At a recent house party and town hall meeting in Dover, NH John Edwards showed up with Brent Blackwelder of Friends of the Earth Action to receive the group's endorsement for Democratic nominee for President. He came to campaign in a retail politics state and answer some very tough questions from NHer-ites; to give them a good look up close and personal at my choice for the nomination.
But he also came to criticize the system awash in "big campaign cash" as the true obstacle to the reform of our government and its policies on almost every issue today and particularly on global warming and health care. Edwards breezed through his remarks spending the bulk of his time at this campaign stop answering questions, but he kicked it up a notch on his criticism of Clinton on two main issues: lobbyists and Iran.
Follow me below the fold for all the video and what I hope is not the future of our party: defeat in 2008 with Hillary Clinton as our nominee.
Brent Blackwelder, president of Friends of the Earth Action, announces the group's endorsement of John Edwards. His full remarks can be seen in this video and they're worth a review because the endorsement was not based on policy alone; it was based on the fundamentals of the campaign itself.
We pick up the comments after Brent Blackwelder speaks to the crowd about his group and the endorsement.
Edwards begins his comments by focusing on global warming, but takes a minute to applaud Al Gore and the incredible work he has done on this issue over the last 20 years. Thank God "some people" in this world see more than just Bush as the face of American politics and leadership.
I don't know about you, I can only speak for myself, but I felt extraordinary pride when Al Gore won the Nobel Prize. (huge applause)
God Bless him for his leadership and strength. And you know it's not as hard today to be an advocate on this issue because of his leadership on this issue. It was lonely times years ago when he was out there pushing on climate change and global warming. And I'm proud of him, I'm proud of Tipper and I'm proud of what he's done... He's been an extraordinary leader in this area.
Edwards connects the problems leaders and advocates on global warming face in today's political climate to the corruption and for-profit corporate advocacy in our system of government today.
Now here's my view, I think the reason we have not seriously addressed global warming is the same reason we don't have universal health care because we have a system in Washington that doesn't work the way it's supposed to work and there are huge obstacles to getting change. In this case it's oil companies, power companies etc. that stand between America and the change that it needs. So what do we do about that? First we address the change and at the same time we address the issue.
He states that lobbyists, who currently own and operate our system of government, need to be controlled through the campaign cash they regularly pony up for election. Or really that the control of these pernicious influences needs to be addressed in our political system today.
The Edwards campaign has adopted what he calls a "symbolic" position in that the campaign does not take money from Washington lobbyists. He applauds Obama for joining in this position but criticizes Clinton for not doing so.
I don't think you can defend the system and be part of a system that I personally believe is corrupt unless you make a strong principled stand and I think we need to ... By the way, what we ultimately need for all of our political campaigns is public financing to get the money out of politics so that the people's business can ... inaudible over applause ... and restore power in this democracy back to the American people.
Black box voting comes up in this clip, that's the first time I've heard him join the two issues. He also talks about having a people's Congress out in the real world to foster grassroots participation in the process of government and more engagement, okay some engagement, on the part of ordinary Americans that feel more than disenfranchised by the system of government we currently have to bear in this country. Demonizing lobbyists is easy to do in the context of a political campaign, but to offer as a central plank to the campaign support for full public financing of elections is another example of how the Edwards message is honest about the problem and cohesive. This message would offer voters a clear and legitimate choice in the general election because who among us really thinks they have any say in the political process today absent a spare 100K in a paper bag. I didn't think there would be that much support for this amongst voters, but the crowd's reaction shows that it's time for a presidential candidate with this position in the race.
make the polluters pay by buying a permit and invest that money in clean renewable energy
ban new nuclear plants
ban liquefied coal because "we don't need another carbon based fuel"
ban new coal fired plants because "we don't have the ability to capture the carbon"
Today America is in a great competition with China to be the biggest polluter on the planet. We need to clean up our act and we should not be making the situation worse than it is. And then we do need to sacrifice, all of us together. You know? We do need to be patriotic about something other than war. We need to say that if we want America to be what it's capable of being we're going to have to take responsibility.
He invokes the famous Kennedy line about our responsibility to more than ourselves as Americans. He basically says that no candidate can reasonably ask the electorate this time around to "just elect me and I'll handle it." And that is true. This country is by far too screwed-up at this point to expect a President to just take care of things for us. We're not children, most of us at least. And the problems we face today all across the boards are not only a huge challenge in and of themselves, but the systemic problems apparent in how we finance our elections are the greatest obstacles to reform that we face on any issue.
The media in America today is also complicit and they won't be providing legs to this message any time soon. Campaign finance reform? No way, many of that corporate campaign cash goes directly to the bottom line in advertising dollars. Health care reform? Not even close when insurance companies and Big Pharma are some of the media's best customers. Global warming? Again, no. When you have the media broadcasting a food fight between both sides that can't agree on the basic science and as Blackwelder said in his endorsement, the polluters fund the think tanks to "scheme on how they would rewrite scientific documents and lie about the facts."
He doesn't go through the specifics on many of his policies here, but he wraps up this section of his remarks with a bit about economic fairness:
I have a plan to end poverty in America and to address the extraordinary economic inequality that exists in this country which is really troublesome to me... Because what's happening today is our middle-class is struggling everyday just to survive.
That is entirely true. I read a recent article about this growing disparity: Income inequality worst since 1920s, according to IRS data. That's where all the growth in the economy goes these days, to the top. From the article: The superrich are gobbling up an ever larger piece of the economic pie, and the poor are seeing their share of earnings shrink: new IRS data shows the top 1 percent of Americans are claiming a larger share of national income than at any time since before the Great Depression. Edwards has also said in his stump speech that this year for the first time in decades the top 300,000 earners in this country now make more than the bottom 150 million. Edwards continues:
And on top of that we have 5 million more Americans that have gone into poverty. I announced my presidential campaign from the Ninth Ward of New Orleans. I did it for a reason because I think it is a glaring example of so many of the problems that exist in America today. Speaking for myself and I don't claim to speak for you, but I don't think we need a surge in Baghdad we need a surge in New Orleans to help the people there whose lives have been destroyed.
I couldn't agree more. Many bad things are happening in our country today, but nothing is worse than what is going on all over the Gulf Coast today. Much is as bad, but nothing is worse.
He turns to foreign policy and has some of his sharpest criticism for Senator Clinton in this clip by drawing some distinctions on the recent Kyl-Lieberman legislation declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization which passed overwhelmingly 76-22.
But it's another place where you need to know about the choices that you have.
There are huge differences between the Democrats and the Republicans ... but there are differences and choices between the Democrats and you should be aware ... We have very good candidates on our side and you have good choices, but there are differences.
Let me talk about Iran for just a second ... Bush and Cheney ... it started with the "axis of evil" remember? But on and on they continue to rattle the saber on Iran. Well there was an important vote that took place on the floor on the Senate a couple of weeks ago ... You can just imagine who wants them declared a "terrorist organization." George Bush ... and Dick Cheney ... because, from my perspective this is the first step of giving Bush the authority to move militarily on Iran. And what I have learned the hard way is that you cannot give Bush an inch... We have to stand strong against this president particularly when he's using the same kind of language in talking about Iran that we heard him using in talking about Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
So this vote took place on the floor of the Senate and I'd like to applaud two presidential candidates, Senator Dodd and Senator Biden voted no which I believe is the right position. They stood up against what Bush wanted to do. I think Senator Obama was not there when the vote took place. Senator Clinton voted yes. And I can't tell you how strongly I disagree with this.
We cannot allow this president the first step in taking military action on Iran and there is a difference. (applause)
It's nice to see that Edwards has this in his stump speech now. I think it's a good contrast on a very serious error in judgment on the part of Hillary Clinton. Edwards discusses the NYTimes article on this vote and how Hillary has moved into "general election mode." Edwards throws it out to the crowd, "have we decided who has won yet?" He gets another big applause line here, but this is exactly what's wrong with media today and one of the reasons that I think nominating Hillary is a huge mistake for my party.
The Hillary is strong meme is wafting through the airwaves right now as the reason for her success in the polls, but her yes vote and the need she feels to communicate strength to the voters with a vote like this could very well turn out to cost us the election if we nominate her. From my perspective, the rationale for her presidency is competence and experience. But if Bush takes military action against Iran then that rational dissolves in about 5 seconds flat. With Hillary as our nominee, a yes vote on Kyl-Lieberman and another pre-emptive strike on another Muslim country in the Middle-East we lose the election, folks. It's that simple. And if Hillary is our nominee she handed them the key to our defeat on a silver platter based on cynical politics and an attempt to show strength where there is no need. I think we can all agree that Hillary is as tough as nails and one smart cookie.
It's not strength to hand over your own destiny to men like George Bush and Dick Cheney. Now that they have her on the record supporting Kyl-Lieberman they control the dialog and can torpedo her candidacy at a time of their choosing. She can't back peddle on two of these serious mistakes and present the American people with a clear and positive choice in the general election.
Hillary is also sensitive to this characterization of her vote for Kyl-Lieberman by sending out an "an unusual campaign mailing ... to voters in Iowa". But if her campaign slogan is Experienced Leadership for a change then that begs the question: what kind of experience and what kind of change? Edwards has said in the past that if we can't offer voters a clear choice in this election then we will not win as a party. I think that's correct. Furthermore, Hillary is already back peddling on her vote and this is not going to help her case for the kind of experience we need to change this country. You can only be wrong once. The second time it's not the other guy's fault. The second time it's your own fault.
John Edwards is the correct choice for the Democratic Party. His position on this issue, economic fairness, global warming, reform of the government and the systemic rot caused by "big campaign cash" in the system, free trade agreements, true universal health care with no one left out of the system and an aspirational frame to a message of transformational change makes the Edwards message the winning message in November 2008. If we don't offer a clear enough choice, then we won't be able to expect the right outcome. If we just blur the choice then we get what we get.
I realize that many Obama partisans can pretty much adopt this language as a case for their own choice for the nomination. But Obama fails my threshold on two counts. First, the universal health care plan offered by Obama does not cover everyone. I think that was a serious error on his part. Both Edwards and Clinton have plans including a mandate that every single person in this country have health insurance. Second, Obama is not right on free trade and ten years after NAFTA that's a very difficult sell to the electorate this time around.
I think that Edwards offers the best choice for this party because we win when we run a credible populist campaign especially on economic issues and today in this country the electorate is ripe for the Edwards message. Bill won it running a populist campaign and that's how Al won it after adopting some very strong populist language at the end. If we nominate Edwards then that's how we'll win again. And if you don't think free trade deals are a big issue out there amongst the voters then I suggest you go out and talk to them. I do - every week. And this "anti-worker" position in the party of working people is the most underreported issue in the electorate today.
All the Q & A for the event will be posted in another diary. I hope you tune it for that vlog as well.
This diary is another in the continuing guerrilla vlogger series. I'm not associated with the campaign in any way although I do volunteer, but I speak only for myself when blogging. I support Edwards for the nomination and I do all these vlogs as a citizen journalist, as in I'm not paid. I do everything with an ordinary mini-DV, a PC, Movie Maker and free tools available on the web.
At a recent house party and town hall meeting in Dover, NH John Edwards showed up with Brent Blackwelder of Friends of the Earth Action to receive the group's endorsement for Democratic nominee for President. He came to campaign in a retail politics state and answer some very tough questions from NHer-ites; to give them a good look up close and personal at my choice for the nomination.
Video: 
He states that lobbyists, who currently own and operate our system of government, need to be controlled through the campaign cash they regularly pony up for election. Or really that the control of these pernicious influences needs to be addressed in our political system today.
Video: 
He doesn't go through the specifics on many of his policies here, but he wraps up this section of his remarks with a bit about economic fairness:
Video: 