MoJo's David Corn: The John Edwards Endorsement: A Last Chance to Prove He's No Phony

[flpoljunkie]

The John Edwards Endorsement: A Last Chance To Prove He's No Phony

A few weeks ago, I was talking to an influential Hillary Clinton fundraiser. When the subject of John Edwards (still in the race at that time) came up, she started sputtering about his hypocrisy. His expensive hair cut, his big house--the guy's a phony, she exclaimed derisively, and his populist, anti-Washington, help-the-poor rhetoric was all just for show. He won't last.

She was right on that final point. As for his authenticity, that was a question that chased Edwards. During his six years in the U.S. Senate (1999 to 2005), Edwards was no working-class hero. He did not develop a reputation as a firebrand willing to take on the powerbrokers of the nation's capital. At that time, Senator Paul Wellstone was the populist champion in the Senate (until his tragic death in October 2002). Wellstone waged one fight after another against corporate interests, lobbying influence, and the sway of big-money. I don't recall Edwards standing shoulder-to-shoulder with him during all these uphill battles.

Yet on the campaign trail, Edwards became Joe Hill in a suit.

Wellstone once told me that you always have to allow for redemption within politics. And perhaps Edwards' conversion was genuine. Why not give him the benefit of the doubt? His message was powerful and well-delivered--even if not embraced by a plurality of Democratic voters. But if Edwards wants to prove he was truly speaking his heart and mind, he has no choice when it comes to endorsing one of the remaining Democratic contenders. He cannot support Hillary Clinton.

[NashVegas]

1. David Corn = Blowhard

Corn was one of the pro-Iraq war journalists who were shitting all over anyone who dissented. I lost count of how many times I read, "but David Corn's a liberal - you MUST agree!"

[EFerrari]

46. The NYTs Public Editor used Corn as liberal cred that nothing happened

in Ohio.

"He's a liberal! You MUST agree!"

Exactly, Crisco.

[AndyA]

2. I don't think Edwards HAS to support ANYONE.

There are a lot of differences between Edwards and Clinton, as well as Edwards and Obama. Barack has a ton of corporate money in his coffers, so he's hardly free from the pull of the corporate strings.

I hope Edwards waits to endorse...if he ever does.

[ChiciB1]

60. ME EITHER! To Keep His Name Viable For Four Years, It May Be

necessary, but I'm not John Edwards! As for myself, I's much rather he used some "hand language!"

Of course, there is the possibility that by NOT endorsing and either one of the other actually BOMBS, AS WE'VE SEEN THOSE ELECTED IN 2006... He may be in a very good position!

David Corn was always very Liberal in the past. Haven't heard much of him lately, but there was a time when he was on C-Span a lot and he really was a barn-burner against the Repukes!

He may have "mellowed" as so many of our so called leaders have! So many DLC'ers who simply seem to "go along to get along!"

Myself, I'll stand my ground, I'm sick of the Election Game anymore. It's just another "sports' event, and if you don't have a player in the "finals" I can't get all that excited. IF I felt either one would change much, I would actually give it a try. But from what I've seen up until now, it's John Edwards for met, and that's IT!!

[LSparkle]

3. I was an Edwards supporter and was criticized for believing in him

If he supports Clinton, I'll have to eat my proverbial hat and admit I was wrong about the guy. I hope it doesn't happen.

[saracat]

7. Why? How could he endorse Obama and turn his back on his own health care plan?

I hope he endoreses no one but I don't see how he could endorse Obama and not contradict himself and abandon his own issues. He has already said Hillary has the most substantial plan to deal with poverty. Why would you have been "wrong" about John is he chooses to support his cornerstone issues?

[KittyWampus]

12. You call yourself an Edwards supporter? His signature issue is Poverty. Obama has a holistic

comprehensive set of policy proposals on that Issue.

Hillary has- nothing.

As a supposed Edwards supporter, I find it really odd that you would ignore his signature issue and focus so heavily on Health Care.

[joshcryer]

17. Edwards would support Hillary over his health care, immigration and Iraq policy similarities.

[jackson_dem]

23. And she is closer to him on trade too. Trade has always been a big issue for Edwards

[Leopolds Ghost]

51. Uh... NO. Hillary Clinton is the ultimate free trader

She got China MFN trading status to jump start what is now the Wal-Mart (her old boss) virtual monopoly on retail imports
from China -- they control the market on retail AND manufactured products in the US destined for retail.

Wal-Mart is Hillary's Halliburton.

[jackson_dem]

25. Edwards was "impressed" by Hillary's specific proposals on poverty when they met

[saracat]

42. Not that obviously, you have seen. And healthcare was just as much John's issue as poverty.

Remember, James Lowe? Remember the Sarkasian's? Remember the little girl John represented in the pool drain case? Do not ever dare question MY credentials as an Edwards supporter because I do not and will not support Obama.

[newmajority]

14. Why would Edwards endorse Hillary's Romneycare II

Mandatory Corporate controlled healthcare with the corporations garnishing your paycheck?? Doesn't sound at all like what Edwards was campaigning on.

[Garbo 2004]

56. Hillary's health plan mimics Edwards' plan. Guess you missed all howls here about E's mandated

health care.

[karynnj]

72. As Obama said, "Ted kennedy would not have endorsed him if he were

not for universal health care." The difference is on how to do it. If the Congress passes a plan with mandates, he will sign it. Edwards if sent a plan that doesn't have them would sign it. There is more difference between Edwards' 2004 plan and his 2008 one than between all 3 2008 plans.

[Yael]

8. I will have to do the same.

Have faith!

[saracat]

10. Why? How could he abandon his own heathcare plan?

Why? How could he endorse Obama and turn his back on his own health care plan?
Edited on Tue Feb-12-08 06:55 PM by saracat
I hope he endoreses no one but I don't see how he could endorse Obama and not contradict himself and abandon his own issues. He has already said Hillary has the most substantial plan to deal with poverty. Why would you have been "wrong" about John is he chooses to support his cornerstone issues

[KittyWampus]

22. How could he abandon his Signature Issue, POVERTY? Hillary has Jack Shit regarding policy positions

when it comes to addressing Poverty.

Go to her website. There is nothing.

Obama has an entire page of detailed policy proposals.

That is not opinion, it's objective fact.

[Little Star]

29. Health care is not a poverty issue?

[saracat]

35. John has publicly stated he was impressed by the substantive nature of Hillary's propsals on poverty

that she presented to him when they met.That is all I know.And I trst John's evaluation better than yours.

[Yael]

40. Saracat, I have a different take on it after stepping back the last 2 weeks

I honestly don't think ANY proposals as written are going to be enacted, and let me tell you why I think this is a good thing.

I honestly believe that Senator Obama can get the PEOPLE motivated and to the polls in November. I don't see Senator Clinton generating that much enthusiasm. While I am not a fan of his particular policy -- it won't be up to him to enact it. It will be up to the house and the senate.

Here, we have a career (R) that we are looking to unseat with a relatively unknown Dem in the house. Rep (R) voted AGAINST S-CHIP. Relatively Unknown Dem is a hard core Edwards Democrat.

If Obama has the coattails to swing the senate and house HUGE in November -- then it doesn't matter what plans are on the table today as the collective Congress will have the mandate to swing to the left and enact even more progressive legislation than we can imagine.

Make sense?

[saracat]

41. In my red state, where my husband is running for state senate in a GOP

heavy district he almost won last time, Obama could cost us the election. Period.And in many red states that will be the case.I know I will not vote for him under any conditions.

[Yael]

53. I appreciate that. PA has't voted yet -- so we have to take the chances we see in our districts!

[ChiciB1]

61. And In MY Red State Too! Very Little Good Happens In MY State!!

And as far as I know for now... it's sorta/kinda Hillary already! Neither will do it for me!

[cbayer]

43. Just having a page named "Poverty", does not a policy make.

Her policy is woven throughout her platform, as she realizes that eliminated poverty is a complex matter which must be address on multiple levels.

But here is a nice concise answer to the question. Now please stop saying she has no policy on this.

"First, we will care for the poor, the sick, the disabled, and others who cannot care for themselves. We will do this by providing health care for all, by strengthening our social safety nets, and increasing food stamps to combat hunger.

Second, we will reward work for those who are capable of working. No parent who works full-time should have to raise his or her children in poverty. I will expand child care assistance; increase the Earned Income Tax Credit, which has been called the greatest anti-poverty program ever created; support unions, which allow workers to bargain collectively for higher wages and better working conditions; and increase the minimum wage. And I will create new jobs by investing in old and new industries, like manufacturing as well as alternative energy.

Finally, I will work to restore opportunity in America. I will create a high-quality early childhood education system so every child starts school ready to learn. I will invest in proven K-12 reforms, reduce the dropout rate, and make college affordable for everyone who wants to go. I will also provide more opportunities for lifelong learning, so those who need to acquire additional skills later in life won't be held back.

I will also help families who are struggling in today's economy - I will help put home ownership back in reach for low-income Americans, protect families from predatory lenders, provide assistance to help families pay their skyrocketing energy bills, and help people save for their future.

Eliminating poverty won't be easy, but we can do it. One of my husband's proudest accomplishments is that during his administration, poverty dropped to its lowest level in two decades and seven million families were lifted out of poverty. We've slid dramatically backwards since then, but the right policies can make a difference.

I'll bring to this work a lifetime of fighting to increase opportunity. For 35 years, I have worked to listen to those whose voices are often unheard or ignored. From representing abused and neglected children as a young lawyer to serving on the board of the Children's Defense Fund to helping create the Early Head Start program and the Children's Health Insurance Program as First Lady, I have always fought to ensure that every American can reach his or her full potential."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/senator-hillary-rodham-cl_b_85425.html

[KittyWampus]

44. Poverty is an issue unto itself. All you can do is extrapolate how this or that policy MAY

impact Poverty. And a speech means nothing. Unless it's posted as policy proposal it's just words. Further, what you posted is mostly vague rhetoric. And only barely begins to address Poverty. It's largely the vague proposals she threw out to address the Middle Class.

Obama doesn't just have a page titled Poverty. He attacks it in a holistic, comprehensive way.

You cannot take this or that piecemeal policy and try and stretch it to pretend it covers Poverty.

In the end, you prove you don't understand Poverty nor do you care.

[cbayer]

45. It's not a speech. It is a written answer to a direct question.

And something "posted as policy proposal" is also just words.
If you look closely, their platforms are very, very similar.
Obama's platform is broken down into:
* Expand Access to Jobs
* Make Work Pay for All Americans
* Strengthen Families
* Increase the Supply of Affordable Housing
* Tackle Concentrated Poverty
And I respectfully disagree. I think an issue like poverty must be addressed over a wide range of other topics.
I think it a mite rude to tell me I don't understand poverty and I don't care. I have seen you ask for this information over and over again, and I was just giving it to you.

[ChiciB1]

66. There IS Something To Think About Here Though... Endorsing Obama Over

Clinton DOES represent a certain amount of change. At least it won't be Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush AND Clinton!

I think Obama was "the chosen one" quite some time back by some BIG HONCHOS as a very viable person of color. Not Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton types. Obama can rise to a certain Rock Star status and follow through. I also think Obama KNOWS why this happened and knows he has a great deal of POWER helping him along! Simply because some VERY BIG POWERFUL people in D.C. want to get what may be called Repuke/Democrats! And Independents!

I DON'T like it, but I think it's a PLAN that was hatched and you know what... it seems to be working! And the "plan" may be to show the Repukes that WE ARE THE PARTY who did it first. Clinton IS NOT very well liked by many many people. When she gives a speech, she sounds like she's "hawking wares" like when she says..... WHEN I'M POTUS, WE WILL YATTY YATTY! It grates on my nerves!

I've had many thoughts about the "why" with Edwards, but his sudden "suspension" came about because he WAS gaining traction, and it WAS upsetting the GRAND PLAN! Maybe he got out BEFORE Super Tuesday so Obama WOULD do better than Clinton! I don't know, but in my gut I DON'T see him endorsing Clinton at all.

I DO feel he will jump in when Obama has a real "comfort" zone, and he may be offered the AG job. Then he's STILL viable and can run in 2012!! I don't know... just musing!

I just can't go with Clinton... she has made me feel that she NEVER thought she was going to have any opposition, and now it's not really a fight between Clinton and Obama, but between those "behind the scenes!"

Politics is ALL about this kind of stuff, and "we the people" won't get to know the "real" story for a very long time. JMHO!

[saracat]

68. I just am sickened by Obama much more than Hillary.I may not agree with Hillary on some issues

or like her "style' of politics but Obama is no better and he is a hypocrite about it.I do believe she will at least try for universal health care and her plan is almost the same as John's.I will never ever support Obama.He is corrupt( nore than the Clintons') and a real hypocite.

[ChiciB1]

69. I Was Just Musing... I'm NOT Supporting Either One... I'm Just Wondering

if this "might" be something! Remember, I'm the one who thinks those up in D.C. with all their connections have done some very SERIOUS damage top this country. At this point in time, NONE of them deserve my vote!!

I don't want Edwards to support either one! I was just thinking out loud!

[jsamuel]

4. the working class is solidly behind Clinton, not Obama. This makes no sense.

[newmajority]

9. That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my life.

Where do the Hillbots get that lie from?

As I said yesterday, I won't comment on John Edwards until he actually says or does something.

But Hillary is NOT the candidate of the working class, she is the candidate of the corporatists, AIPAC, and her own huge ego and sense of entitlement.

[jsamuel]

11. The lower the income, the more likely one is to support Clinton over Obama.

Look it up in any poll or exit poll.

[newmajority]

18. What polls? The ones Markkk Penn pulled out of his ass?

:eyes:

[jackson_dem]

26. No, the exit polls taken from voters leaving the voting booth

[incapsulated]

47. EVERY FUCKING EXIT POLL

Jesus, are you really this ignorant of the primaries going on?

[catgirl]

30. Huh?

Hillary is no friend to the working class. Outsourcing american jobs
is one thing she is good at. Our health care system needs to be over-
hauled, but that's not the only problem poor and middle class americans
are facing.

[asdjrocky]

5. David Corn can suck my left nut.

Phony is a rw word that was used to minimize Edwards. And for him to repeat it, at this point, just shows where he, and you are coming from.

[ChiciB1]

62. Gee, Taken From You asdjrocky... David Corn IS Another Sell Out!!

Will it NEVER STOP??? What has happened to THIS COUNTRY??? I have no nuts, just the ones I feed to the squirrels, and David Corn can't have ANY of them!!

And he can't touch any other bodily parts of mine either!!

[asdjrocky]

63. A new league record...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[ChiciB1]

65. Glad You Liked It So Much!! HA! n/t

[xchrom]

6. may he endorse no one. nt

[jackson_dem]

13. Obamites swiftboated him as a phony and now they revive the smears to try to force him on this

[catgirl]

33. Oh there you go again

The only "swiftboating" happening around here is being done by trolls and desperate
Hillary supporters.

[R_M]

34. True.

[John Q. Citizen]

39. They didn't swiftboat him, they pointed out the conversion was recent. Which it is.

That doesn't make it phoney but it is relevant information.

Obama is winning most of the Edwards supporters as it is. Edwards got what, 4 to 5% in California?

So pretty soon here, it's not going to matter if Edwards endorses unless he also hits the campaign trail with who he endorses in Ohio and Texas, and PA. Edwards and Kerry could do Ohio again for Obama, that could help close the gap. Or if he went for Hill it could help her win by another point ot two.

That could have an effect.

I would bet Obama would be most likely if any endorsement were made. I can't see Edwards endorsing Hill. I could be totally wrong here. It's just my gut feeling.

And I don't care if Edwards endorses or not. He's free to do whatever he wants.

[SteppingRazor]

15. When did Corn cross the street and go to work at MoJo?

He had been at The Nation for quite a while, no?

[vireo]

49. another thing I don't get

Corn's final "Nation Minute" on Air America was devoted to belittling Obama for his inexperience while by contrast praising Clinton. Why the sudden conversion?

[vireo]

50. dup

delete

[Hobarticus]

16. How'd I know, before I opened this, that he'd be labeled a phony

If he didn't endorse a certain candidate?

[jackson_dem]

21. The Obama machine is in overdrive

They never post the policy reasons why Obama is closer to Edwards than Hillary is because they know both celebrity candidates are about the same on policy.

Compare all of this to Hillary and her supporters.

[krabigirl]

19. Edwards doesn't HAVE to jump onto the Obama train. He can do what he wants.

Maybe he will jump on, maybe he won't. But I'm really tired or reading this kind of offensive crap.

[jenmito]

20. Exactly. And they reminded us today on MSNBC that Edwards said he thinks the Repubs. WANT to run

against her. So if he endorses her, it will definitely prove him to be a phony (again).

[jackson_dem]

31. And he also thinks Hillary will "pummel" the rethugs while Obama would lose

Put the two together. He thinks they want to run against her but she will win. He thinks they don't want to run against Obama but he will lose. President McCain or President Clinton?

I love how Obamites attack him as a phony, then pressure him to cave into his demands to "prove" he isn't a phony by endorsing the corporate Obama who is all but sponsored by the msm.

[jenmito]

36. Your infantile name-calling aside,

Edwards has said MANY times that Hillary is the status quo, and that "people REJECTED the status quo" in his opinion "proven" by Hillary coming in 3rd in Iowa. If he endorses Hillary, he's an opportunistic sell-out. Period.

[jenmito]

24. delete-dupe

[The_Casual_Observer]

27. Corn is a trust fund populist.

[dicknbush]

28. HOPE????HOPE??? ....We don't need HOPE we need...

Help! I don't like preacherey type people leading our country. Obama is a frustrated minister and he belongs in a church not the white house!

[R_M]

32. David Corn?

Nothing says extremist hack like David Corn!
:rofl:

I don't take this moron seriously.

[2rth2pwr]

37. Why endorse anybody? He just needs to stand there and look pretty.

Anyway, if he did endorse somebody, it would probably have no effect on his 2 supporters.

[Divine Discontent]

54. go beat your dog. eom

[ElsewheresDaughter]

38. and so the slaughter begins even before JE does a thing for shame on Corn

[incapsulated]

48. So he should endorse the choice of limo liberals instead of the candidate

That the ACTUAL working class prefer.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

52. Indubitably true:

During his six years in the U.S. Senate (1999 to 2005), Edwards was no working-class hero.

[Divine Discontent]

55. Hi, RUMMYisFROSTED

Kennedy-Edwards Minimum Wage Raise Laws

Vote Against Bush's First Taxgiveaway

Vote Against Bush's Second Taxgiveaway

Vote Against $87 Billion "I support Bush's War Bill"

Wrote Bill that allowed individuals to buy prescription drugs from Canada

Wrote and Sponsored Bill that would make sexual orientation a legally protected category in job discrimination

Wrote Sunset Provision into Patriot Act

Floor leader for Feingold-McCain Campaign Finance Reform.

Voted against the Chilean trade agreement, against the Caribbean trade agreement, against the Singapore trade agreement, against final passage of fast track for this president.

Edwards has a very good trade record. Let's compare him to St. Kerry, a prominent progressive who was in office the entire time Edwards was. Edwards is the closest thing to a protectionist that can get elected.

Edwards voted against trade pacts with Chile, Singapore and Africa, which Kerry supported. But he voted in 2000 to grant most-favored-nation trading status to China, as did Kerry and most other senators.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15414-20 ...

St. Kerry

07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act NV
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act NV
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 Y
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill Y
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill Y
07/17/1997 Most Favored Nation Repeal Amendment N

Edwards

07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 N
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill N
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill N

Edwards voted right on every trade bill except one and that one was Bill Clinton's baby. It also was not as clear cut as it appears in retrospect. Edwards explained why he voted for it and it was a perfectly reasonable belief to have, a belief most of his Democratic colleagues shared. Edwards also opposed the Peru, South Korea, and CAFTA trade bills after he left office. Given his record he presumably opposed Oman as well, although I have not seen a statement from him on it. Edwards has opposed every trade bill to come down the pike in his career except one that noted rethug lites like Ted Kennedy and Patrick Leahy voted for, as did most Democrats.

Edwards can seriously be attacked for once supporting the war but the Big Lie, which picked up steam in February of 2007 (what happened that month?), that he was not a populist until recently and especially that he sucked on trade is nonsensical.

Edwards' trade record is identical to Ted Kennedy's:

07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 N
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill N
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill NV

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

59. You forgot the :hi:

:hi:


I'm not here to make a case against Edwards (I can, however).

In my opinion he was a centrist Dem. Sorry to have to say it.


(Typically, I use the pooper-scooper for bullshit, flamebait threads- universally. If you feel threatened by a meaningless opinion half way through the thread...so be it.)

[Thrill]

57. He'll have a hard time proving that to people here in NC

[TheDonkey]

58. Edwards probably won't endorse...

[yeswecan08]

64. Edwards made himself irrelevant. He's a dwarf compared to Obama now

[saracat]

67. And you are an intellectual midget.

[marlakay]

70. I think to be true to himself he should sit it out

and endorse no one. If he endorses to get political gain it goes against everything that he spoke for. He goes against the heart of his message of not selling what you really believe in just to win.

Even more so if he picks Hillary. It was very obvious watching the debates neither liked each other and if he picked her it would be known to all she promised him the moon.

[spooky3]

71. He has differences with and (more) similarities to BOTH candidates.

I hope he stays out, but if he decides to jump in, that doesn't make him a phony. Only someone who is extremely naive (or at least disingenuous) about politics, or attempting to bully him into supporting his/her favorite candidate, would make that kind of judgment.