Reply #83: In complete agreement

[grantcart]

I like Obama and if he becomes the nominee would be enthusiastic.

Your post however makes the case for Edwards against Obama on very substantive grounds. Unlike the Clinton attack which was is now in full force:

a) in Meet the Press which seeks to win evey argument by recasting the context of every question so that she actually was trying to advance the argument that her record on Iraq was better than Obama's. That because Obama gave a few ambiguous statements during the presidential campaign so as to not embarrass the nominees that this somehow missed the fact that he got it right from the beginning.

b) The wink and nod mud attacks by surrogates on his activities as a teenager.

c) The near hysterical reaction by both Clintons that the democratic party is not all about them.

President Obama will someday be a great president but as your post argues there may be a need for a more therapeutic approach but what is called for at this time is surgery. The only one in the race that advocates surgery is Edwards. Massaging the system will not work. I am not anti corporate, but our current situation is one of complete legal bribery and corporate greed and lobbying is destroying the country. It is very much akin to commercial fishing. They keep over reaching until it is over fished and the industry collapses. Because you want a tough reasonable approach to fishing quotas does not mean that you are against fishing, just the destructive greed which threatens the whole community.

In an earlier time Franklin Roosevelt brought in structural corrections. Conrad Black's book Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Champion of Freedom clearly shows that FDR did not attack capitalism, markets and commercial activity he saved it. This conservative billionaire (now serving time because of you got it corporate greed) puts forth the most convincing argument that FDR saved first the democratic party, then the US political system, modern capitalism and western civilization roughly in that order.

By attacking the base problem Edwards similarly attacks the root cause of the problem; the commercial interests of America have completely monopolized the political and even the scientific. All of the candidates are against global warming but only Edwards is going after the problem that makes it possible for commercial interests to dictate public policy. By attacking the core problem of the "Selling of America" it will be possible to address all of the other issues.

Edwards allows the democratic party to regain its focus, to stop being second rate commercial sell outs and to regain its vision. All in time for President Obama to carry forward in 8 years.

What differentiates your post from what we see of the Clintons is that you in critiquing Obama you did not attempt to manufacture something out of air "a complete fantasy" or something out of context.