tert teen

6/26/2007 12:47:31 AM

In Aiding Poor, Edwards Built Bridge to 2008
By LESLIE WAYNE
Published: June 22, 2007

Quote :

"John Edwards ended 2004 with a problem: how to keep alive his public profile without the benefit of a presidential campaign that could finance his travels and pay for his political staff. Mr. Edwards, who reported this year that he had assets of nearly $30 million, came up with a novel solution, creating a nonprofit organization with the stated mission of fighting poverty. The organization, the Center for Promise and Opportunity, raised $1.3 million in 2005, and — unlike a sister charity he created to raise scholarship money for poor students — the main beneficiary of the center’s fund-raising was Mr. Edwards himself, tax filings show. A spokesman for Mr. Edwards defended the center yesterday as a legitimate tool against poverty. The organization became a big part of a shadow political apparatus for Mr. Edwards after his defeat as the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004 and before the start of his presidential bid this time around. Its officers were members of his political staff, and it helped pay for his nearly constant travel, including to early primary states. While Mr. Edwards said the organization’s purpose was 'making the eradication of poverty the cause of this generation,” its federal filings say it financed “retreats and seminars' with foreign policy experts on Iraq and national security issues. Unlike the scholarship charity, donations to it were not tax deductible, and, significantly, it did not have to disclose its donors — as political action committees and other political fund-raising vehicles do — and there were no limits on the size of individual donations. Mr. Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, set out to keep his political options open by promoting issues he cared about, like poverty. 'He wanted to learn, travel and be in a position to be a viable candidate,' said J. Edwin Turlington, a Raleigh lawyer who was the manager of Mr. Edward’s 2003 presidential exploratory committee. 'He had the ability to raise money to fund his activities. He had a vision, and he knew it would take money.' Mr. Edwards mixed policy and politics in a way that allowed his supporters to donate to the causes he believed in — and to the organizations he had set up. He also set up two political action committees, something commonly done by politicians thinking of running for president. But it was his use of a tax-exempt organization to finance his travel and employ people connected to his past and current campaigns that went beyond what most other prospective candidates have done before pursuing national office. And according to experts on nonprofit foundations, Mr. Edwards pushed at the boundaries of how far such organizations can venture into the political realm. Such entities, which are regulated under Section 501C-4 of the tax code, can engage in advocacy but cannot make partisan political activities their primary purpose without risking loss of their tax-exempt status. Because the organization is not required to disclose its donors — and the campaign declined to do so — it is not clear whether those who gave money to it did so understanding that they were supporting Mr. Edwards’s political viability as much or more than they were giving money to combat poverty. The money paid Mr. Edwards’s expenses while he walked picket lines and met with Wall Street executives. He gave speeches, hired consultants, attacked the Bush administration and developed an online following. He led minimum-wage initiatives in five states, went frequently to Iowa, and appeared on television programs. He traveled to China, India, Brussels, Uganda and Russia, and met with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain and his likely successor, Gordon Brown, at 10 Downing Street. 'He was not a U.S. senator; he had no office,' said Ferrel Guillory, a political program director at the Center for the Study of the American South at the University of North Carolina. 'So he set up a series of entities to finance his travel, to finance a political shop and to finance an issue shop. It all adds up to a remarkable feat of keeping a presidential candidacy alive without any of the traditional bases for it.' Mr. Edwards depended for his activities in large part on donations from supporters. In addition to the two nonprofit organizations, he created a leadership political action committee and a 527 'soft money' organization that also shared the same name: the OneAmerica Committee. These two committees each allowed donors to give more than the $2,300 per person limit in a presidential primary or general election, and, in some cases, to give in unlimited amounts. From 2005, when he established them, through 2006, the committee and the soft money organization raised $2.7 million, most of which paid for travel and other activities that helped Mr. Edwards maintain his profile. 'It’s a permanent campaign,' said Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit group based in Washington. 'It’s about shaking every money tree possible and finding every means to finance a permanent campaign. It’s like having different checking accounts, with different rules, and the goal of keeping your name and agenda in the public eye.'"

[Edited on June 26, 2007 at 2:29 AM. Reason : .]

6/26/2007 2:27:57 AM

(Cont. from above)

Quote :

"The two foundations and the two political committees all shared an address in Washington and jointly raised around $4 million. Most donations to the political committees came from his core supporters, trial lawyers and unions, and in one case from an anonymous donor, who gave $250,000. Many donations ranged from less than $10,000 to $50,000. For example, Boyd Tinsley, the violinist and backup singer for the Dave Matthews Band, gave $50,000, as did the Service Employees International Union, whose organizing efforts Mr. Edwards has supported. The Edwards campaign defended the activities of the nonprofit. 'One of the Center for Promise and Opportunity’s main goals was to raise awareness about poverty and engage people to fight it,' Jonathan Prince, deputy campaign manager, said yesterday. 'Of course, it sent Senator Edwards around the country to do this. How else could we have engaged tens of thousands of college students or sent 700 young people to help rebuild New Orleans? It’s patently absurd to suggest there’s anything wrong with an organization designed to raise awareness about poverty actually working to raise awareness about poverty.' 'Of course, some of the people who worked for Senator Edwards in the government and on his campaign continued to work with him to fight poverty and send young people to college,' he added. 'Perish the thought: people involved in politics actually trying to improve peoples’ lives.' Mr. Edwards also developed mutually beneficial relationships with public and private institutions. He founded the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina, which provided him with a platform. In return, he raised $3 million to sustain it. He was hired by the Fortress Investment Group, a New York hedge fund, to 'develop investment opportunities,' according to a 2005 Fortress news release. That led to meetings with such people as Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany; Henry Kravis, founder of KKR, one of Wall Street’s most successful investment funds; and the chief executives of General Electric, Citigroup, Coca-Cola and DaimlerChrysler. 'Fortress became a vehicle for foreign travel,' Mr. Turlington said, 'but it was also a way to spend more time with sophisticated financial people.' The Edwards campaign declined to disclose the amounts raised or spent by the two similarly-named nonprofit agencies — the Center for Promise and Opportunity and the Center for Promise and Opportunity Foundation — since their 2005 tax filings, which are the most recent to have been filed. The Center for Promise and Opportunity Foundation, which started with $70,000 in 2005, gave out $300,000 in college scholarships in 2006, said Pamela Garland, the executive director of the College for Everyone Program that is part of the foundation. The center, often praised for helping poor students in Greene County, N.C., get into college, is on track to give out $476,000 this year, Ms. Garland said. Mr. Edwards broke his ties to that charity once he announced his candidacy for president. 'It’s really just me now,' said Ms. Garland, who began her job last May. She credited Mr. Edwards with devising the program, raising the money and speaking to high school students, using his own up-from-poverty story to inspire them. At the same time, the larger nonprofit group had a more politically active agenda. Its directors included Mr. Turlington, the Raleigh lawyer; Miles Lackey, Mr. Edwards’s former chief of staff; Alexis Bar, his former political scheduler; and David Ginsberg, Mr. Edwards’s current deputy campaign manager. The $1.3 million the group raised and spent in 2005 paid for travel, including Mr. Edwards’s 'Opportunity Rocks' tour of 10 college campuses, consultants and a Web operation. In addition, some $540,000 went for the “exploration of new ideas,” according to tax filings. Nonprofit groups can engage in political activities and not endanger their tax-exempt status so long as those activities are not its primary purpose. But the line between a bona fide charity and a political campaign is often fuzzy, said Marcus S. Owens, a Washington lawyer who headed the Internal Revenue Service division that oversees nonprofit agencies. 'I can’t say that what Mr. Edwards did was wrong,' Mr. Owens said. 'But he was working right up to the line. Who knows whether he stepped or stumbled over it. But he was close enough that if a wind was blowing hard, he’d fall over it.' Of the explicitly political entities, Mr. Edwards’ OneAmerica Committee 527 organization allowed donors to give without limitations. The money was transferred to his leadership political action committee. Leadership committees were initially created to allow prominent politicians to raise money for distribution to needy office-seekers. But Mr. Edwards spent the entire $2.7 million he raised for OneAmerica, including $532,000 raised by the 527, on himself, an increasingly common trend among politicians."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/22/us/politics/22edwards.html?ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=all

6/26/2007 2:28:39 AM

http://johnedwards.com/splash/

Looks like they are close to their 9 mil goal. The 2nd quarter ends today I believe. I wonder how many more contributions they will get today?


On a related note:

Quote :

" 2008 hopefuls in dash for cash as deadline looms WASHINGTON (CNN) -- With a Saturday night deadline for second-quarter fundraising fast approaching, presidential candidates from both major parties are scrambling to rake in the cash before the clock runs out."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/29/2008.hopefuls.cash/index.html

[Edited on June 30, 2007 at 6:48 AM. Reason : .]

6/30/2007 6:33:42 AM

Quote :

" Ten days ago, we put our campaign in your hands. We did the math, and told you that to stay on target we'd need to raise $9 million by midnight tonight. That day we had almost $3.4 million to go, and no one knew if it was even possible. Today, as I write this, we only have $137,046 to go. We can do it. Over 60,000 contributors this quarter alone have gotten us so close. Now we are counting on you to take one more step and help us cross the finish line before midnight in your local time zone."

This is from an e-mail they sent out. So it looks like they are getting close now.



But now that companies will be allowed to throw more money at politics again, small contributions will make less of a difference.

Here’s an article on how the appointments bush has made to the supreme court has affected legal decisions. One of the items being the rule against companies flooding money in advertising for candidates they like, or more often smearing those they don’t like, as an election draws near.

” Supreme Court rulings reflect Bush's stamp”
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/28/schneider.court/index.html

I heard an interesting quote about it earlier today. Something like “groups ranging from the ACLU to the NRA supported this overturning of campaign finance reform because they are for allowing companies to have free speech, but what this in effect does is more free speech more expensive for individuals as they get drowned out by big corporate bucks smear ads.”

If ever individuals contributions were to make a difference, you can really see it hacking away this number 137,046

6/30/2007 1:58:30 PM

http://www.wral.com/news/state/story/1584815/

Suspicious package sent to Edwards campaign headquarters in Southern Village.

The package contained his spine which was reportedly removed when he sold his soul to UNC-CH.

7/12/2007 6:03:53 PM

John Edwards is a sellout of the worst kind.

7/12/2007 7:09:52 PM

I cant stand his ass...he needs to get out of the race he has no chance to win

7/12/2007 7:15:23 PM

"he needs to get out of the race he has no chance to win"

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/26/edwards-romney-lead-in-iowa-poll/

Quote :

"WASHINGTON (CNN) — Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and Republican candidate Mitt Romney both increased their leads in a new Iowa poll released Thursday evening. Among Democratic contenders, former Sen. John Edwards now holds a 5-point lead, climbing up to 27 percent. Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois, both fell 6 points. They now sit at 22 and 16 percent, respectively. "

Seems to be doing alright so far.

7/26/2007 9:12:22 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/27/iowa.race/index.html

More articles on how well Edwards is doing in Iowa.

Quote :
"New KCCI poll has John Edwards and Rudy Giuliani leading in Iowa"

Quote :
"If Clinton loses Iowa, it will nick her image of inevitability."


Edwards has always been in the top tier, but towards the bottom end of it. Wins in the first round will increase his perceived viability and thus fundraising abilities enough to have a real shot.

For a candidate who doesn’t quite have access to the kinds of millions hillary does, his campaign does have a plan to stretch the funds well. A solid win out of the gate is both what they need, and as it appears what they are likely to achieve.

7/29/2007 1:50:41 AM

Quote :

"A new Rasmussen Reports Election 2008 survey shows former Senator John Edwards (D) opening up a seven-point lead of 49% to 42% over former Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R). In late June, the two contenders were tied, and earlier in that month Edwards held only a four-point lead."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008_edwards_leads_giuliani_by_seven_thompson_by_eleven

7/29/2007 3:01:47 PM

Edwards has a pretty good shot of winning Iowa, but even if he doesn't he's atleast going to pull 2nd.

Which means one of the two other real democratic contenders is going to be stuck with 3rd place right out of the gate. Let’s see what that does for public perception for an otherwise tight pack. There are going to be alot of eyes on Iowa.

7/29/2007 3:35:28 PM

^ Agreed about Iowa but it's still about 170 days until then. Obama or Hillary, more likely Obama, could royally screw up or just fizzle out. This three person race could turn into a two person pretty quickly.

Yes, Obama has the money, but does he have the politics to back it up??

That's still unanswered....

7/29/2007 4:34:21 PM

rock stars and athletes can be complete morons, but more people know them than have any clue who Jonas Salk is. the Economist spoke favorably of him though.

7/30/2007 11:42:24 AM

Here's their petition for the resignation of Gonzales. It looks like a combination of a political stunt & really trying to send a message... I wonder how it'll play in the media if they do send a massive constitution w/ petition signatures?

Quote :

"Today, we need your help to send a message to insiders like George Bush's Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who have no respect for the rule of law, our rights and freedoms, or the Constitution. Gonzales, the man who helped enable torture at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and illegal spying on Americans, is now facing a possible perjury investigation for lying to Congress. ... If we gather over 25,000 signatures online, we're not just going to mail them. We're going to put them at the bottom of the largest copy of the Constitution you have ever seen, and deliver it straight to Gonzales' office at the Robert F. Kennedy Justice Department building in Washington, D.C.. How big a copy of the Constitution? Big. Really big. And maybe—just maybe, when he sees that Constitution with all of your signatures, Gonzales will remember that his job is not to protect George Bush—it is to protect the rights and freedoms of the American people. And maybe—just maybe, if enough of us speak out he will once—just once—do what is right, and resign. No matter what he does, history will record that at this critical moment you and I took a stand. And we're going to keep standing up for what is right when our nation needs us—because that's what this campaign is all about. So if you want to join the fight for real change, then please add your name right now and help send Gonzales a message he will never forget. http://www.johnedwards.com/action/sign-petitions/gonzales "

7/30/2007 9:56:15 PM

He's done a lot of petitions... Darfur, Stopping the war, etc. It's hard to make a dent with those things when so many are sent to congress and the white house all the time.....

7/30/2007 10:12:00 PM

Quote :

"Agreed about Iowa but it's still about 170 days until then"

7/30/2007 10:28:03 PM

edwards and hilary will be running mates one way or the other, take that to the bank

7/30/2007 10:49:24 PM

^i see that before i see hillary/obama....my friend was like "its gonna be hillary/obama"...i just dont see that happening...i dont think that ticket would do too well in a general election

7/30/2007 10:59:20 PM

FWIW, over half of the people who voted in 2000 voted for Gore and Lieberman (a Jew).

7/30/2007 11:10:01 PM

http://johnedwards.com/action/networking/

Quote :

"43Things, del.icio.us, essembly, facebook, flickr, gather, myspace, partybuilder, youtube, ning, metacafe, revver, yahoo! 360°, blip.tv, CHBN, vSocial, tagworld, collectivex, bebo, care2, hi5, xanga, livejournal "

Is this something all the campaigns are doing? I mean I know I've seen some profiles on myspace, and a couple on facebook. But are they all trying to reach out online at this level?

7/31/2007 6:51:25 AM

What a great photo up to show how blue collar you are!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/31/edwards-celebrate-their-anniversary-at-wendys/

That Wendys sucks anyway.

7/31/2007 11:59:06 AM

( I think this may be a link based on Rush's comments today, since I said this am I still a parrot? )

http://www.wideawakes.net/forum/index.php?TagFilter=3443&Feed=RSS2

When an Iowa resident asked former senator John Edwards Thursday whether the United States should follow the Cuban healthcare model, the 2004 vice presidential contender deflected the question by saying he didn't know enough to answer the question.

Quote :

" "I'm going to be honest with you -- I don't know a lot about Cuba's healthcare system," Edwards, D-N.C., said at an event in Oskaloosa, Iowa. "Is it a government-run system?""

please tell me this isn't for real.

[Edited on August 21, 2007 at 1:47 AM. Reason : .]

8/21/2007 1:45:54 AM

How on earth anyone actually thinks that man can win the nomination, much less the presidency, is beyond me.

Of course... I said that about Dubya too... and then the Dem's stepped in their own shit and ran Kerry.

The way things are lining up, the Dem's are going to piss away a golden opportunity to win this election by running Hillary, Obama or Edwards. Personally, I like Obama and he would get my vote, but the Dem's won't have the sense to nominate him, I'm sure.

8/21/2007 1:16:30 PM

i honestly wonder if gonzales might not be the most likely to win the general election. of course he's not really even on the radar right now. that and it seems the whole "amnesty" buzz word could kill him too.

8/21/2007 5:00:38 PM

Quote :

"Edwards earns carpenters' union endorsement WASHINGTON (CNN) — Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards will be endorsed by a major carpenters' union at a rally next week, the Edwards campaign announced Thursday. The United Brotherhood of Carpenters, a union representing more than 500,000 carpenters and tradespeople, did not endorse anyone during the last presidential election. The union's executive board chose to support Edwards after meeting with him in Las Vegas last week. "Our endorsement is based on the Senator's outspoken support for all of organized labor and his focus on America's working families," Carpenters' President Douglas J. McCarron said. "In addition to his support for labor, our leadership was particularly impressed with the Senator's strong stand on trade." Edwards has been focusing on what he calls building "One America," which would strengthen the middle class by increasing wages, establishing universal health care and protecting unions. "I am honored to receive the support of the Carpenters Union," said Edwards. "For more than a century, they have been fighting for working Americans and standing up for the values that have made our country great - hard work, responsibility, and fairness. America was built by men and women who worked with their hands, and it's labor that made our country great." The union will formally endorse Edwards at a rally in New Hampshire on September 8."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

8/30/2007 7:45:13 PM

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/09/27/edwards_accepts_public_financi.html

RIP john edwards...thank fucking god...i was wanting you out of here months ago...you had your chance, it didnt happen, now go the fuck away

9/27/2007 7:30:44 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/27/edwards.public.financing/index.html

Quote :

""First of all, I got the money I need to run a serious campaign," he said. "I hope that the other two will join me. As I've said, Sen. Clinton said she is for public financing so she can step forward and show she actually means it." Edwards is the first top-tier Democratic candidate to agree to this funding mechanism, and he noted it will include the primary and general elections. Although he has already begun raising money for the general election, federal law requires him to return those funds if he accepts public funding. Clinton and Obama have also been raising private funds for the general election, but Obama said he would return the money and accept public funding in the general if the Republican nominee agrees to do the same. In the race for the GOP presidential nomination, Arizona Sen. John McCain has also said that if he becomes the Republican nominee, he would also accept public funding in the general election if his Democratic counterpart does so as well. McCain also recently became eligible to receive public funding during the primaries, and aides have said they are seriously considering that option. In order to qualify for so-called "matching funds," the public funding program for the primary season, the FEC requires candidates to demonstrate nationwide support by raising $5000 in 20 different states with no individual contribution to exceed $250, a task which poses little difficulty for major candidates like Edwards. "

At least he can call on Hillary to do the same since she has already supported the idea in theory. He has also received national news attention for his focus on going for small contributions from lots of average Americans. Many of whom wouldn't exceed the $250 limit anyways, and will now have their money matched. He never had a chance at winning in a money numbers game anyways, so I don't think this is a nail in the coffin or anything. But it does definitely reiterate that he has never and will never be able to keep up with the corporate donations Hillary & Obama have received which could be taken as bad news for his campaign, but its not new bad news.

I also saw this recently that I liked, but I wasn't going to post about it here since I didn't want to bring back an old thread & hadn't bumped it in 2 months, but as long as its here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070924/ap_on_el_pr/edwards_health_care_1
Less frivolous lawsuits, more sex ed, and drug policies based in reality rather than conservative ideology/war on drugs mentality.

It's only 4 days until the end of the 3rd quarter, so we'll soon see how well he's doing financially.

[Edited on September 27, 2007 at 8:11 PM. Reason : I wonder if Seth Green will get most of his nearly $5000 back, or if it only applies from here on?]

9/27/2007 7:58:44 PM

reports say he only got like 7 million this quarter

9/27/2007 8:57:17 PM

It was only 9 mil last quarter so its not a huge difference. It's not like he'd easily be reaching the limits that public matching of funds would put on him, so while it is a rehashing of the old fact that he's not pulling in as much as the other top tier candidates, I don't actually see it as a bad thing for his campaign overall and its some extra cash.

According to the CNN popularity poll, Clinton & Obama are both ahead but going down, and he's in third but going up. Now his campaign will have more funds than they would have had otherwise to continue that trend, even if it does draw attention again to the fact that he's not as big money as the other top tiers. He's been trying to spin himself as less of a Washington insider & less corporate ties than Hillary, and he's pointing out with this that Hillary already supports the idea of public financing as a way to end corruption & is calling on her to do the same (which she most probably will not do) so he might be able to pick up a few points in that regard.

He has less of a charge against Obama, infact he said nice things like fresh faces to washington can help bring change, and the he's open to the idea of him as a VP, and that he likes that Obama was 2nd person to announce a universal health care plan following Edwards (something Hillary has only recently & begrudgingly done after having said things like she's been burned by healthcare in the past and wanted to avoid it).

9/27/2007 10:24:34 PM

Quote :

"Reports say he only got like 7mil this quarter"

not even close.

9/28/2007 9:48:02 AM

fuck edwards. yet another politician who doesnt even understand his own policies

9/28/2007 9:52:34 AM

^^how do you know? i'm not saying you are wrong, i'm got the 7 mil figure from that link i posted(washington post blog, so idk how fucking credible that is )

[Edited on September 28, 2007 at 9:53 AM. Reason : ^

Quote :

"fuck edwards"

]

9/28/2007 9:52:48 AM

He's got a credible source

9/28/2007 10:04:14 AM

9/28/2007 10:47:25 AM

gg

9/28/2007 11:03:02 AM

Time magizine rated the candidates after the The September 26 Democratic Debate and called Edwards the winner. He got an A-, Obama B+, Biden B, Clinton a B-, & basically everyone else a C, except Gravel who got an F.

Quote :

" MSNBC Democratic Debate in New Hampshire – Reviews Are In Share 12:49am Thursday, Sep 27 Salon.com’s Joan Walsh Said Edwards “Made a Strong Impression” and Named Edwards the Winner of the Debate. Chris Matthews posed the question, “Who won tonight’s debate?” and Salon.com’s Walsh responded, “I think Edwards made a strong impression and I think he pushed her [Senator Hillary Clinton] back, he brushed her back a little bit. So I would go with Edwards.” [MSNBC, 9/26/07] NBC's Chuck Todd: “Edwards Stood Out to Me,” “It Was One of His Better Performances.” “Of the candidates chasing Clinton, Edwards stood out to me. He seemed to realize he needed to prove contrast with Clinton on just about every answer he gave. It was one of his better performances. The guy is getting his William Jennings Bryan schtick down pat.” [http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381964.aspx, “Some Quick Post-game Take-aways,” 9/26/07] Newsweek’s Howard Fineman: “Edwards Has Emerged So Far the Most Forceful Challenger To” Clinton. “From where I sit, Edwards has emerged so far the most forceful challenger to her (other than Tim Russert).” [http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2007/09/26/fineman-debate-live-blog.aspx, 9/26/07] Marc Ambinder: “Victory for JRE,” “Edwards Was Straightforward, Confident, Clear.” Edwards was Edwards on Centrum Silver: straightforward, confident, clear, knowledgeable, thoroughly encased in his own frame. Ying to the yang of both Obama and Clinton; If you’re new to nomination politics, then you’d think Edwards – and not Obama – was Hillary Clinton’s main foil. The war. Social Security. Health care. Campaign ethics. Clinton didn't take the punch, but she did move to dodge them, which is a victory for JRE. [http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/09/edwards_clinton_spats_stand_ou.php, “Edwards, Clinton Spats Sound Out,” 9/26/07] ABC’s Rick Klein: “Edwards May Have Done Himself the Most Good Tonight.” “11:02 pm: Quick thoughts -- Hillary Clinton benefits whenever no one else distinguishes himself, and Edwards may have done himself the most good tonight. Obama squeezed in one good line, but I don't see that as enough for the evening.” [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07] NBC's Domenico Montanaro: Edwards Was “More Presidential” and “Looked Poised.” “Edwards looked poised in following up on his answer. Not angry or frustrated as we've seen him before, more presidential.” [http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381656.aspx, “Edwards Pointing Out Differences,” 9/26/07] Newsweek’s Howard Fineman: “Edwards Then Hits It out of the Park,” “Wins the Round” on Social Security. “Edwards then hits it out of the park, talking about a ‘protective zone’ of income between $97,500 and $200,000. His proposals sounded carefully thought through—whether you agree with it or not—and was much more specific than what Obama had to say on the topic. Hillary is talking too much about what her ‘husband’ did; she isn't being specific enough—Edwards wins the round.” [http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2007/09/26/fineman-debate-live-blog.aspx, 9/26/07] NBC’s Athena Jones: Edwards Gets a “Whoop” for Promising to End Health Insurance for Congress if No Universal Health Care. “A whoop here for Edwards' promise to cut off health insurance coverage for members of Congress if they don't pass health care by July 2009.”[http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381762.aspx, “Edwards health care reaction,” 9/26/07] ABC’s Rick Klein: “Edwards Is the First to Draw Real Distinctions About” on Iraq. “9:07 pm: I'm ready to give the Big Three credit for intellectual honesty by saying troops will have to remain in Iraq for some years. But John Edwards is the first to draw real distinctions about what to do going forward. This won't be the last time he finds a way to set himself apart.” [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07] NBC's Domenico Montanaro: “Edwards Is Pressing the Distinctions with Clinton.” “Edwards is pressing the distinctions with Clinton. He said they had learned different things on their war vote and said this Iran vote was indicative of that. Will it matter? Edwards clearly wants to put her on the defensive. So far, he's the only one.” [http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381710.aspx, “Edwards Pressing,” 9/26/07] NBC’s Chuck Todd: “Edwards Seems on His Game Tonight.” “It's VERY early but Edwards seems on his game tonight.” [http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381655.aspx, “Edwards Came To Debate With A Plan?” 9/26/07] ABC’s Rick Klein: “I'd Give Edwards a Slight Edge in Making His Points and Making Them Solidly.”10:05 pm: “But I'd give Edwards a slight edge in making his points and making them solidly.” [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07] ABC’s Rick Klein: Edwards “Distinguished” Himself. “9:33 pm: One-fourth of the way in, Edwards and Richardson have distinguished themselves. If people were looking for a new, more aggressive Obama tonight, it doesn't look like they're going to get it.” [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07] Chris Matthew Said Edwards Came with a “Clear Strategy” to Differentiate Himself from Hillary Clinton. Chris Matthews said, “Senator John Edwards was one who came out with a clear strategy to differentiate himself from Hillary Clinton on the issue of combat troops in Iraq and U.S. military action potentially against Iran.” [MSNBC, 9/26/07] "

Edwards campaign recently sent out an e-mail pointing out they get double money for all donations of $250 or less, so I think they are going to cash in on this public financing as much as they can.

9/29/2007 5:19:40 PM

Quote :

"It was one of his better performances. The guy is getting his William Jennings Bryan schtick down pat."

I think Edwards has about as much chance at presidential success as William Jennings Bryan did when he ran.

9/29/2007 11:20:40 PM

^They sent out another e-mail today, obviously b/c the 3rd quarter ends at midnight about 3 & a half hours from now, but the numbers they had there suggested he could do alright against some of the top republicans... if he can just get past the other top democrats for the nomination.

Quote :

"An opinion poll out just yesterday shows that, in a head-to-head contest with Rudy Giuliani, John Edwards wins handily, 50% to 41%. The same poll shows John with a ten-point lead over Fred Thompson, 49% to 39%. ... That's why, with matching funds for low-dollar contributions, your support in the next ten hours means more than ever. http://www.johnedwards.com/contribute Take a moment to remember why you want John Edwards in this race—and in the White House. Is it someone you know who needs health care? A relative serving in Iraq? Children who don't deserve to inherit a world damaged by global warming? Whatever your reason, your contribution, no matter how big or small, can make all the difference."

9/30/2007 8:27:35 PM

ATTN: Supplanter

nobody in the state of NC gives a fuck about John Edwards. Please, shut the hell up. you've padded this thread to hell and back. stop.

9/30/2007 8:52:37 PM

^you haven't been to Chapel Hill lately

9/30/2007 9:11:19 PM

^ Haha....so true...

9/30/2007 9:12:18 PM

I laid it off for 2 months, others kept it going & brought it back, so I jumped back in.

9/30/2007 9:16:12 PM

^^ I heard his office was working hard today.

Also, do the TWW poll skewing arts dare go into the realm of politics? http://www.draftgore.com/

[Edited on September 30, 2007 at 10:16 PM. Reason : .]

9/30/2007 10:15:29 PM

Quote :

"Is it someone you know who needs health care? A relative serving in Iraq? Children who don't deserve to inherit a world damaged by global warming?"

His plan for healthcare is seriously flawed, he has no plan for Iraq, and I've never heard a damn thing about what he would ACTUALLY do for environmentalism.

9/30/2007 11:06:57 PM

^
His trail-lawyer buddies want him in. That's his plan for global warming.

Creating more opportunities for litigation. That's his plan for healthcare.

Creating more and more conditions in life where you can't do hardly anything without a lawyer. That's his plan for Iraq.

10/1/2007 12:05:04 AM

he has no plan for Iraq

Granted this is several months old so plans & strategy may have changed based on changes in the current situation, but he certainly not without a plan.

Quote :

" John Edwards on Iraq at the Council on Foreign Relations The first 2 minutes are just on congressional bills that have already come to pass, but if you watch the last 1 min & 39 secs of the video you'll see some discussion of plans. Here are some of the highlights: “We need to get out of Iraq on our time table, not when we are forced to by our enemies or by events.” ”As a recent council report put it, the US has already achieved what it’s likely to achieve in Iraq. And staying in Iraq can only drive up the price of those gains” ”In Congress and the Whitehouse the focus has been on when to get out, how to get out, and how quickly to get out. Too little consideration has been given to what happens after we get out.” ”I believe that once we’re out of Iraq the US must retain sufficient forces in the region to prevent a genocide, to detour a regional spillover of the civil war, and to prevent an Al Qaeda safe haven.” ”We will most likely need to retain quick reaction troops in Kuwait and in the Persian Gulf. We’ll also need some presence in Baghdad, inside the green zone, to protect the American Embassy and other personal.” ”Finally we’ll need a diplomatic offensive to engage the rest of the world in Iraq’s future: including Middle Eastern nations & our allies in Europe.” On this point he’s said that may mean not being inflexibly closed to engaging with regional neighbors like Iran & Syria pointing out that they both have interests in a stable Iraq. He’s also talked about combining a mission focused on training Iraqi’s with showing we’re actually going to leave by starting to withdrawal some troops."

Creating more opportunities for litigation

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070924/ap_on_el_pr/edwards_health_care_1

Quote :

"Edwards: Limit frivolous lawsuits By JOAN LOWY, Associated Press Writer Mon Sep 24, 4:00 PM ET WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, who made his fortune as a trial lawyer, says attorneys should have to show their medical malpractice cases have merit before filing them. He also said attorneys with a history of frivolous suits should be barred from filing new cases. Edwards' proposal is similar to "certificates of merit" laws that have been adopted in several states in recent years. Those laws usually require that an independent doctor assert the validity of a malpractice case before it is filed. Speaking Monday at a health care forum hosted by Families USA and the Kaiser Foundation, Edwards also said that while reducing malpractice lawsuits, as many have advocated, is a good idea, it won't significantly affect health care costs. "I do want to push back some on what I think is mostly insurance company-driven hysteria because I think the reality is that the cost associated with legal cases is well under 1 percent of our legal system," the former North Carolina senator said. Before a lawyer files a malpractice lawsuit, he ought to be required to have two experts certify that the case is both meritorious and serious, Edwards said. If the lawyer fails to get this certification, the lawyer — not the patient — should bear the costs involved in preparing the case, Edwards said. If a lawyer fails to obtain certification three times, he should be prohibited from filing future malpractice cases, the candidate said. "I think that the bulk of the problem is created when cases are filed in the legal system that should never be filed, and the results are years of litigation and costs that are incurred by the health care provider that should not have been incurred," Edwards said. "A lot of that responsibility goes to the lawyers." Edwards has received about $7 million, or one third of his total fundraising, from donors who identify themselves as attorneys or lawyers. Bill Schulz, a spokesman for the American Association for Justice, which represents trial lawyers, said that states have generally adopted certificate-of-merit laws as a compromise between the legal and medical communities. For trial lawyers, "generally speaking it's been a kind of nothingburger," Schulz said. He noted that nationally the number of malpractice settlements and verdicts has declined slightly, from 14,408 in 2002 to 13,096 in 2005. The forum was the first in a series designed to give top tier presidential candidates an opportunity to detail their health care views. Edwards also unveiled a strategy at the forum for combatting HIV/AIDS that includes age-appropriate sex education, encouragement of needle exchange programs for drug addicts and expansion of Medicaid to cover HIV-positive people before they reach later stage disabilities and AIDS. He called for spending $50 billion over five years on HIV/AIDS treatment and using World Health Organization standards, rather than U.S. Food and Drug Administration standards, to speed the availability of new AIDS drugs. "I do believe it (HIV/AIDS) is a crisis in America; obviously it's a crisis in the world," Edwards said. "

Less frivolous lawsuits, more sex ed, and drug policies based in reality rather than conservative ideology/war on drugs mentality.

I've never heard a damn thing about what he would ACTUALLY do for environmentalism.

Quote :

""Our generation must be the one that says, 'we must halt global warming.' Our generation must be the one that says 'yes' to renewable fuels and ends forever our dependence on foreign oil. And our generation must be the one that builds the new energy economy. It won't be easy, but it is time to ask the American people to be patriotic about something other than war." – John Edwards Our generation must be the one that ends our nation's dependence on oil and ushers in a new energy economy. We need energy independence from unstable and hostile areas of the world, from global warming pollution, and from the old ways of doing business. If we harness American ingenuity to reach for transformative change, we can emerge from the crisis of global warming with a new energy economy that stimulates innovation, brings the family farm back to life, and creates more than 1 million jobs in America's farms and industries. Today, John Edwards called for America to embrace three great goals for this generation: Halt global warming by capping and reducing greenhouse gas pollution and leading the world to a new global climate change treaty. Create a new energy economy and 1 million new jobs by investing in clean, renewable energy, sparking innovation, a new era in American industry, and life in family farms. Meet the demand for new electricity through efficiency for the next decade, instead of producing more power. As a result of the Edwards plan, by 2025 America will import 7.5 million fewer barrels of oil a day, produce 65 billion gallons of ethanol and other biofuels a year, generate 25 percent of our electricity from renewable sources, and produce more than 2 billion fewer tons of carbon dioxide emissions a year. Within a generation, America's cars and trucks will be virtually petroleum-free."

[Edited on October 1, 2007 at 10:26 PM. Reason : .]

10/1/2007 10:18:24 PM

Quote :

"Halting Global Warming by Capping Carbon Emissions The planet has gotten nearly 1 degree Fahrenheit hotter over the past 30 years and will get another degree hotter due to greenhouse gas pollution already in the atmosphere. The ten hottest years on record have all occurred since 1990. If we don't change course soon, we will see dramatic climate changes and a different planet. The last time the Earth was 4 or 5 degrees warmer -- 3 million years ago -- there was no ice in the Arctic and sea levels were 80 feet higher. [Hansen, 2/26/2007; NRDC, 2007] Earlier this year, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- an international network of over 2,000 climate scientists -- concluded that evidence of global warming is "unequivocal" and human activity is "very likely" the cause. [NYT, 2/3/2007] Next month, the panel is expected to report that, without changes, within decades climate change could cause hundreds of millions of people to suffer water shortages and tens of millions to be flooded out of their homes annually. By 2080, hundreds of millions could starve. [AP, 3/11/2007] The Edwards Plan: Cap and Reduce Global Warming Pollution: Edwards will set an economy-wide limit on the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. He will build on the precedent of the Clean Air Act of 1990 -- which limited pollution causing acid rain through a sulfur dioxide cap-and-trade system -- to reduce pollution in a cost-effective and flexible manner. Use Science to Set the Caps: Edwards will cap greenhouse gases at levels that the latest climate science has determined to be necessary to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. He will reduce greenhouse pollution by 20 percent by 2020, and reduce it by 80 percent by 2050. Make Polluters Pay: Edwards will auction off a portion of the pollution permits to raise $10 billion a year for a New Energy Economy Fund to jumpstart clean, renewable, and efficient energy technologies and create 1 million jobs. Other permits will be sold or given away. Lead the World toward a New Global Climate Change Treaty: Climate change is an international problem and the U.S. can never solve it alone. China is building the equivalent of one large coal-fired power plant a week and is expected to pass the U.S. as the world's largest polluter of carbon dioxide in 2009. [NYT, 3/17/2007; WSJ, 3/3/2007] To lead the world toward a new, effective climate change treaty, Edwards will: Make Our Own Commitments to Restore Our Moral Leadership: The U.S. has 4 percent of the world's population but produces a quarter of its carbon dioxide emissions. It is one of only three developed nations that has refused to limit its greenhouse gas pollution. By adopting caps, Edwards will help the U.S. regain credibility in the world without sacrificing American competitiveness. [Irish Times, 2/14/2007; Greenwire, 10/31/2006] Involve Developing Economies: Any climate change treaty must include developing countries, which emit significant amounts of carbon and could otherwise serve as a haven for polluters. However, these nations are poorer than the U.S. and emit far less carbon per capita. To bring them to the table, Edwards will share America's clean energy technology in exchange for binding greenhouse reduction commitments. If necessary, he will insist that strong labor and environmental standards in our trade deals include commitments on climate change. This new deal will require global participation, promote shared responsibility, and let American workers and businesses compete on a level playing field. "

10/1/2007 10:20:56 PM

Quote :

"Creating the New Energy Economy and 1 Million Jobs In the past, America squandered opportunities to lead the world in energy technology. Bell Labs invented the solar cell in New Jersey in 1954, but today 90 percent of solar panels are manufactured overseas. GM made the first modern electric car, but today Toyota and Honda lead the world in hybrid cars. Oil companies are slow to sell alternative fuels at their gas stations, while Brazil increased the share of new cars that run on ethanol from 4 percent to 70 percent in only three years. [Economist, 3/10/2007; HybridCars.com, 2007; GM, 2007; Edmunds.com, 2007; Khosla, 2006] John Edwards believes that American entrepreneurs, farmers and manufacturers can lead the world in technology to generate clean, reliable energy and use it more efficiently. "Clean tech" is the hottest new area of venture capital funding. California-based Tesla Motors sells an electric roadster that gets 135 miles a gallon and can go from 0-to-60 in four seconds. In rural America, hundreds of small renewable energy companies are generating new jobs in ethanol and other biofuels, wind, and solar. The increased demand for the machinery of renewable energy -- such as wind turbines, solar panels and biomass engines -- is an opportunity to create "green collar" jobs and reenergize America's manufacturing sector. [Newsweek, 6/21/2006; Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, 2006; Makower, Pernick, and Wilder, 2006; Apollo Alliance, 2006] The Edwards Plan: Create the New Energy Economy Fund: To jumpstart our investment in the future, Edwards will create the $13 billion-a-year New Energy Economy Fund. The fund will be financed by greenhouse gas polluters through the sale of emission permits and by ending taxpayer giveaways for big oil companies, including special tax subsidies and sweetheart terms in offshore drilling leases. The resources will double the Department of Energy's budget for efficiency and renewable energy, accelerate new energy technologies to market and help new businesses get started, encourage consumers to buy efficient products, and provide transition assistance to workers in carbon-intensive industries. Invest in Renewable Sources of Electricity: Renewable energy has been seen as socially desirable but costly. However, wind is already competitive with conventional sources in many markets. Solar could be competitive within three to eight years. [RAND, 2006; Economist, 3/10/2007] Make 25 Percent of Our Energy Renewable: Edwards will require power companies to generate 25 percent of their energy from renewable sources by 2025. A large expansion of renewable energy can reduce costs under current trends, according to a 2006 RAND study. In Texas, a similar requirement achieved its goals quickly with negligible costs through the accelerated development of wind power. [RAND, 2006] Dedicate Resources to Renewable Energy: Edwards will double the Department of Energy research budget, allowing it to reduce the cost and accelerate the marketability of current technologies to put clean solar, wind, and biomass into more communities. He will also encourage private investment by making permanent tax credits for the production of renewable energy; they currently expire at the end of 2008. Maximize the Potential of Cleaner, Safer Coal: Coal will be an important source of U.S. and global electricity for decades, but it is responsible for more than 30 percent of America's carbon dioxide emissions. Edwards will invest $1 billion a year to research ways to burn coal cleanly and recycle its carbon underground permanently. He will also strengthen mine safety laws to ensure it is mined safely. Two large power companies, TXU and American Electric Power, recently announced plans to build experimental plants to capture carbon. [NYT, 3/15/2007 and 3/17/2007; McFarland, Herzog, and Jacoby, 2007] Transform the Auto Industry to Lead the World in Cars of the Future: Edwards believes that everyone should be able to drive the car, truck or SUV of their choice and still enjoy high fuel economy. American automakers have the ingenuity to lead the world in building the clean, safe, economical cars of the future. Reduce Oil Imports by 7.5 Million Barrels a Day by 2025: America's need for imported oil forces it to rely on unstable and even hostile countries. Edwards called for a national goal to reduce oil imports by 7.5 million barrels a day by 2025 – nearly a third of the oil projected to be used in 2025 -- and get us on the path toward energy independence. [DOE, 2007] Help U.S. Automakers Modernize: Edwards will provide $1 billion a year to help U.S. automakers advance and apply the latest technology, including biofuels, hybrid and electric cars, hydrogen fuel cells, ultra-light materials, and drive train improvements. These resources will be financed from the New Energy Economy Fund and also help manufacturers meet higher fuel economy requirements. With a strong ethanol industry that includes cellulosic ethanol and hybrid and electric technology, American cars and trucks can be virtually petroleum-free within a generation. Produce 65 Billion Gallons of Ethanol a Year by 2025: However, although millions of ethanol-ready cars are on the roads, only about 600 of the 169,000 gas stations have pumps for E85, a blend of ethanol and gasoline. Edwards will require oil companies to install ethanol pumps at 25 percent of their gas stations and require all new cars sold after 2010 to be "flex fuel" cars running on either gasoline or biofuel. The New Economy Energy Fund will develop new methods of producing and using ethanol, including cellulosic ethanol, and offer loan guarantees to new refineries. [RAND, 2006; DOE, 2005; USDA, 2005] Raise Fuel Economy Standards: American cars and trucks are less efficient than they were two decades ago, despite the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. Standards in China, Japan, and the European Union are between 40 and 100 percent higher. Edwards will raise standards to 40 miles per gallon by 2016, a step that could single-handedly reduce oil demand by 4 million barrels per day. [Pew Center on Global Climate Change, 2004; Reicher, 2007] Open the Electricity Grids to Distributed and Renewable Generation: Traditionally, electricity has been produced at large, central power plants and transmitted through miles of power lines. Distributed generation of electricity promises reliable, clean, cost-effective production that is less vulnerable to natural disasters and attacks. Farms, factories, schools, and communities ought to be able to establish their own power sources and compete with traditional plants to sell wholesale capacity, as New England has pioneered. [DOE, 2000; New England ISO, 2006] To open up the grid to innovation, Edwards will: Create Millions of Local Sources of Renewable Energy: Edwards will provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for homes and small businesses that invest in onsite generation of renewable energy like solar, wind, and geothermal power. He will also encourage local generation of renewable energy through "net metering," which allows families to sell extra power back to utilities for credits against their electricity bills. Encourage Distributed Generation: Edwards will cut the red tape that hinders new energy producers from selling their power to the grid. He will require utilities to consider distributed generation as a means of lowering costs compared to new investments in centralized production and transmission. Research the Next Generation of Small Scale Renewable Energy: Edwards will invest in researching more profitable sources of renewable energy generation. For example, biomass engines producing both heat and power that can be three times more efficient than traditional distribution. [Hill, 2001] "

10/1/2007 10:23:51 PM

Quote :

"Meet the Demand for More Electricity through Efficiency Americans can get more power out of the electricity now available, typically at half the cost of producing more supply. Duke Energy CEO James Rogers calls efficiency the "fifth fuel," and energy expert Amory Lovins says that "efficiency is cheaper than fuel." Between 1977 and 1985, the economy grew by 27 percent while oil use fell by 17 percent. Once again, there are large energy savings possible today in energy generation, transmission, and use in homes, factories, and offices. For example, if every home installed five compact fluorescent lightbulbs, it would eliminate the need for 21 power plants. However, in our current system, utilities earn profits by selling power not meeting energy needs more efficiently. Ordinary Americans often lack the tools they need to use energy more efficiently. [ACEEE, 2006; Reicher, 2007; Globe and Mail, 2/24/2007; The New Yorker, 1/22/2007; McKinsey, 2006] The Edwards Plan: Meet New Demand for Electricity through Efficiency for the Next Decade: Electricity demand is projected to increase by 1.5 percent a year between 2008 and 2018, on average. Edwards called for a national goal of meeting this demand by getting more power out of the electricity we use now, instead of producing more electricity. As a result, electricity use would be 15 lower by 2018 and renewable energy would have a better opportunity to gain market share. Increased efficiency includes managing peaks in demand and modernizing the electric grid and is largely achievable with current technology. [DOE, 2007; EPA Energy Star, 2006] Make Efficiency Profitable for Utilities: Most utilities profit from selling electricity, even when it would be cheaper to help their customers use less energy. Edwards will call on states to decouple utilities' energy profits from sales, as California and nine other states have done, so they can focus on serving customer needs. States can also reward utilities for meeting green energy targets. [National Regulatory Research Institute, 2006] Expand Smart Meters and Smart Grids to Use Energy More Wisely: By simultaneously displaying energy use and price, smart meters encourage consumers to use less energy and to use energy when it can be generated less expensively. Utilities can also use information technology to monitor electricity demand, allowing them to plan their production more efficiently. [Nemtzow, 2007; Regulatory Assistance Project, 2006] Invest in Weatherized Homes and More Efficient Buildings and Appliances: Upgrading home furnaces, ducts, windows, and insulation can cut energy bills by 20 to 40 percent, year after year. However, the existing Department of Energy weatherization program reaches only 100,000 homes a year while more than 28 million remain eligible. Similarly, appliance efficiency standards have greatly reduced the energy use of refrigerators and air conditioners, but better use of the Energy Star program could save even more. Edwards will reverse the Bush budget cuts to the weatherization program and instead expand it to $500 million a year. He will call on states to create updated energy building codes. Finally, he will raise federal efficiency standards for appliances and maximize the potential of the Energy Star program by working to get more efficient appliances in stores and educating buyers and builders. [Reicher, 2007; ACEEE 2005] Reduce the U.S. Government's Energy Use by 20 Percent and Make the White House Carbon Neutral. The U.S. government is the nation's single largest energy consumer, with a $15 billion energy bill in 2005. However, its investments in energy efficiency have been cut in half since 2001. Edwards will overhaul federal buildings and vehicles to emphasize efficiency, reducing the use of energy by 20 percent, and expand the government's use of renewable sources. After taking energy efficiency steps at the White House, he will purchase carbon offsets to make it carbon-neutral. [DOE, 2006; Alliance to Save Energy, 2007] Create GreenCorps: Idealistic young Americans can help fight climate change by conducting volunteer energy audits, weatherizing homes, installing home solar panels, and training neighborhood groups to do the same. Edwards will create a GreenCorps within AmeriCorps to create opportunities for them to serve. "

It’s fine to say you disagree with his plans, but don't say he doesn't have one. For almost every candidate you can go to their name.com or atleast google them in about 10 secs, and click the issues section, and read up for their plans on most every hot issue. It’s fair to attack the plan on its merits; it’s not fair to say it doesn't exist. For Edwards its here:

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/

10/1/2007 10:24:43 PM