Two of my problems with Edwards, in a nutshell

[XemaSab]

Elizabeth is going to be in Oakland, California on the 30th of September. Oakland is my hometown. There are close to half a million people in Oakland. According to the 2000 census, it's one of the two most ethnically diverse cities in the country. It is 36% Black, 15% Asian, and 23% White. 25% of the people identify themselves as Hispanic. Oakland has the third highest concentration of gays and lesbians among the 50 largest cities in the country (behind San Francisco and Seattle). 25% of the population is under age 18. 20% of the population is below the poverty line, including 28% of people under the age of 18. 1% of the population in homeless. In 2006 Oakland was ranked the second most dangerous city in California. In 2006 there were 148 murders in Oakland, many of them gang related.

So this is where Elizabeth is going to be later this month. Is she going to be speaking in the park near Lake Merritt, or maybe somewhere in East Oakland? No, she's going to be appearing at a $500 a plate dinner in the chic area of Rockridge.

Yes, I know candidates have to raise money. But it just seems wrong for her to be going to an area with such tremendous poverty and speaking only to the wealthy elites.

Moving right along....

The other thing that bothers me about Edwards is his issue statement about the environment on his website. I'm from Oakland, and I'm an environmentalist. :)

On the "issues" page there is but a lone tab for energy/environment.

http://johnedwards.com/issues/energy/

It's all empty platitudes about so-called global warming (his term, not mine). He calls for

*Cap and trade.

*A new climate treaty.

*Pollution permits.

*Increased efficiency.

If you rummage deeper, there are calls for the use of ethanol as a "renewable" fuel, forcing power companies to shift to 25% "renewables" by 2025 (the only helpful measure in a bunch of pork, but IMHO, too little, too late), "carbon offsets," a billion dollars for auto makers, and, you guessed it, CLEAN COAL.

http://johnedwards.com/issues/energy/new-energy-economy/

I know global climate change is a huge issue, but there is so much more that needs to be done to protect our environment than instituting a cap and trade system for greenhouse gasses and giving out billions to corn farmers, auto makers, and the coal companies.

What about clean air and water? What about the National Parks and other public lands? What about mountaintop removal and oil and gas drilling on public lands? What about overfishing the oceans and overharvesting the rainforests? What about endangered species and habitat conservation? Bush has done so much harm to the environment during his time in office, and trying to undo the damage he has done should be a top priority for any president.

I want a president who really understands the problems we are facing, and I'm just not hearing anything from Edwards that doesn't sound like empty talk.

[jpgray]

1. My only issue is with your first point

Just in terms of primary strategy most candidates will use CA as a cow to be milked for $$. Because it isn't a kingmaker state and time is precious for any frontrunner not well ahead of the pack, I don't find this behavior indicative of hypocrisy so much as it shows the problems with our primary process. If CA were a major early primary that historically makes the difference, candidates would treat it differently.

[XemaSab]

2. This is true.

In the general election, however, we are used for our sweet, sweet 55 votes, which come from the people, not just the rich.

[BEZERKO]

17. California is not the only place used as a cash cow

Southeastern states, like Georgia where I live, will be sponged for cash to spend anywhere but Georgia. The eventual nominee will fly into Atlanta, meet a small group at the Mariot Marquis to get 2 to 4 million dollars worth of 2,000 dollar checks, then take it to Ohio or Florida or New Mexico and spend it there. This is good for the Democratic parties of Ohio, Fla., or New Mexico, but for Georgia Democrats it kind of sucks.

[robinlynne]

3. In case it helps, here in LA, Edwards had a 15.00 fundraiser. I went. There were

lines around the block. And he personally went outside and spoke with the people who couldn't fit in. It was great.

[XOKCowboy]

4. A $15 fundraiser? That's pretty cool.

Did you get to hear him speak? All of his speeches that I've seen online are pretty powerful.

[robinlynne]

7. It was great. I only worried that he didn't have security. He was right down there with us.

[BeFree]

13. Heh

Looks like you blew the OP away with that bit of info, eh?

[robinlynne]

15. tee. hee. only fundraiser I ever went to in my life. love the concept!

[movonne]

5. I think that when looking real hard at the candidates, we will find

things we don't like...so probably it will be real hard to find someone that is perfect...it is when you find more wrong with one than good, then don't vote for that one...unfortunately I find the most wrong with the front runner..

[marions ghost]

6. Is E Edwards only speaking at such big money events?

Or does she also speak to other groups? (I don't know myself).

I guess it depends what she says to the rich supporters. Maybe some of them are smart enough to see that government in favor of the rich alone just isn't working...

It would be nice to have a transcript.

[book_worm]

8. Well isn't that a problem with most of the candidates and not only Edwards?

seems to me that all of them could spend more time appearing before more diverse audiences and spending more time with people who are poor. I will say this for Edwards he has made poverty a major issue in his campaign (unlike the others) and has appeared, probably, in more poor areas than most of the other candidates.

[defendandprotect]

9. Well, it's Edwards or Kucinich -- is Hillary any better on this???

What we have to remember is that everything to do with government has been traded down --
that includes those now serving and those who have served --
our election process -- and the targeting of effective, knowledgable legislators was very effective.

And, you can see this in our candidates -- money has selected those who represent them -- NOT us.

So this is the material we have to work with --

Can we make it thru --

I doubt it -- but, I would prefer Edwards or Kucinich --



And, of course, on Global Warming -- none of their responses is sufficient --

We need to nationalize our natural resources and take back control of oil from a few private families --

We need to make the public very aware of the dangers of burning any fossil fuels --

We need to replace all of our gas guzzlers with electric cars --
See: "Who Killed The Electric Car?"

We can do this in five years --

We need to have polls asking meaningful questions --
and prod journalists to ask meaningful questions --

[defendandprotect]

10. Earlier headline on this was something like "Edwards slams lobbyists...."

Edwards slams Clinton on health care By RON FOURNIER, Associated Press Writer

NASHUA, N.H. - In a raw populist appeal, Democrat John Edwards on Saturday accused presidential rival Hillary Rodham Clinton of defending a lobbyist-driven political system that is "rigged against regular Americans" and that killed her plan for universal health care.

The former North Carolina senator accepted a major union endorsement while insisting that no Democratic candidate legitimately can promise to change America without swearing off special interest money from federal lobbyists. New York Sen. Clinton has refused to do so.

"When it comes to the existing lobbyist game, we've got to end it and not defend it," Edwards told more than 700 members of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters.

The anti-lobbyist challenge is not new for Edwards. But he stepped up his attacks against Clinton by focusing on her most notable leadership role in 30 years of public life — the failed health care plan that, as first lady, she drew up in 1993 for her husband, then-President Clinton.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070908/ap_on_el_pr/edwards_lobbyists

[omega minimo]

11. .

[Hieronymus]

12. Thom Hartmann did a call-in poll on his show. Edwards won by

a huge margin. Hartmann prefers Edwards, as does Bill Maher.

[omega minimo]

14. .

[bridgit]

16. There's allot of money in the Oakland hills, professors & E Bay industrialists...

have to live somewhere; refer to it a 'gentrification' if easier but downtown is gleaming and that means money, also as a demographic corporate sports franchises' little invest where their money will not be returned. Emeryville, just right there, is undergoing an energetic face-lift with SF yups & money pouring in there, as is Brentwood, which used to be a sleepy little town

Naw, she won't be out on Castro St either ladling warm, nutritious soup to passers by, but she will be protected cause Oakland is nothing if not tough as nails no doubt

I hear you on the rest of it...someone has to start saying something

[Catchawave]

18. Do you this problem with all the candidates...or just Elizabeth?

Fundraising is an IMPORTANT part of running for office. The Edwards have been well known to stop by local communities of the Big Buck fundraisers to visit with the citizens for *free*.