I recently had the opportunity to go to a fundraiser for John Edwards and meet him in person, along with fellow MOMocrat, Beth. There were about 60 people in attendance, and we had the opportunity to chat with Senator Edwards briefly before listening to him give some impassioned remarks about the war in Iraq, global warming, health care, and politics in general.
I was fairly sold after hearing him speak at another event in July, but I decided only a few weeks ago that he is the candidate I'm going to support in the primary. I had seen both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama speak and spoken to a number of their supporters before making my decision. This particular event sealed the deal for me, along with his policy statements on education and combating terrorism.
He arrrived with little fanfare and just started talking with people. Beth and I introduced ourselves. I told him we contribute to the Silicon Valley Moms Blog, and he winced. Obviously, he was aware of the controversy that had gone on a few weeks before when another contributor harshly criticized the Edwards for taking their young children on the road with them. She later reconsidered her position after a visit to the blog from Elizabeth, but this episode had just been rehashed in the San Jose Mercury News that morning. Beth and I wanted him to know that not all of the SV moms felt the same way, and we were showing our support by being there and contributing to his campaign.
After the wince, he broke into a broad smile when we told him that we were supporters and how much we admired Elizabeth. He said, "I'm so glad you're here. We appreciate your support."
Like Elizabeth, John Edwards has the unnerving habit of staring intently into your eyes when he speaks to you. Despite the swarm of people around vying for his attention, you get the feeling that he is actually listening and taking in what you have to say, and is interested. He has an easy smile, and seems to be equally comfortable with crowds and with individuals.
After milling around, taking pictures, and answering questions, everyone left the backyard setting and went to the living room of the house. He stood in front of the fireplace, and that reminded me of a modern version of the "Fireside Chat." It was like a giant book club meeting, only the person leading the discussion might one day sit in the Oval Office. It was thrilling just to be there, to say the least. I sat on the sofa took photos and notes, and my husband stood in the back with the tall people.
One of the most surprising things about the speech was that it was very different from the one we heard in July. The themes were consistent, but the emphasis and the words used were different. I think that would be a hard thing to master, since he is giving multiple speeches a day. I think that it would be easier to fall back on familiar rhetoric, tell the same stories, or just give people sound-bite messages.
Instead, he seems to speak directly from the heart, improvising here and there, but sticking with the essential messages of the campaign. He is obviously a skilled speaker, with the ability to weave disparate themes into a unified whole. Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton seemed more scripted when I heard them speak, and a little more like they were going through a laundry list of issues, afraid to miss or skip anything.
In the end, I felt even more strongly than before that Edwards is the most viable candidate for office. Although we don't align on every issue, I trust that he would listen to people, and do his best to be a good president. I think he has the leadership skills, the people skills, and the intelligence to do the job well.
It's hard not to like John Edwards after you meet him, despite the movie-star looks and self-confidence that might be interpreted as arrogance by some. I was told by someone who met him during the last election that he "lacked substance," but I don't see that at all. He has the most detailed policy plans of any of the candidates, and is not afraid to speak the truth, that real and lasting change requires doing things differently and require some sacrifice.
After being introduced by the hosts, he started by thanking them for opening their lovely home for the event. He then said he would give some remarks and hoped we would ask questions. "Ask me anything!" he said enthusiastically. "About issues...politics...how we're going to win...whatever is on your minds." On the last point, he seemed self-assured and confident that he could, in fact win the primaries and the general election.
He then started talking about Bush's speech on the war in Iraq and his response video that aired on MSNBC the night before. He noted that he felt it was important for the candidates to express their views on the war and their plans for troop withdrawal. He thought that it is important for the American people to hear each candidate's plans, rather than just the official Democratic response. He feels strongly that Congress should step up and tie any additional funding to a specific timeline for withdrawal. If Bush vetoes it, they should continue to do the same thing until the funds run out and he has no choice but to affix a timeline. This was met with great approval from the crowd.
Again, Edwards spoke boldly and passionately about issues that mattered to the people assembled--healthcare, global warming, the disparity between rich and poor, and the war. During his remarks, he stated that he has specific plans for each of these areas and wondered aloud, "How can someone be a candidate for President without a specific plan?" He added, "I know what I want to do as President and I don't rely on polls to tell me."
He outlined his plans for change in each of these areas:
- Iraq: Edwards spoke more about the war this time than last time we heard him speak, and was more specific about plans for troop withdrawals and how to make it happen. He referred to the ongoing deception perpetrated by the White House, which results in "more troops, more lives lost, and no end in sight." The President's plan actually results in 7,000 more troops in Iraq next year than when the surge started, so that is hardly a plan for withdrawal. He urged Congress to "show some backbone and force Bush's hand."
Edwards disagreed that we are safer than we were in 2001, and was incredulous that the Bush administration continues to link 9/11 to Iraq, when there is no evidence to support the assertion. He said, "We are great at chest-thumping at the expense of other people's lives."
He said that withdrawing troops on a specific time-table, coupled with continue diplomatic negotiations with Sunni and Shi'a leaders, would be the only way to force the Iraqi government to step up to the plate and resolve the issues that face that nation.
- Environment: Edwards supports a carbon cap and auction for credits instead of a carbon tax. Setting a cap on carbon emissions and allowing trading of carbon credits will ensure that minimum standards are set that would protect the environment.
Edwards thinks the next economic boom will be in creating a "green economy" to develop an environmental infrastructure for delivery of alternative energy sources that will create jobs and help the environment at the same time. The US needs to train the workforce via "green academies" in developing the next generation energy sources, starting with high school programs. He is against further development of nuclear energy due to the dangers of waste disposal, and against coal-based fuels as well.
He said that recent studies have shown that global warming is a more urgent crisis than thought before, and that the polar ice cap could be completely gone in 23 years, if we continue on the same path with "America's oil addiction." This oil addiction will ultimately kill the American economy if allowed to continue on course.
- Health Care: Edwards stated that his health care plan has been on the table for at least six months, and covers every American, unlike Senator Obama. He said that Senator Clinton will be rolling out a plan next week, and he suspects it will be very similar to his. His plan would cost $90-$120 billion that would be paid for by rolling back Bush's tax cuts for people with incomes of over $200,000. His plan has comprehensive coverage for mental health, and outlaws denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions.
- Poverty: Edwards said, "We need to close the huge income disparity between rich and poor in this country. The minimum wage was recently raised, and I believe it should be raised again."
He also thinks that restoring rights for unions to organize in the workforce will protect workers, and making college affordable and available to everyone will help level the playing field.
- Technology & Innovation: Despite the issues that our country faces, Edwards is "enormously optimistic" that with radical changes and getting rid of the albatross of dysfunctional health care systems and a broken carbon policy will lead the way to new innovations. He favors doubling the funding for the National Institutes of Health for research, and enacting policies that are pro-science, whether it is in the formation of green energy sources or biotechnology. His vision is to give hope and opportunity to every American.
Afterwards, he left time for questions from the crowd. I have some video of one of the questions about supporting the US troops in Iraq that I'll post later. Here are a few of the questions, and the answers that I could take down:
Q: Should we be worried that the President is planning a pre-emptive strike in Iran before he leaves office?
Edwards: I think we have a reason to worry about that. According to my sources, the Pentagon has had plans for a long time for intervention in Iran. What Congress should do is pass a resolution that would force Bush to go through them before any action is taken. The Iranian leader, Ahmadinejad, is as unpopular there as Bush is here. There are many, many moderates in Iran who disagree with him. My concern is that the best way to make him a hero in the eyes of the Iranian people is to attack him.
Q: Do you think that the primaries will decide who the candidate is, or will there be delegate counting at the convention?
Edwards: I think the candidate will be chosen by the primaries. At the moment, the early primaries are Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida, then the 20 or so (including California) in early February. It would be hard to turn back the tidal wave after Iowa and New Hampshire, so whoever wins Iowa will likely gain traction through the rest. There are serious consequences to not winning the early states...Hillary knows that, and so does Obama, so they are spending big money on ads in Iowa...
Q: What would you do about conservative efforts to stave off environmental efforts in order to stay competitive in the global market, specifically with China?
Edwards: At the moment, we have no credibility internationally on environmental issues. We need to lead the way with a new international treaty. We need bold leadership that will ask Americans to make changes, and that will mean sacrifice. No President since Kennedy has asked Americans to step up and make the necessary sacrifices to enact change. We need to let the American people know that we are in this together, and tell the truth. Democrats are not saying this either. We need to get rid of this war-centric patriotism, this notion that the only way to be patriotic is to go to war. There are lots of ways to be patriotic, and our leaders need to show the way.
I hope that any of you who have the chance to meet John Edwards will do so. The written word and the sound bites you hear in mainstream media really don't do him justice.
Previously cross-posted at The Silent I.
I'm pretty impressed by this post, Glennia. One thing, though; I have to admit to being darned interested in just how he would go about implementing a nationalized health care system, given the groaningly weighty strength/heft of the current insurance/big pharma lobbying thumb that rests jointly on the scale alongside those who control big oil. It seems like an almost-impossible (if not totally so) venture. I want desperately to believe it can be done - but there are so many corrupt members of the senate willing to have their homes remodeled, etc., for kickbacks and for the simultaneous give-away of this country and its citizens. How can he possibly fight all of that? Optimistic as he is? How can anyone?
*covers eyes with clenched fists*
Posted by: lildb | October 03, 2007 at 02:48 PM
That's a complicated question, lildb. I think one thing that speaks in his favor is that he is not accepting campaign contributions from lobbyists. I know that campaigns are expensive, and that some people feel that they can accept big $$ from lobbyists and not be beholden to them. I'm not sure I buy that.
I think Edwards approach is that he can't do it alone, that it will take a huge effort by not only lawmakers, but regular people, to see the changes take place.
Posted by: Glennia | October 03, 2007 at 03:38 PM
Not only do I agree with your response to my original query, Glennia, but I just found this quote by Mr. Edwards:
>Edwards also vows that in January of 2009, he'll tell Congress that "if by this summer - July - you haven't passed universal healthcare, you lose your healthcare."
How, I ask later, would a president strip Congress of healthcare? Through legislation, he replies. "Anybody who opposes it, I will personally go into their congressional districts everywhere in America and make sure that their voters know that they are standing up for their own healthcare but they are not standing up for the healthcare of the American people."
That quote was culled from a piece I just found on The Boston Globe's website, written by Scot Lehigh. It's kind of a hit piece, but that quote makes sense to me, and answers my question. I like that he would be that willing to go to bat for nationalized health care.
Also, insofar as not accepting campaign funds from lobbyists? Imo, the only way to keep the snake-oil salesmen from continuing to hijack our government across the board is to disable corporate campaign donations. Publicly-funded campaigns would level the playing field.
If only.
Posted by: lildb | October 03, 2007 at 04:53 PM