Wow. That was quite a plug Sharpton gave Edwards!!!

and a big knock on Kerry and Dean.

"We are running against each other, but... I disagree with Edwards, and Kerry and Dean...I think it is important Senator Edwards should tell that story, from a different vantage point. The reason is I think it inspires young people to know that they can start with no advantages and become a successful lawyer, a senator, a president...it doesn't have to do with votes...it has to do with hope...and someone who came out of the projects needs to hear him say that he rose from being a millworkers son....it might make them think they can take a different direction...and I think he shouldn't be criticized for that, he should be saluted."

Of course that started with "You gonna take that out of my time? 'Cause I wouldn't be able to talk," and ended with the comment about Arnold.


I'm sending Sharpton 30 bucks for saying that. That was beautiful.

I thought Kerry came across okay. Dennis had a background that was more disadvantaged than Edwards. There was a time when he was homeless.

Sharpton had a great point that choosing a candidate who came from a lower class background would be an inspiration to kids who would look at what they could grow up to be.

I noticed that Sharpton had to fight for time.

Kucinich might have started at 2 mph, but he's only gone to about 70mph.

That's the point that Sharpton was making.

Money? Why is that a laudable measure?

Political success? What has Edwards done to compare with Dennis's record? (that's not a rhetorical question--has he done anything?)

I'm not saying a kid from the projects shouldn't want to be Kucinich too, but Kucinich probably won't get elected president and he wasn't selected by his peers as one of the eight best anything in the United States.

I love Kucinich, but Sharpton is right about Edwards's stoty. If you wanted a kid in the projects to think that he or she ought to be able think beyond the horizons they can see from the bottom floor of the tower block, you'd probably want them to think that a life like Edwards's, and not Kucinich's, is possible.

Also, Kucinich was kicked out of the mayor's office by the banks. No business has ever kicked John Edwards anywhere. In fact, it's the opposite. Edwards has gotten justice, big justice, for a lot of people from a lot of big, negligent corporations and their greedy insurance companies.

Also, Kucinich was kicked out of the mayor's office by the banks. No business has ever kicked John Edwards anywhere. In fact, it's the opposite. Edwards has gotten justice, big justice, for a lot of people from a lot of big, negligent corporations and their greedy insurance companies.

Indeed Dennis was. And it happened because he stood up and said No to elite interests at the risk of his whole livelihood. Something none of the other candidates has done. Dennis lost his job and 15 years on the shelf for saving Muny Light, but it saved Clevelanders $20M or so every year since then and is going to go on doing so indefinitely.

Dennis could have knuckled under and walked away wealthy. But he didn't. That's real integrity, a quality that we should regard as crucial...shouldn't we?

which is the symbolism for a kid in the projects.

Kucinich stood up to power, and was sent off into the wilderness for 15 years, and he saved Clevlanders 20 million bucks.

Edwards has stood up to power, and each time he did, he won for himself, and his clients, and he got more and more powerful, and stronger, and increased his own opportunities, and the opportunities for his clients each time he beat back the powerful corporations (and he won a lot more than 20 million bucks for the people whose interests he looked after).

What Kucinich did is noble, and he's a martyr, and we should respect martyrs. But Edwards is the kind of person who makes more people think that it's a real option in life to do the right thing. You can do the right thing for people and still provide for your family, and move forward every step of the way.

Edwards is like, if MLK were as rewarded as Michael Jordan...which is what would happen if Edwards were elected president.

But to answer the question, Edwards represented families and children for twenty years as a lawyer. During this time, he was active in numerous charitable activities, including an organization that helped the homeless. His family set up a foundation that built computer centers for under-privileged high school students. You don't have to be in office to do good works.

He called out Edwards, Dean and Kerry, and said one of the few things last night which made me feel very emotional, and it was about how John Edwards's story should be saluted, not criticized, because it's about giving hope to kids who start life with few advanatages.

It was a huge fuck you to Jeff Greenfield's question, it was huge fuck you to the RW spinners and the media and even the people here who repeat it, and it was little tiny fuck you to Kerry and Dean whom he called about by name when he started telling that story. During the rest of the debate, I didn't hear Dean or Kerry go back and undo what Sharpton did to them on that issue.

Sharpton's insight was not a putdown to anyone in the process of observing the significance of Edward's humble roots.

This can be pitched in either direction-- Bush is an example of someone who can't function outside of his social milieu, but Roosevelt was considered a "traitor to his class". There have been many who either by good fortune, hard work or good connections have surpassed class, but they view others who for whatever reason - lack of ability or opportunity, as failures.

It is not the position you arrive at, it is the position from which you view the lives of others that matters.

or Kerry said in an effort to diminish Edwards's biography and play up their own. Even Edwards played down his biography. Sharpton said he disagreed with what all three of the them said.

John Edwards' biography?

I saw nothing.

Kerry said something about "not just their hearts but their wallets". I have no idea what he was talking about, but it seemed to be the idea that there all rich now, so what's the hubbub? And then he said the important thing isn't biography, it's what you fight for. And that was good.

endless tirades about milkmen and mill workers. Sharpton observed the significance of the inspirational message, but Edwards and Gephardt reasons were more likely more politically cynical, as in the case of Kerry's Viet Nam references. You don't hear Sharpton constantly bragging about his early life in a projects single-parent family or, for that matter, Kucinich's endless touting of his truly impoverished early life.

...point out class differences. During the Great Depression, FDR sent photographers around America to document the miseris of the working and underclass because the right wing didn't want America to know how they suffered. Nobody in the private sector was willing to tell those stories, so the liberal governent had to do it. If those pictures hadn't been taken, I don't think today we'd really have a sense for the misery of the Depression.

That's why it's important to hear those stories from the candidates. It isn't about the votes. It's about the hope.

it is more likely pandering.

The Republicans would love to have you think of it as pandering because they don't want those messages to have power.

They're very powerful.

...more like saying it didn't matter where you came from-- if that were the case then what one background should qualify you to speak for the people? intentions and experience are what matters... otherwise there would be no separation of party.

i AM happy sharpton said what he did though... i've thought that all along. edwards should be proud of the hard work he did to get where he is today. it is inspiring. edwards plays it down, but i don't think he should. he should make more of a point it was his hard work and his own vision he could be more than what he was born into that got him where he is-- it is truly impressive.

Edwards should hire Sharpton to run his campaign. If Sharpton doesn't get into the next Democratic administration in a significant role, something is f'd up.

Don't sit around and wonder why non-Dean people are repelled by DU Dean supporters -- read your own subject lines.
And Dean had his worst debate. He was visibly uncomfortable in the town hall style. He never once raised his hand like the other candidates did to be called on in the one-on-one with real voters. And in the first section, he used most of his time to say how he was being picked on. It was a dreadful performance.

Al Sharpton,make my day every time these candidates debate, Sharptons reply defines Edwards, importance in the comming election. Wouldn't the Bush family pay millions if they could buy for Dubah, Sharptons ability to articulate his ideas?

Carol, is so calm and expresses her self well.

...who criticized Edwards for being from a working family? I didn't hear Dean or Kerry do it, so I don't understand why Sharpton tried to call them to the carpet.

But I still couldn't figure out why he pointed out Dean and Kerry. They didn't say anything negative about Edwards' background (at least that I heard). Yes, they come from wealthier families, but that doesn't mean they don't feel the same way that Sharpton does about Edwards upbringing. If anything, he was putting media and Jeff Greenfield in their place for even asking the question.

to Edwards's statement. Sharpton was getting his comment in on the comments the three of them made.

they both said that their and Edwards's stories didn't matter.

Thier stories in the big scheme of things dont matter. Its a good story and goes to the heart of what america is suposed to be about, oportunity. But it has absolutely no bearing on the job of being president. Unless you think a guy who is born rich cant make an efective presiodent.


I agree with al saying that edwards story is inspirational and something to be proud of. But in the long run it has no bearing on thier qualifications for president.

Edwards was right!

kept this nation together, and I wonder how much of it related to his biography, both from the perspective that it gave Lincold a foundation for doing what he did, and from the perspective that the public really related to the symbolism of the biography (the latter being the point Sharpton was trying to hit home).

What is important to people is all a matter of thier own opinion. If this is important to you then by all means run with it. For me its a non issue. I would rather the candidates spent thier time outlining thier policy goals than telling about where they were born but thats just me. I have no problem with it being important to you.

If being poor at one point in your life was the make or break issue for the presidency of the united states kucinich would be our next president. Sleeping in a car prety much tops em all. I personally just dont see it as having any bearing whatsoever on the direction the country takes in the future. I am much more concerned with where they are going than where they have been.

DK and the other candiates with humble roots know where they are coming from, I like that, your life affects the way you think about things, well Kucinich talks about policy and his life's experiences, I know you arent gonna flock to him at the snap of my fingers. It is nice to have candiates who have had experiences like you or me because they know from experience. Same reason why I think a lot of Vietnam vets will like Kerry or Clark, hes one of their own.

get you ahead in America rather than ANOTHER person who had all the breaks, floated through life for long periods of time, got to reinvent themselves several times without suffering any repercussions (even after huge failures, like Bush) can get whatever they want whenever they want it.

It's a very important symbol. Just like JFK's catholicism, FDR's class disloyalty, and Abraham Lincon's life (which is, oddly, extremely similar to Edwards's).

I know AP, we share different candiates but I completely agree with you and I can say Edwards would be good too. Ive seen Kucinich's Slavic ancestry used too, I puke at that. Youre totally right about hard work, Edwards, Kucinich and the others who werent so fortunate as kids but worked hard in school and are living examples of what our ancestors saw when they entered Ellis Island. I really do like Edwards and think its shameful that he didnt get much time last night either. :toast: to those who went up but never forgot what it was like down, my mom is a living example of that, grew up in a simliar surrounding like Edwards, not really but her father was bricklayer and her mother a occassional secretary and waitress so she was like lower middle class but worked hard and went to George Mason. Also the other day she got promoted. People like that are what America is all about.

Also background informs character. Notice lack of humility in Kerry and Dean. It's the old silver spoon thing. Plays powerfully with progressive populists and Reagan democrats. This is why in my humble opinion Edwards and Kucinich are far superior candidates to Kerry and Dean. It's about lunch buckets and pickup trucks versus wine and volvos. But the party leadership doesn't get it.

If you were poor and rose in politics, so often you had to compromise. Edwards, notwithstanding his childhood, could afford not to take PAC and DC lobbyist money because he had a couple million of his own dollars he was willing to put into his campaign.

It's amazing that Kucinich is where he is today without having his own millions.

But, you know what, the party and the major donors all got behind Clinton in 91, because they saw a guy who fit the bill, biographically speaking. Clinton wasn't an LBJ party insider. He wasn't a Bob Dole getting his dues after years of service. He was just a boomer who worked hard and whose heart was in the right place and who had a great biography. The party could see that people would connect with it, and they did.

Although Gore left me scratching my head (he was given the slot because he had put in the time, like Dole in 96). But I still think the party is smart enough to get back into a '92 frame of mind.

Edwards' story is important, not just for the reasons that he and Sharpton gave. Another reason it is important is that it helps people understand how he has come to terms with issues of class and race in society, a key component in helping determine what kind of person he is and how he will address the problems we face.

This does not mean that the other candidates' stories don't matter. In fact, ALL of their stories matter. I don't care whether someone is born to great wealth or comes from the most abject poverty. People can't help the conditions in which they were born. But I want to know what life experiences they have had, what has helped to form them, how they have come to terms with very deep and resonant issues that matter to me, issues that can't be addressed from afar or in the abstract.

In 1991, Sen. Bill Bradley spoke about this in an extraordinary floor speech in which he asked President Bush to explain how he had come to terms with the issue of race in America:

"So, Mr. President, tell us how you have worked through the issue of race in your own life. I don't mean speechwriter abstractions about equality or liberty but your own life experiences. When did you realize there was a difference between the lives of black people and the lives of white people in America? Where did you ever experience or see discrimination? How did you feel? What did you do? What images remain in your memory? Tell us more about how you grappled with the moral imperatives embodied in race relations and how you clarified the moral ambiguities that necessarily are a part of the attitude of every American who has given it any thought--any thought at all . . . Mr. President, this is a cry from my heart, so don't charge me with playing politics. I'm asking you to take the issue of race o ut of partisan politics and put it on a moral plane where healing can take place."

So, Sen. Edwards talking about his personal experiences and background go a long way toward helping voters understand not only where he came from, but where he is coming from. It doesn't mean that the other candidates stories are less compelling or important or that he has cornered the market on empathy and understanding. It just helps people better know who he is.

Think Woodruff, made a statement about Edwards putting forth the message about his family life as a youngster.

I hope that the other candidates noticed that if they give a sincere and heartfelt compliment/defense to one of the others that they both come out looking better.

:)

DID ANY OF YOU NOTICE THE APPLAUSE , EDWARDS GOT THROUGH THE EVENING, EVEN THOUGH, WOODRUFF, ASK THAT APPLAUSE BE HELD.

That was great too.

for Dean, and Kerry and others who grew up rich and became democrats. They really were ripe for the republican bandwagon but had intellegence and compassion to understand that their way of life is not made acessable to ordinary americans.

So I think rich Democrats are impressive as they really don't "need" to be Democrats other than the fact they want to help others less fortunate.

If I had my choice of symbols, I'd take Lincoln, LBJ, Clinton, Edwards, definitely.

Simply not being an asshole Republican isn't that great of achievement. People should be able to achieve that, regardless of wealth.

And, what, that's going to appeal to moderates and center-right Republicans? They don't care that a rich guy chose to be a Democrat? (Remember, you still have to win the general election.)

Edwards's message isn't about chosing a party. It's more universal. It's about hope, opportunity, and what America should be about.

Good one, AP. And Sharpton knows that Edwards' background is why he "gets" it about race. He lived it.

Hes number 2 for me right now.

a rich democrat of a poor 2 rich democrat. You are a (look at this) ----> DEMOCRAT!

And that is a good message to send children.

I respect FDR and JFK just as much as I do LBJ or Lincoln. Just because one grows up rich doesn't mean they are at a handicap for greatness.

about political ideology.

We're talking about symbolism, and how it encourages Americans to act in ways that are good for America.

Did you hear what Sharpton said? I know what Kerry said. But I think you have got to admit that according to the tingles up the spine measure, what Sharpton said was much more exciting and true.

In a chaotic environment like a 9-way debate, he really stood out as someone who didn't waste the little time he got. He was humorous, good natured, gave props, and called the alleged "moderator" on her biased bullshit attitude. He may not be headed for the nomination, but he sure could be a prime pick for a top Democratic party spokesperson.

Even the crappy post-debate commentators remarked on Sharpton's contributions. He stood out.

He tells the truth without trying to be diplomatic. I like the way he demanded speaking time. I wish Dennis had done that because Dennis really got cheated. The debate times really showed the press's bias towards Dean for the nomination. Remember, we didn't pick our candidate in 72. The Republicans and the press did. Are we going to let them do it again?

He should deliver the keynote address at the Democratic Convention in Boston

deliver the key note.

But who thinks it won't be Bill Clinton.

I'm sure he'll give the speech of his life.

i think it's good for edwards to talk about his background and how he grew up. it helps with voters and it tells something about himself just like it is with gephardt and kucinich. i still support kerry though.