Edwards was a phony on poverty!

[jackson_dem]

I found this while trying to find out Hillary's position on poverty. Couple this with Edwards spending millions of dollars to help low-income children get access to computers after his son died (yes! before he ever dreamed of becoming president) and the swiftboating of Edwards' as a phony is total bull. We Edwardians may forgive but we should NEVER forget which quarter the "Edwards is a phony" theme originated from. It wasn't from the Richardson or Gravel camps...

Update: Here’s Elizabeth Edwards’ comment to my article on the Edwards ‘08 Blog:

John’s long commitment (5.00 / 4)

I just wanted to point out that Devin Caughey is simply wrong on several key sweeping unsupported statements. John is not a “latecomer” to anti-poverty work. Long before there was any talk in our house about politics, John worked on homelessness issues in our city, serving on the board of Urban Ministries, a non-profit coalition of area churches dedicated to addressing homelessness. John’s work on poverty was not an “attempt to keep himself in the limelight and position himself politically.” In fact, most commentators at the time suggested that his anti-poverty work was a ticket to oblivion. Despite that, John punched that ticket because he is truly committed. Pushing us to do what is right whether it has a personal payoff is exactly what our consciences do. And no one who deals academically or in the field with poverty issues and has come in contact with John in any capacity shares the same skepticism about either his substantive knowledge and contribution or the sincerity of his commitment. Ask the high school seniors in Green County, North Carolina, a rural economically depressed county, who, because of John’s efforts, will have their college tuition and books paid for next year whether his work has been substantive.
Elizabeth Edwards
Cross-posted at BerkeleyBubble.org

by Elizabeth Edwards
on 3/03/2007 at 7:47 AM EST

http://www.berkeleybubble.org/2007/03/02/john-edwards-vs-barack-obama-on-poverty

[Ken Burch]

1. Shouldn't your thread title be "Edwards WASN'T a phony on poverty"?

Or "Who started the 'Edwards is a phony on poverty' meme?"

[jackson_dem]

2. I want the swiftboaters to read this thread

I notice they never posted in my threads which took a real look at Edwards' senate record (such as http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4240333#4240394 ). They were either parroting talking points or deliberately lying. In the cases where it is the latter, especially among the more "vocal", it isn't hard to see what the "motive" was...

[Ken Burch]

4. Ah, all is revealed.

You should've made it "$400 Haircut Boy is a phony on poverty". That woulda really brought 'em in.

[caligirl]

6. nice find, your title got my attention. See I knew he was a great guy!

[robbedvoter]

11. It's meant to be catchy

[melody]

3. Damned straight

Great post

[McCamy Taylor]

5. Now that he has been martyred by the corporate media everyone knows he was for real.

Too bad so many within his own party bought John Solomon of the Washington Post's (and friends) story hook line and sinker---or else pretended to buy it, because it was good for their own candidate.

I wish their candidates luck when the MSM liars come after them. I suspect that the Obama supporters, being among the newest to the business, are going to scream "Unfair" the loudest, when the press takes off the gloves---which will happen just as soon as Hillary quits, so they ought to be praying that she stays in the race for a while.

[Seabiscuit]

7. You're lucky to be alive, varmint. I almost stormed in here with all guns blazin'!

[Naturyl]

8. John Edwards Sank For Poverty

Refusing to shut up about poverty did more to sink Edwards than anything else. The idea that his commitment is "phony" flies in the face of reality. I know from personal experience how quickly and easily you can make your way to all sorts of ignore lists for refusing to shut up about poverty. I've been run out of communities for it. Edwards made poverty a national issue again - and people didn't want to hear it. Out of sight, out of mind, out of pocket. In other words, if you don't acknowledge it exists, you won't have to do anything about it, and poor hands will stay out of your pockets.

The neo-cons have been incredibly successful in erasing poverty as national issue. It's one of their biggest wins.

[jackson_dem]

9. Yup. He ran on an issue that wasn't a vote getter

He could have chosen something popular as his signature issue or avoided the issues altogether and run on empty sloganeering but chose to bring the plight of millions of Americans in poverty and millions more in near poverty to the forefront of the national discussion. I believe he will be to poverty what Gore was to global warming.

[Occam Bandage]

10. Still bitter?

[K Gardner]

12. Uncalled for.

[bvar22]

20. I am still bitter.

I despair of any significant reform coming to a Democratic Party hopelessly corrupted by Corporate Money, Madison Avenue Packaged and Managed candidates, and an electorate too stupid to know the difference.

Yes. I'm still bitter.

[Jim Sagle]

21. And so am I. Our only choices now that he's gone are an empty suit and an empty pantsuit.

:puke:

[DavidDvorkin]

13. Man, I was just about to smack you around verbally!

The Subject line outraged me! My blood was boiling!

Then I read the post. Nicely done.

[K Gardner]

14. Poverty: "Clinton Camp Still Doesn't Get It"

This is very confusing - the way the issue has been quoted here and the dueling blog posts, but I did find this quite interesting:

Update (2/1/08): Now that John Edwards’ is out of the race, I believe that Obama is the best candidate on the issue of poverty left in this race–and I think he has taken up Edwards’ cause in earnest. Obama’s campaign has indeed taken heed of Edwards’ calls for attention to this issue–and his own website reflects this change, offering comprehensive solutions to tackle poverty as we know it.
Sadly, the Clinton campaign still doesn’t get it–on the Clinton webpage, there’s no page addressing poverty as a key issue, and frankly I’m not surprised. After all, it was the Clintons who got rid of welfare in 1996, and with it, the last safety net for the poor in this
country.

(Was this written by Elizabeth Edwards?)

[jsamuel]

17. no, it was written by the guy Elizabeth Edwards disagrees with

[jackson_dem]

18. No. That part is from the owner of the site

[Infinite Hope]

15. I miss John. n/t

[Triana]

16. Edwards wasn't a phony on anything...but corprats LIKE phony so when THEY picked ...

....our candidates for us, they made SURE a genuine person with a conscience and intelligence would NOT be among them.

[progressoid]

19. k/r