John Edwards was RIGHT...

[Blackhatjack]

The healthcare insurers are not going to negotiate away anything. IF we want real healthcare reform we are going to have to take it from them.

And there is the rub, 'negotiating' has to be in good faith or it does not work at all.

What we are seeing is a carefully designed plan to feign good faith negotiating while in reality bringing about delay which will eventually kill any kind of real reform.

We must take it from them... No truer words were ever spoken. Forget bipartisanship....

Edit: fixed typo

[bobbolink]

1. You're completely right, of course.....

But putting John Edwards name in it guarantees that all you will get is attacks on Edwards.

One very good person has left DU because of these attacks, and I hope you won't be another to leave.

It's ugly here.

[ChiciB1]

16. Hey There... I Think I Know Who You're Talking About... Other Edwards Supporters

are gone too. I've tapered off a lot... thinking I just want to reach 10,000. Just saying the name John Edwards here at DU is almost as if you should be hogged tied and feathered.

I HAVEN'T forgotten about him, and what he said then and probably still believes is TRUE!

And yes, it's UGLY here. I posted something this AM that I think was taken entirely out of context and some of the comments hurled back were vitriolic! I never meant to be negative, just adding my opinion. But these days I don't think you can do that here anymore unless you're ready to "fight" back. Just for adding to the discussion. Mostly you get told to leave if you dare to say something that someone else disagrees with. The nastiness is at a fever pitch and there isn't much unity anymore. It's sad.

I said earlier this week, I reach 10,000 posts and then I'll probably just lurk, just to see how things are going. One might think just waiting for 10,000 is weird, but it's just something I want to do. I've very close.

This place really isn't anything like it was before. It's gotten much too hateful.

JMHO! From an Edwards supporter who has not forgotten, warts and all!

[PurityOfEssence]

33. The sticker's still on my car

I hope he isn't just thrown away as Hart was; it'd be a shame for the country.

His take on health care still resonates, and had he not been so insistent on raising it in the primaries, I doubt it would be the issue it is.

Medicine for Money is Murder (that's my little phrase...)

We are beholden to our corporate overlords, and our President, sadly, is one of them.

[DaLittle Kitty]

38. Still Got John Edwards On My Car Too! Edwards... " You Must Defeat Them!"

and the corporate media and the "StarFucker" took him away from us!

[karynnj]

40. All the Democrats were for universal health care - the differences were quite small compared

to how much they agreed.

Look at the amount of difference in 2004 versus 2008. In 2004, Edwards had a plan that insured all kids only, while Dean and Kerry and others had near universal healthcare coverage. Healthcare was a major Democratic issue in 2004, why would it not be in 2008?

[DaLittle Kitty]

98. Edwards Had The Best Plan By Far in '08, That's Why HE Was Trashed!

Edwards plan described here... http://www.johnrussellforcongress.com/page.asp?PageId=35

[ChiciB1]

102. My Stickers Were Magnetic One... Still Have His Shirts & The Magnetic Stickers

too! I also still have stickers from 2004! What I find so very strange is the fact that all these "other" scandals about Repukes have NEVER had such a vitriolic reaction. Even Ted Kennedy is still standing after given the severity of HIS scandal! He redeemed himself, but was at least given the CHANCE to.

They really did hate him in D.C., I heard it said many, many times! I understand what was done was not ethical in anyway... but he's become such a pariah and many here at DU are simply bombastic if his name is ever mentioned! I get attacked simply because I supported him for so long. It's sad, and I DO understand "some" outrage, but I'm afraid I don't share the sheer meanness to all of it. It's almost as if he's classified as some sort of serial killer. But then, DU has become a very mean place to me. I make some comment about something, thinking I'm trying to look at something objectively and I get people telling me to shut-up and go away, or just get off the thread. Didn't seem this way back in 2004 when I joined! We don't seem to be working together, but AGAINST each other. Perhaps that's why NOTHING GETS DONE anymore!! I know I have worked for the Party and given them THOUSANDS of hours of my time over the years, and yet am now thinking where do I go from here?? I suppose I'm just behind the times, but I HAVE paid my dues and think that just because I'm a BOOMER it shouldn't make me ANCIENT!!

And yes, Gary Hart is a good example of the same thing. It seems he was overly chastised at the time. And has yet to make a REAL comeback. ANOTHER person I really really supported at the time.

[waiting for hope]

119. My sticker is staying - as well as my avator

and sig lines. I'm an Edwards Democrat for life - regardless of what the political climate here is. He was right on so many levels and the first politician to really speak out against the corporate control of DC.

[RufusTFirefly]

140. Second choice here

What first made me sit up and take notice was the fact that Edwards kicked off his campaign in New Orleans. Since the days of Bobby Kennedy, the conventional wisdom (written by the corporate media and PR firms) has told us that it's toxic for a presidential candidate to directly address issues of poverty. I admired Edwards' guts for tackling this vital topic and for speaking the truth about health care:

"Some people argue that we’re going to sit at a table with these people and they’re going to voluntarily give their power away. I think it is a complete fantasy; it will never happen."

[ChiciB1]

171. HI To YOU Too!!! I Changed My Avatar Because I Wanted More

"Power To The People" but I don't think that's happening, so I should probably go back to JOHNNY!!!

I would love for someone to make an Avatar of that picture of him and his family sitting together. I'm STILL no techie, but I so loved that picture. It's was either sepia or black & white, but I LOVED it!

[waiting for hope]

199. Hey ChiciB1!

Maybe I can try with the avatar ... I'll email you if I can get one made. :)

[ChiciB1]

226. That Would Be Fantastic! I Will Gladly Use It. I See You're Still Here...

but not as much as before. I never really got started with the other blogs, which I should have because they are so much more friendly than here. I signed on with two of them, but they're a little more confusing than here. Or maybe I'm just used to this format.

I myself have stopped posting a lot... want to get my 10,000, not that it means all that much, but just a symbol of some sort. I'm not going away, but I LURK much more now.

It gets really UGLY here a lot of the time, I don't remember it being this bad! Could have been, but I may not have noticed as much. Edwards supporters were very comfortable to me and nice most of the time.

[Horse with no Name]

57. Another one checking in

:hi:
psstt...it's not that way because of Edwards, it is that way because of the centrists who flocked here.
Stepping away to put Hazmat suit on for incoming...

[nashville_brook]

70. +1

[HOLOS]

156. DU is a juicy target for dark minded Trolls who live on Misinfo, Fear & Anger!!

[UpInArms]

164. only working toward 10,000?

don't be a piker, my friend!

I'm at 40,000+ and have annoyed the best of the rest of them

stay here by the fire with me :grouphug:

:hi:

[99 Percent Sure]

169. I'm still here and I've got your back re John Edwards. I still have my

bumper sticker in a prominent place on my tabletop. He would have made a great AG. Actually either Edwards or Spitzer as AG would have been the jam on the buttery croissant.

In fact, I liked Edwards better than Kerry and thought they should have flipped the ticket in 2004. John Edwards had the only populist presidential campaign; I believe I would have liked an Edwards presidency very much. Not that I'm angry or unhappy with President Obama because I am not since I did my due diligence prior to throwing my support -- and my votes -- his way, and knew he was more center right than center left. Besides that, I'm a peacenik so I remain disappointed with his promise to escalate the Afghanistan War, and his doing so as president.

But I'm just saying. . . .

[falcon97]

196. I supported Edwards from the beginning.

Now I'm in full support of President Obama. After watching Hillary on Meet the "Press" I think I can vote for her in the future. There will be times in which I disagree with each of them. But, that's what it means to be a Democrat....in part.

[SammyWinstonJack]

213. Another Edwards supporter checking in.

:bounce:

[vssmith]

62. I often wonder why the same people who were quick to

forgive Bill Clinton cannot bring themselves to do the same for Edwards.

[RaleighNCDUer]

146. Curious, isn't it. nt

[question everything]

149. I was an Edwards supporter and I am more disappointed than angry

When you try to compare him to Clinton you concentrate on the cheating aspect and this is not why so many here are disappointed, even angry with him. Had he been our nominee - as you and I wished - and then the affair broke, as it would have - we would have lost not just the White House but also any hope for controlling Congress. And, of course, any change to prevent the rightward slide of the Supreme Court.

These days, with YouTube and all other viral videos and information, with individuals seeking their 15 min of fame by "kissing and telling" you cannot keep any secrets. He, and Elizabeth, should have known that this was going to be exposed. Ignoring this possibility shows either ignorance or arrogance. When Elizabeth cancer returned, this would have been his chance to withdraw. Elizabeth then said that the future of our county, of health care to all, was more important than her cancer and we applauded for that. In reality, they did jeopardize the future of our country by staying in the race.

Recently I posted that I would always vote for a Democrat over a Republican and mentioned Edwards - I don't remember the background for this post. And, of course, was savaged. Had the "U" system were in place, I would have been in -100.

I hope that some day Edwards will be able to come with clear plans and clear vision. And perhaps will find a room in a Democratic administration to implement his plans.

[AlbertCat]

158. cannot bring themselves to do the same for Edwards.

If only Edwards had stayed with the boys at the secret C-House cult! He wouldn't even have had to step down.


Here's a clue. Men and women have affairs. But affairs are not all alike. And the behavior after exposure is more important than the affair itself.

Edwards was a great Dem politician. I hope he'll be back.

[ChiciB1]

173. Not Only They "Unwilling" Forgive Edwards... They Lambaste Him Every

time his name comes up! But then there is the story about how much D.C. really "hated" him! This is just my take, and I think it's because he wanted to upset "THEIR" Applecart, and that just won't fly in D.C.!

So many other politicians have been given 2nd, 3rd and even 4th chances, but not John Edwards! Palm greasing is so much easier to contend with, but that's just my opinion!

Since the election I have had a real epiphany of just how VERY corrupt they are up there... Democrats & Repukes! You join the club, or you can go pound salt! Just sayin!

[Laurab]

190. I don't think the comparison is fair.

Clinton was President, and his wife was not fighting a fatal disease at the time.

Edwards continued to run for President, even though he knew this stuff was out there. Had he won the primary, it would have handed the election to the republicans. It's hard to forgive a guy for that. Aside from his stupidity in not thinking he'd get caught during a campaign for President. It's also hard to like a guy who'd do something like that while his wife was fighting for her life.

Maybe I'm just pissed off because I donated to him the day before he dropped out -the day he vowed he was "in it for the long run". I don't know. I don't really give a damn about what he does in his personal life, but damn - not during a Presidential Campaign.

Actually, that was a lie - I lost a lot of respect for him because of his wife's condition, so I guess I do give a damn. He was my 2nd choice, Obama was my first, and I remember thinking I wasn't sure I trusted Edwards all that much - he changed positions a lot, although he did have some good ideas.

It's not for me to forgive or not forgive - as long as he dropped out, it's between his wife and him, I guess. If he has good ideas, I'm willing to listen, and I think everyone should be. Still, I do think that what he did was quite different, and much worse, than what Clinton did.

[Hawkowl]

208. Gennifer Flowers?

Don't you remember the big interview (60 minutes?) when Clinton was running the first time and denied (lied) about having an affair with Flowers? No difference.

This is probably what Edwards was thinking. He could just pull a Clinton with his wife beside him and he'd be fine.

[Laurab]

225. Still a big difference.

Aside from Elizabeth fighting terminal cancer, Edwards had a reputation of being such a family man. So many people were going after Clinton about his philandering already when he ran - it wasn't a huge secret. In fact, if I remember correctly, there was a "bimbo control" office when Clinton was running. The stuff was ALREADY out there. With Edwards it would have been a bombshell - "devoted family man with wife fighting terminal cancer". If he had won the nomination - BOOM! Hello, McCain/Palin.

His image was so different from Clinton's - and Edwards knowingly took that risk - then throw a baby into the mix with pictures of Edwards visiting - they HAD all that, and if he had won the nomination it would all have come out AFTER - I can just imagine how hard the republicans worked at keeping it quiet until they needed it. It would have been a disaster for us. I don't like the fact that Edwards continued running, or what type of arrogance made him think he wouldn't get caught. Whatever it was, the results would have been the same, and again I say "Hello, McCain/Palin".

[Atticus]

242. And, you're completely right, but I wish you were wrong.

I don't see how anyone who ever heard or read his "two Americas" speech or considered the "damn right" common sense of his remarks about how big corporations would NEVER negotiate away any advantage they possessed could dismiss the man's insight, wisdom and political courage. Do I like or condone what he did? Hell, no! Am I more than a little pissed at him for betraying Elizabeth and handing his enemies the weapon to destroy him? Absolutely!

But, none of that changes the truth of what the man had to say about working people and the raw deal they are getting in a nation run by big money.

[rurallib]

2. And that is why I supported him and wish he had a role someplace.

[LostInAnomie]

3. John was right about most things.

[karynnj]

10. Well, maybe because he had all new different positions in 2008

compared to his 2004 campaign and that was different than his Senate career.

[Captain Hilts]

12. Obama certainly never changed views. Oh, that's right, he did. Never mind. nt

[karynnj]

15. Over Obama's entire career he made FAR fewer changes than Edwards

[Donnachaidh]

53. John never backed down on the IMPORTANT things like healthcare

What seems to be coming out of Obama's white house looks to be yet another corporate trust fund at the expense of the poor and the sick. The beneficiaries are the insurance companies.

Will they send the people who cannot pay the premiums (and NO ONE has even touched on that angle yet - even the cheerleaders) to debtor's prison? Or will they do like the banks, and just keep piling double-digit charges on the unpaid fees, thereby certifying they have a right to go after the poor if they die and leave (or try to leave) some money to their kids.

The ONLY time Obama acted like he was for single-payer, universal healthcare was when JOHN forced the issue. the ONLY time.

[Kalyke]

91. Really?!?!

That's why he supported the bankruptcy bill and was a member of the DLC?? And he dropped his poverty center the minute he lost the primaries. Duh.

Edwards backed down on everything. He was a fake, a phony and a charlatan. Why would anyone continue to support this lying, cheating politician is beyond me.

[karynnj]

94. He never was in office after he changed to the more liberal position

That meant he never had to make the compromises that a person actually trying to get a plan passed has to make.

John Edwards NEVER ran on single payer. The fact is that the only time Obama spoke of single payer was in a debate where the context was he was accused of changing from a 2003 comment in support of single payer. Obama's answer was essentially if he were starting from scratch, that is what he would support, but it was not feasible from where we are. Given that Senator Sanders has no co-sponsors, he is right.

I don't recall if Edwards brought that up or the moderator as a question. If Edwards did, what would his point have been? Edwards was never for single payer. I do remember Edwards bringing up the question of mandates.

[DaLittle Kitty]

110. Edwards Was For A "Pathway" to Single Payer... E.G. The Public Option and Health Care Markets...

e.g. Obama's Health Care Exchanges. Obama thankfully is incorporating some of the ideas put forth by John Edwards and others into his proposal. The problem is all of the bribes contributed to the campaign coffers of people like Baucus... 1.5 MILLION to date. It is election and campaign finance reform that is most urgent and most effectively demonstrated by this mockery of democracy that is health care reform. It IS pathetic and so are most of the unscrupulous players involved in the discussion ... from BOTH sides of the aisle which is, in itself a JOKE because they are both supported by the SAME FINANCIAL BENEFACTORS! The Democrats ARE NOT by definition... The GOOD Guys!!!!! Get that and you might be going somewhere!

[karynnj]

114. Many Democratic plans had possible long term pathways to single payer

This includes Bill Bradley's, Dean's and Kerry's - all before Edwards. The fact is Harry Truman and LBJ were for single payer.

You also need to be careful tarring all Democrats. Edwards was very dishonest in using opensecrets against Hillary and Obama. The fact is that individual contributions - the same thing Edwards got - are aggregated over your employer and then over the industry. The millions that Democrats got includes these contributions. They would be more useful if they supplied the PAC/individual breakdown.

Campaign finance would be an excellent idea - and Durbin has introduced legislation on it. (In the late 1990s, Kerry and Wellstone wrote an excellent bill, that Maine and Arizona used as a model. It never was voted on as it had little support.) Edwards never introduced legislation on this.

[DaLittle Kitty]

203. Nothing Dishonest About Using OpenSecrets... That's All From FEC REports!

Edwards Plan was built on the work of others, however Kerry, Dean and others did not speak about the mechanics of implementation. Edwards' Medicare For All and Health Care Markets were the model that thankfully... Obama is now basing his plan on. Yep lots of talk for the past 50 years but ALWAYS stopped by the powers that be! By those campaign contributions... Most members in congress would never lift a finger to reform the election finance syste... Because they retain their jobs by being put up for sale.

Watch my friend here tell you about his experience... A first hand account of PRECISELY "how" things work! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBJAkCjjz1Y

[JDPriestly]

122. Edwards ran on having a Medicare-type option.

That is what Obama claims he wants. The difference is that Edwards, from the get-go, assumed the insurance companies would fight him every inch of the way. They did.

We know about Edwards' affair. We've seen embarrassing pictures.

We weren't told about Obama's breaking his promise to quite smoking until after he had pretty much won the primary. And no photo of him smoking has received prominent coverage. Yet, Obama stated that he had promised his wife he would stop smoking. We knew the minute he said he hadn't that he is not a man who can keep a promise to himself or to his wife. He is not a man of strong will and discipline. He is just human. So is John Edwards. John Edwards is more seasoned than Obama.

Now, Obama is letting us down. He should have had single payer advocates at the table with the insurance executives. Then he could have gotten a program somewhere in the middle: his public policy.

Now we will end up with some horrible plan that requires people to pay but has no mechanism to insure access to real healthcare. Obama has messed this up already. And in the process, he has messed up the promise of Medicare for the baby boomers. That's the big one. If the cost of medical care continues to rise, the younger generation will either have to pay huge amounts for the care of their parents and grandparents or watch their parents and grandparents die younger than their equivalents in other countries of treatable conditions or diseases. Someone else's grandmother may not mean much to you, but how do you feel about your own?

[bobbolink]

129. And in messing up, he has guarateed BIG Democratic losses next election.

Of course, neither Obama nor the Blue Cross Dogs will admit any responsibility for those losses.

:(

[karynnj]

172. Smoking after saying you were stopping is NOT equivalent to having a sleazy long term affair

Nicotine is addicting. Answer this:

Would Michelle by angrier if she found out he had a year long affair and likely fathered a child? I really think so. Now, would Elizabeth have been as hurt and angry if Edwards had taken up smoking?

You are also confusing the policy with how much people pay. Edwards was not promising free healthcare insurance to everyone without it. I assume that he was thinking something along the idea in the HELP bill which starts by paying almost all the cost at an income level slightly above medicaid and tapers down to no subsidy at all at 4 times the poverty level. (This is somewhat like the idea behind SCHIP which made insurance affordable for kids above medicaid level)

The fact is putting single payer advocates at the table would not have resulted necessarily in being at a different place. In addition, it is CONGRESS, not the President that rejected single payer - because they know the votes aren't there. In addition, Medicare is still there and Obama is trying to fix a problem that was already going to happen.

The fact is that obviously Obama wants to get the best plan he can through Congress, but right now, there appears consensus on three things - one is no preexisting conditions, two is the ability to buy into a plan at group rate if you don't have one, the third is that there are new subsidies for people up to 4 times poverty. Why no take a more balanced approach admitting that this will be better than where we are now? In addition, thinking that Edwards, who as the nominee might have led to President McCain, would have had more success getting Congress to do what he wanted.

[ChiciB1]

174. I Like You... I Generally Like Your Posts... But I Personally Think YOU ARE

wrong about the statement you just made. Don't want to bicker with you, we have this persona as President and I worked to get him elected, but too many have kicked his "ass" around for longer than most others who got themselves into the same situation.

He's a man, he strayed... and by all that's evident, he's paying DEARLY, where others never paid anything close to as much!

I speak with "peace" on my mind!

[ChiciB1]

227. This Reply Was For karrynnj... It Doesn't Look Like It... Just Thought I Would Clear It Up... n/t

[JDPriestly]

120. Edwards learned. The Democrats in power now never learned.

Obama is just a bit too young to have learned much about D.C. yet. He is where Edwards was before the 2004 campaign.

With this last speech, Obama began to sound like he is waking up to the fact that he is dealing with public relations and strategy robots not real people. The health care insurers have a strategy:

Get the government to require people to pay for healthcare.
Control healthcare costs so as to maximize profits and minimize service.
Pay the top honchos huge salaries and pay their underlings just enough to keep them silent about what is going on.

Two things we need to bring in: compensation limits on executives in the healthcare business and no enforcement of confidentiality agreements for their employees who blow the whistle on unethical business practices or price gouging or discrimination based on medical condition by their employers. I know it would be impossible (and probably unconstitutional) to pass laws of this nature so I'm not altogether serious about these two points, but that is what we need.

The reason I was (and still am) so angry about Edwards' conduct is not that I think he is such a bad man, but because he was our only hope for decent government. Obama is a wonderful person in some respects but, perhaps unknowingly, he is owned by big business. Edwards had watched the devastation of his hometown and its culture and industry, an industry in which he had, at one point, apparently considered working in, and he knew what our choices are. No other candidate had such an accurate view of our reality.

[XemaSab]

18. +1

n/t

[Oregone]

48. Phoney populist

Yeah, good talking points, but not much more.

Where did his daddy work again? Oh yes, he really is one of us!

[Madam Mossfern]

51. Do you have something against

people who are financially comfortable? Does that make them evil?

I was an Edwards supporter and donated more to him than I have any other political candidate.
Am I disappointed that he, like so many other politicians just couldn't keep it in his pants and then lied to cover it up? You betcha! Does that mean that we throw away the baby with the bath water? Those with a personal agenda may think its necessary.

[Oregone]

76. Yes I do

Because they live in "the other America".

They only visit ours when they need votes, or are slumming for chicks.

[4lbs]

123. You must really hate FDR then. (n/t)

.

[SammyWinstonJack]

214. +1

:evilgrin: :thumbsup:

[bobbolink]

131. You're aware that BROAD BRUSH condemnations are against the rules here, right?

Would you like to take this opportunity to apologize for slamming EVERYONE who happens to have money?

[jhrobbins]

152. My partner and I used to be comfortably middle class, but we are now both

disabled and out circumstances have changed CONSIDERABLY. My best friend is very rich and we are still very close-this has not made a difference. In fact, two years ago, when we were struggling to pay our exorbitant electric bills, he quietly stepped in and payed them for two years. You're wrong about people with money. There are some that are a-holes, but I have met some poor people that are equally a-holey. Money isn't the root of all evil; the love of money is the problem.

[Donnachaidh]

54. yeah, and the appointment of Geithner and Summers shows what

a populist Obama is. :eyes:

[Oregone]

77. As if that was ever my argument

Obama just plays pretend a little less than Edwards. At the end of the day, "we" are neither's number 1 concern

[Donnachaidh]

79. a little LESS?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Oh please -- CHANGE we can believe in? While handing billions to Geithner and Summers' pals? You call THAT *a little*???

And we might as well bend over once again -- because his next big giveaway will be to the insurance companies that helped support his vision of *change*.

But hey - It will only adversely affect the *other guy* - so let's get behind it anyway, no matter how BAD it is. :rofl: :rofl:

[Oregone]

82. Oh, aren't you just a hater

:)

Hey, Im not getting behind everything. I just think the contrast would of been a tad bigger with Edwards. He would of done all the same shit--and people would of said, "What the fuck is up with the mill worker's son? Giving away our money to the banks? WTF?"

[bobbolink]

134. That's WOULD HAVE, not WOULD OF

[jhrobbins]

159. People are always making that mistake-makes me crazy too.

[bobbolink]

160. I only pointed it out because of the superior attitude of the poster....

calling another poster a "hater".

It was deserved.

[ChiciB1]

107. Dare I Say How Many "Goldman Sachs" People Who Have Been Picked

to be a part of this administration?? There are a LOT! We will NEVER know what John could have done, but I felt so much CLOSER to him than I did to Obama.

However, as a good little Democrat I worked my butt off to get him elected, especially after Sarah Palin! I heard people talking on Hardball more than once that Edwards would NEVER get elected because he didn't have ties to a lot of the "big players!" In the end, as usual the "big players" found their opening and went for the jugular.

So John & Elizabeth if you still lurk here... I'm still one who misses you... A LOT!! And I don't think I'll ever say I'm sorry for it!

I did get to talk with Elizabeth on a post here at DU way back when. It was a pleasure!

I want this country back, and I want to see Obama to succeed, but IMO he needs start making those CHANGES he talked about day in and day out during the campaign. He's actually REVERSED himself on quite a few things and I feel somewhat betrayed.

[MissDeeds]

150. Another Edwards supporter here

and I agree with everything you said.

[ChiciB1]

168. I Remember YOU!! It Seems So Long Ago, Yet It Wasn't! We Had Some Of The

BEST SUPPORTERS here at DU and I also think the MOST understanding and kind ones too!

I'll NEVER forget when we kept the "energizer bunny" thread going on for days and days! It seems so "nice" to be one of his supporters. I know he's still out there doing things, but UNFORTUNATELY I can no longer donate money to him!

We've had to take over my mother-in-law's Nursing Home finances and it's "breaking our bank!" She qualified for Medicaid, but her place can't be sold until she passes away, so we're having to pay those expenses.

But thanks for the reply, I think of so many of "our group" more times than I want to!



:hurts: :love ya:

[MissDeeds]

193. Hey ChiciB1

It's good to be remembered. We had a great group of folks supporting Edwards, passionate, driven, but for the most part civil. A terrific group to hang out with. I still miss everyone and think of them all often. It's nice to see familiar names pop up once in awhile.

Sorry about your mother-in-law troubles. My mom is getting close to needing nursing home care, too, and it is such a worry for so many reasons.

Take care friend. :hug:

[ChiciB1]

224. Good Luck To You With Your Mother Too! It's A Very Sad Thing To

go through. My mother-in-law is simply a shell of herself. No longer walks, talks or recognizes anyone. This very fact says something to me though. And it's one that Obama DID talk about. The amount of "money" being spent on her care by Medicaid is astounding! I get monthly bills, and even though they only pay a portion of the cost, the billing amount each month runs around $20,000.00 a month! It's truly amazing. Most Nursing Homes around here charge around $3,500 or more, so Medicaid has come in handy. But where she once was with Hospice for almost a year, she now is in a room with another patient. Nursing Homes have had cut-backs and I know they pay their help poorly.

Even though Hospice "knows" she is terminal, I think they believe that by turning her over to the home that it will accelerate the process of her passing away. We have long since adjusted ourselves to this fact because she is no longer "there!" It may seem callous, but it really isn't. My mother had pancreatic cancer and by the time she passed away it was almost a relief because she suffered so much. She died rather young by today's standards at 67.

We have no idea if my mother-in-law is suffering in any way because her mind has simply withered away. People tell me she will eventually just "forget" to swallow food put in her mouth and since she's DNR, that will be it. She IS elderly and has lived a long life, but Alzheimer's has robbed her of the last 11 years of her life. We kept her at our home for almost 10 of those years, until it became impossible to handle the day to day care.

Sorry, for the diatribe, but I felt it necessary to "talk" about this end stage of life and whether it's ALWAYS better or NOT to keep a person alive who seems not to know anything is going on.

JMO.

[MissDeeds]

233. Bless your heart

You are a very kind and generous person to keep her in your home for 10 years while she was suffering from Alzheimer's. It is a horrible disease and a heartbreaking thing to watch. My grandmother had it and went from a grand and proud lady to a babbling shell of her former self. I know she would have preferred death with dignity. It was a terrible thing to watch.

Medicare, Medicaid, and the horrendous costs of nursing home care must be addressed. I have known middle-aged folks who have lost nearly all of their life's savings in trying to provide for a parent's care in the later years of life. Something is really out of whack with the way this issue has been permitted to spiral out of control. I hope the health care bill eventually agreed upon will
curtail end of life costs.

Take care, and best of luck to you and your family.

[Plucketeer]

194. Another Edwards believer here.

I've not tried to consider how radically different things would be if he'd not fallen. Truly a "missed chance" for the minions of this nation.

We're not gonna get the health care change we need. We're gonna get sleight-of-hand jobbed.

[JDPriestly]

125. Edwards' dad worked in a textile mill. Edwards was a self-made man

as was his father. Do you have a problem with that, Oregone?

Obama's grandmother had a good, clean job in a bank. Obama went to private schools. Edwards went to public schools. Do you have a problem with that, Oregone?

Edwards was a gifted trial lawyer and became rich through years of work. Obama wrote books about himself and became rich through their sales.

[MissDeeds]

151. +1 n/t

[JDPriestly]

211. What does n/t mean?

[MissDeeds]

223. It means 'no text'

that there is no written message.

[JDPriestly]

232. Thanks.

[karynnj]

176. Obama is a very gifted author

It is ridiculous that you take every element of Edwards' background as if it was better than any alternative. The fact of the matter is that Obama and Edwards were in nearly the same socioeconomic place when each graduated from college. Obama was better positioned to make money because he went to Harvard Law and was an editor of the law review. He choose to work for peanuts on the southside of Chicago. Edwards worked a while as a corporate lawyer than went out on his own as a trial lawyer. He made a fortune doing that.

The fact is that had the eloquent Obama opted to use his talents as a trial lawyer, he would have ended up with something like the $27 million the Edwards had. He didn't - what he did more directly helped more people.

I personally though Edwards' claims silly - he was wealthy for almost his entire adult life. Even at the point when he graduated law school and married a fellow lawyer, they knew that any economic difficulties were minimal. Within a few years, they had an upper middle class income between them and soon after that they were wealthy.

[SammyWinstonJack]

215. The contrast is clear.

:thumbsup:

[Horse with no Name]

58. -10. n/t

[dysfunctional press]

67. and apparently- he was trying most of them out with rielle hunter...

:evilgrin:

[Oregone]

78. Oh damn. Now you did it!

:)

[dysfunctional press]

83. someone had to say it- especially with a set-up like that...

but- we could really use a :rimshot: smilie.

[onehandle]

148. Carter changed positions. Clinton changed positions. Obama changed positions.

A politician changing his positions? Wow! Alert the media.

DU cracks me up.

[sandyd921]

4. He was right about lots of stuff

especially that the corporations are the real threat here. If only...!&%!!*#@!!

[Cha]

147. If only he didn't let

his dick doing his thinking.

[SammyWinstonJack]

216. -1 nt

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. Democrats have agreed to MANDATE private health insurance as "the only way to achieve universal HC"

This is of course the OPPOSITE of universal health care. Obama is a "convert" to the idea.

People who do not have health care will be required to PROVE on their TAX forms that they have
a private contract with an approved, for-profit (most are for profit) health insurer or else
file for a hardship exemption. Young underemployed persons like myself, or persons who simply
wish to opt out for whatever reason, will be fined $1,000 a year.

This is CLINTON's plan and it is a CONSERVATIVE plan that the INDUSTRY is pushing.

Yet EVERY GODDAMNED YUPPIE ON THE INTERNET supports it as a (fictional) stepping stone
to universal health care.

Sort of like saying the "dictatorship of the proletariat" is a stepping stone to
democracy in a socialist state. It's not.

[Leopolds Ghost]

9. In other words: FUCK THIS SHIT.

Dems who oppose mandated private health care (which will merely enslave us to
the insurance firms) because it is "like car insurance" should ban together and
pledge to burn our insurance cards if mandated "public-private" health care
(i.e. a mix of private for profit insurance and private for profit insurance
contracted to the government) is passed. The industry is lobbying for this,
according to the Post. A vast coalition is assembled behind the idea and all
three bills contain this language. You WILL BE FINED for not having health
insurance. Like demolishing public housing ensured that the number of public
housing residents went down. That was called a SUCCESS, again by the Clintons.
Don't you see what the hell is going on?!

[midnight]

19. If the insurance co. write this mandate, then we have no reform.

[karynnj]

13. EDWARDS was also for this very same mandate

Obama argued that it was important to get the costs down first. What changed is that big business shifted to demanding mandates. (Ivan Seidenberg of Verizon argued for this before the Finance committee.)

[dflprincess]

21. Costs aren't going to come down as long as the private insurers are involved

and the CBO says the "public option" won't be any cheaper. And Steny Hoyer said it wouldn't be cheaper because then the competition wouldn't be "fair" and people wouldn't have a real choice between private and public plans because they'd go for the cheaper option (no shit, Hoyer said this in an interview on "All Things Considered" right after HR3200 was made public).

Remember how we all cried foul when Cheney had private meetings with the oil company executives? You notice how few of us question Obama's private meetings with the health insurance executives - how some people seem to think he had those meetings to "kick their butts"? Yet what came out of them was Obama deciding he liked mandates even though he opposed them during the campaign and even though Romney Care is failing in Massachusetts.

[Donnachaidh]

55. link?

Really -- I'd like to see where exactly Edwards said he was for mandated health INSURANCE.

[denem]

89. You've got to be kidding.

[karynnj]

97. True and he said that that could not be done without mandates

He was not saying the government would provide free insurance to everyone.

Here's a source you can't question.


Edwards' truly universal health care plan will ensure that every American has health insurance. He will require proof of insurance when income taxes are paid and when health care is provided. Families without insurance will be enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP or another targeted plan or be assigned a plan within new Health Care Markets.

Families who lose coverage will be expected to enroll in another plan or be assigned one. For the few people who refuse to pay, the government will help collect back premiums with interest and collection costs by using tools like the ones it uses for student loans and taxes, including collection agencies and wage garnishment.

http://johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/20071128-health-care-mandate/

[namahage]

155. Will this help?

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/

The Edwards Plan achieves universal coverage by:
Requiring businesses and other employers to either cover their employees or help finance their health insurance.
Making insurance affordable by creating new tax credits, expanding Medicaid and SCHIP, reforming insurance laws, and taking innovative steps to contain health care costs.
Creating regional "Health Care Markets" to let every American share the bargaining power to purchase an affordable, high-quality health plan, increase choices among insurance plans, and cut costs for businesses offering insurance.
Once these steps have been taken, requiring all American residents to get insurance.

Sure sounds like "mandated health INSURANCE" to me.

[Nederland]

36. I think you need to read up on Obama's plan

Young underemployed persons like myself, or persons who simply
wish to opt out for whatever reason, will be fined $1,000 a year.

That's not how it works.

[karynnj]

41. In the primaries, this was Edwards' and Clinton's positions

They were not specific on the penalty.

[Donnachaidh]

56. link? Again with the broadbrushing.

Back these up with links please.

[Aragorn]

86. links?

Did you not know, forget, or are you calling the poster a liar? Or are you of the belief that a link is "proof" ?

[karynnj]

103. Thanks - I just gave her a link - from JRE's own site

It amazes me how many of Edwards' supporters seem oblivious of his Senate career, his very conservative Democrat 2003 positions, and even his 2008 plan. That some think it was single payer or even British style national health insurance shows that they may not have looked at his plans.

(The same poster questioned my observation that the 2004 Democratic platform included a near universal healthcare plan and an extremely strong environmental/alternative energy plank. (Kerry, like Gore before him were committed to fighting global warming decades ago and Kerry had the strongest environmental record in the Senate per the LCV.)

Needless to say, she provides no links to anything Edwards was for in the contested period.

[karynnj]

99. Here you go

Edwards' truly universal health care plan will ensure that every American has health insurance. He will require proof of insurance when income taxes are paid and when health care is provided. Families without insurance will be enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP or another targeted plan or be assigned a plan within new Health Care Markets.

Families who lose coverage will be expected to enroll in another plan or be assigned one. For the few people who refuse to pay, the government will help collect back premiums with interest and collection costs by using tools like the ones it uses for student loans and taxes, including collection agencies and wage garnishment.
http://johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/20071128-health-care-mandate/

Edwards was actually pretty specific here on the penalty. In various news accounts in the pre primaries including the debates, he was less specific. I had not gone to the Edwards site until getting this for you.

[karynnj]

100. Here you go

Edwards' truly universal health care plan will ensure that every American has health insurance. He will require proof of insurance when income taxes are paid and when health care is provided. Families without insurance will be enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP or another targeted plan or be assigned a plan within new Health Care Markets.

Families who lose coverage will be expected to enroll in another plan or be assigned one. For the few people who refuse to pay, the government will help collect back premiums with interest and collection costs by using tools like the ones it uses for student loans and taxes, including collection agencies and wage garnishment.
http://johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/20071128-health-care-mandate/

Edwards was actually pretty specific here on the penalty. In various news accounts in the pre primaries including the debates, he was less specific. I had not gone to the Edwards site until getting this for you.

[denem]

85. The MANDATE, including Private Insurers was THE EDWARDS POLICY.

He proposed that even before Hillary. MANDATED HEALTH INSURANCE WAS EDWARDS' PROPOSAL, including the Public Option. Hypocrisy rules.

[karynnj]

104. Yep - here it is from his web site

"Edwards' truly universal health care plan will ensure that every American has health insurance. He will require proof of insurance when income taxes are paid and when health care is provided. Families without insurance will be enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP or another targeted plan or be assigned a plan within new Health Care Markets.

Families who lose coverage will be expected to enroll in another plan or be assigned one. For the few people who refuse to pay, the government will help collect back premiums with interest and collection costs by using tools like the ones it uses for student loans and taxes, including collection agencies and wage garnishment. "


http://johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/20071128-health-care-mandate/

[JDPriestly]

126. Only by a miracle will we end up with the Edwards plan.

The key difference between Edwards' plan and Obama's is that Edwards said from the get-go he would not negotiate with the insurance companies. Obama is wasting time on the insurance companies. They are not his or our friends. They only want to squeeze out money from us and the taxpayers. Edwards' plan should be the way it goes and that should be that. The health care industry has been strangling Americans for decades now. They have not earned a place at a negotiating table. This should be left up to the American people and all the insurance company propaganda should be outed for what it is. The only things that are being insured now are the big salaries of the insurance company executives and the big donations the health care industry makes to its pet members of Congress.

[bobbolink]

132. Edwards also said that if Congress refused to pass an adequate bill by July,

he would do everything he could to take away THEIR health care.

Obama?

:rofl:

[karynnj]

179. One problem - the President does not have the power to do that

so "everything he could do to take away their health care" was precisely NOTHING. Edwards was being a demagogue with this - he KNEW he couldn't do it.

[karynnj]

167. Obama is not "negotiating" with the insurance companies

First off, the bills are being written in Congress. Both Obama and the Congressmen have spoken to the insurance companies as well as other stakeholders. Talking is not negotiating.

Second of all, if Edwards were President, he would also be faced with the fact that Congress writes the legislation. Do you really think Edwards could tell Congress not to have any industry people in their hearings.

[cornermouse]

177. You're right.

He isn't negotiating. He isn't negotiating because with national mandatory healthcare, the insurance companies can afford to sit back till it gets passed and then start chiseling away at "inconvenient" items in the bill next session, such as forcing them to cover people they don't want to cover. In other words, there is no reason to negotiate, the store is already given away for free.

If Edwards was President, he would at least fight for it. Other than one speech/news conference, how much fighting have you seen Obama do?

[karynnj]

180. Most fighting, we won't see

It will be in quiet, sober meetings between Obama and individual Congressmen or groups of Congressmen. It additionally will be things quietly done by people in his administration. How would Edwards have fought for this?

[cornermouse]

183. There is nothing to fight about.

The "store" was given away before the fight began in order to convince insurance companies to, best scenario, go along with the program or, worst scenario, put up a half hearted fight at most.

By the way, doesn't Obama's vacation at a $20,000,000 vacation getaway sort of spoil the working for peanuts picture?

[karynnj]

184. No - he does not own that place - and he and Michelle are not poor

now nor have they ever said they were. I didn't either - my point was that he did not seek to make a fortune as a trial lawyer.

Also, doesn't JRE OWN a HUGE estate in addition to his Chapel Hill house?

As to insurance companies, your paranoia is showing.

[cornermouse]

185. Maybe you missed it.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07242009/watch.html

MARCIA ANGELL: But what I would say this time around, and now I am going to be very pessimistic, Bill. This time around, I don't think it's going to happen because of the power the pharmaceutical and insurance lobbies. I don't think it's going to happen. But I would rather see Obama go down fighting for something coherent and practical that the public could mobilize behind, than go down fighting for this amorphous plan that tries to keep these private insurance industry in place.

BILL MOYERS: It seems to me like they're more finessing than fighting.

MARCIA ANGELL: Well, he will have to fight. But I think he'll go down.

TRUDY LIEBERMAN: They've been finessing since the very beginning. They've been finessing since the campaign. During the campaign, he was not even willing to be pinned down. He had a whole list of things that he would like to do. But so did Hillary Clinton and John McCain. And in some ways, they really weren't all that far apart, except on the issue of long term care.

That is another time bomb that is awaiting America and nobody has talked about it. But aside from that, I see an Administration that is trying to keep this playbook going as long as possible. And to commit as little as possible until the 11th hour. And by then, it's going to be too late for the American people to know what's going to await them. And as a journalist, whose job it is to explain to the average person on the street what all of this means to them-- that's not happening. And as a journalist, that troubles me. The press has not dealt with the issue of how this is going to affect the auto mechanic on Main Street. Or the babysitter. Or--

This is what I see also. Think about it.

[karynnj]

191. long term care? I know someone who has long talked of long term care

Here's a recent op-ed. Teresa Heinz Kerry - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6139230

[cornermouse]

195. I liked, probably still do like, Teresa Heinz Kerry.

That said, her credentials in healthcare compared to Ms. Angell and Ms. Lieberman would be?

Trudy Lieberman covers health care reform for the Columbia Journalism Review and directs the health and medicine reporting program at the City University of New York's Graduate School of Journalism.

Marcia Angell, a physician herself, is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Social Medicine at Harvard University Medical School and was the first woman Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. She, too, has written widely and often about health care reform.

[karynnj]

202. Why contrast her to them? They are not doing the same thing.

They, of course, are professionals in the field of health care policy. She did not contradict anything they said. Teresa Heinz Kerry's role has been to fund research and conferences in this area and to act as an advocate for policies. She has worked with state legislatures on healthcare.

She has hosted conferences bringing together top researchers on women's health issues and environmental toxins annually for over a dozen years. Her knowledge and the depth of her understanding of policy is greater than Elizabeth Edwards' - and I have no problem with Edwards acting as a policy advocate. I think the work EE's does is valuable. Teresa's, done with the support of the Heinz Foundation, is as well.

[cornermouse]

204. You're the one who went off on the tangent, not me.

I compared them because you were trying to compare them and as nice as Teresa may be, her knowledge level about the subject is nowhere near theirs. For that matter, I would doubt that Teresa's knowledge level comes anywhere near Elizabeth's personal experience and, no doubt, knowledge gained from her illness.

Nice try at equivocating, deflecting, and being disingenuous, though.

[karynnj]

205. Teresa's father was a doctor and Teresa spent

considerable time accompanying him to bring health care to the poor in Mozambique on weekends as a teen. Teresa has spent considerable time since at least the early 1990s working on healthcare and environmental issues. Her knowledge and the work that she has done far exceeds what Elizabeth Edwards has done. Although she does not do scientific research herself, she funds promising work and hosts major conferences on healthcare and environmental toxins.

As to whether Teresa understands the type of research that is presented at those conferences, consider that she used the insight that she had to save her husband's health and possibly his life. Senator Kerry's dad died of prostrate cancer - as a result she looked carefully at the PSA scores and noticed that while his score was below the level that would indicate a problem, it was higher than it previously had been. Kerry's doctor had seen all his results as normal. Teresa and John went back together to discuss the results with the doctor, who, because they insisted, did a biopsy that indicated he had cancer. Without Teresa, it is likely that it would not have been discovered until it was more advanced. Interestingly, the AMA policy changed in 2005 or 2006, to include looking at the trend - as Teresa did. (The NYT article on that change did not mention Kerry and it is likely that the research was independent of Teresa's insight - I am not saying or implying that she had anything to do with the change which should be attributed to the scientists who proved it made sense. But, it does say she has the type of analytical mind to think to look at the data as she did. )

In addition, in her 2007 book, she spoke of the dangers of phylates. This was before it became a substance that environmental groups wanted banned and legislation was written. Teresa is a very serious, studious woman, who John Kerry rightfully praises as brilliant. More importantly, her conferences provide a place where top researchers meet - sometimes leading to synergies.

I think what Elizabeth Edwards brings is not the same depth of knowledge, but her personal story which is compelling. She has really been interested in healthcare just since 2004. I know this from her own words. In Saving Graces, she says she did not know the K/E healthcare plan. Now it was on the web site and their were plenty of articles including a very in depth one with Kerry's health care advisor. Not to mention as the wife of the VP candidate, she could have easily gotten any information she wanted. I think she said this to knock the Kerry campaign, but I think it made her look bad.

What she does bring is her own story. She is a living example of why preventative care is important. Although it was not the case for her, for many women, the reason they do not have the recommended tests is because they can't afford them. She is working as a senior fellow at Center for American Progress. She is a good advocate, but she is by no means more an expert than THK.

Your entire post there (both parts) was tangential to the earlier posts.

[cornermouse]

212. Let's try a direct comparison.

Trudy Lieberman covers health care reform for the Columbia Journalism Review and directs the health and medicine reporting program at the City University of New York's Graduate School of Journalism.

Marcia Angell, a physician herself, is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Social Medicine at Harvard University Medical School and was the first woman Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. She, too, has written widely and often about health care reform.

vs.

Teresa- daughter of a doctor.

Says volumes doesn't it. Bye bye.

[karynnj]

217. try reading - I said I never compared her to those women -

The only comparison I made was between Teresa and Elizabeth. This is the second post where you bring in the credentials of these women - even though I never said Teresa was to be compared with them and Teresa's op-ed agreed with what they said. You created that strawman out of thin air.

You ignore everything I wrote other than that she is a daughter of a doctor - ignoring even that she was involved with her dad in delivering health care to an impoverished area. Yet, you would be the first to complain if I said that Elizabeth Edwards' credentials were just that she, like millions of American women, suffers with cancer.

My post that you responded too was entirely on your statement that THK was less knowledgeable than Elizabeth Edwards. I note that you did not even try to defend your indefensible statement that Elizabeth Edwards was more knowledgeable.

That is what speaks volumes. It means you know that you can not win an argument comparing THK to EE.

[cornermouse]

189. continuation of the conversation.

BILL MOYERS: You're hesitating.

MARCIA ANGELL: I'm hesitating. Because I don't think he's grasped the nettle. And I don't think that even the best of the proposals that he is considering are going to be effective. And I worry about even the public option, because--

BILL MOYERS: You've been skeptical of the public option.

MARCIA ANGELL: I'm skeptical of that, because the power of the insurance industry is so great that I believe that they would use their clout in Congress to hobble the public option in some way. And have it become a dumping ground for the sickest patients, and then cream off the profitable ones for themselves. And then what people would decide is that the public option was no good. That the public couldn't do any-- the government couldn't do anything right. And that would be the wrong lesson to dwell on.

TRUDY LIEBERMAN: That's what some people fear will happen to Medicare. That it will be privatized in some way, to deal with--

[JDPriestly]

210. Edwards would do as many presidents have done: present a bill to

Congress and let them change it.

[foginthemorn]

219. Of course the WH/Obama are negoiating with the insurance companies.

Where have you been?

[sandyd921]

170. You got that right!

That was one of the major things that drew me to Edwards and turned me off from Obama. You don't negotiate with a skunk. Edwards talked about the reality of the insurance companies and the rest of the corporatocracy. Obama seemed then and now to be either extremely naive or already bought and paid for.

[bobbolink]

154. I'm ashamed to belong to a party that will pull this kind of shit on citizens!

:blush:

[Orwellian_Ghost]

6. Yep

And let's remember that what we are taking is ours. What we are taking, taking back more aptly stated, are only the things that have been stolen from us.

It will take mass direct action. It will take sustained demonstrations and many will get arrested, myself included. Nothing else will alter the situation. We know what to do. Are we up to it? I think so. The pot is boiling.

[bobbolink]

8. Some of us are up to it. The rest of the population isn't hurting enough yet.

:(

[Naturyl]

17. Yes, that's very important.

We need to never buy into the idea that we are trying to get some "free lunch" to which we are not rightfully entitled. This world belongs to all of us, and access to health care is a basic human right.

Wealth and power have already taken for themselves so much of what belongs to all of us. Demanding health care is just one way of taking back what is rightfully ours.

[ChiciB1]

22. I've Been Saying "Revolution" For Years Now... Or Mass Uprising If You Will...

You are more optimistic than I. But should it ever get off the ground, I'll be there on "all fours!" It IS TIME, it really should be sinking in, but still I sit and wait, then think some more again.

Waiting for this country to TAKE AMERICA BACK! Yesterday isn't too soon!

[bobbolink]

27. You've expressed my thoughts very well.

Not holding breath.

[karynnj]

7. Did John Edwards have the required 50 votes?

Not to mention in 2004 the same Edwards bashed Dean's and Kerry's near universal plans as "too expensive". How much support do you think Edwards would have gotten if he refused to negotiate - you do realize that not a single one of his former peers endorsed him.

The fact is that even Republican Senator Grassley says there will likely be a bill passed this year.

[JDPriestly]

127. Had Edwards been elected, the story you hear in the press would have

been very different. Obama has hired a bunch of assistants who are putting on happy faces in public and playing footsie with insurance company executives under the table. The whole negotiating scenario is an act. The insurance companies are not negotiating in earnest, and maybe Obama isn't either. His speech this week sounded serious, but has he pointed out that Baucus and his committee are the biggest problem yet. Maybe Obama needs to take them on.

[valerief]

11. You're so right. nt

[Naturyl]

14. Would Edwards have actually kept his word, though?

Maybe. I won't say he wouldn't have.

Obama didn't fight very hard. I can't see Edwards doing less.

[FrenchieCat]

20. Is this over, or are we all speculating that it is,

cause MSM says it is?

I think we are currently defeating ourselves.....
because WE are not fighting for it,
we are accepting that it is all a done deal,
and complaining about it,
something that we could easily wait till after the fact to bemoan,
if it turned out to be true....

[Orwellian_Ghost]

30. It never started

The "debate" has been as manufactured as the election spectacle and the range of discussion would not fit through the eye of the American political needle.

Who in the hell is this "WE" you are babbling on about?

[FrenchieCat]

23. Whomever expected for the healthcare industry to totally go away

in all of its glory was bound to be wrong....
as it ain't going away, no matter what we might want.

What is it about not going to totally overhaul the system as it it
does no one understand? It was never stated that we were going to start from scratch...
so I'm not quite sure about the certain "frenzy" all of the sudden.

Seems like now that something might get passed that may just be halfway decent,
the clamouring of voices for us not to be happy about anything are getting loud once again.

[bobbolink]

24. I don't know who you're quoting, because Edwards certainly expected a FIGHT, and said so.

[FrenchieCat]

25. Oh I remember Edwards alright......He was the Hedge Fund guy

[bobbolink]

26. And we all remember you.

You've been a lot of fun, and added so much.

[FrenchieCat]

28. I know that some folks will never forgive me for highlighting that other part of Edwards....

although some have privately thanked me via PM and called it us "dodging a bullet"....
cause when we think of it now, barring his affair, that Hedge Fund stuff would have looked
pretty bad during the meltdown, if you ask me.....as that happened right in the middle of
campaign.

I didn't dwell on the petty stuff, like his big house and that kind of stuff....
just the things that disturbed me like the hedge fund, the sudden pop up of the anti-poverty program, and his inconsistency from one election to the next, which I felt would have made him vunerable.....

My understanding is that was alright to do during the primaries here at DU. :shrug:
Don't forget there were many battling Barack OBama and Hillary Clinton as well.

[rwheeler31]

32. There are many dems with skills, use their talents.

[FrenchieCat]

35. That's true.

I was responding in terms of someone saying they "remembered" me from the primaries.
I've been here since 2003, so I was just guessing that this was so.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kalyke]

95. Anyone who still supports Edwards is a shill.

I mean, come on, the guy jumped on and off whatever bandwagon was popular for eight years, then, to stay somewhat relevant when not a senator, he jumped on a poverty bandwagon, only to jump off that after losing the primaries.

And, he personally screwed his ill wife and young family by carrying on with a "videographer" whilst paying her with campaign funds.

And you're calling someone else a shill?

I can't believe anyone would ever trust Edwards again, his wife included.

[karynnj]

108. I too remember her posts

It was completely reasonable for people to point out major changes and inconsistencies between what Edwards did and said - or between what he said at one time and another.

What mystified me was that Edwards strategically ignored these shifts rather than using both what he saw traveling the country in 2004 and EE's health situation as the reason he changed. Had he done that, it would have seemed more genuine and helped him answer MTP like questions (where older tapes are played.) The media treated his IWR "I was wrong" op-ed very uncritically.

There were questions with the hedge fund job (my bigger question was whether it in fact was just a thinly disguised huge campaign contribution - as Edwards himself said he only worked a few days a month, wherever he was and did whatever he wanted AND he later claimed to have little knowledge of their business.) and with many things where it is likely he lied. (Or had EE do so - such as including in her prepared speech that Obama's plan would not cover her because of pre-existing conditions ... said on the eve of the Iowa caucus, when refuting the claim would be difficult. )

[bobbolink]

130. thank you for saying what needed to be said.

[MonteLukast]

68. My off-the-wall theory about that...

I've always wondered why he would do that... he was already wealthy. He already had plenty to finance his campaign. Why would he need even more money?

It sounds to me like he was living by a prosperity gospel.
However de-religionized, however sublimated... because whether it's Joel Osteen's church, the "law of attraction" or "New Thought", the effect is the same: to make a person justify greater personal wealth accumulations because they're spoken the right words or thought the right thoughts.

It would make sense tied in to his other reckless behavior as well. Part of the reason he believed he wouldn't suffer any consequences may have been because he thought that he was exercising enough faith and positive thinking that the "law of attraction" would protect him.

Mark Kielar says it better than I do here.

I said before that JE seemed to act out-of-character. Elizabeth described him in the Oprah magazine interview (not TV) as old-fashioned. As a lawyer, he was exhaustive and deliberate. Recklessness and devil-may-care-ness do not seem to have been his usual traits.

But following a prosperity gospel can certainly make you act like that. Following a prosperity gospel can certainly make you forget the abundance you already have.
And the all-important need to maintain a positive self-image and say only happy things to yourself-- lest you break the law of attraction-- would have certainly blinded him to what effects his actions may have had on others.

This would be very interesting, if prosperity gospel was as big a factor in Edwards' downfall as I think. His case would be a perfect close-to-home example of how insidious it really is.

[GreenEyedLefty]

74. Your theory is interesting, but definitely off the wall.

[Cha]

238. Yes, Frenchie Cat is very passionate

about being an activist..I'm so glad she's on board.

[DaLittle Kitty]

39. Yep That's What Dennis Kept Saying @ Every Opportunity. So What Was Dennis Running For?

Just there to take up time and space and protect the anointed ones... HillBill And the Candidate who NEVER Said (HOW) he would accomplish anything! and here we are... with a solid majority in ever increasing CAPITULATION mode! Edwards will be looking better every day as Health Care and what was that other major issue Obama was running on ... Oh... the (I was against it from the start) WAR in Iraq... continue to head nowhere or SOUTH! Edwards will have learned a lesson here and so perhaps may some of the public... wait and see!?

[FrenchieCat]

42. The primaries are back.....

Gawd, How I missed them!

[Donnachaidh]

65. maybe you'll get a better rate per post next time. n/t

[bobbolink]

133. This is a prime example of why we need to unrec INDIVIDUAL posts.

I'm sure you've missed it all... your opportunity to attack shrunk.

[karynnj]

46. We are on a timetable to leave in Iraq - and have recently left all the cities

As to Edwards, he was a co-sponsor of the IWR and was not willing to back Kerry/Feingold in 2006. He never had a coherent exit plan.

The bills are being written in Congress. Had Edwards won, he would have to get a bill through Congress too.

[Horse with no Name]

60. What about Afghanistan?

Seems we just rearranged chairs on the Titanic.
Yeah we pulled out of Iraq but we took up residence in the house next door.
I don't consider that progress.

[karynnj]

90. Afghanistan/Pakistan is where there still is a "lawless" area where

Al Queda still is free. We are trying to work with the local people to provide security. I do think we need to be very careful about our policy there - especially when people like John Kerry in SFRC meetings is speaking about the wisdom of having a lighter footprint there - even as we have more forces to have the ability to great more security.

[Donnachaidh]

63. yeah, and the professional blogger army posted that little talking point everywhere.

Let's all remember the shitstorm of posts from certain individuals if any of the other candidates might take away from the shine of the Chosen One.

Was it pay per post, or was a salary involved? Never got a straight answer on that either.

[karynnj]

181. There were many many Edwards people posting constantly

Should I question if his campaign paid you? The fact is that people like the one you posted this about were there before and after the primary season/general election. Are you suggesting that Obama planted these operatives long ago - some before he even became a Senator?

[JDPriestly]

128. And the only guy who knew that the economy was about to collapse

and warned us about the impending impoverishment. Maybe part of the reason he changed so many of his viewpoints was that he saw the insides of a hedge fund. I suspect that may have changed him.

[karynnj]

182. Sorry, he did not warn about the impending collapse before anyone else

There were many people who you can claim that of - Krugman and other economists did years before. All three top candidates reacted to events in 2007 at roughly the same time.

[JDPriestly]

209. Yes, lots of economists were warning. Edwards was the first

and only presidential candidate to warn early on. Interestingly, Edwards had a huge backing from economists including Galbraith and a long list of well known economists. Edwards listened to the brightest and best economists. We can see what economists Obama listened to.

[MannyGoldstein]

163. But Not Just ANY Hedge Fund...

His hedge fund specialized in backing predatory-lending schemes. Which, among other things, foreclosed on dozens of NOLA on homes after Katrina.

[eridani]

113. "Industry" = disengenuous lumping together of parasites and actual providers.

60% of providers want single payer. So do I, but I would settle for forcing private insurance out of the Enron business model and into acting like private life insurance, which is strictly a supplement to Social Security survivors' benefits.

Single payer leaves current providers in place, no matter what their arrangements.

If we can't get single payer, any plan which continues to allow insurers to deny claims, cherry pick, rescind policies, or even to charge sick people more for coverage ought to fail. A public plan should be open to anyone within 11 months of passage of a bill. If that is not the case, we should not support it.

[rwheeler31]

29. Yup that is why they had to mess him up.

[karynnj]

43. He did that himself, when

he worked for a hedge fund, making $500,000 for a job where he worked 2 or 3 days a month doing whatever he wanted - and said it was to learn about poverty.

he changed 180 degrees on at least 4 issues from 2003 to 2007.

he lied about what he did in the 2004 general election.

he suddenly spouted Trippi anti corporation rhetoric after having been a very DLC Senator, who voted for the bankruptcy bill.

he had a sleasy affair which he repeatedly lied about - even in his confession.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He did not do one thing to fight corporations or corruption as Senator.

[liberal N proud]

31. Why do you think they had to destroy him?

He is just lucky he didn't have an accident.

[Jennicut]

34. He may have destroyed himself with his careless actions

[ChiciB1]

175. Oh, I See... No Other Democrats Have Had Any Such "Careless Actions!"

THIMNK!!

[earth mom]

37. Edwards was right, but the problem is that he is a DU whipping boy.

The old "attack the messenger instead of the message" routine is rampant around here whenever his name is brought up.

But that doesn't mean he was wrong about corporate america.

If nothing more, Edwards did, at least, speak truth to power when he had the chance.

[karynnj]

44. Not exactly

He demagogued and attacked others, for things he did as much as they did, because he wanted to get the support of the left as he envisioned 2008 as a fight between himself and HRC. HRC was positioned too close to the right of the party, so that was the only side he could run from.

[earth mom]

45. Give it up. The 2008 elections are OVER. It's the MESSAGE that matters. nt

[karynnj]

47. I'm glad you realize that the election is over. It certainly did not seem so in your post

The fact of the matter is that when you ignore the different rhetoric and ignore the minor policy differences, Obama, Edwards and Clinton all ran on nearly the same things. All spoke of universal health care, all spoke of a serious environmental/alternative energy program, all spoke of Iraq in variations of the arguments used for Kerry/Feingold. The reason so much of the debate in 2008 was personal, was there were not big differences on the issues. (All of these were very close to Kerry 2004 (his K/F was a natural evolution from his 2004 plan reacting to events in Iraq. These were standard Kennedy/Kerry wing positions. The surprise is that Clinton ran on them too. )

[Donnachaidh]

66. THIRD request for a LINK to back up your rhetoric.

Ass-stats don't count.

[karynnj]

87. What specifically are you questioning.?

What I claimed here:

Kerry had a near universal plan in 2004.
From Krugman:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/09/opinion/09KRUG.html?ex=1247112000&en=e844595bdb3044cc&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
Here's a long interview with Kerry's health adviser.
http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hhpr/publications/previous/04s/Littlefield.pdf
That Kerry ran on these issues and that the 2004 and 2008 platforms were not that different on those issues? That Edwards had a less ambitious healthcare plan than Dean or Kerry?

You want a link to the 2004 primary issues and the 2004 general election?

Here is a DU summary, of how Kerry tweaked his 2004 plan in 2006 - the link went to johnkerry.com and no longer works. Prosense has never misquoted from the links she provides and would have had no incentive to misquote Kerry's site - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=273&topic_id=97587&mesg_id=97611

As to Edwards' own proposal - here's a comparison from 2004 by the LA Times -

Yet healthcare remains one of the most important distinctions between the two major contenders for the nomination. Kerry has offered a plan that is more ambitious, comprehensive and expensive than Edwards'.

In one of his few policy challenges to Kerry, Edwards has argued that the country can't afford his rival's plan. In turn, Kerry insists Edwards' approach would do too little to reduce the ranks of the uninsured or to restrain the rise in premiums for those who have insurance.

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/feb/28/nation/na-health28

On the environment, Kerry's words echoed in 2008 being repeated by all.

The point though is that Edwards was not the first on any of these issues - nor was Kerry. Bill Bradley in 2000 also ran on a strong healthcare and environment program.

W

[ChiciB1]

228. I Was Sent An Email Recently Asking That I Sign Onto A Letter To "Certain"

Senators who received enormous contributions to their campaigns. Might be a little off topic of EDWARDS, but the NUMBER ONE recipient was John Kerry! Eight Million plus. Even Baucus is sitting around the 3.5 million.

I had waited and waited and waited til the time John Kerry would run, I worked very hard for him, but this and some other actions have made me "re-think" my devotion!

I erased the email, but I'm sure others may know the organization and the email I'm talking about. I signed it, and said I wanted my name to be presented and not hidden.

[karynnj]

240. Did you forget that John Kerry was the Nominee of the party

Those contributions include all the individual contributions by people who worked for companies in that industry. For example, there are lots of companies in NJ that do research on drugs. I know some of these people and I know they are Democrats. I know them because our 24 years old daughters met each other when they were about 3 and were fascinated that they had same first name and had the same kind of Mary Jane shoes on! Now, if this extremely nice couple contributed, their dollars are in Kerry's total.

I know who sent the emsil - Bold Progressives and I know the DFA are pushing the Bold Progressive commercial. Both should be ashamed of themselves. They were extremely dishonest about Kerry's position and did not have the grace (or intelligence - take your pick) to realize that EVERY Presidential nominee (or top candidate) has higher numbers than people who never ran for President. In fact, Edwards' numbers would be high as well, though likely lower - not because he was "better", but because he never was the front runner. In fact, the DFA should ask Dean why he opted out of public financing - it was because Kerry followed, that his number is this high. In 2004, Democrats were thankful that Dean and Kerry did this.

The fact is Kerry ran his first 4 Senate campaigns rejecting PAC money and he wrote a campaign finance bill with Wellstone. This attack on his integrity by a MoveOn.org alumni, Adam Green is dishonest and swiftboating - and YES, I have no reluctance in calling him a liar because the message he sent out in reply to anyone who questioned him says that he fully acknowledged that Kerry was a supporter of the public option - which is NOT what he wrote. It also begs the question of why he was included.

What other than NOT endorsing Edwards, who was a very uncooperative VP, refusing to use the campaign slogan, has Senator Kerry done. The fact is that though BOTH Edwards attacked the Kerrys, neither Kerry said one negative word about the edwards.

[JI7]

244. wow, this is just fucking bizarre, Kerry was a Presidential Candidate

of course he would have far larger contributions than those who haven't been. but you seem to want to ignore that.

yet you have no problem ignoring everything Edwards has done to show he is a phony and continue to insist he would have done something good.

[bobbolink]

137. And just what was that "message" that matters?

"Hope"?

:rofl:

[Horse with no Name]

61. The centrists have their agenda

and whip themselves into a mass frenzy of hatred whenever his name is mentioned.

[jimlup]

49. Point is we HAVE TO TAKE IT FROM THEM!

We need to shut these f&$@!s down - pure and simple. The more they are involved the less efficient our health care system will be.

[onehandle]

50. Of course he was. nt

[Kingofalldems]

52. No wonder disrupter(s) disliked him so much.

[nashville_brook]

71. +1111111111111111111111

not sure how many that is...it just felt right.

[onehandle]

188. They were way in the minority. They were just the loudest.

And spent most of their time hacking away at Hillary and Obama while the vast majority of DUers supported Edwards.

The primary here ruined much of DU and has had long lasting effects.

[onehandle]

235. nt

[Mass]

59. Sanders was right. And he cares. A lot of people were right.

Kucinich was right.

Edwards was not extraordinary (if anything, how do you know he would not have changed his mind as president). Why the nostalgia on somebody who is not worth it.

[kpominville]

69. Why does one affair ruin John Edwards but multiple Republicans can have affairs with

No negative effect on their careers whatsoever?

[Jackpine Radical]

73. Maybe because the Republicans in question don't threaten the Corporate State.

Using flaws in the messenger to defeat the message is an old and highly effective form of misdirection. If the messenger doesn't have fatal flaws, you make them up. The Dean Scream, product of a manipulated sound system; Al Gore, serial liar, Love Canal, inventing the Internet. Obama's great genius has been in managing to deflect the crap--Wright, Ayers, Michelle,s "Really proud," etc.

I went to Edwards after a couple of (imho) more progressive candidates bowed out, seeing him as having moved left from where he had been in 2004, and standing substantially to the left of Obama and Hillary. I never deified him, but I never demonized him either. He was stupid and reckless, not evil. He gave ammunition to the Talking Heads of the corporate press. They used it on him.

I think we're lucky; I still have nightmares about a scenario in which he won the nomination & the details of his affair came out in about October. Palin would be a heartbeat away from the Football.

[QC]

81. BINGO!

Class talk is dangerous.

[ChiciB1]

178. BINGO! BINGO! BINGO!!!! n/t

[Kajsa]

75. That is an excellent question, Kpominville.

It's a double standard I never understood.

Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[ChiciB1]

229. Hey, I Keep Seeing E. Spitzer On "The Meeting" Show With Dylan Somebody...

Can't remember his name, but I do see SPITZER on there a lot. Why has he been resurrected? Seems he had "several" little escapades on the side. AND NOT SO LONG AGO!!

Sure, he had to resign... but here he is, BACK AGAIN and fairly quickly!

And I thought Spitzer was a really good politician and still do. But he did screw up, as did many others. And yes, WHY is it that EDWARDS is such a "poster boy" when so many others have been caught with their hands in the 'er "cookie jar?"

[Cha]

239. Because he denied it and lied about

it and actually put his country at risk which makes him an arrogant traitor.

[enzymatic]

72. I couldn't agree with you more! I overheard a nurse talking in a cafe last week

complaining, actually, how her hospital makes them work their asses off and take overnight shifts and how hard it is on the body. I turned around and said that I thought there was a shortage of nurses and she explained that it didn't change their pay, etc.

Then she starts in on OBAMA'S HEALTH CARE and I realized she was against it (surprising for a nurse, and surprising in my very liberal hometown). I said that I hoped the insurance companies went out of business (and I didn't mean that people didn't have jobs but that we get rid of that whole industry). Know what she replied? That people cheat insurance companies! I told her that I never heard that; that I was more familiar with doctors who pad their expenses. Ugh.

[dysfunctional press]

84. "people cheat insurance companies!"

and technically, a lot of those "people" are doctors, who OFTEN do what they can and have to in order to get the insurance companies to live up to their obligation to the patient.

and it all PALES in comparison to how the insurance companies CHEAT their customers, and the public at large.

[CLANG]

80. HR-676

has almost 100 sponsors in the house. It is the perfect plan and nobody will talk about it in the media.

[bobbolink]

136. Sorry, but it's lost a lot. Down to 83 at last count.

:(

Thanks to new Blue Cross Dogs in Congress. :puke:

[Kalyke]

88. Sorry, but Edwards was an opportunist.

He wasn't the first to say that and only hooked onto the whole "populism" issue because it played up to the base.

He was actually part of the problem. And didn't give two hoots about the poor (as evidenced by his dropping them like a hot potato once he lost a second time in the primaries).

I agree that the health insurance companies are scoundrals who won't negotiate in good faith, but, geez... why did you have to include that worthless cheating asshole to make your point?

[JackDragna]

92. Perhaps because he was the only candidate..

..who gave any real lip service to the huge problems of economic inequality in this country. For all his faults, it was nice, for once, to hear someone who comes from the party that supposedly represents "the little guy" seem concerned about their problems.

[Kalyke]

96. Wes Clark and Howard Dean in 2004 and Dennis Kucinich in 2008.

Only candidate, my ass.

[karynnj]

115. You should add John Kerry in 2004 as well

Kerry did at least as much as Dean and more than Clark on these issues.

Kerry, like Dean and Clark, had a better healthcare plan than Edwards. In addition, Kerry actually did things to help people in poverty while Senator - unlike Edwards.

Kerry was the sponsor of Youthbuild, securing funding evey year since the early 1990s.
Kerry wrote the precursor bill to SCHIP with Kennedy
Kerry wrote and sponsored for over a decade the affordable housing trust fund - gradually gaining cosponsors until he had 23 in 2008, when Dodd and Reed (2 of the cosponsors) included it in their banking bill.

[MilesColtrane]

93. We're going to need bipartisanship to get something decent passed.

Mainly because there are those in our own party who will vote down meaningful changes.

[cornermouse]

101. If what Obama was pushing was a meaningful change,

I would be right behind him. But when you really look at it, you realize it isn't the change its being presented as. What we really need is single payer/universal healthcare/whatever you want to call it and I'm not going to "settle" for less.

I suggest that if you haven't watched this weeks Moyers Journal on this subject, you look it up and watch. Credible guests with excellent reputations and qualifications.

[sendero]

105. Obama has already proven...

.. that he sides with big business, nothing meaningful is going to happen. I'm amazed that anyone still thinks it will.

Anything that does happen will be like Medicare Part D, a give-away to big business, not a helping hand for Americans.

[felinetta]

106. We really needed Edwards to be fighting for us in some capacity or position. What a shame we

can't have his input.  The Repubs would rip him to shreds.  

[ChiciB1]

112. But A Lot Of Democrats... Many Here At DU Would Rip Him Even Worse!!!

I see it EVERY SINGLE TIME his name comes up! I wonder if ANYONE can find another politician who is WORSE than Edwards!!

I mean, here at DU he's been called almost everything except perhaps... THE DEVIL HIMSELF!

My heart beats with PRIDE knowing that everyone in D.C. have such a HEART OF GOLD!! Would that I Could be a fly on so many walls!!!!!

[karynnj]

118. I'm not sure he would have been anything but a distraction

What we need now is two things:

The most important is someone who can persuade legislators who are on the fence (or the other side) to move in our direction. Remember Feingold's comment in 2008 before any affair scandal? Feingold was unusually outspoken, but I think his comments reflect a majority opinion in the US Senate. Edwards does not have the gravitas or their respect. Remember no one in the Senate voted for him.

The second is people to rally the public who can prod their congressmen. The fact though is that Edwards has no credibility except to the people who still are with him - and they are already on board. So, who new could he influence? Elizabeth Edwards has more ability to do this than he does.

(I don't think he was the policy guru of his team - so I doubt he could be useful behind the scenes.)

[SammyWinstonJack]

220. They'd have to stand in line behind many Dems and all of Corporate America.

The Repubs would rip him to shreds.


Just read the comments in this thread:

the hedge fund guy

phony populist

etc etc etc

[McCamy Taylor]

109. John Edwards was attacked by the press starting 01/08 because he would have delivered health reform.

[clear eye]

111. Worse than that. While they distract us w/ insurance "reform" they are laying plans to gut Medicare

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6154041&mesg_id=6154041

[JDPriestly]

116. Yes. It is naive to think that you can negotiate with huge corporations

and get them to give you anything other than a coupon to buy their product at an already inflated price.

[Cleita]

117. I'm watching the Liar's Club who met on Thursday (Republican Senate

Committee on Health Care Reform) on C-SPAN right now. Forked tongues all over the place with the Cassandra predictions of doom if government offers a public plan. I think the nervous twitches, body language and blinking eyes speaks volumes on the fact that they don't even believe what they are saying.

[waiting for hope]

121. +1 zillion ...

Edwards was right about a lot of things ...

[robinlynne]

124. That's why I voted for him.

[GeorgeGist]

135. John Edwards is RICH ...

[bobbolink]

139. Well, gee.... send him to hell for that.

:wtf:

[onehandle]

142. LOL! Is it any wonder that John Edwards was the overwhelming favorite at DU.

This was the best that the minority at DU could come up with during the primaries.

Funny how it's the same argument that Boss Limbaugh and Fox News could come up with.

[onehandle]

218. nt

[RufusTFirefly]

144. And we all know rich guys NEVER make good presidents

"We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace -- business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.

"They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

"Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me -- and I welcome their hatred." -- Franklin Delano Roosevelt

[Clear Blue Sky]

138. Insurance companies have big $$. Into the pockets of members of Congress. Both parties.

[spin]

141. The members of Congress have great heath care...

and they really don't give a shit about us.

We could change this.

[Clear Blue Sky]

161. That would be a great thing to change, but how?

Making Congress have the same health care plan as the rest of us would insure that they pass a good plan.

[spin]

166. That's a hell of a good idea...

Unfortunately they'll never vote for it.

[onethatcares]

143. as long as we keep smacking each other in the nutz

we're never gonna be as organized as those that oppose every item that would lead to a better world for all of us.


Just sayin.

[pleah]

145. K&R Edwards supporter here.

I have always been against bipartesanship.
It doesn't work. All you get is watered down legislation that doesn't do much of anything.

[shimmergal]

243. We'll never get anything that

really helps ordinary people thru bipartisanship.

FDR didn't get a single Republican vote for Social Security when it was passed.

And I don't think LBJ got any Republicans to vote for Medicare.

It's time to bite the bullet and get a decent healthcare bill passed by any means possible. Can we get 50 votes in the Senate?

[Laelth]

153. Hear, hear.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the solution to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[peacetalksforall]

157. Remember the counter for the cost of war? If there is going to be a delay in taking back

our health rights at reasonable costs. We need to expose and document the impact of delay by gathering every story with $$$ signs.

For every day this is delayed, we have to organize a count of 'damage' to the little people. During the 2008 election, callers were requested to call in with the things that prevented from the voting or voting, but without assurance of their vote being counted right. These are a part of history.

Using counters and testimony, what is needed is evidence of how people are hurting psychologically, spiritually, and monetarily with hits to self-esteem. If the lobbyists have paid enough to the right people to delay this we can't have the mainstream press ignoring it. We need to fight. We need to carry on in a Michael Moore way - locally or nationwide. We need to document every single Representative and Senator and every move they have made to delay this as a gift to the profiteers.

We can't be forgotten.

They can't kick us around like this. They meaning our paid and voted for representatives.

Enough.

[mzmolly]

162. I was an Edwards supporter in the primaries, but I'm willing to give the President

a chance to implement his plan.

[onehandle]

187. Agreed. nt

[cali]

165. johny hedgefund was and is a duplicitous fuck who made money off the backs of

Katrina victims and VICIOUSLY attacked howard dean in 2004 on healthcare. Period.

A hearty unrec for the asswipe edwards. bernie, dennis, russ, howard are worth ten thousand Johny hedgefunds.

[onehandle]

186. Way to miss the point.

I am so glad that the majority of DUers get the point and voted this to the top.

[Blackhatjack]

192. Those who can't separate their personal animosity for Edwards from their fair evaluation of the OP..

... are doomed to being led around by the nose by their opponents, no matter how smart they might be.

If all it takes to divert your attention from the statement clearly set out in the OP is to simply mention "John Edwards", then you will be easily manipulated in what you think and say, no matter how smart you might be.

The question posed here is: "Do you agree or disagree with the statement in the OP? Or do you not have an opinion in that regard, and are merely interested in highjacking this thread to bash "John Edwards"??

[waiting for hope]

198. Nor would she admit that

perhaps a hedge fund or many gave Obama a high five ... love it when people who live in glass houses throw stones ...

[LaPera]

197. Yes, yes, yes.....unfortunaletly Edwards is absolutely correct = I certainly supported Edwards ...-

and I certainly don't give a flying fuck about his personal life...I also love Elizbaeth...but it's none of my or any one else' fucking business.

Edwards had the best health care plan bar none!!

Cheers!!!!

[balantz]

200. He was right. Some of us were sure about that before the primaries. n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

221. Yes we were.

:thumbsup:

[defendandprotect]

201. If we want MEDICARE FOR ALL e-mails and telephones aren't going to do it --!!!

[karynnj]

206. Kucinich, not Edwards had a medicare for all plan

[defendandprotect]

234. My point was independent of either Kucinich or Edwards --

AGAIN, if we want MEDICARE FOR ALL what we are doing not is not going to

deliver it!!

[karynnj]

207. READ THIS NYT summary of the likely bill

Instead of having a buyer's regret "we still love JRE" party, take a serious look at what is in the bill. There are many many good things here. The fact is that JRE did not come close to winning, long before his affair was known - he did not win a single primary or caucus. No one can say if he would have won a general election, even if his affair did not become known - which is unlikely as the woman's name was known in 2007 - there is no way it wouldn't become an issue. In addition, there is no way to know how he would have interacted with Congress.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/opinion/26sun1.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2

[wroberts189]

222. Seat at the table: they eat ALL the food. nt

[hyphenate]

230. I'm a little behind the times

as I wasn't near the 'net for very long yesterday, but I couldn't agree more.

I got the tongue lashing of my life the last time I mentioned John Edwards, and it goes to show that the people in control of DU--the posters--are not the same people who have kept it alive in 2004. Five years ago, most of the crew here was far more receptive to innovation, liberal ideas, and each other.

Yes, there are a few of the old regime left, but lurking, rather than posting, afraid to tell the truth because of the attacks in response to their comments.

John Edwards is still a good guy, no matter what has been discovered about his affair. I guess people have issues with that aspect of his personal life, but it shouldn't affect his good judgement on any number of topics. How red have we become since 2004, and how many DUers are trained to attack--just like the matador's red cape?

It's been 11 months since I got reamed, and as a result, I've been to the point where I do a lot of backspacing and retreat over some topic, just to avoid getting attacked.

[onehandle]

231. There is a small minority that attack upon the mentioning of John Edward's name.

There are a couple in this thread. They can't resist.

The positive response to this thread is proof that there are many who are bullied into silence by those attack dogs.

It was voted up to the front page in a very short time and was there for a day.

People should shout these single-minded distractors down.

[hyphenate]

236. Very true

I remember when it used to be cool to have your own opinion. But that seems to have been a lifetime ago. ...



:hide:

[waiting for hope]

237. Hey hyphenate!

:hug:

[hyphenate]

241. Hey yourself!

:hi: