Why would Edwards or any of his supporters endorse Obama after knowing he voted for this?

On February 10, 2005, Obama voted in favor of the passage of the misnamed Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 which seriously hampers the rights of ordinary citizens to challenge corporations. Senators Biden, Boxer, Byrd, Clinton, Corzine, Durbin, Feingold, Kerry Leah, Reid and 16 other democrats voted against it.

So did 14 state attorneys general, including Lisa Madigan of Obama’s home state of Illinois. She called it a “corporate giveaway.” The Senate also received a desperate plea from more than 40 civil rights and labor organizations, including the NAACP, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Human Rights Campaign, American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Justice and Democracy, Legal Momentum (formerly NOW Legal Defense Fund) and Alliance for Justice. SOURCE

They wrote:

“Under the Act citizens are denied the right to use their own state courts to bring class actions against corporations that violate state wage and hour and state civil rights laws, even where that corporation has hundreds of employees in that state. Moving these state law cases into federal court will delay and likely deny justice for working men and women and victims of discrimination. The federal courts are already overburdened. Additionally, federal courts are less likely to certify classes or provide relief for violations of state law”

The bill which will seriously impair labor, consumer and civil rights involved five years of pressure from 100 corporations, 475 lobbyists, and tens of millions of corporate dollars to buy influence. It also involved the active participation of the Wall Street firms now funding the Obama campaign. The Civil Justice Reform Group, a business alliance comprising general counsels from Fortune 100 firms, was instrumental in drafting the class action bill, according to Public Citizen which also said in a 2003 report that Mayer-Brown partners and employees gave close to $100,000 <$92,817> to the Obama campaign by December 31, 2007. Mayer-Brown, hired by the US Chamber of Commerce, spent $16 million in 2003 lobbying the government on class action reform.”

I hope he endorses the candidate for November.

against the some of issues that defined Edwards campaign, labor and universal health care.

voted to fund the war...

(in Obama's words) "drove the bus into the ditch." Once the Iraq holocaust started, it then became vital to fund them to keep them alive because the Dems could not get 60 votes to over ride a Dumbya veto.

He's shown no such independence in his voting record so far, and every time he does vote against the party it's in the conservative, not the progressive, direction.

But Obama isn't a member of the DLC's softball league so that makes it okay for DLC haters. :sarcasm:

don't let anybody fool you into anything different.

How can anyone vote for McCain after he voted for torture and the war? How can anyone vote for Clinton after she voted for cluster bombs, and of course the war? I don't like this, but you know what? I have to vote for somebody. Obama has earned my vote with his initial opposition to the war, his strategic wisdom as demonstrated in how he's run his campaign, his appreciation of and broad knowledge of history, and a level-headedness which I think will serve us well. I also think he shares with me a fundamental value--the belief that you keep on talking respectfully with people with whom you disagree.

I'm not happy with Obama's corporatism, but he is unique in showing respect for the people, and their intellect.

:hi:

--IMM

I really think he voted wrong on that issue. Reason being, people like nurses that don't get a lunch break or don't equal wages compared to other nurses or are forced to work overtime should be able to bring a suit. I'm a nurse and I have seen nurses go to the state labor department and demand back pay for all the missing lunch breaks etc. If the labor department didn't agree they were going to file a state law suit. That vote was just wrong, especially because it effects my profession. Obama should take that vote back.

Thanks for the perspective from the nursing profession. No politician is going to take a vote back if there is no danger of us taking our loyalty back.

At issue here is not choosing between Obama and McCain. That argument is a wolf in sheep's clothing, and is a fear tactic.

At issue is whether or not our role is to pressure our representatives, first and foremost by telling the truth, or to indulge in hero worship and give them loyalty fits - a loyalty that they do not return. People here are trying to tell us that we are more likely to beat the Republicans by taking on the second role rather than the first. The reverse is obviously the truth. We are more likely - much more likely - to defeat the Republicans if we stand for the truth first, and for candidates secondly, if we adhere to principles and ideals first and are not afraid to speak out when "our" people violate those principles and ideals, if our loyalty to candidates is conditional rather than absolute, and if we look for leadership rather than for heroes and saviors.

is beyond the resources of most private groups and even most states - and the most effective way to combat them is in federal court?

It may be harder to get a fight going in federal court, but once there it is more likely to be successful. Each time a corporation is sued in state court and overwhelms its opposition it creates a precedent that can be used in later battles.

Just saying, there may be more to this than meets the eye.

I'm an Obama supporter, and I don't like this vote.

We have to see the totality of candidates, and in totalityu I still prefer Obama over Clinton. But I do want to find out more about why he voted for this....Maybe there were extenuating reasons, Maybe not.

I still would have preferred Edwards.

it was supposed to be smoove johnny's place there, challenging hillary, but that damned obama stole it from him!!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Standing with the have-nots, with the persecuted, abused and forgotten, and fighting for power and for economic justice was acceptable and mainstream and emotionally safe and secure so long as we had the cover of the Edwards campaign. Now it is risky and frightening to maintain those positions. People are scrambling for the safety of the herd and are willing to toss their principles to the wind, and toss their former allies and comrades under the bus.

It is fear. On this thread, people are saying "but the alternative is McCain!!!! Be very afraid people!!! Run for cover!" The problem is that this approach makes a Republican victory more likely, not less likely.

This is not really about voting or not voting for this or that candidate. It is about what ideas will be seen as acceptable, what opinions will be heard, how much critical thought will be tolerated.

Was it ok then? Why would you support Edwards after his votes?

run as a saint.

:shrug:

to logic. Clinton IS better than Obama. Clinton IS better than McCain.

Obama wants to reach out to G.H.W. Bush. Now there's an idea for hope and change!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Read my post, and the responses, "The Secret Ingredient of "Kool-aid" here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5168771

what's up with this outfit?

http://www.obamatruth.org/