By- Suzie-Q @ 5:45 PM MST
Corporate Elite Still Terrified Of John Edwards
Via Reuters:
Ask corporate lobbyists which presidential contender is most feared by their clients and the answer is almost always the same — Democrat John Edwards.
The former North Carolina senator’s chosen profession alone raises the hackles of business people. Before entering politics, he made a fortune as a trial lawyer.
Open attacks on the business elite are seldom heard from mainstream White House candidates in America, despite skyrocketing CEO pay, rising income inequality, and a torrent of scandals in corporate boardrooms and on Wall Street. Read on…
Edwards’ message and union support has resonated with a large segment of America, but unfortunately, as with other candidates, he’s only getting a fraction of the press coverage of Obama and Clinton. Rudy Giuliani, who was little more than a side note in Iowa and New Hampshire, is going broke and suffering from plunging poll numbers, is still getting press as though he’s a legitimate candidate — while Edwards, who has faired well so far this primary season, often goes unmentioned.
Yes because he wants to restore Democracy in this country!
FYI-
Edwards continued his assault on “corporate power” and “corporate greed,” saying he would end tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans and “take this country and democracy back.”
Trade, economic issues dominate last Dem debate before Iowa
Suzie, do you think Edwards tilting against corporations is going to produce anything other than a huge bow wave? I’m not so sure.
Hi Vigilante!
Look at the economy and the war. Corporate greed must end…
I think Clinton and Obama would be more of the same… and needless to say all of the GOP would be as well.
I believe Edwards would work to change this country back to a real Democracy.
A while back I posted this revealing transcript showing the disdain for Edwards by CNN. Here is the excerpt of the post:
The Democratic “debate” held in Las Vegas on November 15th would have been just more fawning over Hillary (As in pearls or diamonds?) if not for something said by John Edwards. Thankfully the interruptions from Wolf Blitzer were ignored.
EDWARDS: The question is: Will America be fine?
… 35 million Americans, last year, went hungry; 37 million people in this country live in poverty every day; 47 million Americans have no health care coverage.
And there is a fundamental choice that everyone in this room, and Democratic voters have to make. And that is, who do you believe will take on this system and change it so that it’s no longer rigged… corrupt and rigged against the interests…
BLITZER: All right. All right.
EDWARDS: … of the American people.
That is the fundamental choice. And I think people are entitled to know that they have choices. There’s nothing personal about this. This is about what America needs to be. This is about those 35 million people…
BLITZER: All right.
EDWARDS: … who are hungry every single year. When is our party going to show a little backbone and strength and courage and speak up for those people who have been left behind?
It seemed like Blitzer was waving off the crowd with, “Nothing to see here folks, just keep moving along.” Or for you younger folks, “These are not the droids you’re looking for.”
Well, what will the Corporate News Network do with that bombshell? Would it be swept under the carpet as usual?
Not this time. The censors and arbiters of American politics decided to pounce.
On a CNN news show the following Sunday, I saw the banner reading, “Grading Edwards” across the screen.
“Great,” I thought, “Now I’ll know what I’m supposed to think about that outrageous display of truth.”
There, for America’s edification and enlightenment were Blitzer and his fellow “reporters” Candy Crowly, Suzanne Malveaux and Dana Bash. Essential in their assessments, of course, were the important details of how Hillary handled whatever it was Obama said about her. And when Edwards’ challenged her for voting with the neo-cons on Iran, Hillary accused him of “mudslinging.” Yes, now that’s leadership. And Blitzer pronounced, “The consensus, I guess, Candy, is that Hillary Clinton won.”
Now it was time for the smaller fish to fry.
Speaking of Edwards, Dana Bash told us, “His campaign says that, well, he is running to reflect the growing anger among Democratic primary and caucus voters.”
Blitzer then quoted an Iowa political columnist, “…John Edwards should have stayed home.”
Candy Crowly responded, “He may be a little bit too angry… he’s the firebrand, and that turns some people off.”
Blitzer went on to quote Senator Dodd, “I’m surprised how angry John has become. This is not the same John Edwards I once knew.”
Blitzer added, “I guess that’s a problem he faces, Suzanne, how far do you go in expressing that anger without potentially turning off some Democrats.”
Suzanne Malveaux then informed us, “Polls show that people don’t like that kind of negativity.”
And to follow up, here’s a comment from my latest post:
Edwards is stuck in third place, but it is so refreshing to hear a presidential candidate utter the unspoken truth of corporate power corrupting our democracy and government.
This in itself is as historic as a black candidate winning a primary.
The corporate media will never admit that this is the fundamental issue affecting democracy in America. He has been, and will be called angry, out of the mainstream, and too radical as well. The media does its best to ignore and marginalize him.
Edwards’ clear identification of what most ails this democracy is what makes him the best choice for a free and prospering future. Talk about “you can’t fight city hall.” This guy is taking on the corporate media, the federal government, K Street lobbyists, and Wall Street. His chances are not good. But his words are vital and the message must continue, but he will be eliminated. He is not welcome in the Empire Club.
“This in itself is as historic as a black candidate winning a primary.”
Good point. The rest is well argued. I’ll give it some thought.
I still feel JRE is kind of too one-dimensional of a candidate.