Active Resource

I have been listening carefully to all of the candidates who are running for office.

When it comes to human decency, basic civility, compassion, integrity, and
progressive reform… there are three “progressive” candidates who have a chance
at winning the presidency.  Hillary and Barack are both preferable to any alternatives

offered by the confused and divided Republican party, but their commitments have

been too “flexible,” and their policy statments have meandered all over the landscape. 
The best and most viable candidate is John Edwards. 
He talks the talk, walks the walk, addresses the issues, has a proven
track record, refuses to back down, and is eminently electable.

There are (at least) six pivotal issues in the race which begins January 3rd.
 Iraq, Health Care, Education,  Immigration,  Rule of Civil and Constitutional Law,
 
 and   Electability.     Hillary, like her Republican counterparts (those whose “values” she
claims to share) is willing to surrender to the ongoing occupation of Iraq. 
She calls for a nebulous “Phased Redeployment” but will not commit to ending the occupation.
Her health plan is to turn it over to the insurance firms and let them
dictate terms.  Her plan to “offer and renew coverage to anyone who applies and
pays their premium” does not address the concerns of working Americans and does
not address the issue of why the richest nation on earth cannot provide universal
coverage for our people.
Her plan for education is to do nothing and hope the system fixes itself.  Her
website does not even acknowledge the crisis in our schools. In discussing immigration,
she does not even address the issue of NAFTA.   As for the restoration of the rule
of law and constitutional integrity…  Hillary seems content to surrender habeas
corpus and allow our rights and constitutional protections to remain suspended.
Her website and policy statments completely ignore these fundamental issues.  

A further concern is that Hillary is not electable. Matched against ANY republican…
she loses.   And with her baggage, lack of charisma, and shifting stands on the issues, her nomination
might well cement a Republican victory. There is too much at stake for such a gamble.

Barack Obama wants to end the war, “Obama would immediately begin to pull out troops engaged in combat
operations at a pace of one or two brigades every month, to be completed by the end of next year. He would call for a new
constitutional convention in Iraq, convened with the United Nations, which would not adjourn until Iraq’s leaders reach a
new accord on reconciliation. He would use presidential leadership to surge our diplomacy with all of the nations of the
region on behalf of a new regional security compact. And he would take immediate steps to confront the humanitarian
disaster in Iraq, and to hold accountable any perpetrators of potential war crimes.
He wants the US to move towards universal health care: but his policy statments defer to the
insurance industry:  While he wants to be “Providing affordable, comprehensive and portable
health coverage for every American,” his plan still leaves the insurance companies in charge. His
Mandatory Coverage of Children is a good start, but he stops short of a plan for universal
coverage for all Americans.  On Education, Obama understands the crisis and provides
useful guidelines for reform.  He stops short of calling for universal higher education, but he
recognizes the problems in our schools and provides useful solutions.  His plan is less comprehensive
than dwards, but immensely more useful than Hillary’s avoidance of this issue. On Immigration,
Barack Obama straddles the issues:  He “believes that our broken immigration system can only
be fixed by putting politics aside and offering a complete solution that secures our border, enforces
our laws and reaffirms our heritage as a nation of immigrants.” But this political talk ignores NAFTA
and does not address the crux of the issue or offer substantive reform.  He neither mentions nor
addresses the problems created by NAFTA.  Barack does not even address ongoing concerns about 
restoration of the rule of law, nor does he even discuss constitutional concerns.  While
Barack is clearly a useful alternative to the current corrupt corporate regime… and once spoke about
real reform, his conservative policy statments and timid tiptoeing around the forces which must be
confronted do not bode well for this nation.  He has retreated, compromised, and become less palatable
as a candidate.  And while racism is now mostly undercover in America, it is live and well. 

Matched against the Republican opposition, Obama does better than Clinton,
but he loses in many polls. We cannot afford this gamble, nor should we be satisfied
with the compromises he has made.

John Edwards has an entirely different approach.  He would end the war and end the
occupation.Edwards supports the immediate withdrawal of 40,000-50,000 troops from Iraq
and the complete withdrawal of all combat troops from Iraq within nine to ten months.  He would
work for universal healthcare…   “We have to stop using words like ‘access to health care’
when we know with certainty those words mean something less than universal care. Who are you
willing to leave behind without the care he needs? Which family? Which child? We need a truly
universal solution, and we need it now.”  – John Edwards  and universal education. 

John Edwards has the most comprehensive educational reform program of any candidate.  
Strengthening Our Schools:  The Edwards Plan  Read the full Edwards plan for strengthening our schools
Expanding Opportunity Through College for Everyone  He understands the relationship between
immigration and NAFTA.  “Trade has become a bad word for working Americans for a simple reason:
our trade policy has been bad for working Americans. We need new trade policies that put workers, wages and
families first.” – John Edwards “NAFTA has actually cost us more than 1 million American jobs. NAFTA has
failed Mexico and Canada too. In all three countries, it has hurt workers and families while helping corporate
insiders.”… “Our trade policies must lift up workers around the world. Making sure that all workers share in
the gains from trade is the right thing to do economically, and it will make America safer and more secure.” 
And he would demand that we restore the rule of law and the supremacy of our constitutional
foundations.  “We are not the country of Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. We are not the country of secret
surveillance and government behind closed doors. We are Americans, and we’re better than that.”
– John Edwards
Edward will “Say No to Torture,   Restore Habeas Corpus and Shut Down Guantanamo,  Protect Americans’
Privacy and Freedom, and Defend the Constitution.”  He stands up for working people, tells the truth, 
speaks from the heart, and his record shows that he walks the walk.  I predict he will win first or second
place in Iowa… and working Americans should support his campaign.  (he won second place)

Matched against ANY of the Republican candidates… John Edwards wins.. 

It is my hope that unions, non-profits, institutions, and grassroots organizations reconsider their
options in this upcoming election.  If we “settle” for corporate apologists who refuse to discuss the
most pressing issues of the day, such intransigence might prove fatal.  We cannot afford eight more
years of corruption, abuse, betrayal, and compromise.  If we ever hope to restore our reputation,
credibility, and honor… we must be careful in the choices we make.  Clearly Hillary Clinton stands
with corporate governance.  She does not address the economic divide which cripples our nation. 
Both Barack and John Edwards speak to concerns with poverty and a weakened middle class, but
Barack is too “politic” to advocate for the reforms are necessary to confront these issues.
John Edwards speaks for working people.  And he seems the best choice to speak truth to power.

regards, Tim