Dichotomy alert…

I find it funny that so many people think that Edwards was the only person ‘standing up’ for the common man.

Sheesh, how quickly we forget. Edwards had a pretty good ‘schtick’, but the only real champion of the common man this last time around was Kucinich, and he got pooped on by the media for his troubles.

......................

So Edwards was not the ONLY candidate expressing the plight of the poor and the myth of our free society, but your guy was such? I recall Edwards coining the term, “Two Americas”. and not to diss Kucinich, can you cite his words regarding this subject?

I’ll wait.

don knutsen. Righteous bunch of pinheads etc .... Right. Very bad habit perhaps only encouraged by the reality shows and survival shows. (I’ve never seen one, as no tv, but have read about them.) We are letting the medium of national discourse confuse us re what’s real and what isn’t, what matters and what doesn’t. Whatever happened to drawing lessons from Shakespeare, Hawthorne (The Scarlet Letter), and even that stuff from Rabbi Yeheshua, “.. let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”?

don knutsen, May 12 at 5:11 pm

Seems to me most folks shot from the hip that is not the best way. Edwards=Bilderberg=bad boys=we dont need any more of them got too many now.

Inherit The Wind, May 9 at 9:05 pm #

I certainly didn’t imply that Edwards invented the subject, I believe a case might be made that Jesus did….

The question then becomes, “why do we place such emphasis upon the private lives of our candidates to the detriment of their positions?

ardee, May 9 at 5:11 pm #

P.S. I spent 25 years in Pacifica, raised three of my four children there, and love it still…..
************************************************

Is critical thinking dead?  John Edwards didn’t invent the concept of “Two Americas”—it’s been out there going back to the early ‘60’s with the publishing of “The Other America”.  RFK’s reputation didn’t begin to become the stuff of legend until Marion Wright (Edelman) took him to SEE that other America and he was visibly shaken by it.  It was one thing he and LBJ were totally sympatico about—and that was the mid 60’s.

It’s hard to even CONCEIVE of the Kennedys and their proxies NOT being totally supportive of Edwards on this point—enough to fight off any attacks on that score.

No, I think it’s more likely Edwards was just done in a mistep and pure political hardball rivalry…nothing sinister there.  He stepped on his dick (as the expression goes) and paid for it.

There are “two Americas.” John Edwards is a member of neither.

For Bob In Pacifica, May 9 at 4:55 pm #

I believe that the destruction of Edwards political career may very well have been undertaken precisely because he brought up the subject of the ‘Two America’s’. The powers that be hate to see publicized the basic and inherent injustices contained within this nation of ours.

P.S. I spent 25 years in Pacifica, raised three of my four children there, and love it still…..

Edwards’ appeal? He was talking the best universal healthcare of any candidate. His campaign speeches rang of populism, real populism. He said what a lot of progressives felt. Sorry that Marie Cocco missed his appeal. Maybe her political reporting would be better if she actually studied position papers.

JOHN EDWARDS APPEAL

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39333

STUDY STUDY STUDY LESS TALK TRY TO LISTEN

BEST JEWS ASK QUESITONS

BEST RABBIS SELDOM GIVE ANSWERS

TRY TO ASK MORE QUESTIONS

FOGGYJONES looks like you got your hands full with the younguns.

http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/sharebook/664781840

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

It’s a relief to see that at least some people see Edwards’ policies—which we really needed badly—as more important than his personal life. It’s hard enough to find pols who are sufficiently populist to really push for health care for all Americans. They shouldn’t have to walk away from a campaign because people might object to their private life.

The people in NC knew he was a looser

A looser of screws or bolts? Slotted head or Philip’s head?

John Edwards is the poster boy for ambulance chaser his court room antics were sickening and he was only doing it in hopes of a big settlement. The people in NC knew he was a looser and the reason he ran for president is the same as Arlen Spector they both knew they could not get re elected

For me, the appeal of John Edwards, that would still cause me to support him in any future Presidential or other political campaign, is the fact that he stood up in court, fought the insurance companies and often beat them.  That’s the combination of guts and skill that I want in a POTUS, a legislator or a Supreme Court Justice.

Insurance companies are killing people every day by denying or delaying covered benefits.  Most people, who are even lucky enough to have a pseudo medical insurance policy, are being conned.  They find this out when they actually submit a slightly non-routine claim.

Then, of course, there are the previously unheard of millions who have no insurance at all, and the abuse, hostility and incompetence to which they are subjected when they seek treatment for life-threatening medical conditions at U.S. emergency rooms.

Healthcare is a word that can only be realistically applied to the 1% elite.  The rest of us are simply an ongoing source of revenue for doctors, hospitals, procedure mills, psychologists, physical therapists and all the others that make their living in the Med Biz.

We already have a good working model for a single payer Universal Health Care system. It’s called Regular/Standard Medicare. If we implemented it for everyone, this country would not suddenly become bankrupt, private doctors would still continue to practice, and people could choose any private doctor that they wanted. The difference is that instead of doctors and their billing people needing to know and abide by twenty different insurance companyies rules and paperwork, the medical system would be greatly simplified and all bills would go to one payer.

Why don’t we change to such a system?  It is because the medical insurance companies would be put out of business. Insurance companies control huge amounts of money and, therefore, have enormous political power.  We don’t have a single payer health care system because insurance companies won’t allow it.  It’s that simple.

That’s why John Edwards is my kind of candidate. I couldn’t care less about his whether his fly is zipped or unzipped.  I’m too preocupied with staying alive.

NABNYC, May 8 at 1:45 pm #

I disagree.  John Edwards stood for something that none of the other candidates did:  a radical change in our society to raise up the poorest, commit ourselves to eliminating the horrible inequality which is a part of every community.

....I have not agreed with everything you post, odd if I had, but this is most eloquent and well worth remembering. It may have even played a part in his downfall….not that I’m the conspiratorial type.

I had nothing against Edwards’ positions.  I thought they were pretty good. I just thought he wasn’t the first choice to take over administration of the government.  His “chops” were a lot thinner than Obama’s, whose weren’t that thick.

But by the time his fly came unzipped in public, he was ALREADY finished as a candidate—he didn’t make it as far in 2008 as he did in 2004.

Edward’s claim to fame was his “two America’s” message which I think was heartfelt. I liked his message of working with the less well off - it was refreshing after all of the materialistic b.s. we are fed in this country 24/7. Too bad his private life was a mess, because he could have played a key role in the Obama administration. We have too many politicians catering to the wealthy - we needed someone like Edward’s and he let us down.

Edwards just came along a little too late. By the time he ran for Prez our nations facination with womanizing southern lawyers that felt our pain was begining to wane. For we had already moved on, to ex-drunken texas half-wit, and then a haughty half-negro with a silver tongue and a lack of soul.

Are alpha males with a penchant for chasing chubby chicks, binge drinking, and pathological lying our only qualifications for leadership in modern america?

Yawn…  Marie Cocco’s thinly veiled outrage at Edwards’ infidelity just shows that she’s no different than any other woman whom time and gravity have made insecure.  Ladies, if you can’t keep your emotions from compromising your reason, just write about something else.  And your feigned contempt for Elizabeth Edwards’ is laughably transparent.  Her weakness is your weakness (really, you might as well advertise it on a billboard) and that’s what makes you soooooo angry.  But I guess if you keep telling yourself you’d behave diffently long enough, eventually one person will believe it.

I disagree.  John Edwards stood for something that none of the other candidates did:  a radical change in our society to raise up the poorest, commit ourselves to eliminating the horrible inequality which is a part of every community.

I think it was during the Clinton era (a term which carries more horror with every job lost, every new “treaty” sending money and plants and tax dollars someplace else, every new “accommodation” to bring millions more poor unemployed people to take American jobs while my neighbors lose their jobs and homes)—but it was during the Clinton era, when things seemed calm, that the Democratic Party officially banished the term “poverty” from their walls and instead became the Party of Wall Street, the Party of Corporate Love, the Party of the Middle Class, the party of 30%-and-climbing interest rates on loans to working Americans.  I almost think that any Democrat who uses the word “poverty” is banished to the envelope-stuffing wing, duct-tape over their mouth. 

Shhh.  We don’t talk about unions, teachers, nurses, social security, healthcare, daycare, women’s rights, living wages, racism, environmental concerns, job security, pensions, employee rights, and we certainly do not talk about poverty.  We’re “new” Democrats, and we only talk about fundraising and Aipac and our insurance and Wall Street and Banking friends.  We only like rich people who pay us bribes.  Poor people are useless.

So along comes John Edwards, so much of an outsider that he apparently didn’t get the memo.  And he starts talking about poor people.  Despite Clinton’s proclamations about the brave new world he created, it turns out that only Bill and Hill and their friends got rich off of globalization—the rest of us got hosed, and the poor got hosier than ever.  Poor became really really poor.  Housing for everyone went up 300%, so most people spend half their take-home for a roof.  We’ve been had in this country, and the Clinton folks lead the war against us.  And the poor suffered the most.

When John Edwards staked his position as being an advocate for the poor, he ripped the curtain away from the DLC to show our own citizens living in shacks without running water, children without healthcare, unemployed parents, grandparents whose pensions were stolen by the biggest donors to the Democratic Party.  John Edwards was threatening to expose the truth about the Clinton era, about globalization, about the fact that our country does not work for most of us.  And regardless of his personal history, his decision to campaign on this issue meant the Democrats had to shut him up.  Which they did.

As far as who he had sex with, I would not inquire anymore than I would ask about somebody’s bathroom habits.  It’s personal.  It’s nobody’s business except his wife.  She’s decided to live with it, and I think that’s part of the bigger issue of women’s right to choose.  She made a decision, kept her family together, we should respect that.

And for all the finger-pointing moralists out there, remember:  it’s not like he started a war, or tortured and murdered people, or accepted bribes to let spies walk free even though they stole classified information and gave it to a foreign country.  He just had sex with someone.  Take a breath and move on.

I believe I understand what people saw in him, but I never shared their views. I think his charisma appealed primarily to 40-something liberal women who fell for his Poor People line - and that’s what it was, a line.  I also believe there was a large component of sex appeal in the mix.

John Edwards was old news a year ago.  His campaign was over, and all he had left was a fairly long shot at the Veep nomination—Clinton, Biden and others were clearly ahead of him.  All the affair did was kick him out of the VP slot and an Obama cabinet position. 

It’s likely that the big splash over the affair came from within the Dem party.  It’s an old story that your opponents are in the other party but your enemies are in your own!

The cynicism of our defacto election system is all built on perception—how ELSE could a dunce like George W. Botch EVER get elected over a clearly far more competent and intelligent Gore?  Even the intelligent, competent and thoughtful Obama had to be “marketed” to defeat a totally inappropriate-for-the-job John McCain.

BTW, Edwards’ infidelity was a one-time slip.  McCain spent a YEAR cheating on his wife before he divorced her and married his mistress, Cindy.  Yet that’s a pass. I think the issue is between John and Elizabeth Edwards.  She is P.O’d and hurt and humiliated by him and she’s paying him back.  It’s up to them to work out the rest.  But Oprah’s had a lot of fun bringing it out.  That’s what she does and how she built her career.  I have some issues with Oprah’s methods though I respect much of what she has achieved.

This is the first, of the few articles, I’ve read on the “new” John Edwards episodes, that focuses on John Edwards, not on Elizabeth with heavy “dissing” of her.

Men writing about this have asked why didn’t she, the wife, do this or that in re his career?  Some comments on some news and liberal-ish blogs have been ugly in re Elizabeth, including some by women.  It adds up to women get blamed for whatever: whatever their adult husbands do or don’t do. Thanks Marie Cocco.  (I was never an Edwards supporter.)

although not alone, Edwards apparently couldn’t tell the ‘Patriot Act’ of ‘01 was blatantly UNconstitutional.Something so obvious even a non legal scholar could see.Second when a candidate works so hard to sell their family, instead of their experience or vision- you know they either don’t have any or don’t want any one to look too closely or deeply (Palin).Everytime he dragged out his father being a mill worker, Eliz’s Cancer or the loss of their son, I thought shady lawyer and hedge fund mogel.Hedging the odds by Creating a humble beginings storyline and working the sympathy angle.
Granted it was a plus when he ran with Kerry- Heinz, but became painfully obvious in ‘08, it was a well oiled script.And we already had experience with one ‘Slick willy’ who fancied himself the new JFK- Talked the Talk but couldn’t Walk the Walk. Edwards was pitching a Defendant that lacked creditability. $400 haircut was the definitive proof it was nothing more than a Court room style sham.

I echo the perceptive noting by a couple of folks here that the real pity in all of this is that Edwards was the only true champion of the poor in America and that messsage, essential in its proclaiming the fraud of “the land of the free and the home of the brave” has been lost.

We alsways seem to fall into the role of making our leaders or would be leaders into something more than human when they are simply just like the rest of us, strengths in some areas and weaknesses in others. Those we support are become cartoon supermen, those with whom we disagree are arch villains of the lowest order.

This is no way to run a nation.

Edwards’ appeal to me was his mandatory universal health coverage and the semblance of a populist agenda. (All the rest of this personal stuff is garbage. Who cares why or when he Went Astray? I blame the whole celebrity-pol culture on Jerry Brown, who was, as far as I know, the first candidate to create a persona on TV in his gubernatorial campaign.)

Here we go with the personality instead of the what the man may have stood for in a run for the presidency but in this case it may be appropriate.

He may be guilty or misappropriations of campaign funds and deserves investigation and prosecution, but so what? Tell me one other candidate that hasn’t misappropriated funds, you get caught or you don’t.

What is the real issue here for me is the potential that this will become the current ‘monica lewinsky’ parade that will be covered incessantly by the MSM to give them an out on reporting on the real issues, the real crimes of those that are inflicting this country and world because the MSM is dedicated to keeping their handler’s names out of the news.

So can we get back to our current electorate’s misbehaviors?

John Edwards was a 2004 Bilderberger attendee. Most Demo’s had their hearts set on Gephardt, who can’t stand NAFTA. So I don’t care about Edwards. If I see him on any Prez ticket then I know the fix is in.

Where was Cocco’s mind that day? She “never understood John Edward’s appeal”? Her problem, not his. Not that many others in media were much attracted to Edwards’ foul-mouthed talk of wide-spread poverty across so-called “land of plenty.” Whether he meant it or not, he had no chance, not in the case of media whose principle function is booster-ism. Never mind reality, which is the point—spectacle in place of actuality.

Only later did Edwards do the nasty, indeed very possibly out of exhaustion, if also out of whatever ego, though not likely that much. How many out there ever suffered through long-time illness of a spouse? Other than those who think relationships are functions solely of intellectual compatibility? Apart from the physical? (The physical is what is really taboo in media. In more ways than one, whether denial of poverty or denial of sex. The body matters not, except for purposes of Darfur photo ops. Even so, Appalachia is less often photographed. Same for any American inner-city ghetto/barrio. Plus, no George Clooney or Bono standing by.)

By now, especially since Oprah-fication, we’ve become an even more intolerant society than before. Media’s enjoying yet another circus consisting only of the most chintzy, hypocritical moralizing. All falling all over themselves to demonstrate, not only sympathy for the wounded wife (despite having written a “tell-all,” needless to note, though I do note), but also—very probably—their own fidelity back at various (with lovely views of wherever) ranches, afforded by way of pandering moralizing.

No doubt, Elizabeth felt as she still feels wounded by hubby’s screwing around. Which doesn’t mean skepticism isn’t in order, as she’s not likely being entirely honest either—not with herself and not with him. And not with media either. There really are no such beings as “innocent” adults. Only innocent children still guileless.

But never mind, public flaying—by media, and now by wife, who’s currently carrying on in public—of Edwards is just about complete.

Cocco seems to imply here that Edwards had less of a “public record” than did Obama or a number of others, who even if they were longer in public office had even less to show for that. Obama, lately, has been discovered to have been cheap-talking candidate himself. (The one with a demonstrated public record was Ralph Nader, who was, therefore, ignored. In the same way Chomsky is routinely ignored—for the fact both cause embarrassment among the ideologically soaked.)

Then she suggests we (along with herself) should be more concerned with “self-absorbed” politicians. Which ones would those not be? Since about Eisenhower? Kennedy? Nixon? Reagan? Bushes? Clintons? Anyone? Anywhere? Not surprisingly, none anywhere in the case of celeb-driven culture that values just below money “15 minutes of fame.”

Cocco’s talking through her hat here, after having somehow missed Edwards while present in Manchester when he was there.

As for “spectacular flameout,” that was only by way standard media flogging. As before when Howard Dean (from New Hampshire) was declared “lunatic” for supposedly “screaming.” All nodded, said “amen.”

When media doesn’t approve of speaking in public of poverty in this here rigged casino of a national disgrace of a supposedly “equal-opportunity” economy, any who does is done. Over. Kaput. Outta here. Off the table. No matter what else any ever did or didn’t do. Though if any did happen to go astray, any will be then be rendered unto Oprah-fied culture as necessary according to media panderers to idio-fied. Even Edwards’ still-around wife is profiting by public flogging, which might be—hint, hint—indicator of how it happened he went astray in the first place. Among any number of other possible reasons never to be disclosed when reality is denied. “Phantom,” indeed. Not Edwards, but reality.