About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
 susanthe
 William Tucker
ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

John Edwards: "as President, I represent the American People!"

by: jamess

Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 15:07:56 PM EST
John Edwards has gotten many laughs with the cutting line about Industry Lobbyists: "If you give them a seat at the Table -- they'll eat all the food!"

Lobbyists are the "Bogey Man" that's everyone loves to hate -- but are they really that big of a Deal?

It's just Business right? Corporations are People too. They deserve to have their Voices heard in DC, too, Right?   I thought I read that somewhere in the Constitution, Didn't I? .... Hmmmm ....
jamess :: John Edwards: "as President, I represent the American People!"
There he goes again! Talking about those big, bad Drug Companies, Insurance Companies, and Oil Companies and their Lobbyists!  Woooh Scarey!

John Edwards - Just Say No

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

The reason we don't have Universal Health Care today, is because of Drug Companies, Insurance Companies and their Lobbyists in Washington. They stand between you and the Health Care that you need.

We have to take this System on. We have to Change it! We have to be willing to be honest about it. I don't believe you can change that system and bring about the change we need on Health Care, on Energy, and on everything else, unless you're willing to say 'It's broken -- It doesn't work!' If you defend it, and you say, 'Oh well it's fine, we'll just take money from the Lobbyists, it's no big deal -- and then we'll work it all out.' -- that doesn't work! You have to say NO to these people.

You have to say as President, I represent the American People! I don't represent Drug Companies, Insurance Companies and their Lobbyists in Washington! I don't represent Oil Companies -- I represent America! Because that's the ONLY way we're going to get the Change that we need in this Country. ...



How dare Edwards have the audacity to want to actually "represent the American People, as President"?

Doesn't he know, that not how our System of Government Works anymore?

Exactly!

Edwards does know, and he's Just Saying No. No More!

NO More "Business as Usual"

NO More CEO's "Buying a Seat at the Table" in Congress

Lobbying Overview - Total Spending, by Industry Sector:

NO More trading our Corporate Representatives for their, and vice versa:

Just how much of those Lobbyists BILLIONS finds its way into Congress?

HMOs - $30 Million


-------

Drug Companies - $77 Million


-------

Insurance Companies - $179 Million


-------

Oil & Gas Companies - $117 Million


-------

Electric Utilities - $81 Million


-------


No More taking over the Election Process, by helping those Representatives pay their Campaign Bills:

If previous Campaign Donation Trends are any guide, get ready for another year of "Madison Avenue" Mud-Slinging!
(the 2008 "donations" are just getting started)

HMOs


-------

Drug Companies


-------

Insurance Companies


-------

Oil & Gas Companies


-------

Electric Utilities


-------

No More taking over the Legislation Process, by reminding those Representatives WHO paid their Campaign Bills:

Here are the Top 20 Members of Congress raking it in from each Industry sector:

HMOs


-------

Drug Companies


-------

Insurance Companies


-------

Oil & Gas Companies


-------

Electric Utilities


-------

John Edwards is Ready to give them Hell!  
 He knows how they operate. He's been beating Corporate Interests for 20 years, in the court room arena.

One things for sure, John Edwards does not back down from a Fight!

John Edwards - "Give 'Em Hell"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...


Reform Groups Announce Six Benchmarks for Lobbying Reform

Jan 23, 2006


1. Break the nexus between lobbyists, money and lawmakers.

Cap contributions from lobbyists and lobbying firm PACs to federal candidates at $200 per election and to national parties and leadership PACs at $500 per election cycle.

Prohibit lobbyists and lobbying firms from soliciting, arranging or delivering contributions and from serving as officials on candidate campaign committees and leadership PACs.

2. Prevent private interests from financing trips and from subsidizing travel for members of Congress and staff, and executive branch officials and federal judges.

3. Ban gifts to members of Congress and staff.

4. Oversee and enforce ethics rules and lobbying laws through an independent congressional Office of Public Integrity and increase penalties for violations.

5. Slow the revolving door.

6. Place sunshine on lobbying activities and financial disclosure reports.


It will take more than just rhetoric.

John Edwards will take the power out of the hands of Lobbyists. He will:

-- Take on the Lobbyists' Power with a Constitutional Line-Item Veto:

-- Prohibit Lobbyists from Giving or Raising Campaign Cash:

-- Today, lobbyists approach politicians with campaign checks in one hand and wish lists in the other. Federally registered lobbyists gave over $23 million in the 2006 campaign. Edwards has never taken a dime from federal lobbyists or PACs. He will sever the connection between money and lobbyist influence by:

     * Ending lobbyist campaign contributions:

-- Lobbyists should be able to make their cases on the merits, not by influencing politicians with donations. Edwards will prohibit all federal candidates from accepting campaign contributions from federal lobbyists.

     * Stopping lobbyists from bundling:

-- Lobbyists solicit donations from others and direct them towards candidates to maximize their impact, a practice known as bundling. Edwards has never allowed any lobbyists to bundle donations for him. As president he will ban federal lobbyists from bundling for federal candidates.

-- Close the Lobbyist Revolving Door:

     * Banning top government officials from becoming lobbyists:

     * Banning lobbyists from taking top government jobs

-- Expose Lobbyist Contacts to Sunlight

-- Prohibit Executive Branch Employees from Accepting Corporate Gifts

http://johnedwards.com/iowa/is...

---------

John Edwards -- The Plan to Build One America

End the Unique Power of Lobbyists

-- Prohibit lobbyists from donating to campaigns or fundraising for them.

-- Fight lobbyists' bread and butter - earmarked pork-barrel spending - with a constitutional version of the line-item veto.

-- Close the revolving door between Capitol Hill and K Street by banning former top officials from lobbying their colleagues and lobbyists from taking executive branch positions related to their former clients.

-- Expand the congressional ban on lobbyist gifts and travel to executive branch officials.



It's really not a Laughing Matter! The Legislation that the Lobbyists help write and pressure through Congress IS really criminal, sometimes!




IF the Focus of this Country doesn't change soon,
from how Wall Street is doing
to how "your Street" is doing --

well America should just quit pretending to represent the People
and Actually start inviting CEO's to Congress for Planning Sessions,
since it's their Opinions that are the ones that matter anyways!

Oh wait, they already do --

The Cheney Energy Plan,
The Lieberman-Warner Carbon Give Away,
FCC Telecommunications Consolidation Plan,

... the list goes on.

Big Business gets the Concessions,
We the People get the Bills!

Edwards is right - It's Time to End this Game!

And NOT when "it's Convenient" for Politicians to fix it
(huh, when's that ???) --  But NOW!


It seems some Senators IN OFFICE NOW, could be reforming this System of Corporate Favoritism, NOW -- not "Later"?  

SO Why Aren't they? .... Hmmm?
------------


Post Script:

If John Edwards has a valid point about Lobbyists, why is the Media all too ready to just chalk it up to "Edwards has become Angry"?

Well, Could it have anything to do with the fact, that the Corporate Media is "trying to get their Seat at the Congressional Table" too?

TV-Radio Stations


-------

Books, Magazines, Newspapers


-------

It's the American People WHO need to get Angry !@!
And Support Candidates, like John Edwards, who are willing to take on this Broken System -- and NOT just go along with it!

No one else will do it for you!
Indeed, they'd rather have you "Relax, Just Go Shopping" ...

"Business as Usual" is Good for "some interests".
The ones that matter most in today's world, it seems.


[Note: Most Images, click thru to more info!]
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
John Edwards: "as President, I represent the American People!" | 6 comments
Thanks for the data (4.00 / 3)
There is no question in my mind that DC business as usual needs to be shaken up and John Edwards is just the person to do it.  This is an important opportunity to achieve true change.  Go NH!

standing on the sidelines looking for a reason to enter the fray.
Very interesting data (0.00 / 0)
that really shows why business as usual is just not appropriate in DC.  
Democrats have to change the culture and the only candidate
that is really looking at this issue is John Edwards.  
It is a complex issue yet simple to really understand.  
Hopefully voters in NH get this information.
Edwards flip flops (0.00 / 0)
Which Edwards are we talking about?  The liberal, moderate or war hawk?

Edwards is also careful to temper his progressivism with more centrist positions. Speaking to Rolling Stone, Edwards refused to rule out recommitting U.S. forces to Iraq to halt a genocide, and he even demonized single-payer health care: "Do you think the American people want the same people who responded to Hurricane Katrina to run their health-care system?" On The Tonight Show, Edwards also played it down the center, soft-pedaling global warming and trumpeting his anti-poverty credentials.

http://www.rollingstone.com/po...

Bill Richardson: "Get out now. Get all our troops out now. It is the only right and responsible choice."

Richardson Flops (0.00 / 0)
Remind me again what he was doing when we had a problem with the Nuclear Energy trade secrets?

standing on the sidelines looking for a reason to enter the fray.
[ Parent ]
Which Richardson are we talking about? (4.00 / 1)
The one who said

"I supported President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq, without a new resolution from the UN, because I was persuaded that Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction posed a threat to the United States and our interests in the world...At this point...we must see this mission through."

- Bill Richardson
page 348
Between Worlds | The Making of an American Life

Richardson strikes me as the ultimate panderer who says whatever will work at the moment.  He was a war monger and this new Richardson that defends Clinton is a contradiction that makes no sense.  I think he is just looking for a job in the Clinton Administration.

[ Parent ]
Edwards flips and flips (0.00 / 0)
Almost every major vote Edwards made while in the Senate - Iraq, No Child Left Behind, trade pact with China, bankruptcy reform -- he now disowns.  See http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpo...

What does that say about his judgment?  Doesn't that make Edwards a panderer under your definition?

You are dead wrong about Richardson as a war monger.

Richardson's view, that the U.S. must be patient and place the matter of invading Iraq to a vote of the Security Council prior to commencing hostilities, was rejected by many in Congress, including John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, and ultimately was the path President Bush pursued.

On March 11, 2003, eight days before President Bush announced the U.S. was at war with Iraq, Richardson criticized the Bush Administration's rush to war in an interview on CNN.  At the time, most Americans supported going to war and were critical of the U.N.

Richardson defended the work of the U.N. Richardson explained how unilateral U.S. military action in Iraq would undermine the U.N. and hurt the prestige of the U.S. abroad:

CROWLEY: I want to ask you the question, first, if there is no Security Council resolution approving of a war on Iraq, and if the Bush administration should go ahead, who loses in that scenario?

RICHARDSON: Well, I think the United Nations loses because it shows a lack of relevance to this crisis.

And, secondly, I think, Candy, that the United States loses because we're going into a major conflict without the blessing of the U.N. Security Council, without some of our major allies like France and Russia, and also those 10 other members of the Security Council, the 10 non-permanent members that have a voice right now.

So I think it would come at considerable cost especially if we're to win the war, which we would, issues relating to a post-Iraq configuration to the prestige of the United States worldwide to bring some kind of order to the Middle East and bring some kind of Persian Gulf-lessening attention. So, I think everybody would be a victim. The United Nations, the United States and, certainly, our NATO allies. I think would be hurt, too, because if they don't support us the breakdown of the NATO alliance might be next to go.

CROWLEY: Well, I want to cite a couple of figures for you. One of them just came from a CBS/New York Times poll, which showed that right now only about 34 percent of Americans believe the U.N. is doing a good job handling this situation.

Fifty eight percent think it's doing a poor job. On top of that, we also found that 55 percent would support an invasion, even if the Security Council says don't do it. What does that say about how Americans view the U.N., and has that changed since you were the ambassador?

RICHARDSON: Well, the United States as a populous, here in new Mexico, there's not much support for the United Nations. But at the same time, Candy, what everyone should understand is the United Nations does a lot of things that we, the U.S. as the only superpower, don't want to do.

They get involved in conflicts in Kosovo, in the Congo in Africa, in Guatemala and Latin America. Immigration issues, AIDS, refugees. We don't want to get directly involved in these, but we use the arm of international support, legitimacy of the United Nations to do it.

Now, in the Persian Gulf, conveniently, the U.N. supported our efforts in 1991 to get a broad coalition. And I think we've used the U.N. in the war on terrorism to get international support.

But clearly in this Iraq crisis, the U.N. has to step up and simply enforce its [1441] resolution. And it's not doing that. So, it's going to be a big loss for the U.N. in terms of its peacekeeping relevance, unless it really steps up and gets tough on Saddam Hussein. I think that's the issue.

CROWLEY: So, am I right, am I hearing you correctly that you believe that the U.N. Security Council should pass the resolution that Britain and the U.S. are proposing?

RICHARDSON: Well, I would go a little differently, Candy. I think the U.S. and Britain should compromise. That's the essence of diplomacy. To get nine votes, if it means postponing for 30 days, or 15 days or 10 days, a new resolution with benchmarks on Iraq's behavior, let's do it. I think that France and Russia are basically gone.

They are going to veto. But it would be a partial victory if we get nine votes for a victory of a majority in the Security Council. If we don't do that, I think it's going to be tremendous prestige loss overseas. I think, domestically, it's going to cause more problems for the administration. The Congress will be divided. This is a time when it's frustrating, but what's the rush, really. Iraq is not heading down Baghdad into the United States.

Again, it is a threat, but it's not an immediate threat. It's not something that is like the war on terrorism, where we're under alert from a potential terrorist attack in this country. So let's be judicious. Let's be calm. Let's be patient.



Bill Richardson: "Get out now. Get all our troops out now. It is the only right and responsible choice."

[ Parent ]
John Edwards: "as President, I represent the American People!" | 6 comments

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox