Putting His Mouth Where Our Money Is And Our Hearts Are
Jane says:
Senator Edwards, We Need You To Lead
John Edwards should challenge his rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to go back to Washington, DC and fight against retroactive immunity for the telecoms.
The Republicans are not going to let Reid punt and extend the Protect America Act for another 18 months so it looks like the FISA bill is going to come back up again on Monday. Chris Dodd’s objection to Unanimous Consent still stands, so they will pick up in the middle of the Motion to Proceed debate.
[…]
John Edwards is the perfect person to lead with this message. Such an action would illustrate his genuine commitment to change and fighting vested interests in Washington, and hopefully it will channel that intense anti-immunity passion toward his campaign. He won’t be able to participate in the filibuster himself, but by offering to leave the campaign trail and go back to DC with Clinton and Obama he’ll be able to show leadership in challenging all Democrats to put thoughts of personal gain aside and join together in the fight to save the constitution.
It’s a good thing for everybody if Edwards takes up the challenge. First of all, it’s the moral thing to do. Second, it’ll push Obama and Clinton leftward, and since they are knee-jerk triangulators, this is the only sort of political push they’ll respond to. Third, it’ll gain Edwards traction and dollas from teh netroots, which in turn might just might put him back in a position of parity with the two frontrunners. Fourth, such a push might convince people who have been hesitant to believe that he means what he says.
If this election were only about the economy, I’d be the biggest Edwards whore you ever saw, because he’s the only one on our side saying the right things on that front. But it’s not. Alas. Richardson, Dodd and, in his flaky way, Kucinich, have in my opinion been the only candidates to consistently say the right things about the most important stuff — the war, rule of law, executive power, torture, habeas, etc. If Edwards could only steal their thunder on these issues, he’d be a perfect candidate. The FISA-immunity fight would be the perfect bridge from his bread-and-butter (attacking the malignant influence of corporate power) to what he’s heretofore been relatively tepid (as Russ Feingold recently and scathingly pointed out) about.
Significantly, of all our candidates, Edwards generates the most bile from the Wingnut Establishment. It’s true that they hate what Hillary and Obama are; but even more they hate what Edwards is about. This of course means that what Edwards is about is… right. So, John Edwards, onward and upward — whattaya say? Take up Dodd’s cause and make the wingnuts’ heads completely explode. Then you might have DFHs like me as your biggest supporters EVAR. Lucky you.
I want retroactive immunity for being a total asshole my entire life. And I promise to not change.
What is so hard about filibustering that I do not understand? You stand at the podium and read Encyclopedia Britannica and attack some northern Senator with a metal-tipped cane until he’s covered with blood.
it’s too late for edwards to bounce back imo. 2 weeks before Super Tuesday is not enough time to turn his poll numbers around, unless he had unlimited money.
Good post, HTML. Thank you.
Go Edwards!
Praise Lord Jesus, a new thread!
Yeah, I hope he does take up this challenge. The country is already greatly indebted to Edwards for pushing the presidential campaign further left than the-powers-that-be wanted it to go.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120103739264407641.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
this seems to be your guys’ kind of bread-and-butter
Well, we can dream, can’t we?
The Peace Elf has tried showing “The Contenders” where slightly left of center actually is, and they seem to ignore him pretty well. I suppose some more hands on the prybar couldn’t hurt, but I ain’t holdin’ my breath for it to work.
I’d seriously prefer Edwards to either of those two snippy folks in the lead, but alas, I’m bracing for disappointment.
It’s an excellent strategy, and while cokane may be correct (it probably is a little too late), it would certainly open up a lot of purses, and get a fair amount of news-cycle play, which would be cheaper than an ad buy.
Hopefully someone in the campaign is trolling the netroots…
hi, guys, nice discussion, I am Jonny. A cute white candidate with perfect economic stature.
I am eager for a good vote, All can view my crazy hot photos at populistlove.com by searching “Edwards2008?. No matter who you are and where you come from…
You don’t have to have an ulterior motive as to “how this might help my presidential campaign” to filibuster a truly horrific piece of legislation that retroactively immunizes the largest corporations in the United States for illegally spying on U.S. citizens.
But, you know, these crazy kids nowadays …
He’s the only one on the presidential stage who can do this, and move the others to join, and move the Overton Window further left. I know he’s still not in the Senate, but could he tag team with Dodd to help filibuster? Are Kennedy and Feingold still on board to lend a throat?
I’d love to see him talk about how absolutely ludicrous and illegal this thing would be. Especially in light of the fact that the telecos broke the law until the Feds quit paying them. So it had nothing at all to do with patriotism, or time of war or national defense etc. It was ALWAYS about money for them, and power for the executive.
Thanks for publicizing this HTML. it’s my understanding Elizabeth Edwards actually does rea the liberal blogosphere, so maybe she’ll pick up on it from here or the other sites calling for it. And Edwards so rocked at the debate last night!
The problem is that most Democratic voters don’t care if they are being spied on by the U.S. government. Most assume they are, and most do not care either way. Being spied upon by the government does not register high on the scale of stuff. Nor does letting off scot-free the corporations that have done it. Most Democrats don’t really give a crap because, like torture, they know it will never actually affect them personally. The Constitution was written by people obsessed with philosophy, about the “concept” of stuff. Americans and most Democrats have not been raised or educated in the philosophic tradition, nor do they travel in places where this is paramount. Superficial is as superficial does. Pass me the HD remote.
cokane,
That’s not nice. Now I have to go scrub the stupid off of me. I can’t even try to read that whole slice of ass.
I will say that if you visit any rod and gun club in southeastern Massachusetts (oh … say the Easton Rod & Gun Club) you will meet people who deeply understand the “concept” of gun ownership and the “concept” of the 2nd amendment at about one googol levels. Why this conceptual depth does not translate to other parts of the Constitution has always perplexed me. But then again, rod & gun clubs have forever excluded women from being members (and … ahem … deeply tanned males) so I think I answered my own question.
It’s so (sadly) telling about our times that pushing Clinton and Obama to stand up for our basic Constitutional rights is considered moving them “leftward”.
Be that as it may, I’m all for Edwards doing this, and have sent my email to him.
It’d be good for Clinton and Obama to see what “leading” actually means.
The problem is that most Democratic voters don’t care if they are being spied on by the U.S. government.
I don’t believe that for a second Doug.
you will meet people who deeply understand the “concept” of gun ownership and the “concept” of the 2nd amendment at about one googol levels. Why this conceptual depth does not translate to other parts of the Constitution has always perplexed me.
They do, in their own way. There are extremes on both sides and they have just as strong a reaction to Marxist-Leninists on the left. The problem is that the saner voices on the right have been shouted down and marginalized for several years now.
noen — Most Democratic voters do not care if the U.S. government is spying on them, because, most likely, the U.S. government is not spying on them and will never spy on them. Ergo, they do not care deeply if legal barriers to the U.S. government spying on them are eroded and ultimately removed. Same with torture. These issues do not have resonance among Democratic voters because they are not palpable. They require a mental leap of logic, to make the “them” into the “us.” Much like driving while black. Or male pregnancy.
Y’know, call me crazy, but considering how the Executive branch has been restructured, I’d almost prefer Edwards in the 2 spot. Question is whether he’d take it, but he seems to genuinely respect Obama. To me, the key at this point is keeping Hillary off the ticket.
The DLC must die.
The legal right of gun ownership is palpable. It can be weighed. You can either have the heavy steel thing or you can’t. Spying by the U.S. government only takes away your privacy — your lack of being spied on. Nobody comes and arrests you. Nobody comes and takes away a big block of expensive metal that you bought. Nobody at a store tells you they can’t sell you something. Same with torture. Your Constitutional protection from being tortured only becomes palpable when you are being tortured. Unlike a gun, when that “right” is taken away from you by a Legislature, you don’t feel anything or seem to lose anything. People have become so dumb in our country that we have lost even the ability to converse about these logical, conceptual and experiential distinctions.
Unlike the right to buy and own gun, when the right to not being spied on and not being tortured is taken away from you by a Legislature, you don’t feel anything or seem to lose anything because they are negative rights. They are rights to be left alone in your own body and to have your body left untouched. It’s not like you have to go to K-Mart and buy a license every year to not be spied on or not be tortured and all of a sudden they won’t sell you one.
Sorry Doug but you’re full of shit. “Most Democratic voters do not care if the U.S. government is spying on them, because, most likely, the U.S. government is not spying on them and will never spy on them.” What the fuck are you talking about?
1. Yes the government is spying on us. It’s what paranoid authoritarians do.
2. Go to any Democratic site like DailyKos and you’ll find hundreds of people who are pretty damn pissed off about it.
“Same with torture.”
Bull. Fucking. Shit.
BTW, I took a look at your blog. I think you need to contact your psych doc and have him up your meds. Seriously, you’re not really making a lot of sense there.
How can anyone here claim to speak for “most” people?
Anyway…real leaders don’t need to be begged to lead. Hillary, Obama and Edwards are not leaders, period. They’ve never taken significant leadership roles in anything substantial, and they’ve had plenty of opportunity.
In Reality TV shows they are all “flying under the radar.”
John Edwards you’re a freak get a blog like mine and have people come their to tell you how much you are a freak
It takes forty senators to filibuster. It takes sixty to break it. That’s how it works now. No dictionary reading. (Not that our Democrats would ever run out of things to say…)
To maintain the filibuster while congress is in session and the floor is open, you need to maintain forty awake senators to press the ‘nay’ button. To break it, you need to issue the roll call and find the other side lacking 40 votes while you have more votes than they.
See Doug? See the ands? And and and?
Democrats have maybe 25 senators who are serious about being Democrats first. Then you have 23 who are just ‘not Republicans’ and then there’s two – one who always votes Republican, though he is nominally with the Democrats, and another who isn’t a Democrat and can’t be counted upon.
There’s 49 Republicans in the Senate, and we’ve basically taken away all but their most staunch conservatives. That means that 49 > 25. Got it?
I hope so.
I hope Edwards stands with Dodd on this one. And calls out the other candidates. And I also hope he doesn’t take the VP slot. If anything, Obama should be the VP if he doesn’t get the nomination.
Hey alanj878, how is that “get rich through the stock market” working out for you these days?
noen — you need to calm down and drop the personal attacks on me. I haven’t said boo about you. I’ve just made some general comments about philosophical and human rights issues on a blog. What I have said above is about the same as what Glenn Greenwald and Oaktown Girl (see above) have said on the same topic.
I agree with a Different Brad that the DLC must die. It’s like having the Clean Coal Coalition market your wind farm project. Or Phillip Morris design your anti-smoking ads. Or Mikey do testimonials for Fred Thompson’s ball sack.
Not to oversimplify this, or to extol the virtues of pseudoDems like Hill and Barry, but does anyone remember the ass-thumping Edwards gave Amanda Marcotte?
I do.
Yeah, okay, I guess I’m oversimplifying.
How can anyone here claim to speak for “most” people?
Damn straight, RandomObserver.
Truth is we’re bored of all this political shit and are just counting the days until the next episode of American Idol is on!
noen — you need to calm down and drop the personal attacks on me. I haven’t said boo about you. I’ve just made some general comments about philosophical and human rights issues on a blog.
I don’t need to do squat. And I need least of all to listen to the shit that is coming out of your mouth. When you say that Democrats do not care about torture, yeah, I take that personally. So if you come here and drop crap like “Dems don’t care about torture” or “Dems don’t care about privacy” be prepared to defend yourself. You didn’t make general comments. In fact, you spammed this blog with text you cut and pasted from yours. In doing so you made some serious accusations.
On the other hand, Some of your statements don’t make a whole lot of sense to me. So I’m thinking that perhaps you’re a bit handicapped in that regard. Which is why I say, in all seriousness, perhaps you should think about seeing someone. And in that case, I believe you like pie. I bet you do don’t you?
Doug said: “The problem is that most Democratic voters don’t care if they are being spied on by the U.S. government.”
Boy, you brighten the room just by walking in., don’t you?
Doug: “The legal right of gun ownership is palpable. It can be weighed. You can either have the heavy steel thing or you can’t.”
The Constitution calls for a “well regulated” militia. This means some (admittedly debatable) amount of regulation is proscribed.
n the other hand, the 4th amendment unambiguously states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
See? The gummint can’t spy on us without a warrant. Doesn’t matter if the people “care” or not.
You didn’t make general comments. In fact, you spammed this blog with text you cut and pasted from yours. In doing so you made some serious accusations.
Well, to be fair, he never used the word “guillotine”, which is the same as joking about murdering people, right Doug? So he gets a pass on what he DID say.
Speaking of challenging presidential candidates, now would be a really good time to ask GOP candidates where they stand on Social Security privatization.
Well what do ya know??? You guys finally cleaned out that nasty refrigerator, took the garbage out, vacuumed the apartment and sprayed it down with Frebreeze!!!
I love the smell of a residence in the morning, sans cauliflower…………….smells like newthreadery!
Doug: “The problem is that most Democratic voters don’t care if they are being spied on by the U.S. government.”
I think We DO! Consider the huge turnout of Dem voters…a fair number used to be Repukes, too.
Edwards needs to make a noise loud enough that the Corporate Media can’t ignore it!
Have him check into the situation with the Internet Security company VERISIGN. (I’m sure you’ve seen their check-mark logo on your screen). Under mgt of Jim Bidzos, it wouldn’t cooperate with the Fed’s spying. But Mr. Bidzos was kicked out, and now VERISIGN is talking with the Feds…
Doug Watts said, Most Democratic voters do not care if the U.S. government is spying on them
No. The plain fact is that most Democratic voters don’t care about jack-shit except winning elections. Like their Republican brothers, Democrats do not have the fucking spine to buck their masters and betters. They’re content to drool over some born-agin-pwogwessive chewtoy like Edwards until it’s time to pull the lever for Hillary.
Most Democratic voters probably wish that the Democrats they elect would do more of what the Democratic voters want, but only the smartest Democratic voters realize that they are among the last ones who are listened to about what elected Democrats will do.
And they put up with it because most Democratic voters realize that the vast majority of Democrats are at worst disappointing capitulators aiding and abetting corruption and some right wing policies, whereas Republicans are a gang of destructive, nightmarish, nation- and world-ending freaks.
Perhaps most Democratic voters, like most employees, would rather choose between “not great” and “nightmarishly bad”, and don’t need to hear someone lecturing them for not having the amount of influence over the Democratic Party that billionaires do.
I can only speak as an observer (what with that “not being American” thing stopping me from voting and all) but I’m still hopeful that Edwards can break through the media meme of Obama v. Clinton.
From what I see, he is a much better choice than either Obama, who’s interested in comprimise for the sake of political peace (and that way lies madness) or Clinton, who’s int the DLC and business interests up past her neck.
He’s the reason why I find myself in perpetual arguments about trusting government more than businesses. Tragicaly, the folks I’m usually fighting with are usually other lefties who haven’t thought about it much. Well, them and libertarians – but they haven’t thought about much of anything anyways, so they’re no challenge.
One favour – can Kucinich be VP, please? What with all the power the VP office has laid claim to under this administration, the right person there can now get one hell of a lot done…
Word.
i agree with thursday.
also, doug watts first comment at the top of teh thread=brilliant. i too seek such retroactive immunity.
i’m guessing here, but if you asked 99.1 percent of voters as they enter a primary voting booth what their feelings on on retroactive immunity for telecoms, they would respond “huh?” and then worry about teh gays or taxes or choice. or guns.
It would be great if he came out against retroactive telco immunity, but Edwards is cooked.
Landru said,
January 23, 2008 at 13:22
Not to oversimplify this, or to extol the virtues of pseudoDems like Hill and Barry, but does anyone remember the ass-thumping Edwards gave Amanda Marcotte?
And Melissa McEwan.
That was the big reason I ended up endorsing Hillary.
I wish Edwards had stayed in the Senate. He’d either be the awesomest thing this side of the Dodd or a known phony.
Fifth, it will give us all a day or two off from the Barack and Hillary show. Their speechwriters make me miss the real TV writers, and I don’t even watch TV.
No matter what challenge Edwards issued (and I think this is a good one, for sure), I fear it would not be very well-reported in venues where most folks get their “news.”
Maybe someone said it in another thread, and I hate to sound like a nihilist, but I fear we are truly fucked.
Though, hey, that “short man in search of a balcony” sure took a dive, huh? (warning, Tweety clip).
At least we’ll always have that to look back on fondly.
digamma rather nails it. I’m with you on fighting this retroactive immunity push, but your fourth point (“such a push might convince people who have been hesitant to believe that he means what he says.“) is exactly wrong.
The problem with Edwards is that all these wonderful convictions he now claims to have were nowhere to be seen when he held office and could, if he wished, vote his convictions. Yet more grandstanding from him about how Senators need to be principled civil libertarian antiwar progressives even though Edwards was not such a Senator will hardly help to convince any skeptics of Edwards’s authenticity.
Yet more grandstanding from him about how Senators need to be principled civil libertarian antiwar progressives even though Edwards was not such a Senator
Who was?
Go Edwards.
I don’t want to hold my nose before voting in November.
I’m tired of a leadership that won’t lead, and a hierarchy in the party which is too fucking timid — they should let someone actually lead or get out of the goddamn doorway.
We’re the ones (The People; remember us?) who keep paying for Reid and Pelosi’s necrophiliac style of politics.
Any news on this?
My hand to Coyote, HTML, if this happens I swear I will stop btching about TBogg’s migration. And if you knew how little use I have for The Lake of Happy Drone Pee*, you know this is quite the faith offering for an ex-Irish-Catholic to make…
Of course such a challenge would probably pre-empt Edwards’ chances, such as they might be, for the underticket; but he’s had a taste of that dogs’ dinner already and might not want another helping, after all. I am enough of a pessimist to believe that some considerable percentage of my fellow not-Reichtard Americans are liable to go into their voting booths, possibly as early as Super-Duper Tuesday, and realize their hand will not punch the button for a candidate short a Y chromosome or long on the melanin, so it’s too early to write off the Progressive White Man’s campaign in any case. I am a believer: Someday, sooner or later, the candidate who gets the Oval Office will be the one with whom I’ve fallen in love. Hasn’t happened in 30-plus years, and yet I keep showing up every fourth Tuesday in November.
* Disclaimer: I really love Christy Hardin Smith’s writing, I greatly respect Jane Hamsher’s accomplishments, and I have nothing but admiration for FDL stalwarts such as Marcy Wheeler, TRex, Pachachutec, etc. I know that logical adults do not blame the leaders for the shortcomings of their followers. And yet, so much of the commentary on FDL is the very exemplar of why “liberal” has become so tattered a banner beneath which to march!
Anne Laurie, I encourage you to start showing up every first Tuesday in November instead! I can’t guarantee better results from the change, but every little bit helps!
Couldn’t have typed it better myself. FDL really is a bastion of liberal indignation; a place where policy and ideology meet. The writing really is excellent.
With that said, the comments at FDL suck. For one, why the Hell do you have to register to comment over there? I tried registering with a fake email address (Mailinator), but that didn’t take. For two, I refuse to read a comment thread beyond anyone that posts “first,” which means I rarely read them anyway.
If it’s any consolation, the core Tbogg commentors were so rude initially that any first! stuff got strangled in the crib; man, I enjoyed doing that. As one of a cast of many of course; I’d love to claim full ownership but it was a group effort. Please save your applause, we all emjoyed smacking the organic free trade teacups out of the FDL commenteratti’s delicate lily white hands.
It’s Bogg’s blog, but I wish he was still at the old digs. However, I love his writing too much to not read him.
Um, Edwards isn’t a Senator anymore, so what good would this do? It’s not like he’s got anyway to force the issue.
Go Edwards go!:
Found over at FDL, with yet another shitty comment thread. Edwards is putting this on Obama and Clinton. They’re senators, and can help with the Dodd fillibuster. Of course, they’ll probably find some superficial TV or radio gig to distract them, while the real heart and soul of the country is up for debate.