OPINION & EDITORIAL
John Edwards may prove best option
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Kyle Szarzynski:
- John Edwards may prove best option (December 4, 2007)
- America, stop kneeling at altar of religious insanity (November 27, 2007)
- Critics ignore Kumar's progressive strides (November 26, 2007)
- Islam no defense for extremist action (November 20, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Barack Obama: Political St. Nick (October 15, 2007)
- 'Oprabama?' No thank you (December 10, 2007)
- Obama's charisma essential to victory (January 29, 2007)
- Presidential race crazier than ever (February 19, 2007)
- Edwards' questionable call (March 28, 2007)
by Kyle Szarzynski
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
"[Ending poverty]," said Sen. John
Edwards, D-NC, "is the cause of my life." These words and countless others
demonstrate that if there is a candidate among the top Democratic contenders
for president who is the true champion of the America's underclass, it is not
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Il, and certainly not Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY.
Notice the word "if" above. To not
have included it would have been embarrassingly ahistorical, for we all know
from the last decade or two what a disappointment a Democratic presidential
victory can be.
Actually, Bill Clinton turned out
to be not so much a disappointment as the worst kind of catastrophe. His
egregious personal life aside — though I suppose his pathological lying and
pathological adultery merits at least a mention — the ex-president was a real
bastard. Remember the '90s? It included quasi-genocidal sanctions against the
Iraqi people, welfare "reform" and the Defense of Marriage Act. I think Alan
Greenspan understated it when he said, "[Bill Clinton] was the best Republican president
we’ve had in a while."
Yes, Mr. Clinton was part of the
nasty U.S. political machine, a machine whose wheels are spun more often by
corporate interests than the American people (Mr. Edwards is, too). I have no
illusions about the Democratic establishment being anything more than the
better half of the same ugly organism.
But other than a weak base for
social movements and a nonexistent viable third party, what else do we have?
The Democrats may suck, but it's the best we can do for now, even if we don't
like it. And I see no contradiction between voting for a Democrat and working
for social change outside the electoral system, anyway.
So, if you accept my logic about
the need to swallow the lesser evil, why is Mr. Edwards the best choice? He
does, admittedly, share many of the deficiencies of his chief rivals, like a
bad position on Iraqi withdrawal, a hawkishness on Iran that goes too far and a
gay rights stance that doesn't go far enough, among other things.
But Mr. Edwards has a few
distinctions, not the least of which is his consistent and biting attacks on
American poverty. He has embarrassed Ms. Clinton and Mr. Obama by demanding
they match his call for an increase in the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2012,
almost a $4 increase. He has also promised to enact legislation that eliminates
the health care of Congress (all 535 members get "socialized medicine," in case
you didn't know) unless they pass a universal plan.
It shouldn't be a surprise, then,
that Mr. Edwards has become the candidate of organized labor. He has received
the crucial endorsement of several unions, most crucially the United
Steelworkers of America and its 1.2 million members. Last week, the former senator
sent a taped video of support to Houston public workers who were in a fierce
duel with the city over wage increases in their contract. I just couldn't
imagine Mr. Obama or Ms. Clinton doing the same.
It's also worth mentioning his
bold plan for college tuition. Under his plan, if a student agrees to work
part-time during his first year, then the government will pay for one year of
tuition, fees and books. He also advocates an elimination of billions of
dollars of loan subsidies and an expansion of other financial aid. It's not an
exaggeration to say that if Mr. Edwards had his way, every American could
comfortably afford college.
But what's most appealing about
Mr. Edwards is his rhetoric, which has more than just superficial importance.
His talk of the campaign against poverty as the "new Civil Rights Movement" and
denunciation of "two Americas" raises the expectation of what kind of society
America should be and the responsibility of government in solving social ills.
By pointing out that poverty should be unacceptable in a nation as wealthy as
ours, for example, Mr. Edwards pushes the spectrum of mainstream political
opinion solidly to the left.
Again, this kind of speech is
unique to him among the frontrunners. It is Mr. Edwards, not Mr. Obama, who is
talking like a radical. It is only Mr. Edwards who has explicitly called for a
new labor movement and said that American destitution can be eliminated in our
lifetime. He has conquered the territory of left-wing economic populism, and
regardless of his many policy inadequacies, this is a commendable achievement.
I suppose there are legitimate
reasons for going Green, going Nader or not voting at all. But if you have
resigned yourself to voting for the lesser evil, Mr. Edwards is your guy.
Kyle Szarzynski (kszarzynski@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in Spanish and history.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 2:22am):
Oh dude, you're totally out there. In the ether man. Totally radical. You are so different and unique. Like a snowflake. No, normal political choices won't hold you down!
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 2:23am):
Except that in his position at the University of North Carolina, he has refused to address the fact that many campus workers make poverty wages and work in unsafe (read: rat-infested) working conditions, and are denied the right to freely associate.
And that he lives in a multi-million dollar mansion.
He may have good rhetoric, but he's clearly not from the same America as the rest of us.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 5:05am):
I am ready for a man who understands the working class by living in a 0.6 acre house, avoiding taxes at all costs (while expecting the working class to pay them for him) and invests heavily in the petroleum industry (have you seen the oil he uses to keep his dew in tact :) ).
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 7:25am):
Minimum wage is problematic. With it, you're telling the most basic, unqualified worker what they're worth. Here lies the problem: if you aren't "worth" minimum wage, you stay unemployed.
Edwards had his chance in 2004. Oh, by the way, he was only a one term senator (like Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln).
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 8:39am):
Hey 2:23, so according to you, a person cannot be rich and be an advocate for the poor. That argument is lame! What exactly is wrong with that? I guess you would prefer that Edwards give the best tax breaks to the richest of the rich like Bush did. Do you think the Bush's or any of the GOP candidates aren't rich and ARE "from the same America as the rest of us."??? Try again.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 9:17am):
John Edwards, working class hero?
yer killing me here - LOL, LOL
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 11:12am):
when the breck girl made 13MM on his exploitative subprime mortgage hedge fund, did he send in extra cash to the IRS? or does he just complain that capital gain taxes and taxes in general are too low for rich people?
chickentaxhawk.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 11:18am):
Let's all go get $400 haircuts in celebration of Edwards and Szarzinski.
Im over it. All semester you have used your column as an anti obama mouthpiece.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 12:30pm):
8:39-- I don't think any of the candidates of either side give two shits about the working class' suffering. I do think that Edwards is trying harder than most to mobilize that vote in his favor. And I do think he's genuine in his recognition of the Two Americas. But I'm sorry, I don't see him being successful in truly helping a majority that he can't relate to, especially since he has been completely spineless in his post at UNC.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 12:46pm):
Somehow this made me think of Edwards,
As climate alarmists from all over the world head to Bali to talk about the sacrifices regular folks have to make to save the planet from global warming, it seems certain media will ignore all the private jets clogging the tiny airport.
As if it's not enough that the United Nations Climate Change Conference is being held at what NewsBusters reported as "a truly beautiful tropical island paradise," the management of the nearby airport has issued a warning to attendees that they are going to have to park their private jets somewhere else.
I kid you not.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 1:58pm):
Well, you know, the people who make the decisions in the world are the rich yuppie feel-good snobs like Bono and Edwards, not the people who actually suffer from environmental and economic problems. And unfortunately, these problems have often intensified as a result of misplaced "good intentions."
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 2:51pm):
So, there's a guy who gets $400 haircuts and says he wants to fight for the poor and working class.
Is that different than a guy who calls himself a Christian and kills thousands of innocent Iraqis for no good reason?
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 3:36pm):
thank you 251p for that awesomely profound display of moral equivlance. the useful idiot's guide to life. you are the next socrates
liberalism is a mental disorder.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 6:05pm):
3:36, What's Liberal about that statement? Christ Himself could have written it; that dude loved parables.
Anonymous (December 4, 2007 @ 8:35pm):
I notice no one (except 7:25 minimum wage guy) actually addressed any of Edwards' actual policy positions in any comments which I find pretty telling. Well guess what? He has the best positions of any of the Democratic candidates for college students while at the same time every commenter is stupidly diverted from discussing his actual policy onto discussing media-generated controversies. Because god knows you can't care about poor people if you live in a big house! And surely anyone who pays for an expensive haircut must be a phony, because well, the media tells me so. Why don't we just reelect Bush again? I mean, he'd be fun to have a freaking beer with.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
