Big Business puts John Edwards on Notice

Let this serve as a warning to Edwards, and any other Candidate that would DARE to put the issues of "Economic Populism" back on the National Agenda:

LA Times - Jan 07, 2008
Chamber targets anti-business candidates

With the nation's economy increasingly becoming a volatile issue in the presidential campaign, the president of the United States Chamber of Commerce is about to issue one very tough promise to spend millions of dollars against candidates deemed to be anti-business. (Are you listening John Edwards?)

It seems if you dare to tell the Truth about the wholesale "sell off" of hopes and aspirations the American Middle Class -- well the "powers that be" just might get a little UPSET with you ...

But will that shut Edwards up about it? ... I hope not!

Sunlight afterall, is the best disinfectant!
(not capitulation and compromise)

The US Chamber of Commerce, why do they care about what Edwards is saying?

Could it be that some alarm bells went off, as Edwards keeps calling out Lobbyists before a National Audience?

John Edwards:

"No corporate lobbyists or anyone who has lobbied for a foreign government will work in my White House. We will not replace corporate Republicans with corporate Democrats. I hear people argue that the way that you can get things done is to sit at a table with drug companies, insurance companies, oil companies, and negotiate with them and somehow they will voluntarily give away their power. I think this is a complete fantasy."

And then the nerve -- to raise the issue again on a Sunday Talk show! What was Edwards thinking?

John Edwards: This Week with George Stephanopoulos

John Edwards: The real question is What is Day One in the White House going to look like? "Day One, in my White House there will be NO Corporate Lobbyists, Nobody who Lobbied for Foreign Governments."

"Yes. There will be NO Lobbyists who have worked for Trial Lawyers, NO Lobbyists who have worked for Big Corporations in my White House -- Period!"

"I don't think the Lobbyists are doing America any good! I think what they're doing is, they're standing up against working Middle Class families. And the Middle Class is struggling, and at risk as a result."

Straight talk like that -- really upsets those shadowy sales-rep-types, who have more of a say in Congress, than YOU DO!

Even though the US Chamber of Commerce's logo shows "the people" they supposedly represent, their "behind the scenes" activities show the Chamber actually works very hard for some slightly more "influential interests".

Think this is an exaggeration? Reuters in the UK, has just announced, that Big Business is the "most afraid" of John Edwards to really change things:

Reuters U.K. Jan 11 2008

U.S. corporate elite fear candidate Edwards

By Kevin Drawbaugh

WASHINGTON, Jan 11 (Reuters) - Ask corporate lobbyists which presidential contender is most feared by their clients and the answer is almost always the same -- Democrat John Edwards.

His stump speeches are peppered with attacks on "corporate greed" and warnings of "the destruction of the middle class."

He accuses lobbyists of "corrupting the government" and says Americans lack universal health care because of "drug companies, insurance companies and their lobbyists."

An Edwards campaign spokesman said on Thursday that inside-the-Beltway operatives who fight to defend the powerful and the privileged should be afraid.

"The lobbyists and special interests who abuse the system in Washington have good reason to fear John Edwards.
"Once he is president, the interests of middle class families will never again take a back seat to corporate greed in Washington," said campaign spokesman Eric Schultz.

Open attacks on the business elite are seldom heard from mainstream White House candidates in America, despite skyrocketing CEO pay, rising income inequality, and a torrent of scandals in corporate boardrooms and on Wall Street.

Another lobbyist said an Edwards presidency would be "a disaster" for his well-heeled industrialist clients.


Asked which candidate their clients most support, corporate lobbyists were unsure. Clinton has cautious backing within the corporate jet set, as do Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain and former Republican Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, they said.

These candidates represent stability to executives who have much to lose if November's election brings about the sweeping change some candidates are promising.

"My sense is that Obama would govern as a reasonably pragmatic Democrat ... I think Hillary is approachable. She knows where a lot of her funding has come from, to be blunt," said Greg Valliere, chief political strategist at Stanford Group Co., a market and policy analysis group.

But Edwards, Valliere said, is seen as "an anti-business populist" and "a trade protectionist who is quite unabashed about raising taxes."

"I think his regulatory policies, as well as his tax policies, would be viewed as a threat to business," he said.

This is what the Corporate Elite is SO nervous about:

Edwards' Smarter Trade That Puts Workers First

The Edwards Tax Plan: Reward Work -- Not Wealth

Edwards: will represent the People, against the Lobbyists

So American People beware!

You can Pick your Candidate, only so long as 'they don't upset the apple cart'. Anyone that dares to really challenge Corporations for Economic Fairness, will face the wrath of the Media Pundits and Programming Directors! (and the US Dept of Commerce too, apparently.)

Silly People, thinking we actually run our Government. That ship has sailed, starting with Reagan's Deregulation, and Supply-Side give-aways to business, and it's been going down hill ever since. (Anyone remember NAFTA and CAFTA?)

Despite the angst of the super rich, to keep hording and acquiring more Wealth, our country has done fine in the past when Tax Rates were much higher for business and the power-elite.

Historically, Marginal Tax Rates have been much higher than we have now: (Even rolling back to the Reagan Tax rates of the 1980's is hardly extreme, given historical Tax rates.)

Even when we had these greater levels of Tax Responsibility for the very wealthy in eras past, that did NOT cause the U.S. Economy to nosedive in those years. Just the contrary actually, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continued to grow in those periods, in large part I suspect, due to the hard working nature of the American People:

Edwards just wants Corporations to be Good Citizens, and to pay their fair share, to support this Country of ours:

The Corporate Section of the chart (Rose Color) could really stand to be a little wider, now couldn't it?

That Reuters article cited a lobbyist who said:

an Edwards presidency would be "a disaster" for his well-heeled industrialist clients.

So what is exactly "the disaster" for those industrialists?

Perhaps making 300 to 400 x more than average worker is NOT enough to maintain their "upper crust" lifestyle? Or perhaps "corporate greed" has little patience for the petty problems of working people, as we drift ever further into debt and despair?

Ever since the Regan era, American Workers started going downhill ... and we have rarely looked back. And our Leaders have rarely tried to correct that course of those who toil their lives away, in the trenches:

Distribution of Wealth Trends in the US

Most of those Trend lines by the way, are headed in the WRONG Direction for 95% of us!

Of course those Corporate Execs and their Lobbyists are 'pleased as punch', since their Wealth Trends are skyrocketing upwards, in that top 5% tier.

This is what Edwards is talking about when he says we must fight for Economic Fairness, and against the greed of the top 1%. Of course much of that Business elite often have a totally different Agenda -- so different in fact, that they have put Edwards on their "must watch" list (and on the Media Blackout List too).

This Wealth Gap is Real. And has recently been confirmed by respected University of Michigan researchers:

Wealth Gap Is Increasing, Study Shows

ScienceDaily (Aug. 9, 2007) — The rich really are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, a new University of Michigan study shows.

The study---the most recent available analysis of long-term wealth trends among U.S. households---is based on data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, conducted by the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR) since 1968.

Over the last 20 years, the net worth of
the top two percentile of American families nearly doubled
, from $1,071,000 in 1984 to $2,100,500 in 2005.

But the poorest quarter of American families lost ground
over the same period, with their 2005 net worth
below their 1984 net worth,
measured in constant 2005 dollars.

The poorest ten percent of families actually had a negative net worth---more liabilities than assets.

The researchers also examined net worth dynamics across different age groups and educational levels. They found that the median household net worth of people in their 20s declined by nearly 30 percent, while the net worth of households headed by people in their 30s also fell slightly. The findings provide support for the widespread sense that it is harder than it used to be for younger people to establish themselves financially.

Those Divergent Wealth Trends are Real. And so is the daily pain for the Majority of us left behind, on all those downward tracks! As Edwards has been saying those corporate interests are literally stealing our children's future!

John Edwards on Taking on Entrenched Special Interests

John Edwards

.. these entrenched interests -- whether you're talking about oil companies, drug companies, gas companies, whoever -- these entrenched interests are literally stealing our children's future. They have a stranglehold on this democracy and they are having an incredibly destructive force on the middle class, on families ...

That is no exaggeration! It's just life in modern day America, where Issue-based Reporting has been tossed aside, as another extravagance, that our Corporate Media cheerleaders, seemingly has no use, nor time for!

I can sort of understand the Media and Lobbyists trying to keep Edwards quiet -- Greed being what it is! Afterall they have that 'Home in the Hamptons' to protect, and all those stock options to cash in someday.

But when fellow progressive Democrats join the rabble to censor Free Speech, and the Democratic process -- there is really NO Excuse! A diversity of ideas is a Good thing for Democracy. We already have WAY TOO Much filtering out of the Voices of average Americans, from the traditional Media.

As Democrats, we should embrace Free Speech, which includes the rights of Citizens in each State, to cast their Votes!

Last time I checked we were having an Election --
NOT a Coronation!
NOT a President by Media-Fiat!

But an old-fashion, Let the People Decide Election!

So stand back and let the People Speak!
Whether it upsets Big Business, or not.


No votes yet


by trying to tell us how we should vote ... I mean "everybody wants to vote for a winner". Right? I was depressed after Edwards showed 2nd in Iowa, but after New Hampshire the old hopelessness from 2004 came flooding back.

So, I guess the time to fight is NOW! I support Edwards -- and more importantly, I trust him. I am glad he isn't going to "throw in the towel" just because the pundits think he should.

ePMedia ... get the scoop with us!
If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little. ~ George Carlin

The Corporate Media rarely has the best interests of the People in mind.

They have other profit motives driving them --
which have very little to do with the plight of the Middle Class.

I'm thrill Edwards has vowed to stay in this to the Convention. That way the issues of the Middle Class will still have a Voice in the process at least until then.

The Media really shouldn't get too caught up in their own hype -- those Polls aren't quite the "predictor" they thought, it seems.

Besides in the Count that matters
the Delegate Count: 25, 24, 18
Edwards is still very much in the race:

Wade Byrd, a Fayetteville, N.C., lawyer and Edwards fundraiser who returned Wednesday from New Hampshire, said Edwards has enough money to be competitive for now.

"It's a long way from over," Byrd said. "We've had some great fundraising between Iowa and New Hampshire. We feel pretty solid through South Carolina."

The Edwards campaign notes that the playing field looks more level if you consider the delegate count. Obama has 25 delegates, Clinton has 24 delegates and Edwards has 18 delegates.

Edwards campaign strategists say Edwards will have the financial wherewithal to continue. They say the Edwards campaign made financial decisions this summer to run a lean campaign. They also said Edwards has just had two of his most successful fundraising weeks on the Internet.

"It's a three-way battle," said Jonathan Prince, Edwards' deputy campaign manger. "It's a long fight. We have the resources to compete."

thanks for all you are doing for the Edwards campaign.

ePMedia ... get the scoop with us!
If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little. ~ George Carlin