one thing about John Edwards you cannot deny

[LSK]

He is good at defining the debate and driving the issues to whats important.

He has been out front on poverty. Now the economy is souring and everyone is starting to talk like him.

He has been out front on healthcare. Now the call for universal healthcare is becoming stronger and stronger and almost everyone from our party is in favor of it.

He has been out front on speaking out against Kyl-Lieberman and he was proven correct with that NIE.

He has been out front on saying no to lobbyists and now everyone is trying to say they are not taking money from lobbyists.

He has been out front on changing Washington and now everyone is running a "Change" campaign.

He is now out front on Veterans issues and has now drawn in Billo into a fight he cannot win. Soon all the candidates will be discussing Veterans issues.

John Edwards has been defining the debate in this election cycle. This used to be the Republicans game of defining the debate. John Edwards has taken that from them.

[SlowDownFast]

1. That's seven things. n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

2. Seven good things. nt

[SlowDownFast]

7. Agreed. Seven VERY good things.

K&R.

Go Edwards!

[peacetalksforall]

13. Highlights. Just the top of the list. Positive. True. Good enough for me

- insight into one person's thoughts on this Thursday afternoon.

[OzarkDem]

3. So very true

I don't see how the news media can keep ignoring him.

[lame54]

4. K&R

:thumbsup:

[polichick]

5. True...

It's a shame more people don't credit him for guiding the conversation and raising the bar.

[Crazy Dave]

6. His universal health-care plan still makes people pay for insurance

If not for that he'd be my choice. Forget the insurance companies. The politicians can't and won't provide or fix the health-care system so they want others, like employers to be responsible for it. Sorry, forcing companies to provide what the government should be providing will make more American jobs move overseas where most of the developed world already has universal, single payer, government funded insurance.

[LSK]

8. he subsidizes the poor and allows anyone to op into a medicare program

This is genius because everyone will switch to the more efficient medicare program and dump the private insurance companies.

Thom Hartmann and Paul Krugman have praised this plan.

Anyways, regardless of what you think of him or his plans, you cannot deny that he has been bringing a strong message that needs to be heard.

[Crazy Dave]

9. I'm hoping something like that is the real plan

It's what the right-wing claims will happen under most of these democratic plans.

For once let's hope they're right.

[bobbolink]

30. HR676 will take ten years. Edwards is doing the same thing, just a different path

to by-passing the insurance corporations. Let the people make the move away, rather than forcing it by legislation.

I was unsure at first, but as I learned more about it, I'm enthusiastic. Less direct battle with the insurance companies!

Ten years for HR676..... maybe less for Edwards plan?

PLUS... Edwards has said he will address a joint session of Congress first thing, and tell them if they don't pass a GOOD health care bill by July of '09, he will do everything he can to take away CONGRESS' health care! How many others are saying that? Not even Kucinich, right?

He's serious about getting the corporations out of health care. That's what will make all the difference.

Give that some thought, 'k?

[Crazy Dave]

36. Sure and you think about this

Unlike Edwards, Kucinich still has a job in Washington as a policy maker and he will be re-elected for another term. Here's a fact, no matter how good the Edwards plan is, he doesn't have a chance of making it to the democratic convention as 3rd place won't win a general election. I predict he will be out after he comes in 3rd (again) in South Carolina. But even if he can hang on until Feb. 5th, he will surely be annihilated and humiliated in all 20 plus states and after that he and his health plan will be history.

But if I am wrong, which I won't be, and he continues after Feb 5th I will personally make a monetary donation to his campaign.

K?

[grantcart]

55. If Hillary is ahead after Feb 5

then the nomination will go to the convention as she will not get more than 50% of the delegats. If Obama stakes out a lead then there will be pressure to unite. Once at the convention everything is in play.

Kucinich's Universal Single Pay Not for Profit is of course the best plan and is used by some form by every other developed country and is very popular. Without a parlimentary system here it is very difficult for one party to ever have enough power, even temporarily, to get such a wide change. Edwards plan gives us incremental change by making Medicare optional but in the end virtually everyone will opt for Medicare because in this case not for profit is in fact more efficient.

Let me thank you in advance for your Feb 6 Edwards donation.

:toast:

[Crazy Dave]

62. Trust me

I'm a man of my word and it will be done if he's still in the race but I doubt it. Don't get me wrong, Edwards is a good man and I used to be an Edwards supporter before the Kerry handlers got ahold of him in '04. I personally feel he'd be a great and more effective advocate for the poor and the diminishing middle class as is Al Gore for the environment in the private sector versus being in the government where you are forced to make political judgments and decisions rather than correct or moral ones. Al Gore has said many times now that advocating for the environment is a lot easier without his hands being tied and with less distractions as a president.

I'd love to see Edwards prove that New Orleans wasn't just a photo opp. for him after he drops out in Feb.

[grantcart]

64. I understand your point

Edwards has burned his bridges and has nothing else to go back to. He will still get delegates because Democrats don't have winner take all primaries. The only reason to drop out would be not having enough money and I believe they have kept some back for this but if repeat if it goes down to 0 I think that Edwards would write a few checks himself to keep it going although it might be a smaller campaign. Unless somebody has 51% of the delegates he has no incentive to stop.

[tsuki]

10. Me too. I would opt for Medicare buy-in. nt

[Yuugal]

15. "still makes people pay for insurance"

Edwards has made it clear that if you can't afford it you will subsidized and that assistance will be given for people up to 100k income. If you want to keep what you have you can do that too. The private systems will be in competition with the govt one and may the best care win for you. Your choice.

Edwards has also said it will cost about 120 bill and be paid for with the repeal of Bush's tax cut for the uber rich. I can't see what is not to like:

No pre-existing conditions exclusions
Dental and Vision-care included

This is a dream deal for the working class/poor. If you make over 100k a year you probably had insurance anyway and can keep what you have now.

[Selatius]

16. Private for-profit health insurance will be buried if forced to compete with non-profit insurance

Because the government entity that would be offering health insurance in competition with private companies would not be tacking on profit mark-ups to generate income for shareholders. In short, the government will beat insurance companies on price provided real competition is allowed instead of suspended like I suspect what the Repubs and health insurance companies want to do.

[Yuugal]

23. Yummylicious, isn't it? nt

[Yael]

38. Not to mention the ecomomies of scale that collective bargaining affords

with costs.

[Crazy Dave]

19. I've got insurance but it's useless

I've had my own health insurance with the same carrier for over two years and they're only going to pay $1900 out of a $7300 emergency room bill over the holiday. The health of all Americans should be the government's top priority and not be dependant on "for profit" insurance companies. A person with an injury or an illness should be able to walk into any emergency room in the country and not have to worry about paying for it. Or if you're like me, wondering if the insurance company will even pay for it.

I'd like for one politician, just one to explain sensibly why a poor communist country like Cuba can afford and thinks its citizens deserve free health care but our wealthy, humane?, and democratic nation says it can't and won't.

[LSK]

21. to answer your question:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x85223

[Crazy Dave]

25. Doesn't answer the question, doesn't even address it

Why a small island nation with a GDP a fraction of a percent of the United States and a trade embargo, provides free health-care for all its citizens and the US says it can't and won't.

[bobbolink]

31. I think Edwards DID explain that. Greedy corporations.

He's said that over and over again.

[Yael]

37. It is the only plan with a path

I am a HUGE supporter of HR676, but also know that it would collapse the economy if implemented overnight.

[jwirr]

57. If all government health care programs were united into one then

that cost is already covered and would probably actually be cheaper than it has been. There is a good deal of the US that is already covered under government programs: Veterans, Native Americans, the poor, the disabled, elderly, government workers, legislators, the military. The money for these groups is already in the budget so it is only for those not in these groups that need health care coverage.

[PVnRT]

47. If the government provides, people still pay for it

It doesn't become magically free because it comes from the government - it's funded through taxes in some form or antoher.

No, I don't have a problem with that. The poster's comment is simply misleading.

[Crazy Dave]

52. Of course not free

But paying $500 - $1000 extra a year in taxes versus paying $500 a month plus the co-pays and the deductibles is a much better option for me.

Plus I have insurance and they only want to pay $1900 out of a $7300 bill.

[progressoid]

11. Yessiree!

[Blackhatjack]

12. So True!!! K & R

[Selatius]

14. He forced the health care debate by being the first to drop a serious health care plan.

Neither Obama nor Clinton can claim that. They played catch-up.

[NorthCarolina]

18. Actually, Conyers-Kucinich HR 676 Preceeded

the Edwards Universal Health Insurance plan. Just thought it prudent to set the record straight.

[LSK]

20. true but John and Michael Moore have been pushing it mainstream

[tomp]

28. they have not been pushing hr 676.

that bill is far better than any other candidate's proposalproposal.

[bobbolink]

32. Actually, if you've read any of the replies to this thread, you will understand that EDwards is the

same plan. A different means to the same end.

HR676 will take TEN years to implement, do you realize that?

PLUS... a battle royal against the corporations, with who-knows-what outcome!!

Think about that!

Edwards puts the for-profits DIRECTLY in competition against the non-profit, single payer. That competition FAVORS the non-profits, right?

With HR676, to get it passed, you MUST convert those who are satisfied with their current insurance. Another battle.

Edwards plan bypasses that....

Until the non-profit is so strong, that EVERY"ONE will chose it!

I hope you will give that some thought.

[NorthCarolina]

58. Can You Direct me to the Link That Specifies a 10 year Period

needed to implement HR 676?

[bobbolink]

59. It's in the wording for HR676.

Be my guest.

[Selatius]

22. True, but in terms of the presidential race, Edwards deserves credit.

Kucinich was technically the first, and I concede that point, but Edwards blew open any debate whatsoever on health care reform. Neither of the other two paid much attention to Kucinich. Edwards' plan is not a simple and clean like a single-payer system Kucinich endorses, but ultimately, political considerations must be weighed into the equation as well, and Edwards' plan is more likely to be passed. The consolation with Edwards' plan though is that it can be a stepping stone towards single-payer health insurance, for the reason that people will be given a choice to purchase private health insurance or public health insurance, and the public plan would not tack on profit mark-ups because it doesn't have a duty to generate profits for shareholders, so it should win on price alone.

[madokie]

17. And I would like to introduce to you all the next President of the United States of America

John Edwards

We the people will finally have one of our own in the whitehouse, now if thats not something to be proud of nothing is. I don't know about anyone else but come november 4 I am going to be one party down dog leading up to and including inaugurating day. This one my friends is mine and yours whether you want it to be or not

[Kansas Wyatt]

24. I hope so..... We are doomed with more of the same without him.

Edwards will actually fight for and represent 'We The People.'

[Mnemosyne]

35. Hear, hear!

:smoke::toast:

[GreenTea]

26. He's certainly no Reagan admirer!

[tomp]

27. please make sure you specify "top three" candidates.

dennis kucinich is out front of every other candidate.

[LSK]

29. yes but nobody has given him a podium to speak from

For whatever reasons, Edwards has been given more of an opportunity to speak and he has made the most of it.

Yes Kucinich was against the war from the start and had a true Universal Healthcare plan long before the others but he has not gotten his message out there and has not been given much of a chance.

Edwards has been given that chance and he has used that chance to speak for us and through him, our issues are becoming front and center in this campaign.

[Nutmegger]

33. R&K

Thank you LSK. :hi:

[smokey nj]

34. K&R!!!

[JanMichael]

39. I'll start by saying that I support Edwards against H. & O. BUT----

---his HUD and affordable housing policy ideas on his website suck.

People PLEASE email and demand his support of the National Housing Trust. Also his demand for 1500 job cuts in HUD, dumping remaining jobs down to state agencies, and giving up on rehabbing existing affordable housing in favor of vouchers for what really exists (short supply sub-standard housing)is republican idiocy.

[The River]

40. You Nailed It...

I've been seeing the same thing.
Obama seems to adopt Johns ideas
a bit quicker Mrs. Clinton but they
are both following -------> The Leader
when it comes to campaign issues / attitudes.

It makes the media plan to marginalize him
all the more obvious.

[krkaufman]

41. "Edwards has been defining the debate"

Just think how much more the debate would shift if he was getting any bloody coverage.

[MagickMuffin]

42. Delete DUPE

[MagickMuffin]

43. I created a Video, attacking the MSM and in support of "Go for the Gold" $7 MILLION 1 DAY FUNDRAISER

You can check it out here. I have two versions this link is the REVISED Version. Corrected some glitches and took the effects out of the VO.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph ...


This is the original version.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph ...

I composed the background music as well, if anyone is interested.

Also if you guys could go to youtube and rate it, would be really sweet. And hopefully more coverage.


Unfortunately, I can't donate, we're living on credit cards:scared: hence my contribution is the time I devoted to making a video.


K'd&R'd

Go JOHN GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Laelth]

44. Hear, hear!

All the more reason for him to continuing to fight, even if he can't win (and I think he can).

:dem:

-Laelth

[flasoapbox]

45. Agreed

:kick:

[pmorlan1]

46. You're Right!

You're right, Edwards has been defining the campaign. You can see that for yourselves when you see old "Mr Blows With the Wind" Romney talking about fighting lobbyists. LOL

Don't forget to donate to Edwards campaign today. Let's make today a BIG fundraising day.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/17/17235/8304/839/438507

[7horses]

48. John is...

out front on everything except media coverage!!! Don't forget to donate today to John Edwards. Help break the record for one-day donations, and make the media cover him. I just donated. Go, John go!!!

[LSK]

50. just did

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2709395&mesg_id=2711451

[redqueen]

49. His talk on the economy is only going to resonate MORE as time passes.

The recession thinking people saw years ago has been acknowledged.

And now the s may really be hittin the fan, thanks to some banks' ponzi-style schemes.

[KoKo]

51. And....he uses Springsteen's "The Rising" as his Campaign Tune...

I can't think of many more inspiring songs than that one...! I just donated to him on the other thread of DU'er Pamela who is donating the earrings.

[natrat]

53. unlike obama he actually deals in specifics which is nice-too bad the junta will smash him

[jwirr]

54. I am whole heartedly an Edwards supporter but one of the things

that comforts me in this primary is the fact that even though George McGovern lost the election his ideas were forwarded into the legislature and made law. If we cannot win then let's lead the pack to a real consensus on what is important.

[grantcart]

56. He is also

tenacious

[MadHound]

60. Puhleeze, stop acting like all of this originated with Edwards

Edwards stole virtually all of this from Kucinich, the only candidate who's been right on the issues virtually all the time. Who's the only candidate who voted against the IWR? Who's the only candidate promoting a true, single payer, non-profit health care system? Who's been out front on Kyle Lieberman, and been correct all along about Iran?

I can go on and on with this, but the fact of the matter is that Edwards is simply another corporately compromised candidate. That's he's stolen the progressive platform out from under Dennis doesn't mean he'll actually follow through on it if he's elected. In fact given the fact that he's taking in lots of corporate money(as opposed to Kucinich who's taking in none), it is highly likely that he will shed his progressive persona if he gets elected.

If people want a progressive in office, then they need to vote for a real progressive like Kucinich, not a fake one like Edwards.

[LSK]

67. I dont know where some of you get your facts

Or how you form your opinions.

Edwards fought Corporations for 20 years as a lawyer and you choose a few selected votes in the GOP Controlled Senate and label him in bed with Corporations.

:wtf:

[Dawgs]

61. And what about when he was in the Senate, where he could actually do something?

He was out front selling Bush's war.

No Thanks, John Edwards.

[LSK]

68. he could not have done much

The House was GOP controlled back then.

Why do you show off your ignorance?

[Orsino]

63. I agree. Most Dems appear to disagree.

If everything you said were true, he'd be winning primaries. A majority of Democrats seem to think that Clinton and Obama are better at these things.

[DutchLiberal]

65. And the last thing you can't deny about Edwards: it's all only talk.

[LSK]

69. you are wrong

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4082013

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3898749

[DutchLiberal]

70. What makes you think I'm interested in propaganda?

Edwards not only voted for the IWR, but he also co-sponsored it! Edwards has earned a lot of money via involvement in hedge funds! Edwards vows to take on corporations, yet accepts corporate money!

Edwards was a centrist war hawk in 2004, remember? He only says what he says now because it resonates well with the public. If tomorrow, the public would have another opinion, he would take a radical different position. He has no principles, he's an opportunist.

[leftofthedial]

66. of the three candidates blessed by GE

and the oligarchy


Edwards is by far the best