Edwards on Poverty
Tweet
From John Edwards speech to the Center for American Progress:
This Administration may think every American is an island. But Americans know that Katrina s victims shouldn t have been out there on their own, and that no American should be out there on their own. That s why even when our government failed to respond to Katrina, American citizens stepped up in an extraordinary way. We know that it matters how we as a nation meet our responsibilities. It defines us as a nation.Throughout our history, people around the world have been drawn to America for what we stand for: that we are all created equal, and that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The government s response to Katrina undermined those ideals. One foreign magazine called it The Shaming of America. It has been our shame.
I want the world to see a different America an America that is working every day to live up to what was written I want them to see the one America that we all believe in.
And that means that while we must first address the urgent tragedy of poverty in the Gulf states, we must also address the tragedy of poverty across the fifty states.
He is also proposing The Working Society:
Where I come from, what matters the most isn t how much you have, it s how much you give. Work gives pride, dignity, and hope to our lives and our communities. And so the President is wrong: America is not, and never wished to be, a Wealth Society.
To be true to our values, our country must build a Working Society an America where everyone who works hard finally has the rewards to show for it. In the Working Society, nobody who works full-time should have to raise children in poverty, or in fear that one health emergency or pink slip will drive them over the cliff.
In the Working Society, everyone who works full-time will at last have something to show for it a home of their own, an account where their savings and paycheck can grow.
In the Working Society, everyone willing to work will have the chance to get ahead. Anyone who wants to go to college and work will be able to go the first year for free.
In the Working Society, people who work have the right to live in communities where the streets are safe, the schools are good, and jobs can be reached.
In the Working Society, everyone will also be asked to hold up their end of the bargain to work, to hold off having kids until they re ready, and to do their part for their kids when the time comes.
18 Responses to “Edwards on Poverty”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
The magazine he is talking about the “The Economist” their cover a week or two ago was, “The Shaming of America.” I think they were pretty fair in their analysis for the fuckup of handling Katrina.
Did he “Working Society”, or “Workers’ Paradise”?
Edwards uses the word ‘asked,’ not ‘forced.’
Not all that ballsy of a statement.
“In the Working Society, everyone will also be asked to hold up their end of the bargain to work, to hold off having kids until they re ready, and to do their part for their kids when the time comes.”
Just how does Edwards propose enforcing this virtue?
He does have a knack for making Marx sound all flowery and fun.
cellulose,
What happens when we “ask” and not “force” people to “hold up their end of the bargain” by staying in school, by working hard to obtain a marketable skill so as to obtain a higher-paying job and by waiting until after marriage before having children and they thumb their nose at you and refuse?
Too bad Edwards is a chickenhawk when it comes to Hurricane Relief. According to the Immutable Laws of Liberals, that means his opinion is automatically deemed irrelevant.
That s why even when our government failed to respond to Katrina, American citizens stepped up in an extraordinary way.
Oh please. People didn’t step in because of what the government did or didn’t do. People helped regardless of all that because that’s what Americans do. They don’t need to follow the governments lead to lend fellow citizens a helping hand in their time of need.
Jay,
You are making an illogical point here. He said, “even when our government failed…American citizens stepped up.” The words “even when” are not the same as “because”. What he is saying is actually identical to what you are saying: regardless of what the government did or didn’t do, the people did their share. His problem is that the government didn’t do anything in addition to what the people did privately. And that’s a shame because the government can do a whole lot of good here.
I thought the government exists only to cut taxes and go to war?
John Edwards clearly has not gotten the memo.
Before the 2004 election, Trent Lott was giving speeches about tax reform. He said, approximately, the middle class tax advantage was unfair to most Americans. Working families get to deduct interest on their mortgages and it was unfair to banks and business. The myth of every family owning their own home was hurting America by taking money out of the economy that could be invested in more important things…like apartment houses and Wallmarts and rightwing networks.
He had given the speech to grovers and norquists three times before someone told him that the mortgage associations and the real estate associations were furious. He kept making the speech, but quieter. Ask him about it. He really believes middle class home ownership is hurting America.
Maybe you basement conservatives should consider what would happen to you if your family could not afford the house you live in. And how could a family, that has children so stupid that they must scream ‘Marx’ and ‘Commie’ at everything they do not understand, be smart enough to buy their own house without the Middle Class tax deduction?
Here is an idea whose time has come; Every conservative family should just give up that tax deduction as a protest to the communist idea that every one has a right to their own home. It is fair, and honest and balanced.
Joe Schmoe-
Here’s another idea whose time has come: Every progressive should repeat to themselves 3 times:”Trent Lott and Grover Norquist do not speak for all conservatives”.
Did he Working Society , or Workers Paradise ?
Frank;
I guess that’s your way of saying this sounds like Karl Marx rehashed?
Or am I reading to much into the cryptology?
I meant to say, “Did he say Working Society , or Workers Paradise ?
And. yes, that’s what I meant.
Sounds a lot like “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” to me.
Here in America, wage earners are called employees.
Sounds a lot like From each according to his ability, to each according to his need, to me.
Frank;
Is there something wrong with this idea? I don’t get it?
Hey Frank since we’re on the topic of ideology now, I finally got around to reading that Russel Kirk you mentioned. It was pretty bad, worse than I expected even. Just straight up Authoritarianism, really.
I learned several things. That the poor are poor because they are genetically inferior (from The Injustice of Equality). Justice is nothing more than a matter of maintaining private property rights (from The Meaning of Justice), and the proper role of the Church is to preach obedience to the State (ibid). Also no other nation is capable of democracy, since they lack our unique British heritage (The Degradation of the Democratic Dogma).
So now we know where you’re coming from, right? I believe I’ll take Marx over Kirk, for Marx once told us:
Ideas won by our intelligence, embodied in our outlook, and forged in our conscience, are chains from which we cannot tear ourselves away without breaking our hearts; they are demons we can overcome only by submitting to them.
Leo: No you don’t — sorry
SadieB — So? Should I be surprised?
To both of you — the next time some conservative in these threads suggests that liberals are basically Marxists, I would expect you two to own up to it, as you have here.
p.s. SadieB: You couldn’t possibly be more wrong about Kirk; I can’t even tell you where to begin to truly understand him. Sad.
Frank;
Dodging the discussion. I asked you for some basis for your pejorative use of the phrase.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need,
What is wrong with the concept? I do not associate the idea with Marxism, I associate the concept with that of the early Christian Congregation. It seems you have a rather narrow view of ideas in general. I am not a marxist any more than you are a nazi. I have a spectre of Socialism in my bag of ideas because I am not afraid of names. I do not like to be cubby-holed as a this, or a that. I, like my genetic gene pool, am a combination of disciplines and dogmas that changes as I learn. How do you learn? I hope one of the reasons you visit this site is to learn about the other point of view. That is why I visit Powerline. Little Green Footballs and such. Is that why you are here Frank?
Just once I would like to hear a direct answer to a direct question without all the bobbing and weaving.