This week on NOW: John Edwards' War on Poverty

[antigop]

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/429/index.html

Even though he's no longer running for president, John Edwards is still a man with a mission: to cut poverty in the United States by 50 percent in 10 years. This week, NOW's David Brancaccio talks with Edwards about how he plans to achieve this ambitious goal and what role it may and should have on the upcoming presidential election.

"What's happening in America today is middle class workers, people who are like my parents and my family, the family that I grew up in, they are having a terrible time," Edwards tells NOW.

The current economic crisis has Edwards and his followers more committed than ever, but will their efforts gain enough momentum to make a difference?

NOW wants to hear from you! Send us your opinions, reactions and ideas about "John Edwards' War on Poverty"

[jeanruss]

1. opinion

I just posted my comment on NOW. I guess Obama was considering Edwards for the VP slot, so the affair story is out there again. I could care less if it is true. Some of our best leaders had affairs. These days we should be grateful that the sex isn't of the deviant dishonest type. There are so many phony hetero Republicans, it's hard to keep track. At least , in the Democratic party you can be open about your life and work for the country. Edwards really terrifies the oligarchy.

[bobbolink]

2. People seem to be confused between the meaning of "POOR" and the meaning of "MIDDLE CLASS"

And, I'm guessing that Edwards is one of those.

:(

[snappyturtle]

3. I disagree. I think Senator Edwards is coming to the revelation that

poverty is an evasive process that is effecting the, what's left of, the middle class. They're melding...the poor and previous middle class. I think it's worse than that. I see young and old educated people who had had much better times being effected by poverty in their present lives. However,he does seem to realize it is effecting the blue collar class of old. imho

[bobbolink]

4. Yes. Because only the middle class gets the attention.

Case in point... there has been a HOUSING CRISIS for DECADES now.... poor people who are becoming homeless by the thousands because there simply is NO housing for us.

Yet, there was nothing said. No articles. No speeches. No congressional action.

BUt SUDDENLY, the muddle-class has a HOUSING CRISIS-- Oh my... it's all over the papers, it's on TV, it's on Air America... Oh my, we gotta do something!

Yet, where is the mention of housing needs for low-income people?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Crickets.....

That is just the tip of the iceburg, and apparently it's all OK with you.

It's OK that so many POOR people died in Katrina...

It's OK that we have the worst poverty of any industrialized nation.

Where is that in our Democratic Party priority list?

Zilch.

It's only when it hits the muddle-class that it becomes an issue.

And that's just fine.

But then you all start bitching if you can't get poor folk to vote for you....

THINK. It only hurts for a little while.

[Naturyl]

5. This war is over, sadly

Sen. Edwards' war on poverty is now over due to his inability to manage his urges. How disappointing. With hardly anyone else even addressing the issue, we cannot afford this loss. But that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Sen. Edwards, couldn't you have kept it in your pants for the sake of those counting on you? Nope, guess not. Oh well, at least the poor are well-accustomed to disappointment.

[bobbolink]

6. You're right, and the question is, WHY is this ignored by so-called "progressives"?

When there is only ONE "leader" trumpeting a cause, this is the likely result.

So, I ask again, WHY is poverty the "orphan issue" of "progressives"????

Can we actually face this question head-on and honestly?

[Naturyl]

7. I can, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for company

The simple fact is that anybody who has the means to do something but would rather not is going to have a hard time being honest about this issue. The real solution to poverty is obvious, immediate, and easily feasible, but people don't want to hear about it, because it would involve a bit of sacrifice. And so we hear a litany of reasons why simply giving poor people money is NOT the answer. News flash - it is, and it's the ONLY answer. But nobody wants to hear that, because it's their wallets on the line.

[bobbolink]

8. "And so we hear a litany of reasons why simply giving poor people money is NOT the answer. "

BUt, that's the RW mantra.

I'm asking why DEMS, and "progressives" and "aware" people simply check out on this issue.

"The simple fact is that anybody who has the means to do something but would rather not is going to have a hard time being honest "

Well, I can't argue with you there.

So, then the question becomes, WHY would they "rather not"?

Can we probe this and find some clue so we can then try to find out how to get people motivated?