Showing posts with label Edwards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Edwards. Show all posts

Saturday, April 7, 2007

A conversation with John Edwards



I found this on Salon this morning, you can read the whole interview here.

Elizabeth has announced that you plan to hire a tutor to help home-school your two youngest children, Emma Claire and Jack, in the fall so the family can be together on the campaign trail. Have you realized how many conservative votes you could get if you play up your plans for home schooling?

I hadn't thought about that.

I assume that evolution will not be part of the curriculum.

It'll be part of our curriculum.

If there is one word that I have heard from you in this campaign -- in your criticism tonight of "incrementalism" and in your New Hampshire speech last month about "transformational change" -- it's the word "bold." I didn't hear this from you four years ago at this time.

You probably never heard it from me.

What changed?

Circumstances. I think things have changed for America. Our standing in the world has gone down. The war in Iraq has gone downhill. Our healthcare systems have become more dysfunctional. And both climate change and energy use have gotten worse. I think it's what's needed under the circumstances. I think it's also combined with me being more seasoned and more comfortable with taking stronger, bolder positions.

If someone who was in a campaign 10 years ago had published a pamphlet that some interest group was really upset about -- with the oldest technology in the world, a printing press -- it would have been a somewhat similar flap.

Sure, sure. Bloggers by nature, as you know, are right at the edge. That's how they operate. It's how they get their message across and how they get heard.

Do you have any sense of the role that blogging and the Web will play in this campaign?

I think we all are learning. But I have a sense of it. I think they're going to play an important role. That's what it feels like to me.

In your speech tonight, referring to terrorism, you talked about how Bush and Cheney want us to cower. . . .

They believe in a parental government. They don't believe it in the sense that they think that big government should solve all the problems. But they believe it in the sense that they don't exhibit confidence in the power of Americans to do great things and be strong and courageous. And that's amazing for a Republican president. And they tap into fear as the mechanism for accomplishing it. I just think it completely underestimates America.

The larger sort of question is: Do you buy the notion, as Cheney has said, that what the Bush administration calls the "war on terror" is a struggle that will be going on all of our lives?

There is a struggle that certainly will go on for some time. But I do not define the struggle the way he does. He wants to talk about this as war, the war on terror. And this struggle is one that has many layers. One layer is the only one they like to talk about, which is violent, radical Islam. Is this a threat to the security of the world? It absolutely is. But there are many components of that struggle that they never talk about, which are the underlying causes, which is the underlying capability of the terrorists to recruit. It is a multi-causal thing. It is young people not being educated, being educated in madrassas, living lives of poverty and hopelessness; corrupt regimes. There are multiple contributors to the undercurrent that allows terrorism to be a force in the world. Can we stamp it out entirely no matter what we do? Probably not. If we do all the things today that we should be doing, we can weaken it to the point that America and the rest of the civilized world can manage it.

So it won't be the defining issue of the 'teens and '20s of this century?

I think that depends on what we do. It depends on what we do.

Last question. Do you regret voting for the Patriot Act?

No, no. What I do regret -- put this in there if you're going to write it -- is that it was hurried, it was rushed, it wasn't challenged the way it should have been. There are provisions in there -- sneak-and-peek search provisions, provisions about libraries -- that never should have sailed through like they did. That I do take responsibility for voting for. I along with the other members of the Senate who voted for this. But there were things that needed to be done. We had huge problems with the sharing of information that needed to be fixed. But it should have been done the right way.



Please read the whole interview, I just hit some highlights of it.
As Democrats, we have a nice selection for '08. While the right, thinks that Cheney running could be their "secret weapon". Ah, can't you just see the humor!

I think it's not to early to really look at the candidates, see what they stand for, who they are and maybe help each other make some choices. Let me know what you think of this interview and Edwards. With any luck, between us, we may find a solution to the clusterfuck that has become our government and our country.

Saturday, March 24, 2007

Coulter - Helping Edwards Campaign

Yes, the self-proclaimed Christian has done it again, but this time Edwards is taking it straight to the White House!

On Friday, Coulter, a writer and columnist known for provocative remarks, told an audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington: "I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot,' so I - so kind of an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards."

Whenever this "woman" picks up a pen or opens her mouth, she proves my point. Noecons can not be Christians. (personal note: I promise to finish that piece this week!)

The Edwards camp is now seeking to capitalize on the slur by soliciting $100,000 in "Coulter Cash" to "show that inflaming prejudice to attack progressive leaders will only backfire."

Three cheers to Edwards and his camp for making this holier-than-thou, judgemental bitch pay for her mud slinging.

Edwards, smiling and forging ahead, is sticking to his agenda. His concerns? Health care, emission limits and global warming, the economy, the wars, the American people..... things you would actually think the Christian right would care about. Guess not, eh?