Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jern
Way out of touch
It's His Call

By MARC ROTTERMAN, Special to the News & Observer

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts announced last Sunday that he is forming an exploratory committee for president, and Sen. John Edwards is said to be thinking of doing the same.


related

Why now for Edwards?


Having served in the Senate for only four years, Edwards has become a captive of the trial lawyers and the left-wing special interests in Washington. He has lost touch with the average American. Clearly, he is not ready for "prime time."

Should he take the plunge, his record will be fair game, and he will be scrutinized as to whether he is up to the job of being president. To be sure, he is ambitious and knows how to get on TV and in the newspapers. He does make a nice appearance and knows his lines. But is there anything past the sound bites? Does he have the experience to do the job? And does his voting record accurately reflect his 1998 campaign promises?

Consider what Edwards said on CNN's "Inside Politics" on Nov. 2, 1998. In the interview, Edwards said he would vote frequently with Sen. Jesse Helms. Fast-forward to a Washington Times article on Oct. 15, 2002. Asked by columnist Robert P. Novak to recall any conservative position he's taken in the Senate, Edwards said, "I could give you an answer to that question if you give me a little time to think about it."

In fact, Edwards almost never voted with Helms, or for that matter, with any other conservatives. The American Conservative Union gives Edwards a "lifetime rating" of 12 percent and Helms, 99 percent. Clearly, Edwards' vote did cancel out Helms'. Edwards voted against John Ashcroft's nomination for attorney general. He voted against the capital gains tax cut, and on a key Helms amendment to an education bill that would allow federal funds to be withheld from public schools that bar the Boy Scouts from using their facilities, Edwards voted "no."

Neither has Edwards been reluctant to criticize President Bush. The Washington Post reported Oct. 6 that Edwards assailed Bush for using the war on terror to jeopardize Americans' civil liberties. In a speech in Iowa, Edwards said, "It is right to stand up to Saddam Hussein, but it is wrong in the name of the war on terrorism to let this administration take away our rights, take away our liberties, take away the things we believe in."

In the same speech, Edwards suggested that Bush is out of touch with ordinary Americans. "This president comes from a different place. ... He doesn't come from real America. ... He doesn't understand what real people's lives are like."

This from a man who has been fighting for the "little guy" in Hollywood. Numerous Hollywood big shots have donated to Edwards' campaign as well as to his political action committee. Last year, Californians were second only to North Carolinians in campaign donations to Edwards. Moreover, it has been reported that more than four of every five dollars raised for Edwards' hard-money PAC, New American Optimists, came from personal injury trial lawyers. In fact, since being elected in 1998, Edwards has raised nearly half of his money from trial lawyers or their law firms.

Have these contributions affected Edwards' voting record? Some in Washington would say so. Two years into Edwards' Senate term, he sponsored a bill to make it easier to sue HMOs. Terrance Scanlon, president of Capitol Research Center, cynically noted that Edwards "is now sponsoring a bill that would allow for huge lawsuits against health maintenance organizations, directly benefiting trial lawyers."

So what are the odds that John Edwards would get the 2004 Democratic nomination for president? Early polls in key states such as New Hampshire and Iowa show him getting between 1 percent and 3 percent of the vote among probable Democratic presidential contenders.

And how is he faring back home should he decide to run for Senate? A Mason-Dixon poll conducted Oct. 11 tested Edwards against U.S. Reps. Sue Myrick, Walter Jones and Richard Burr. In each case, Edwards got no more than 45 percent of the vote. Not a good sign for a sitting senator.

Should Edwards run for president or for re-election to the Senate?

That's his call. In either case, it appears he would have a tough race on his hands. Clearly, his voting record does not reflect the values and beliefs of middle America or the average North Carolinian.

(Marc Rotterman, a Republican strategist, is a senior fellow at the John Locke Foundation and treasurer of the American Conservative Union.)




2 posted on 12/08/2002 7:05:56 AM PST by jern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: jern
Apparently Edwards hasn't been watching his zilch poll numbers. Amazing how this dweeb thinks people will actually vote for him for president? He's not even popular in his own state!!
3 posted on 12/08/2002 7:11:21 AM PST by areafiftyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: jern
I fear this is going to be a repeat of 92
Bush will defeat Saddam and terrorism will be under control
Economy can't turn around in time for 2004
Oh it may start to improve just like it did under Bush I ,but if it does it will be late 2004 and the media will keep it quiet. In addition the dems in the senate will do everything possible to stall any tax cuts etc designed to boost the economy and Bush will NOT attack them over it, but will continue to try and play nice

Edwards is a BIG nothing but so was Clinton
4 posted on 12/08/2002 7:15:11 AM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: jern
Rotterman forgot to mention Edwards' treatment of Pickering in the Judiciary Committee hearings, when he demonstrated his true loathsomeness.
16 posted on 12/08/2002 10:19:17 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson