Senator Russ Feingold comments on Senator Edwards' many weaknesses as a progressive presidential candidate in a recent interview in the Appleton Post-Crescent newspaper from Appleton, Wisconsin along with a reader who commented on the article itself with a quote attributed to Senator Edwards.
The one that is the most problematic is (John) Edwards, who voted for the
Patriot Act, campaigns against it. Voted for No Child Left Behind, campaigns
against it. Voted for the China trade deal, campaigns against it. Voted for the
Iraq war … He uses my voting record exactly as his platform, even though he had
the opposite voting record.
Reader comment on the interview:
"I would have voted for the resolution knowing what I know today, because it was
the right thing to do to give the president the authority to confront Saddam
Hussein...I think Saddam Hussein was a very serious threat. I stand by that, and
that's why [John Kerry and I] stand behind our vote on the resolution".- Attributed to John Edwards as a quotation from 2004.
Millions of Americans in need of economic reform and health care and millions more hungering for pragmatic leadership in our efforts to end our involvement in Iraq prudently and defeat the allure of Usama bin Laden and Al Qaeda are wondering why John Edwards continues to attract so much loyalty from so many members of the American progressive community. It is a curious phenomenon.
Yes, Senator Edwards has today become a very vocal spokesman for several progressive causes (including media policy which has had a damaging effect on his current campaign efforts), but he remains a wounded warrior unable to meet any conservative opponent effectively in the general election season due to several enormous reversals in his policy positions, notably concerning the central question of the Iraq nation-building experiment. (Acropolis Review readers are invited to review December 2003 video footage of Senator Edwards' public comments concerning Saddam Hussein's capture in Iraq as one conspicuous example of Senator Edwards' weak national security and foreign policy judgement.) Senator Edwards had his moment in a full term in the United States Senate, and his record there was unremarkable apart from its caution and relative conservatism. Senator Edwards was unable even to win his adopted state of North Carolina or his home state of South Carolina for the Kerry-Edwards presidential ticket in 2004. It is doubtful that Senator Edwards would do well among voters in Texas.
These are inconvenient truths which must be considered by all Americans in search of the strongest candidate best able to move our nation forward against what will be strong opposition in the general election season. It is time to move on.
5 comments:
Good questions.
As re: why so many of us support Edwards: I (and many others, it seems) very much appreciated hearing him say "I was wrong" about those votes. He didn't try to make excuses or try to cover them. He ponied up and explained his rationale for doing so, in detail. It is the depth of his understanding and appreciation for the problems we face that I, personally, find most appealing. I would say that the interview he did with Charlie Rose is the one that really explains it best.
And while I like Kucinich as a senator and as a progressive voice, I think he's too easily dismissed. In general, and not just in elections. His earnestness is nice, but to me, he just doesn't seem like he has all the leadership skills we need to get where we want to go.
While I can see arguments either way, overall, Edwards is the man with the plan, IMHO.
Sen. Feingold is ignoring that all three candidates are running on his record while not voting with him. Edwards is the one who has most repudiated his past votes.
Based on polls in Oklahoma and Ohio and other states, Edwards is the most electable Democrat. he beats Clinton and Obama against GOP candidates by up to 30 points in the South and 10 points in Ohio.
Clinton and Obama will have the same risky chance that Kerry did.
Okay, Fair enough. I would vote for Russ Feingold, were he running on the strength of his record. However, he's not.
Edwards will do poorly in Texas? More poorly than Hillary or Obama? I think not.
No candidate is perfect. Russ, after all, was one of the few (maybe the only Senator?) who voted against the Patriot act during the fervor of 9-11 fever.
Hillary is another Lieberman Democrat and Obama, although I believe is sincere, would be ineffective and tied too much to corporate interests. Especially now that he has evoked his love of Reagan, and Edwards took him to task for it.
Edwards is the MOST PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATE we have out of the three leaders. I do not forsee Kucinich beating McCain. Do you?
Do you want Progress or not? Clinton and Obama bring the status quo and more of the same...
Edwards 08!
If Edwards has so many negatives then Rethuglicans should work to get him the nod as they seem to be doing with HRC at the moment.
i HAVE BEEN AROUND SINCE EARLY IN THE LAST CENTURY. JOHN EDWARDS IS THE ONLY, I REPEAT ONLY CANDIDATE THAT WILL REPRESENT EACH AND EVERY AMERICAN. HE IS A BORN LEADER AND WILL APPROACH EVERY CRISIS WITH CALMNESS.EDWARDS IS DEFINITELY NOT A POLITICIAN LIKE THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES. HE HAS PROVEN ALL OF HIS ADULT LIFE THAT HE TRULY CARES ABOUT EACH AND EVERY HUMAN BEING.GO JOHN EDWARDS
Post a Comment