YEAAAAAAAAAAAGAAAAAAHGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Seriously though, if Edwards gains momentum he just might swipe my vote from RP.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Edwards and Biden, now that would be a team to run America! We would have both home and abroad covered with intelligence and integrity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and unusual punishment? What Biden and others should be promoting is the punishment of those responsible for permitting, enabling and excusing torture.

I'm glad that Edwards is staying focused on the impact of corporate power and hope that he's continuing to emphasize the fact that insurance companies and Big Pharma put huge profits above the health and well-being of American citizens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can not emphasize this enough: If the Democrats are stupid enough to give the nomination to Hillary Clinton, they'll deserve everything that happens to them. John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich are the first candidates since George McGovern (Remember him?) who have not forgotten that they are the political heirs of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Hillary Clinton is a Democrat in name only. Why do you think Rupert Murdoch has been holding fundraisers for her? Either she's in his pocket or he wants her nominated because he knows that she is destined to lose. Why have the big drug companies been doing the same? Why has the corporate-controlled media all but christened her as the 2008 standard bearer? You don't have to be a political scientist to figure any of this stuff out, folks!

And don't forget this: Hillary's nomination is all-but-certain to unleash a Nader style/third party uprising at the polls next year. That is a chance we can not afford to take again.

Every poll has John Edwards winning handily against any and all Republican challengers next year. Every poll has Hillary Clinton losing. Those are the facts, ma'am. Edwards energizes the base. Clinton does not.

Hey, Democrats! Do you want to know why I left your party almost a decade ago? You people are just dumb enough to give the nomination to Hillary Clinton! Prove me wrong, Dems. Prove me wrong.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Interesting to think of how Saddam Hussein and a MINORITY of Sunnis could become "the axis of evil", but a MINORITY of corporation controllers and CEO's in the U.S. can continue to be perfectly acceptable...except in the eyes of Edwards, thank God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a long time Edwards supporter, and a long time Alternet reader, to see so many positive, in depth stories about John Edwards and his platform on my fave news site seems like a dream. Especially when the majority of reader's comments are favorable as well.

I am going to Iowa on New Year's Eve to do my part on behalf of the Edwards campaign and this latest round of stories about Edwards' surge of momentum the week before the caucus has me more energized than ever!

Dustin Blythe
Mishawaka, IN

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I hope that the people of Iowa will refuse to bend to the corporate media's attempt to keep John Edward's out of the picture. Tell the media to go to blazes and cast your vote for the man the corporate power brokers fear the most---vote for John Edwards!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We're not naive children here, certainly?

Edwards deserves support, not because HE will right anything, or how perfect and unassailable HE is.

But because in a scenario where Edwards can bash some unfortunate G.O.P. candidate saddled with Bush II's legacy, dragging momentum for populist congressional candidates with him, all the while railing eloquently against Corporate Greed, and Corruption:

We might just have a congenial atmosphere for important change in this country for the first time since Franklin Roosevelt died!


Can you get over your -understandable- quesyness at Huckabee's kooky religious convictions to see that even the MASSIVELY SURGING REPUBLICAN candidate is appealing to POPLULIST, WORKING-CLASS values?


I dream of a Edwards/Obama vs. Huckabee/Whoever race---- imagine it!

The Populist Plain-Talk Lawyer-for-the-People, and the Youthful, Charismatic "Beyond-Race" Mid-West Senator,

-against-

The Witty, Down-Home, Working-man's Baptist Preacher, and Whoever has the stones to stand with him against the MoneyBoys (Ron Paul?)

Ha, effin- HA!

What will the Oligarchs do then?

Cook up some big "fear" action to justify suspending the elections as so many of the "made themselves experts" on the InterWebs predict?

You tell me, where's the money in facing down the combined might of 50 million armed-to-the-teeth Rednecks and 100 million "that's the final straw!" ex-middle-class Workers?

NOT GONNA HAPPEN KIDS


Everybody on the "left" needs to start opening their eyes and face it:

THE BIG CHANGE IS COMIN' BABY!

Not the way we foresaw perhaps, but it's coming.

With the collapse of the Credit Finance system, with the It's-gotten-to-damn-obvious state of the environment, and with the continued, mind-numbingly stupid squeezing of the Majority by the Oligarchical Minority, it's coming.

Commodity and food prices going "north" because of the inevitable, and should have been predicted and accomodated for effects on price of Peak Oil, is gonna be the "straw that broke the American-willing-to-stand-bullshit's back".

Mark my words.



All this is why for the first time in my several decades of eligibility I might actually register and Vote for the damned President of the U-dot, S-dot.

As long as the Dems put up Edwards that is.

Hell, I might even go so far as to register DEM and vote in the primary if I thought it would help (though it would break my Commie Grandpa's Heart).


We don't NEED John Edwards as President, but we sure could USE him!.


Remember kids,

No King is a Good King.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

a trillion dollar war on cancer and yet more cancer??????? you being lied to and poisoned . We have a medical dictatorship in America that only gives medicine for symptoms. No sickness = No money. These people need to be removed from research and decision making . why would you want to fix a problem that makes your company 200 billion anually .... google suppresed medical treatments .... google dr robert beck and check this site
http://www.whale.to/a/allopathy_h.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

heh, edwards. i can't believe that ya'll have just fallen for this guy. he is such an unbelievable fake!

you want to know what would happen if huckabee & edwards some how bear their party's standard? president bloomberg - and i am voting for him.

i know there are economic frustrations, but what are these clowns going to do with their anti-corporate rhetoric? are they going to "take down the power of corporations"? sounds like a recipe for economic disaster. and if they aren't going to actually do anything they are just going to let you down by promising you the moon & giving you a photo of kraft cheese.

i can live with hillary, as long as she teams up with obama. and i can live with obama center-stage. clinton gets a bit carried away with her rhetoric some times, but is nowhere near as blatantly irresponsible with her promises as edwards. obama is honest - notice no real anti-corporate rhetoric. that's because like them or not corporations are the framework of the american economy & it has been that way since this land was colonized...they have to have a seat on the table, and yes, corporations can have a productive part in the process. they won't give away the farm, if that is what you want, but the recent ascendence of the left-liberal agenda is in no small part because the business class has simply turned away from the republicans due to their inability to govern effectively. corporate people are in fact informed & ready to accept both universal healthcare & global warming policies. even if what they want doesn't perfectly align with what you want, i bet you can get something out of the deal that is superior to the status quo, going forward without also taking steps back.

anyway, i'm not saying turn the keys over to corporate america. but people who work at corporations, who are employed by the corporate model, number in the dozens of millions and are part of our national family as well. the maturity to understand that we have to negotiate our mutual self-interest with good faith is vastly superior to the phoney edwardsian sibling rivalry.

one last thing - there can be such a thing as a good king. i mean, kings can be good or bad leaders, just as with democratically elected leaders. and if the national mood of discontent gives the GOP & DNC huckabee & edwards, i'd say bring on king bloomberg.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the international bankers already have the keys to America and everywhere else. Americans and other democracies must take them back and destroy the greedmongers and elitist robber barons. Read Confessions of an Economic Hitman - fuck 'em all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The central issue on the restablishment of democratic government in USA is the rollback of corporate power. Edwards has taken the lead in this issue and if for no other reason deserves our support in the primaries. Huckabee represents religion and Clinton represents the worst of industry in the ruling class system of corporatism (wikipedia for coproratism Mussolini).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Why on earth would we expect the corporate powers and their lobbyists, who make billions by selling out the middle-class, to just give up their power because we ask them nicely?"

Edwards is right about the need to fight for economic opportunity, of course, but to attract widespread support, he needs to emphasize opportunity instead of finger pointing and fighting. Even people burned by the pillaging of economies far and wide, including right here in the U.S., still lap up takes of the land of opportunity. In fact, the main reason most voters are upset is that the three biggest myths about America have been busted by Bush:

(1) The U.S. is the biggest, bestest do-gooder nation on the planet;

(2) The U.S. can and should run the world through economic and military might that ultimately brings peace and justice to all who deserve it; and,

(3) The U.S. is the land of opportunity and prosperity for the hard working, common person.

Pointing fingers at the multinational, robber-baron corporations that are vacuuming up the wealth and health of the nation faster than Ross Perot can say "sucking sound" may play well to party loyalists who are mad as hell and highly motivated to participate in primaries and caucuses, but it is not going to be an attractive message to the barely conscious that give the GOP hope for another four years despite the ruin they have already wrought for the last seven. Most people are just too afraid and traumatized to let go of their hope that they will have a job and just enough pay to live a descent life to risk anything that sounds like an attack on the powerful providers of jobs--until they hear that there is some sort of safety net and new promise awaiting them if they let go of their reliance on mega-corporations and whatever trifle they allow to trickle down to the mere mortals that work for them.

Edwards would do well to let go of the pain and fear rhetoric and put considerable focus on rewarding businesses for delivering on the promise of the greatest good for the greatest number (not the biggest billionaires) that was the original selling point of the theories of free trade and capitalism. Where business cannot deliver on that promise when left to its own devices, government has a legitimate role in regulating and facilitating economic activity so that such outcomes are more likely than the looting and laying waste that has become the devastating new norm of globalization.

Edwards has some good points. He just needs to put more attention on the good and less on being pointed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If I`m not mistaken....this guy AND Hillary
were guest at a Bilderberg gathering! Now...
I`m not Mr.Know It All by any means...but I`m thinking anyone even remotely connected with these Globalist are not good for us...the middle class
slaves of the state! Are we all still so ignorant
of what they let us see and read? Do we really think ANY...of these clowns will make a difference
in our lives? Do we think that the choices of the so called "presidency" of the "United States of America"....will bring peace and prosperity to we the people? To peace on the planet? To a better life for our children? Do you really think one of these "chosen few" will give us affordable healthcare?Ect????
They`re cut from the same mold folks.
The "election process" of this country is a joke.
The election process is a convenient diversion of whats really going on.
The presidency of this this country has become a "voicebox" for the global elitists!
I`m not saying anything here that we don`t already know.......right?
THEN....whats with this story on another
puppet?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It doesn't matter who you vote for, Dem or Con. They are all the same. Have you seen any difference in your lives with a Democratic Congress? The poor, the elderly, the disabled and the middle class will be gone. We are nearly gone now with the economic downturn and war cuts to Medicare/Medicaid. The goal is to eliminate all but the wealthy. What they don't realize or care to realize is that when all the people who purchase their goods and services are gone, the wealthy will be gone too...that is when there is no one left to prop them up.

Your children, your grandchildren will all die in middle eastern wars that are perpetuated by either party because the government likes it, they love killing, torture, power, money and wealth. We let our government sell us out and destroy us. It's gone on for too long now to throw the plan in reverse and no candidate or elected official is about to do that anyway. These people don't represent us, so why bother to vote or get all excited about another phoney election? Nothing has or will change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have to admit to something I'd rather not. Back in 1980 I attended the Republican caucuses here in Iowa and I played a small role at my caucus in getting support behind Bush I. As memory serves, I think it was only because we saw him as the lesser of the evils, I remember most of us thinking Reagan was pretty null and void even then. I've many a times thought us giving Bush that push then paved the way for the rise of his family's legacy that followed. But have no fear, I am solidly in the other camp and will do what I can on the 3rd to push for Edwards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can't believe you lap up this DK-wannabe. Kucinich is the REAL THING! Edwards is just DK-lite.

I'll take Edwards over Pillory and O-dumba, of course, but Edwards doesn't have the progressive credentials and the record that DK has.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Leaving aside the question of who YOU want to win, don't forget the point David was trying to make in this post: that having Iowa go first isn't a bad thing--that Iowans really take their unique, repeated, direct access to candidates seriously. I couldn't agree more with David's wish that the world would be better off if all the other states ran their elections like Iowa.

Even if Iowa's population is not representative of the country as a whole, I would rather have Iowans who pay attention doing the deciding than people whose only contact with the candidates is through the distorting lenses of the mainstream media and paid campaign commercials.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am usually very skeptical and jaundiced when it comes to politicians. It seems in America, big money and corporate power have long since trounced the needs and agendas of the average working Joe (or working Mary). But, I think Edwards is worthy of consideration as an exception to this rule. He does seem willing to take a shot at the monstrosity called "free trade." A monstrosity that has sucked the manufacturing and industrial base out of the USA to the slave labor, corrupt practices of China and her cohorts. By doing even this alone, Edwards has shown some guts. I would like to hear more about what he is about. As for being progressive, he already sounds about 1000 times better then Hillary. A corporate shrill if ever there was one. And Obama, he is big talk but deeply in the pockets of big business and the banks. So, let's give Edwards a chance. And, we need to be alert for what will happen if he really is seen as a threat to big business Hillary. The mud and lies will start to fly like you would not believe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Show me Edward's votes against "corporate greed"?

Edwards voted for the reviled Bankruptcy Bill--not once, but twice in 2002 and 2005.

Obviously, Edwards chose financial interests over working families.

How does Edward's records square with "takes on corporate greed"? Clearly, Edwards is an enabler of "corporate greed".

The only venue where Edwards "takes on corporate greed" is in his empty promises, which too many gullible Democratic Party voters buy--hook, line and sinker--to their detriment, again and again.

Forget about what Edwards says--and the same goes for Shillery Clinton and Obama--and examine his voting record.

In addition, Edwards--or should I say, Judas--also sided with the entire GOP caucus to vote against the Wellstone amendment to the 2001 Bankruptcy "Reform" bill.

Moreover, Edwards rejected a means test amendment that would have protected debtors from sudden financial misfortune. On the same Bankruptcy "Reform" bill, Edwards again voted with the entire GOP caucus to reject an amendment that would have included a more consumer friendly means test than that included in the original bill.

And, last but not least, Edwards supported the final version of the Bankruptcy bill that "punishes the vulnerable." Months later, Edwards again voted for the similar version of the Bankruptcy bill that emerged from negotiations with the House of Representatives. He also voted to limit debate twice on the bill, stifling further amendments or arguments. This version was not substantively different from the earlier versions, as it still made it significantly harder for working Americans to discharge their debts through the bankruptcy system. Chris Dodd rejected this bill, along with Senators Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry and Wellstone. 14 Democrats and 2 Republicans voted against the final measure. (That is, HR 333, Vote 234, 7/17/01; HR 333, Vote 236, 7/17/01; HR 333, Vote 230, 7/12/01).

The late Senator Paul Wellstone, D-Minn, said the Bankruptcy "Reform" Bill--and I quote--"punishes the vulnerable and it rewards the big banks and credit card companies for their poor practices."

Edwards, Clinton and Obama's treachery extends to other policy debates, as well.

Where have they voted against a clearly illegal war?

Where have they stopped funding?

Where have they voted for re-deployment of the troops?

How about impeachment of the war criminal, George W. Bush?

The truth is that Edwards, Clinton and Obama have done nothing.

All you have, at the end of the day, when dealing with Republicans who masquerade as "Democrats"--like Edwards, Clinton and Obama--is a handful of empty promises, which they have no intention of fulfilling.

The reality is that Edwards, Clinton and Obama are funded by the same Americans and foreign entities who support and fund Bush and the Republican Party. The fact is that all three of them--Edward, Clinton and Obama--have tripped over themselves to give Bush everything he wants--from illegal war to corporate friendly legislation. None of them has fought Bush--none, not one of them.

And, finally, I must take issue with the author of this grotesque puff piece. The author misleads the reader when claiming that Edwards is anti-corporate, when examination of Edward's voting record proves that Edwards--like Clinton and Obama--is nothing more than Republican who masquerades as a "Democrat".

Forget about Edwards and his empty promises, and instead, examine his deeds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And he was bashing corporate control the entire time. I don't think he goes far enough on health care - Kucinich is still the ONLY candidate proposing a true non-profit single payer plan - but he's saying a lot of the right things otherwise.

I couldn't help fearing that at the end of this speech, or some speech, some day, we're going to hear the dreaded news report start out, "Earlier today, shots rang out at the end of John Edwards' rally...". It always seems to happen to those on the side of the people who fly too close to the Sun. I hope not this time. Maybe I've just seen the replay of RFK's last speech too often. Things like that that happen when you're young and impressionable have a way of haunting you for life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Check out On the Issues for all of Biden's positions at http://www.ontheissues.org/Joe_Biden.htm#Foreign_Policy
and check out all the other candidates while you are there too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He ain't Kennedy, but he's the only Democrat to pick up the populist mantle.

Let's elect him and see if he holds up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At this point, I think its too important to break the deathgrip the Republican Party has on our lives to risk putting another Republican in the White House. Even if Ron Paul weren't actually nutters, the fact that he's willing to let the Republican Party as it is today maintain power in Washington tells me his election would result in more of the same crap we've been dealing with. We need to break this cycle of power and Edwards is the right man for this job. We don't need to cut our social programs, we need to stop giving handouts to billionaires. We don't need to scrap our public schools, we need to fund them. We don't need to invent scare tactics to freak people out about immigration, we need to address the real issues with wisdom and compassion. I just don't think there's a Republican/Libertarian candidate out there that wants what's best for most people - they're just greedy, trying to hoard what they can for themselves and theirs. That's NOT the way to run a nation!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As others here have commented, Edwards' voting record clearly nails him to the flip-side of everything he now claims to be.

Anyone who believes this act merely projects their own fantasy onto another hollow ad campaign for the corporatists running the show.

On what pretends to be the "left" Kucinich may not be perfect but at least he's a reasonable facsimile of what he presents himself to be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Edwards is not a "populist" or a "progressive". Have a look at his voting record:

09/29/2006 Military Commissions Act of 2006 Y
09/27/2006 Military Commissions Act of 2006 Y
10/24/2001 USA Patriot Act of 2001 Y
10/12/2001 Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 Y
06/21/2000 WTO Withdrawal resolution N
04/14/2005 Bankruptcy Reform Bill Y
09/14/2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Y
04/18/1996 Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act Y
07/31/1996 Welfare Reform Act of 1996 Y
07/18/1996 Welfare Reform Act of 1996 Y
03/14/1996 Anti-terrorism bill Y
12/13/2001 No Child Left Behind Act Y
05/23/2001 No Child Left Behind Act Y
06/13/2000 Higher Education Funding Amendment N
02/06/1995 Line Item Veto Act Y
12/12/2007 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 Y
03/06/1996 Cuba Sanctions bill Y
10/30/1995 Bosnia Troop Deployment Resolution Y
10/20/2005 Firearms Manufacturers Protection bill Y
08/02/2007 Prescription Drug Imports N
10/31/2007 Trade and Globalization Act of 2007 Y
07/11/2007 Extension of Funding for Transitional Medical Assistance and Abstinence Education Y
06/15/2007 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Y
09/14/2006 Secure Fence Act of 2006 Y
02/10/2005 Real ID Act of 2005 Y
1/07/2007 Sexual Orientation Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) N
07/30/1996 Working Families Flexibility Act of 1996 N
12/13/2007 Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 Y
03/07/2006 PATRIOT Act Reauthorization bill Y
09/28/2006 Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act Y
06/27/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act Y
06/27/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act Y
08/04/2007 Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2007 N
11/05/2003 Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2004 Y
07/24/1996 Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Funding Amendment N
12/21/1995 Welfare Reform Bill NV
11/08/2007 United States-Peru Trade Agreement Y
07/20/2006 U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement Y
05/04/2000 Africa Free Trade bill Y

How, after examining Edwards' voting record, can anyone conclude that he is "populist" or "anti-corporate" advocate?

This is not the voting record of a "populist" or "anti-fascist"; this is the voting record of a Republican who masquerades as a "Democrat".

Obviously, Edwards thinks that we, the voters, are a bunch of cretins. And it appears that in the case of gullible Edwards' supporters that he may be right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Edwards is not a "populist" or a "progressive". Have a look at his voting record:

02/02/2000 Bankruptcy Reform bill Y
03/23/1999 Kosovo Resolution Y
10/25/2001 USA Patriot Act of 2001 Y
09/14/2001 Military Force Authorization resolution Y
11/19/2002 Homeland Security Act of 2002 Y
05/21/2004 Condemning Iraq Abuse of Prisoners resolution NV
10/11/2002 Use of Military Force Against Iraq Y
05/18/1999 Religious Memorials at Schools Amendment Y
2/18/2001 No Child Left Behind Act Y
06/24/2004 Defense Department FY2005 Appropriations bill Y
09/25/2003 Terrorism Information Awareness bill NV
07/17/2003 Terrorism Information Awareness bill Y
04/03/2003 Appropriations for Operations in Iraq Y
10/16/2002 Department of Defense Appropriations, FY2003 bill Y
08/01/2002 Department of Defense Appropriations, FY2003 bill Y
07/18/2002 Military Construction Appropriations Act FY2003 Y
0/18/2001 Military Construction FY2002 Appropriations bill Y
09/26/2001 Military Construction FY2002 Appropriations bill Y
10/14/1999 Defense Department Appropriations bill, FY2000 Y
06/30/1999 Cuba Travel Ban Amendment Y
06/30/1999 Foreign Operations FY2000 Appropriations bill Y
04/29/2004 Internet Access Tax bill Y
03/19/2003 ANWR Oil Drilling Amendment Y
07/13/2000 Death/Estate Tax Amendment Y
06/20/2000 Hate Crimes Amendment Y
05/20/1999 Juvenile Crime bill Y
10/28/2003 Michael Leavitt, Adiminstrator of the EPA NV
02/03/2000 Alan Greenspan for Chairman of the Federal Reserve Y
01/24/2001 Norman Y. Mineta for Secretary of Transportation Y
01/24/2001 Thompson for Secretary of Health and Human Services Y
01/23/2001 Martinez for Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Y
01/23/2001 Anthony Principi for Secretary of Veterans Affairs Y
03/02/2004 Firearms Manufacturers Protection bill NV
10/03/2000 American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, 2000 Y
11/09/1999 Two Year Minimum Wage Increase Amendment N
11/09/1999 Three Year Minimum Wage Increase Amendment N
6/11/2002 Hate Crimes Bill Y
10/22/2003 Reduction of SPAM bill NV
09/25/2003 Do-Not-Call Registry bill NV
09/16/2003 FCC Media Ownership bill NV
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y

How, after examining Edwards' voting record, can anyone conclude that he is "populist" or "anti-corporate" advocate?

This is not the voting record of a "populist" or "anti-fascist"; this is the voting record of a Republican who masquerades as a "Democrat".

Obviously, Edwards thinks that we, the voters, are a bunch of cretins. And it appears that in the case of gullible Edwards' supporters that he may be right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clearly, as this snapshot of Dennis Kucinich's voting record confirms, he's the only real progressive in the race, today. And he's the only candidate with a proven, consistent record of delivering progressive votes in Congress. Read on...

07/26/2005 Small Employer Health Benefits Plan Amendment Y
04/14/2005 Bankruptcy Reform Bill N
07/26/2002 Homeland Security Act of 2002 N
12/13/2007 Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 N
10/16/2003 Iraqi Debt Forgiveness Y
06/27/2003 Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 N
06/15/2007 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations N
06/22/2006 Death/Estate Tax Amendment N
12/12/2007 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 N
11/14/2007 Head Start Act of 2007 Y
11/08/2007 Homeowners’ Catastrophic Insurance Act of 2007 Y
06/22/2006 Line Item Veto bill N
04/13/2005 Death/Estate Tax Repeal Permanency Act of 2005 N
03/17/2005 Budget FY2006 Appropriations Resolution N
05/05/1999 Bankruptcy Reform bill N
10/09/1998 Bankruptcy Reform bill N
11/07/2007 Sexual Orientation Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) Y
08/02/2007 Prescription Drug Imports N
07/31/2007 Lobbying and Donation Regulations Y
07/13/2006 Voting Rights Act Reauthorization Y
04/05/2006 527 Reform Act of 2005 N
05/17/2007 Guantanamo Transfer Plan Y
06/22/2005 Flag Desecration Resolution N
09/26/2006 Public Expression of Religion Act of 2006 N
07/31/2007 Lobbying and Donation Regulations Y
12/11/2007 Recognizing the Importance of Christmas and the Christian Faith Y
02/12/1997 Term Limits resolution N
07/25/2007 Ban on Permanent Bases in Iraq Y
12/19/2005 Defense Department FY2006 Authorization bill N
05/20/2004 Defense Department FY2005 Authorization bill N
06/10/1999 FY2000-2001 Defense Authorization bill N
03/18/1999 National Missile Defense bill N
11/08/2007 United States-Peru Trade Agreement N
6/16/2006 Global War on Terror N
04/28/1999 Military Operations in Yugoslavia Limitation Act Y
04/28/1999 Withdrawal of U.S. Troops from the Balkans resolution Y
10/05/1998 Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 Y
06/18/1999 72 Hour Gun Background Check Amendment Y
05/01/2003 AIDS Assistance bill Y
06/08/2000 OSHA Ergonomic Protection Amendment Y
03/09/2000 Minimum Wage Increase-Two Year Raise Y
03/09/2000 Minimum Wage Increase bill Y
09/29/2006 Military Commissions Act of 2006 N
09/27/2006 Military Commissions Act of 2006 N
10/10/2002 Use of Military Force Against Iraq N
08/04/2007 Foreign Intelligence Acquisition N
09/28/2006 Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act N
06/29/2006 Intelligence and Law Enforcement Resolution N
03/07/2006 PATRIOT Act Reauthorization bill N
10/24/2001 USA Patriot Act of 2001 N
10/12/2001 Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 N
06/27/2007 Andean Trade Preference Act Extension N
07/20/2006 U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement N
07/28/2005 CAFTA Implementation Bill N
06/09/2005 Withdrawing Approval from the WTO Agreement Y
06/27/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
06/27/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
07/27/2002 Trade Act of 2002 N
12/06/2001 Fast Track Trade Authority bill N
06/21/2000 WTO Withdrawal resolution Y
11/14/2007 Head Start Act of 2007 Y
10/18/2007 State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Reauthorization Y
10/10/2007 National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007 Y
10/04/2007 Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 Y

Source: Dennis Kucinich's voting record.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gonna be a long time before I forgive Ralph for 2000 - but this goes a long way. From POLITICO:

MUSCATINE, Iowa — Ralph Nader unleashed on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Monday — criticizing her for being soft on defense spending and a chum of big business — and expressed his strong support for John Edwards.

In an eleventh hour effort to encourage liberal Iowans to "recognize" the former North Carolina senator by "giving him a victory," the activist and former presidential contender said in an interview that Clinton will "pander to corporate interest groups" if elected.

Alternet has a piece and a link to the entire article.

Ralph doesn't like corporations either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm a little behind in my reading - but if you're still following this thread, check out what Kucinich said about why he endorsed Obama instead of Edwards in Iowa for his supporters. (You will need to sign up for the site before you can read this.):
http://www.dennis4president.com/

An Edwards/Kucinich ticket is pretty impossible!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]