Edwards Goes After the 'Corporate Democrats' -- Is This a Turning Point for His Campaign?

[EV_Ares]

(Go John & Elizabeth)


In a dramatic speech, John Edwards fired a major broadside against corporate America and, more significantly, "corporate Democrats," -- the likes of which hasn't been heard from a viable candidate with national appeal in decades. Last week, John Edwards fired a broadside against corporate America and, more significantly, "corporate Democrats," the likes of which hasn't been heard from a viable candidate with national appeal in decades.

Edwards is en fuego right now, and if he keeps up the heat, his candidacy will either be widely embraced by the emerging progressive movement or utterly annihilated by an entrenched establishment that fears few things more than a telegenic populist with enough money to mount a credible campaign.

"It's time to end the game," Edwards told a crowd in Hanover, New Hampshire. "It's time to tell the big corporations and the lobbyists who have been running things for too long that their time is over." He exhorted Washington law-makers to "look the lobbyists in the eye and just say no."


Real change starts with being honest -- the system in Washington is rigged and our government is broken. It's rigged by greedy corporate powers to protect corporate profits. It's rigged by the very wealthy to ensure they become even wealthier. At the end of the day, it's rigged by all those who benefit from the established order of things. For them, more of the same means more money and more power. They'll do anything they can to keep things just the way they are -- not for the country, but for themselves.

The system is controlled by big corporations, the lobbyists they hire to protect their bottom line and the politicians who curry their favor and carry their water. And it's perpetuated by a media that too often fawns over the establishment, but fails to seriously cover the challenges we face or the solutions being proposed. This is the game of American politics and in this game, the interests of regular Americans don't stand a chance.
It's a structural argument, and Edwards didn't pull punches in calling out his fellow Democrats, saying: "We cannot replace a group of corporate Republicans with a group of corporate Democrats, just swapping the Washington insiders of one party for the Washington insiders of the other." The rhetoric was a clear signal that Edwards is going to beat the drums of reform as a contrast to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

(entire article @ link)

http://www.alternet.org/story/60748/

[yellowdogintexas]

1. my current pick of the slate is John Edwards. nt

[mmonk]

2. He is getting better in his rhetoric.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

3. Edwards had best stay out of small planes...

These people play for keeps..

[cali]

4. I like Edwards but

there's a certain irony in his attack on the dem corporate block considering how involved in it he's been.

[Blackhatjack]

5. Edwards is on strong progressive ground here, Question is will progressives support him?

Take any progressive, show them Edwards' positions and proposals without telling them they are connected to Edwards, and their agreement should light up the board like a Christmas tree.

So far the attacks on Edwards have all been about manufactured 'personal' issues, and not about his positions and proposals.

And the added benefit of backing Edwards is that he is best positioned to beat Repubs in the General Election.

Just makes you wonder exactly how progressive some people really are when they state they prefer a candidate other than Edwards who does not represent their interests nearly as well.

[madrchsod]

6. sure fire way to sink his chances because we all know that

the truth gets lost when money talks. i think he`d be the best canidate to protect the the people`s rights but we do`t count. i cringe to think there`s a good chance that hillary will be president.

[GreenArrow]

7. "likes of which hasn't been heard from a viable candidate "

If the majority of voters were looking for this sort of rhetoric, then Kucinich would be doing much better than he is. Edwards is flailing, and this sort of rhetoric, coming from him now, will only work for him so long as potential voters are willing to overlook his past actions.

[MethuenProgressive]

8. But he still backpeddles when asked if he's talking about Clinton/Obama

Why doesn't he have the balls to answer the "do you mean Clinton and Obama?" question?
Is he still holding out hope for another veep spot?


edit: added "/Obama" to subject line