Edwards Rails Against Lobbyists...and Hillary (who he accuses of defending a lobbyist-driven system)

Edwards Rails Against Lobbyists
By RON FOURNIER – 49 minutes ago

NASHUA, N.H. (AP) — In a raw populist appeal, Democrat John Edwards on Saturday accused presidential rival Hillary Rodham Clinton of defending a lobbyist-driven political system that is "rigged against regular Americans" and killed her plan for universal health care.

The former North Carolina senator accepted a major union endorsement while insisting that no Democratic candidate legitimately can promise to change America without swearing off special interest money from federal lobbyists. New York Sen. Clinton has refused to do so.

"When it comes to the existing lobbyist game, we've got to end it and not defend it," Edwards told more than 700 members of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters union.

The anti-lobbyist challenge is not new for Edwards. But he stepped up his attacks against Clinton by focusing on her most notable leadership role in 30 years of public life — the health care plan that, as first lady, she drew up in 1993 for her husband, then-President Clinton.

"For more than 20 years, Democrats have talked about universal health care. In 1993, Democrats controlled both chambers in Congress" and voters had elected "a president who actually had the courage to propose a plan for universal health care. It was completely killed" by lobbyists for insurance companies and the health care industry, Edwards said.

<SNIP>

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jcRUno1AGWCeu5Z8GAORZfI8ftPw

Has he ever said exactly which money was it that Obama and Clinton took that he was offered and declined?
I keep thinking, if he really wanted to help people and shape policy, why'd he quit the Senate?

Edwards and Obama are both out front in criticizing lobbyist influence while Hillary promotes it.

From the article ---

On a recent trip to New Hampshire, Clinton stood by her husband and said, "I've learned you bring change by working in the system established by the Constitution. You can't pretend the system doesn't exist."

Edwards replied Saturday: "Senator Clinton is right. You can't pretend the system doesn't exist. But you can't also pretend that it works."

:eyes:

He ran for president in 2004, which was also the year his senate seat was up for reelection. Unless you wanted him to run for both his senate seat and the vice presidency at the same time, he had to "quit".

Face it, quitters never win.

He made the decision when he was running for President. He did not have a seat secure enough that he could win it and the Presidency at the same time.

But that's exactly it, Lieberman is much, much safer in deep blue CT than John Edwards was in NC. Trying to run two simultaneous full on campaigns would have been ridiculous.

Also, Leiberman had not run for President - Gore picked him in the summer. In retrospect, Leiberman likely SHOULD have let someone else run - if there was a Democrat, who was most likely to win - not a certainty in CT. They had a Republican governor who would have appointed a Republican if Leiberman was VP.

In Edwards' case, you could argue that he had too little experience to run for President - but that was his choice. He could not simultaneously spend the time needed to run for president in the rest of the country and spend enough time to win NC. It was a gamble he chose to make. Had the 2004 election been fair, it would have been a gamble he won - and it may still be. Even if he doesn't win the nomination, it still may have been the right choice if Edwards did not want to be a long term Senator.

:rofl:

I have a lot of trouble not getting angry at Edwards when he does this. He treats voters like idiots. We're supposed to be so stupid that we can't see through his naked demagoguery, his blatant hypocritical pandering? He attacks "lobbyists" as if they are a pure evil, yet he allies with groups that rely heavily on lobbists--unions, lawyers, environmental groups, teachers, whatever.

He has many fine qualities, but I just flat don't trust him a lot of the time. It's like he's trying to be our Karl Rove. There should be more separating us from the filth on the Republican side than just positions on issues. There should be a complete difference in essence, and I just don't feel that with Edwards.

Edwards can see the difference between corporate lobbyists (you know, the ones that serve the interests of corporate "persons" and write bills for the Republicans) and those who represent REAL living, breathing Americans.

If he can see the difference, why does he paint ALL lobbyists with the same brush?

It is just yet another instance of Edwards having no principles and just saying what he has to say at the moment to try and get votes.

Yet when he attacks other candidates for taking money from lobbyists, they can't have the same perfect insight as he does, so they are corrupted by the money they take, whereas he is able to avoid corruption because he is so perfectly something or other.

He was a bigger Bush ally than Zell Miller in 04, now he's a populist? Give me a break. He'll say anything.

What a crock.

And you can't tell the difference between lobbyists that represent REAL people and those who represent FAKE people? No wonder you're so fucking confused.

Yeah but what he and Obama don't tell you is they take employee money from those who work at lobby firms,also they take money from state lobbists. These 2 are peeing on your back and telling you it's raining.22% and 13%.Hillary is working very hard for every vote. These two didnot show up at AArp forum. Shame on them.

Clinton's campaign fired back. "Voters aren't looking for which Democrat can launch the angriest attacks on other Democrats," spokesman Howard Wolfson said via e-mail. "They are looking for the candidate with the strength and experience to bring real change to Washington on day one, and that's Hillary Clinton."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/08/AR2007090800726_2.html

is trying to make the choice FOR them.

Nah.

In what twisted, rabbit-hole of a world is a candidate who openly celebrates and promotes "the system" going to bring about "real change"? Bullshit. Not. That. Stupid. Howie.

both Yahoo and AP to put emphasis on health care and Hillary Clinton --

:thumbsup::kick:

CONTRIBUTIONS BY SECTOR

JOHN EDWARDS (D)
Lawyers & Lobbyists
$6,559,042

HILLARY CLINTON (D)
Lawyers/Law Firms
$6,176,295
Lobbyists
$406,300

I don't see the difference. In fact, I would have expected Hillary to have far more because of her front runner status.

I'm beginning not to like Edwards. Hillary, for all that people say about her being phony, tells the truth about her associations with lobbyists. Edwards doesn't.