeches, read his campaign literature, or visit his web site. You, on the other hand, self admittedly ‘depend on the media’. What a shame.
“So why should I be fucking impressed that you want to tell me that you got mind fucked by watch Edwards on the fucking tube? Fucking unimpresive argument/”
I didn’t ask for you to be impressed. I asked you to apologize. You seem to also have a problem with this concept.
“Third. I honestly have nothing whatsoever against Edwars of for him. He made a lot of money as a an attorney> Fine. Rom,ney made a lot of money running the Olympucs and RG was a pretty impressive anti-mafia attorney.”
This is a point? You gotta’ be kidding me.
“What YOU seem unable to do is give me some fucking reason why I should give a good fuck to Mr..Edwards campaign.”
I asked to not be such a jerk about John Edwards. That is all. If you do not agree with John Edwards’ position on the issues, that is fine. Instead you, and you first, launched in to an ad hominiem attack on his character. Absent your apology, this is unforgivable.
“Would I vote for the fucking guy? Fuck yes if he were to run against most of the repricans.”
Well, why didn’t you say so? Which republicans would you vote for if it were them against Edwards for the presidency? I can think of none. You apparently would vote for some (unnamed) republican. Why? Which one(s)?
“The only difference i see between Edwards and Romney os that neother has walked the alk of th spotions they now take,”
Meaningless drivil.
“I am still waiting to he4ar what you think is impressive. Seriously. tell me something he has said that impresses you?”
You claim to read his mind. What could I possibly say to enlighten you further?
That was NOT on the top of my list!
You’ll always be a wannabe Republican Puddy. Don’t you remember – Tom DeLay called Saipan his “petri dish” of unfettered capitalism. He and Abramoff made sure that no regulation would ever touch the place.
Of course Saipan is a cesspool of sweat shop and sex slavery. The place is run by a pimp.
Saipan is the legacy of YOUR crowd running things since 1994.
So why shouldn’t wingnut Republican money flee to places like that?
51
Silly clueless, poor people don’t watch fox. They watch the bullshit I use to spew on See BS. Stay tuned for my new special “how to get fired for lying and sue your employer”. Coming soon. hehehehe
Uh oh.. Ghost is baaaaack.. Must be trouble in “paradise”.
poor people don’t watch fox.
So why do you want to take the TV away from a poor person? Can’t a poor person aspire to watch Faux News so he can be a right-wing idiot like you?
Geeessh… hehehehehehe…
32
Pudwhacker:
As a black man in today’s society does it not bother you that you never answer the question. You hit, run, avoid. You ad hominem till you are out of breath.
As a black man in today’s society, you should be absolutely ashamed.
So tell me Mark @ 50…are YOU rich? If not, why not?
I doubt that you are, but I don’t hold your economic ordinaryness against you. Your assertions lead to the logical conclusion that we could all be rich. That can’t possibly be.
Sane people support policies that promote equal opportunities and work socially to contain the harm that the often observed unfair outcomes that are as plain as the greed of your glassy eyed stare. Sane people are opposed to socialism for the rich.
Too bad you are not one of them.
Well at least we have both gotten the f word out of the way. Scratch up one.
Back to Earth,
If you want to sell Mr, Edwards I couold be a customer but you still beed to tlel me something impresive that he has said or done.
What I see is a fairly inexperienced and somewhat unsuccessful politician who says a lot f tings that have .. so far have little depth.
Who would I vote for against him for someone on the Republican menu?
That depends on who the rep is and what they both convince me of. Since i am distrustful of religious folks, I would be interested in the lapsed catholic?
Today, Newt said he’d get into the race if he can raise $30M. I’m in.
Newt will mop the floor with whoever you moonbats nominate. Newt understand Murka and has written extensively about what makes Murka better than the rest of the world. Check out his series on “Renewing American Civilization”.
You guys can campaign on your platform of Surrender and Socialism. And in a few cesspools such as The McDermott Zone, that will have great appeal to the limpdick hyphen-names and TSWITW will get near 100% of the vote. But the rest of the country will see the wisdom of Newt’s approach and will elect him in a landslide.
Tough shit guys. Maybe next time….
Mark,
There is only one appropriate response to you. My only regret is that you can’t see actual level of my laughter after reading your last post. I am gonna hurt myself.
Mark, pull your head out. The actor is the savior, not Newt. Newt’s past will not stand up in the end. Same as Rudi’s.
Asshole.
Vagina Lips @ 60: I’d be willing to wager with you that any dem nominee would mop the floor with Newtie-boy.
I would, but you are a welsher, and thus lacking in all honor.
Whether it is Clinton, Obama or Edwards or Richardson really does not matter. The fact is that there is no way a Rethuglilcan can win.
I just wish some Democrat would stand up and say “If elected I will bring our troops home.”
End of story.
You lose.
Maybe next time.
They might mention the restoration of Habeas Corpus too.
Check out next preznit:
http://newt.org/
63
Yeah yeah. Tough talk from a backer of a party that hasn’t won 50% of the popular vote since the 70’s. If a dem gets in it will only be because of a third party taking votes away from the repub. That is how Clinton got in back in 92, why not now. We will see.
A platform of Surrender and Socialism is a sure winner.
Keep at it guys.
67
What is that annoying buzzing sound?
I’m fascinated by the hate you guys have for Newt.
Everything…without exception… EVERYTHING that Bubba takes credit for was the direct result of Newt’s Contract With America.
If it wasn’t for Newt’s leadership in the house, Bubba’s presidency would have been nothing.
If you guys were honest, you’d agree with me that Newt has the vision and skills to put America back on track to the conservatism that made us great. I sure hope he does it before we fall into the abyss of Surrender and Socialism.
Dan Rather @ 23:
A consumption tax? Heee hee! Hooo hooo! Hawhawahahaw!
(you can imagine I’m doing Al Pacino here. It’s cool)
Have you actually thought that through? I mean, do you believe this, or are you channeling someone else when you want a consumption tax?
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. I looooove a consumption tax. Why? Because I don’t spend more than 20% of my income on consumables. Ever. I suppose I could, but it’s not me. My ill-gotten goods are saved, invested, or used to pay off the mortgages.
I ain’t that rich. The higher you go on the food chain, the less of your income is consumables and the more are investments. Bill’s fantastic house is somewhere around 1/500th of his net worth. Even Paul Allen with his yachts, submarines, antique aircraft and other fantabulous toys is probably not spending more than 1-2% of his net worth on consumables.
A consumption tax of the sort that you are prescribing is the worst of all possible worlds. 1% ers pay dick, 10% ers pay very little, the bottom 40% with little disposable income pay next to nothing, which leaves palookas like you holding the bag for the entire Federal tax bill.
Thanks! What a wunnerful idea!!!
You shouldn’t drink so much MTR. It’ll damage your liver. The brain went long ago. Save what you can. Better a vegetable than fertilizer. Well…then again… I guess we should have warned you sooner.
As to how Newst will do, well, everybody here knows better than to bet with you, so even if you had money you’d be safe.
Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic.
But funny.
50 Mark
What I see is not an honest wonderment or curiosity, but instead a purposeful shifting of the topic from Edwards’ political proposals to an attack on him for nothing more than the crime of being both successful and compassionate–something Republicans a few years ago pretended to care about. Republicans pretend to care, Edwards does care.
50 Mark
BTW, I don’t hear John Edwards “telling the little guy that the system is rigged against them and they have no shot,” all I hear is YOU saying that. If you want to claim that Edwards does, please link us to an article or transcript (no op-eds, please) so that we can evaluate your assertions about his words.
What I hear John Edwards saying are things like that he wants to expand early childhood education, invest in underperforming schools insted of punishing them, provide incentives to recruit quality teachers in high-poverty rural and urban areas, and push for higher pay for teachers and education support professionals (http://www.nea.org/annualmeeti.....peech.html).
But here’s a question: in a the system is not “rigged,” wouldn’t upward and downward mobility be the norm, and you’d see maybe half of the people heading one way and half another over their lifetimes? But social and economic upward mobility is NOT the norm in the USA, and we’re no longer a middle-class society, in which the benefits of economic growth are widely shared. Between 1979 and 2005 the real income of the median household rose only 13 percent, but the income of the richest 0.1% of Americans rose 296 percent (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c.....this-blog/). But you don’t think that those with the gold are making the rules? Funny.
60 MTR
A candidate with higher negatives than Hillary. That WOULD be fun.
It’s funny that a relatively wealthy man who would like to help those in poverty is mocked for doing so (although come on, we all know it is cynical partisan spin and not any real concern about Edwards’ authenticity), but a relatively wealthy man who doesn’t give a shit about the poor is somehow just fine.
Daddy Love: It’s the choices Edward’s has made in investments and his personal lifestyle that allow people to mock him!
I bet if Edwards showed up to Columbia to debate Whackminostupid he could make waves!
75 Pudd
His “personal lifestyle?” You mean that people mock him for being a self-made millionaire who fights for ordinary people against heartless corporate greed? Or do they mock his lifelong church attendance and his 30-year marriage to his college sweetheart? Or is it their four children, or the tragic death of their son, that people are mocking? Maybe they are mocking his wife’s cancer? Sounds like a pretty Republican thing to do. Oh, yeah, you guys DID mock her cancer.
My partner and I were discussing Edwards. I like that he is for revolutionary change, not incremental change. I’m tired of how wimpy and calculating the Democrats are. So Edwards appeals to me. I’m tired of the results of Triangulation where democrats move the the right and Repubs don’t move at all and that’s considered progress. It seams that Triangulation equals the middle class gets smaller and smaller.
Yet, my partner said Edwards would loose or if not loose, be a Carter type President (Nice but not effective). He plans to vote for Hillary, because she had the brains and the political clout to make a effective president. Cause if they had something on her, they would have used it by now. He didn’t feel that Edwards had the smarts to be an effective president.
My problem with Hillary is that I don’t see her challenging the corporate interests that I feel are ruining the country. I want a government that will strive to make a bigger middle class, instead of bigger corporations.
I guess I want a mythical progressive president who will be as good for the country, as Bush’s policies in general and Bill Clinton’s NAFTA and WTO and Telecommunications Act were bad for it.
@75:
Book deal.
Having an affair while pursuing impeachment of the President.
Divorcing his sick wife.
Conspiring to subvert House ethics rules.
Yeah. That Gingrich is a Pillar Of The Community, no doubt about it.
Sheesh.
-OM
gosh…i have to ask….did roger finally get run over by a car?
Ghost – you mean Roger is NOT Goldy? The meds must have taken effect.
Edwards
What is revolutionary about his camaign? ” Revolutionary” is meaningless slogan w/o real proposals. No better mor worse than BO’s use of the word “Hope” … blah blah.
We need objectivism, so …..
Having access to a great political sage, I asked myself to rank the tasks facing the post Bush president in terms of urgency (not just importance). The I asked my sage to rate each Demo candidate’s skills for that purpose:
1. Declare a strategic objective for Iraq based on some sort of exit that would include regional or international effort sto fix the Bush mess.
Best skills for purpose: HRC, Richardson, Biden, Dodd
2. Reorganize a terribly dysfunctional executive and judicial branch. This is a huge and urgent task,
Best skills for purpose: HRC
3. Tax policy reform
Best skills for purpose: Obama, Dodd
4. Judicial reform
Best skills for purpose: Edwards, HRC, Obama
5. Repair US Image, new alliances
Best skills for purpose: Obama, Richardson
6. Address America’s Class Issues:
Best skills for purpose: Obama, Richardson,
7. Convince Americans of Need to Sacrifice
Best skills for purpose: Obama, HRC
8. Re-establish Scientific Apparatus
Best skills for purpose: Obama, HRC,
9. Address the Immigration Mess
Best skills for purpose: Edwards, Dodd,
10. Provide Role Model
Best skills for purpose: Obama, HRC, Richardson, Edwards
Remember, this is a scientifically derived, objective survey.
Christmasghost:
What brings you slithering in here before Advent? Disoriented as usual, I suppose, but maybe it’s just the desperation of the Republicans that roused you from your usual coma.
With respect to a potential Newt candidacy – Newt is a brilliant historian and visionary. When it comes to ideas, Newt puts all candidates in both parties to shame. His biggest problem is that the press would not focus on the substance of his ideas, but would instead devote 95% of their Newt coverage to the petty, the trivial, and the irrelevant. The press HATES Newt as much or more than they hate Bush. They always have. But when it comes to ideas, any candidate from either party would be hard pressed to beat Newt on ideas alone.
Daddy Love you have to understand the difference.
Edwards defends the people at the bottom and that makes him an ambulance chaser.
Fred used his law degree to defend white-collar criminals, that makes him a good American.
At least to the GOP, who have made shafting 95% of America into a national pastime.
@83 Newt, a briliant historian???
Really? What have you read by this man who even with his prestige does not get a job at a major school?
I have read som of his stuff. He is a fair historian.
As for his dieas. Newt does not have any ideas about governance, he is totally a rovian .. message over matter.
Not exactly what we neeed now.
@85
As for his dieas. Newt does not have any ideas about governance, he is totally a rovian .. message over matter.
Not exactly what we neeed now.
He’s definitely an “all hat, no cattle” kind of guy. And his potential for sheer mind-blowing hypocrisy is off the charts (he was the undisputed porkbarrel champion of the 90s, even as he railed about big government).
Daddy Love: You missed all the stories of Edwards and his investments in companies foreclosing on Mortgages in LA, SC and NYC?
WHEW………i see that ylb and chadt are in their usual form…..
can you guys ever actually answer questions or are you too busy showing us your grade school rhetoric?
have you heard of an adult, reasonable discussion?
can you be more b-o-r-i-n-g?
afraid of finding out the reality of any situation?
everytime you pop up with some inane comment such as “maybe the meds are kicking in” don’t you realize that people know that unless you are 12 and spend all your time watching southpark….you even mentioning ‘meds’ is most likely because you, yourself, are on them.
good grief!
and thanks for the concern. but sorry to disappoint you. no trouble in paradise…..just slumming to see what the never-workers are up to. or not.
and i see that you haven’t changed a bit. still whining and not producing……
@90
Well, it’s that we hold you in such high esteem here that we tend to respond to you the way we do. We stumble all over ourselves when confronted by your inimitable talent, and are unable to express our admiration coherently. You being a scintillating intellect and all. I just can’t THINK of a more brilliant essayist than you. Your penetrating analysis of all that you address stun all who read it into insensibility.
We profusely worship your wisdom and rejoice at the enlightenment which always follows your visits here. We are not worthy.
You may be assured that we give your pronouncements the consideration that they deserve.
errata are: stun=stuns, bothering in the first place.
I am a fan of Edwards. I attended this event, and other Edwards events, but I have not endorsed him. I happen to think all of the leading Democratic candidates are head and shoulders above the Republican candidates, but it would be inaccurate to list me as a supporter because that implies that I prefer him to the other Democratic candidates, which I don’t.