ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Edwards takes shots; Carter by side

Posted: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 3:39 PM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum
With former President Jimmy Carter by his side, Edwards visited Georgia Southwestern State University to discuss his vision for America and his plans to build One America. Edwards began his speech with an attack on Bush's request for more money to fund the surge in Iraq. Using his fingers to make quote marks while saying the word "surge," Edwards dismissed the idea as a good plan.
 
"The Congress will be coming back next week, and I think the American people have seen enough excuses," Edwards said. "They don't want excuses anymore. They want to see this war come to an end. They want to see it brought to an end. What the Congress should do when they come back next week is make it absolutely clear, no timetable, no funding. And there should be no further excuses. The Congress needs to stand their ground. They had a mandate from the American people in the election in November in 2006 and they need to meet that mandate."
 
Invoking the second anniversary of Katrina, Edwards said another surge in Baghdad is not what America needs. "We need a surge in New Orleans."
 
Edwards also attacked Hillary Clinton once again on the lobbying issue. "That system has to change," Edwards said. "I don't think anybody should defend that system, whether it is Senator Clinton or anybody else. I think the system needs to be changed. There is nobody in this audience who thinks the way Washington works today is working for them. I am absolutely certain about that."
 
On poverty, Edwards lamented that the economic growth over the last five years has only benefited the richest Americans. In combating poverty, Edwards called for (1) truly universal health care; (2) a higher raise in the minimum wage; (3) an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and removal of its marriage penalty; (4) the strengthening of workers' rights to organize unions in work places; and (5) strong national predatory lending laws. All of these items clearly cost money, and Edwards proposed paying for health care specifically by cutting Bush's tax cuts. He did mention how he would pay for the other changes. 
 
Edwards borrowed a line from his wife Elizabeth regarding his stance on healthcare. "If you are shopping for a presidential candidate and they come before you and they tell you they have a health care plan and you find out that health care plan is not universal, then you should make them explain to you what man, and what woman, and what child in America is not worthy of healthcare?" He furthered the sentiment, stating if a candidate isn't for truly universal health care, the voter "ought to be looking for another candidate."
 
On a different note, Edwards took an aggressive stance on nuclear weapons in Iran and Pakistan. "I want to be the President of the United States that initiates and leads an effort, over time, but an effort to actually rid the planet of nuclear weapons ... America will have to lead the way and I'm not short sighted about this. I don't think it can be done overnight. I know it will take time, it will take leadership, and it will take cooperation from other countries."
 
Carter, an alumnus of GSW, told the audience Edwards is a "candidate whom I really admire." While he did not officially endorse Edwards, he came pretty close with his bold prediction that the presidential hopeful "has a very good chance to do well."
 
"I can say without equivocation,” Carter said, “that no one who is running for president has presented anywhere near as comprehensive and accurate a prediction of what our country ought to do in the field of environmental quality, in the field of healthcare for those who are not presently insured, for those who suffer from poverty and with a special attention to a subject he knows quite well, and that is the rural areas of America.”

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

mad: i think a lot of us are waiting to see how the vote goes down on the additional $50 billion request for shrub's failed war.


Oh, we all know how that vote is going to go.  Bush had Nancy over for dinner, and she got the message on how the House should vote.  Reid is a push over in the Senate.  Harry and Nancy will put up the usual fuss, but in the end, they know President Bush will get his way.

Then clueless people like madinMadtown will back up a little bit more, "Well, we'll wait and see how the Democrats vote the NEXT time".  People like that just do not live in the real world.
most of you against edwards attack his hair his house, what does that got to do with leading this country? that's what kids do on the playground,take something about your appearance and denigrate you. and carter. whats the matter you don't own a sweater for when it gets cold?you want cheap gas so you can burn it up in your suv but cheap or nocost health insurance is un american. and to set the record straight gw is the WORST president EVER.followed by reagan.he set us on this feed the rich forget the poor course.look at what ex presidents are doing (have done)carter, humanitarian,clinton paid speaker, g bush,wealthy financier and political lobbyist,tho not ex pres but gore,fact finder on global warming, edwards, poverty fighter.so you can see what kind of person they really are. everything that anyone says against edwards look at GEORGE! how can you say he has done anything good for this country.all his lies!!!!!!!!!and his administrations lies.people against carter probably weren't even born yet.do not vote bush-lite hillary unless you want more of the same crap this country has seen for the last 6+ years;nothing done on real issues like wages, healthcare, school costs, bridges falling down, but waste of time stuff like flag burning.i agree with peter from nj.
and why is patriotism always being defined as support for war and guns?
Response to Dr. Coles of Los Angeles, CA:

No one disputes that this is not a 'Socialist State' as your tone seems to imply.  However, there are and have been many social programs in the US and we've always been better off for them.  Universal Healthcare should not be viewed as giving away something for free.  Rather it should be viewed as an inalienable right.  We are still famiiar with that concept, aren't we?
Sometimes, the failure to understand policy is breathtaking.  

How can Lauren write, "All of these items clearly cost money, and Edwards proposed paying for health care specifically by cutting Bush's tax cuts. He did mention how he would pay for the other changes."

Her list of proposals: "In combating poverty, Edwards called for (1) truly universal health care; (2) a higher raise in the minimum wage; (3) an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and removal of its marriage penalty; (4) the strengthening of workers' rights to organize unions in work places; and (5) strong national predatory lending laws."

1. She acknowledges he pays for.
2. Minimum wage = de minimis cost, if any (additional DOL funding for enforcement?  De miminimus at best).
3. EITC expandsion: true.
4. Union organizaing?  Again, either de minimis DOL costs or none at all.
5. Predatory lending laws?  Again, de minimis enforcement by the FTC or banking regulators.

Basically, nearly all of Edwards agenda is covered, $ wise (only health care would cost more than a month or two or Iraq).  And I am sure the genuione real effort to collect all owed taxes would pick up that "discrepancy."

This is embarassing.
I disagree that Edwards can't win the general election.  In fact, the only Democrats since Kennedy who have become president have been from the south.  That said, Edwards has been way ahead of the pack on all the important issues.  His "two Americas" frame certainly fits my experience in the legal profession as well as healthcare and education.  I like all the Democratic candidates, but Edwards is the one I feel really gets it.  And I loooove Elizabeth.  


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=338433

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google