Wash. Post's Kornblut claimed Edwards launched "new poverty tour" to distract from the "three H's"
In a July 10 Washington Post article, staff writer Anne E. Kornblut wrote that Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards "is battling back the 'three H's' that have dogged his campaign -- expensive haircuts, a lavish new house and a stint working for a hedge fund," adding: "Now, he is trying to put emphasis on a 'P' -- his new poverty tour across the South and the Midwest." Kornblut's suggestion, however, that Edwards' "emphasis" on poverty is intended to distract from the "three H's" is baseless -- poverty has been a signature issue of Edwards' 2008 presidential campaign, as it was during his 2004 campaign. Kornblut herself reported on July 25, 2006, while she was with The New York Times, that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) "did not, however, go as far down the populist path as other possible presidential candidates, in particular Senator John Edwards, who is focused almost exclusively on poverty as he campaigns in early primary voting states."
On February 4, 2005, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill announced the creation of a "Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity that will be led by former U.S. Senator and vice presidential candidate John Edwards." During the 2004 Democratic National Convention, then-vice presidential candidate Edwards said: "We can also do something about 35 million Americans who live in poverty every day. And here's why we shouldn't just talk about, but do something about the millions of Americans who live in poverty: because it is wrong. And we have a moral responsibility to lift those families up."
According to the Post article:
John Edwards is battling back the "three H's" that have dogged his campaign -- expensive haircuts, a lavish new house and a stint working for a hedge fund.
Now, he is trying to put emphasis on a "P" -- his new poverty tour across the South and the Midwest.
Beginning next Sunday night with a stop in New Orleans's Ninth Ward, Edwards, the former senator from North Carolina, will "take a break from his normal campaign schedule of events and take the campaign on the road for three days, through eight states and 12 towns and cities, in order to bring attention to the 37 million Americans living in poverty," according to an official campaign statement. His campaign manager, former congressman David E. Bonior, held a conference call yesterday morning to sketch out the details of the trip, which the campaign steadfastly insists is not aimed at improving his political standing but instead designed solely to bring the issue of poverty front and center in the presidential race.
"We want to force the issue into the debate," Bonior said. Asked by a reporter to identify the targets of the message, Bonior said, "It's aimed, quite honestly, at you."
As Media Matters for America has documented (here, here, and here), the media have extensively scrutinized Edwards' haircuts, his North Carolina estate, and his brief stint as an adviser to a hedge fund, often baselessly suggesting that they conflict with his anti-poverty campaigning. Kornblut's use of the term "three H's" mimics a June 19 Politico article by chief political correspondent Mike Allen and senior political writer Ben Smith, which reported that "Edwards has never really gotten over the scalding publicity for what Republicans and his Democratic opponents call 'the three h's' -- the haircut that cost $400, his huge house and his lucrative involvement with a hedge fund." Allen and Smith did not cite any specific Republicans or Democrats using the term, while Kornblut did not attribute the term to anybody.
The right wing spin machine must be very afraid of John Edwards. Why else would hey cook up all this stuff about him?
It's the old strategy of using an opponent's strengths against them.
When you have no means to attack the message, attack the messenger.
Afraid of John Edwards? No, that's not even close to the truth. Rghtwingers, and some on the left wing, recognize Edwards for the phony that he is. His statements about joining a hedge fund (that specialized in subprme lending) to study poverty speaks volumes about his sincerety, or the lack thereof. A new "poverty tour"? LOL...give me a break.
Again, Edwards isn't calling it a "poverty tour." Only the idiots who seek to spin and mock it are calling it that.
How does one get tickets for this Poverty Tour? Can I get luxury box seats along with Mr. and Mrs. Edwards, or must I sit on jagged milk crates in the bleachers? And I imagine no champagne can be served in that section either, would be kind of hard to explain.
Tommy, did you read the post from Pete just above yours?
OK, let's focus on the message then......please detail how Mr. Edwards plans to pay for his assult on poverty?
There's a picture of John Edwards with his family on his web site! How dare he use his own family for political gain!
Honestly Tommy, just go to his website and check it out bro. It's easy to make fun of the haircut and what not but I think he might actually be serious about doing something about poverty.
Hey Tommy,
I think I'll wait for The Rolling Stones Tour
They'll only charge me once for a ticket...
And won't keep reaching into my wallet to fund their "programs" with higher taxes like Edwards will.
I wonder when someone is gonna do a tour for the Middle-Class?
I agree, let's not name it the Poverty Tour.....how about the Class Warfare Tour, or the Tax Hikers Tour? Those are more accurate.
How about the raise taxes so we aren't owned by the communist Chinese tour? Or the responsible government spending and end to corporate welfare tour? Maybe the sensible taxation and spending tour?
Taxation is the price you pay in a free society. It's what our government does with those taxes that's important. I agree with Eisenhower, every battle ship built robs the poor of food.
How 'bout the "Bring Back The Lockbox Tour"?
how about the monica oral tour.................................................................................................where she speaks about her times in the oral ...oops.. I mean oval office.
Well, if that's all ya got...
Im poor....I cant afford to buy a ticket....what am I going to do?
Don't worry. The free market will take care of everything.
I'm guessing you could sell your bootstraps but what would you pull yourself up by.....
Here's his plan:
http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/poverty/
Some of the initiatives call for gov. spending, others do not. Sure would be glad to shift my tax dollars over from weapon systems that don't work or are already obsolete, or paying Halliburton to support these initiatives.
I read it, no specifics, naturally. Just one item, the creation of these temporary jobs, who pays and how much will this cost.
He doesn't say, must have left that out by mistake, I am sure.
No specifics? How specific do you need? You want him to break it down to the penny? There is more information on there that George Bush used in 2000 and 2004.
So far none of you can tell me how Edwards is going to pay for any of this? You keep saying the specifics are there, but where?
use the baby bush plan: Increase the taxes on the poor and lower taxes on the wealthy. It's a no brainer... how do you think bush figured it out.
Bing, I expect this from some here who have as much smarts as a seaside mollusk, but not the rest of you. I would hope you would demand specifics from a huge government program such as the ones Edwards is pushing. He pins his hopes on those who won't ask any detailed questions, because they follow foolishness such as this blindly back to their watery shores and bury their heads in the sand, apparently.
Do you really not understand how government spending works? Nobody here is going to explain it to you. Jeez, read a book or something. Self-education is a wonderful thing. We're spending billions in Iraq and you're wondering where Edwards is going to get the funding for small business programs? Beyond that, Edwards has a very detailed plan that includes more than simple redirection of government spending, and encompasses education, child care and housing as well as job concerns. He's outlined far more than just an empty "No child left behind" slogan. Other countries have made this multi-faceted plan work, but continue to scoff if you like.
Tommy,
he has said repeatedly on the stump he plans on rolling back the taxes on the top 1% that Bush enacted to pay for many of his programs. Stop the war in Iraq and that's billions that could be spent elsewhere. I'm not sure what specifics you're looking for. How can one be specific if they are not in office with the real numbers in hand? You can't. I think his plans are feasible but no one's presidential plans can be proven because no one can predict the future. Edwards provides more thorough information than any other Presidential candidate I've seen. That's why I think he is serious about the problem of poverty and that he can do something about it.
I would assume he would just write a check from the USA bank account he gets upon becoming President. You know the ones made from solid gold. Or is that not how government spending works....? I seem to recall requesting funding and budgets and stuff but it all gets a little hazy.
So it's okay to spend $10,000,000,000 per month in Iraq, but the thought of spending a tiny fraction of that to help Americans sends you into a frothing fury. Gotcha.
There are plenty of specifics. You just refuse to acknowledge them, because you just want to keep repeating the empty charge that Edwards is going to raise taxes for "us all." Either that or you're in need of some political science and economics courses.
If John Edwards expects me to work then he is going to have to pay me more than my girl friend gets from welfare, all of our food, HUD housing and free state health care.
So you're a welfare queen.
King, sir.
Jester, actually.
So even after being provided a link in the Edwards thread below, you're still going to keep on pretending that you don't understand how his policies would work? Or is it that you read his policies and program outlines and now you're going to pretend that you don't understand how funding works?
".please detail how Mr. Edwards plans to pay for his assult on poverty?"
As if conservatives really care about the true cost of poverty.
Whatever short term costs are incurred the longterm payoff of an expanding middle class helps every family.
Removing the costly risk of failing in the market by establishing a strong safety net enables market participation for working people thereby nurturing community roots and entrepreneurship. There's no number that can be put on a benevolent society.
But if that sounds a bit thin, it still rings more true than let me give you, Mr. Workingstiff, a couple extra bucks in tax cuts.
Have you visited Edwards' website and searched for the answers to that question? Checked with his campaign? Googled his speeches? If you had, you wouldn't ask that question and hope that people will believe there is no answer to it.
You do realize that Edwards isn't calling it a "poverty tour," don't you? All you're mocking is the right wing spin on this story. The actual name of the tour is the "Road to One America Tour."
It's pretty revealing that republicans are unable to conceive that anyone can be rich and enjoy their wealth while, at the same time, care about helping others rise from poverty.
It's just inconceivable to them!
These guys don't care about truth. They aren't concerned with facts. All they want to do, and what they are paid to do, is smear Democrats. Seize on anything they can spin and repeat. If a candidate was frozen in ice and raised in a sterile environment and had the biggest IQ and was most qualified to lead our country they would find something, a birthmark or thinning hair line to use against them. Personally Bush's past is as sketchy as any politician I've ever known about. He mocked killing a woman on death row for Pete's sake! His wife killed a guy! He went AWOL for his National Guard duty and for all intents and purposes a draft dodger during the Vietnam war, he blew up frogs as a child. His mother is a sociopath! The list is endless. Edwards actually has plans, you can see, he's very thorough in his proposals but hey he looks handsome and gets his haircuts in hotel rooms, oooh look a hedge fund! And he's a mean old trial lawyer who got millions sticking up for the little guy against those corporations more concerned with profit than consumer safety. The horror!!!!!!!!!!!!
Republicans really should just shut up. Bush has lowered the bar of "past transgressions" any schmuck now qualifies to be the President of the United States.
What really boggles my mind is the belittling of anyone actually willing to address the issue. It's not sexy so choosing it as a platform is pretty gutsy by Edwards. Watching wealthy people mock someone for talking about it or wanting to do something about is the real shame of it all. They will talk about anything BUT the issue of poverty. It's disturbing they care so little about the growing poor, a direct result to trickle down economics. Besides, poor people can't afford the newspaper or cable.
A gutsy move by Edwards, are you kidding? To say he is against poverty and wants to see it elminated is courageous and gutsy, but offers nothing more than tired old big government liberal spending programs?
I'd hardly call that gutsy. Pandering, by definition, is more like it.
Yeah, and it's funny that he models his program after Britain's program...a goal to end child poverty in 20 yrs...but according to Edwards...the program is nearly half done...and only 17% effective...typical government operation.
The million new jobs and minimum wage will cost over 2 trillion dollars for his program...and that doesn't include all the housing vouchers, subsidized banking, work bonds and a myriad of other "tired old big government liberal spending programs".
Courageous...not hardly. Phony...certainly...until he explains how his program will be different than LBJ's great society...and how he plans to pay for it.
Exactly, typical liberal baloney. Lay out all these programs that sound so noble and effective, but detail none of the costs or the specifics in implementation.
One example, Edwards proposes in his temporary job creations that people are required to "stay off drugs". How exactly does he intend to enforce this, through daily drug testing?, monthly drug testing?, and where will this take place, at the person's job site?, and who will administer this, some govt. agency?, private drug screeners?......it's ridiculous and just ripe for fraud and abuse.
The devil is always in the details which is why there are none from Edwards. Sell it down the street John, we ain't buying.
How will the bill get paid?
By charging Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Mitt Romney, George Bush, himself and all the other folks who benefit from having a healthy and expanding middle class a little extra in taxes.
So, the direction is always class warfare, income redistribution and higher taxes.......if you think that is anything new or gutsy or courageous or ground-breaking, forget it. We've heard it from liberals for decades, it's failed before, it's tired and worn out, it's ineffective, it's economically bruising, it seeks to demonize people of means, and it's all been trotted out before - and look where we are?
Good luck.
We got here by ignoring the welfare of our fellow citizens by eliminating investments in the common good. For 26 stinkin' years since Reagan, Republicans have sold us a bill of goods that the market will make it all better. We now have stagnated wages and a shrinking middle class. Oh, joy!
So they bought us off with a measley tax cut and told us working folks good luck while they redistributed wealth to the wealthy through corporate welfare.
Republicans privatized and profitized their responsibility to general welfare, thanks for nothing.
The best way to pay for Edwards' programs:
Begin by recovering the $12B per week of current costs for Bungle's stupid illegal invasion. Then restore the 1999 tax code except indexing the AMT ($120B per year). Cancel dropping a couple hundred billion $ on extending Ray-Gun's "Star Wars" into Eastern Europe, when as recently as last autumn, the score was still, 16 tries, 1 (accidental) hit on targets of predetermined trajectory, with homing devices onboard.
Well, if we are still short a few bucks, we could always charge Tommy $1 for each time an independent jury of his peers finds him guilty of "Why is this here?" : >)
That is absolutely an attempt at humor, Tommy: I personally relish those particular posts. I always have to stop to figure out exactly what misinformation or misrepresentation is demonstrated and found offensive. That is the very best preparation to read the rest of the comments.
Atta boy, conley...spoken like a true liberal.
The old liberal standard for financing grand social engineering...cut the military and raise taxes...but your tax on Tommy was creative.
did he say "cut the military"? or did he say stop a wasteful counterproductive war and don't spend money on a missile defense system that has failed test after test?
You don't get wingnut logic, Mefirst. Wes called Conley a liberal. Therefore, everything Conley said is necessarily nullifed because liberal is supposed to be synonymous with bad.
What's the Repiblican answer for bettering society? Let working people struggle to stay afloat, redistribute the commonwealth to the private sector and let the market sort it out?
Markets are engineered by people, except that they have been perverted by conservative ideology to give primacy to profit, not the individual.
Well let's look at it. Which Republican candidates for President consider poverty an issue?
Rudy?
http://www.joinrudy2008.com/index.php?section=2
Nope. Um how about McCain?
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/
Nope. How about ole Mitt?
http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/index
No way. He does talk about Extending Health Insurance to All Americans, but that is simply a redux of the system we have which is making big pharma rich.
Fred Thomson?
http://www.imwithfred.com/About.aspx
Nope. Nothing about the poor or povery or really any issue he is interested in other than making money.
If everyone cares about poverty, why then don't any major republican cadidate have it listed as one of their issues?
Sure Republicans care about poor people. They want to keep them just poor enough to where they'll work for starvation wages, but not quite poor enough that they turn to crime.
I would like to see Bill Cosby and Willie Nelson do the tour with him and a documentary done of it. People like him and I think they might feel more comfortable talking to them than to many others. When you are poor you feel shame and often only humor as well concern can get people to open up about what is happening to them and their families.
Create 1 Million Stepping Stone Jobs for Workers Who Take Responsibility. Every American should have the chance to work their way out of poverty. However, some willing workers cannot find jobs because of the place they live, a lack of skills, experience, and references, or other obstacles like a criminal record. As much as 18 percent of former welfare recipients do not have a job. Edwards suggested creating 1 million temporary jobs over five years. The jobs would be reserved for individuals who cannot find other work after six months of looking, pay the minimum wage, and last up to 12 months. In return, workers must show up and work hard, stay off drugs, not commit any crimes, and pay child support. Studies have shown that these programs are successful moving people into permanent jobs. Jobs would be chosen carefully with local business and labor leaders to meet local needs without displacing existing workers. [Turner, Danziger and Seefeldt, 2006; Mathematica, 2002; CBPP, 1997; Ellwood and Welty,
Just what are we going to manufacture or provide services to, cleanup, paint.........who is in charge of the work force. Where and what are these jobs?????????????????????????????????????
What do you care?
Because I am one of the poor SIR!
Perhaps you could do the work of one of the displaced "immigrants". :)
for one thing, there are bridges all over this country that are not maintained and their useful years are shortened due to that lack fo things like a simple coat of paint.
Conservatives are scared to death about bringing poverty as an issue.
The reason is simple. Poverty increases under Conservative watch, middle class shrinks under Conservative watch, if Conservatives maintain power this country will become like Haiti.
Once the country becomes worse than Haiti the Conservatives will elect a drunken spoiled frat boy with the brains of a manhole as the United States Baby Doc.
The most hilarious cry of Conservative is this so called tax increase. What a laugh what a scream tax increase, when under Conservative watch they will spend money until the nations back is broken via debts. They will borrow money until it takes the next four hundred years to pay it off.
Finacially Conservative will ruin this nation and yet they yip about a tax increase.
On the Social level Conservatives will outlaw any ideas other than their own. This nation will be one giant prison with over half the country imprisoned for daring to come up with an idea that doesn't align itself to Conservative ideology.
Only 1 percent of the nation is happy under Conservative watch.
Conservatives will make living under the Taliban seem like freedom land.
Not to mention Jim Crow laws will return. Look at their KKK Roberts in the Supreme Court.
So what do the Conservative's Trumpet sound on the issue of poverty? Thier trumpet sounds, "Edwards Haircut".
NEW ELEMENT "Du" DISCOVERED
A major research institution (probably funded by a government subsidy) has just announced the discovery of the densest element yet known to science. The new element has been named "Bushcronium". Bushcroniumhas one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 224 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 311.These particles are held together by dark forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. The symbol for Bushcronium is "Du", as the symbol
"W" was already taken by Tungsten.
Bushcronium' s mass actually increases over time, as morons randomly interact with various elements in the atmosphere and become assistant deputy neutrons in a Bushcronium molecule, forming isodopes.
This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to believe that Bushcronium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as "Critical Morass". When catalyzed with money, Bushcronium activates Foxnewsium, an element that radiates orders of magnitude more energy, albeit as incoherent noise, since it has 1/2 as many peons but twice as many morons.
The "nucular" reaction alluded to below where Du combines with Foxnewsium (Fx) when bombarded by a moron beam yields: Du + m (morons) + Fx = DumFx which is sometimes phonetically pronounced to describe the nature of the isodope produced.Although Faux Noise is the only “news” element mentioned in the formula, any other “news” element, i.e., CNN, ABC, CBS, WoPo, WSJ, etc., could be used just as well and get the same isodope.
I would like to say that I come up with this witty but overlooked scientific discovery. However, it was sent to me and I know not from where it came. I just want as many citizens as possible to think about it and ponder its message.
Tonight on Fox News, Fox News "Junk Science" Analysts debunk the Liberal, Terrorist-Loving, Surrender Monkey, Bushcronium deception. Stay tuned if you love America.
The Pentagon is spending about $6 billion a month on the occupation in Iraq, or about $200 million a day...I do hope that the righties on here who keep asking how Edwards is planning to pay for his anti-poverty plan did not support the invasion of Iraq.
They also might think about the WPA in the 30's. Local communities throughout the country note with pride their local landmark buildings, built by the WPA.
The Pentagon is "spending" 200m a day, but it's the Gov't that is "borrowing" that same amount. War on the credit card. It's SO 21st Century.
If this article is true, that means John Edwards started his war against poverty three years ago, before news of his expensive haircuts came out. That's the kind of clairvoyance the article missed.