Imagine these could be the next President and VP...
Posted on 07/10/2004 3:22:08 PM PDT by Pokey78
'We've got better vision. We've got better ideas. We've got real plans. And we've got better hair," said John Kerry, introducing his running mate. The Kerry-Edwards vision, ideas, etc don't look so good in the cold light of day, but John Edwards's hair does.
I can personally vouch for his beautiful layered nape, having spent much of New Hampshire primary season looking at the back of his tanned neck on chilly winter mornings. He likes to campaign in the round, so all winter, in Legion halls and diners, the advance men rearranged the furniture and then the pretty-boy Southerner would come bouncing into the circle to the strains of Small Town (by has-been rocker John Mellencamp).
Radiating all the vigour and enthusiasm Kerry had surgically removed at birth, the honey-toned Edwards found himself adored by the media for his "two Americas" stump speech, a Disraelian portrait of Dickensian gloom conjured in the tones of a Depression-era sob-sister.
Even if you have never heard it, you know how it goes: there's one America where Dick Cheney's oil buddies are swigging down Martinis and toasting their war profits; but there's another America where "tonight a 10-year-old little girl will go to bed hungry, hoping and praying that tomorrow will not be as cold as today because she doesn't have the coat to keep her warm".
You would have to have a heart of stone not to be weeping with laughter at that line. But Democratic primary voters are not that rude. So they looked thoughtful and engaged, and they nodded and they applauded. And then they went out and voted for somebody else. After you've heard the speech a couple of times, you realise that John Edwards is perhaps the most condescending candidate in America. But the voters condescended right back, smiling politely at the clean-cut charmer, and then going away and forgetting about him.
In New Hampshire, he came a poor fourth. Likewise, New Mexico and North Dakota. In Delaware, he came third, with 11 per cent of the vote. In Oklahoma, he came second, managing to lose to loopy General Wesley Clark. The only place he won was the state of his birth, South Carolina. In Florida, he pulled 10 per cent of the vote; Maine, 8 per cent; Mississippi, Arizona, 7 per cent.
Edwards is a lawyer, and supposedly his great strength is his ability to make an argument and sell it to a jury. But the more the primary jurors heard his argument, the less they were sold on it. "There are two Americas," said Conan O'Brien on CBS. "Unfortunately for Edwards, neither one voted for him."
Who is John Edwards? Well, in a nutshell, he is the metaphorical brother of that non-existent coatless girl. Now 51, but looking a well-preserved 12, he was born in Seneca, South Carolina, and had a soi-disant dirt-poor, hardscrabble childhood in Robbins, North Carolina. His dad worked in the textile mills, and John was the first member of his family ever to go to college.
Where Senator Kerry's biography is full of problematic phrases like "Swiss finishing school", Edwards's is a classic American story - if one overlooks some of the details. According to Sidney Blumenthal, Clinton-stain-mopper-turned-Guardian-columnist, "He bears the memory of his father taking the family to a local restaurant after church only to leave when he realised he could not afford anything on the menu."
Really? Robbins was a town of just over 1,000 people, so presumably it was, if not the only restaurant, one of only two or three. In small towns, folks generally know what the local eateries charge. And, while the Edwards family was poor by comparison with John Kerry, dad was in fact the mill's production manager (though the son tends to leave that bit out). So, in a mill town, at a restaurant presumably priced to cater for mill workers, the management of the mill couldn't afford to eat?
Ah, well. There are two Americas, and, as a successful plaintiff's attorney, Edwards spent 20 years exaggerating the gulf between them. "Plaintiff's attorney" is American for the kind of lawyer who specialises in those suits that Britons find so fascinating - you spill the coffee on your lap, so you sue McDonald's for a gazillion dollars, etc.
Edwards worked an ostensibly less ridiculous seam: suing doctors and hospitals when babies were born with brain defects. He made his name with a 1985 cerebral palsy case, where he channelled the words of the unborn child as she waited in the womb, hour after hour.
"She said at 3, 'I'm fine.' She said at 4, 'I'm having a little trouble, but I'm doing OK.' Five, she said, 'I'm having problems.' At 5.30, she said, 'I need out'," Edwards told his hushed jury. "She speaks to you through me. And I have to tell you right now - I didn't plan to talk about this - right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She's inside me."
The jury came back with a $6.5 million award, and Edwards was the hottest trial lawyer in North Carolina. His line, in that and other cases, was that there would have been no brain damage if the doctor, instead of the breech delivery, had performed a caesarean. Thanks in part to lawyers like Edwards, there are now far more caesarean sections than ever before, yet without any reduction in birth defects.
The correlation between C-sections and birth defects is non-existent. But Edwards sold junk-science to jury after jury, for big bucks. In his "two Americas" routine, he talks about his commitment to "bringing down the cost of healthcare". One reason it costs more than it did is because of Edwards and his fellow ambulance-chasers.
Nonetheless, if the Bush campaign is figuring on tarring Edwards as a fancypants trial lawyer, they should rethink. He spent much of his life defending kids against corporations, and, whatever the fine print, the basic outline of that terrain is not favourable to Republicans.
For another, his own son died in a car accident at the age of 16 - the one stark tragedy in Edwards's effortless career rise and happy home life with his college sweetheart. Today, John and Elizabeth Edwards have three children - a daughter at college, and two youngsters born since the death of their first son. What the Republicans see as a shyster the media will paint as a champion of defenceless children driven by a heart-rending twist of fate.
It is standard on the Left now to insist that Bush's "war" is a fiction cooked up by Dick Cheney to enrich his pals. But Edwards's two Americas are the real fantasy. Take that 10-year old girl, hungry and coatless. In America, poverty doesn't mean hunger, it means fat - it's harassed moms shovelling 99-cent cheeseburgers into their kids because it's cheap and quick. Nor does poverty mean coatlessness.
Edwards's shivering 10-year-old can get a brand-new quilted winter coat for $9.99 at JC Penney, or secondhand for three bucks at my local thrift shop - at least until Edwards and Kerry crack down on the cheap textile imports they've been attacking these past two years. There may be two Americas, but Edwards's America doesn't exist anywhere from Maine to Hawaii. Even as a lurid Victorian melodrama designed to frighten prosperous soccer moms into voting against hard-hearted Republicans, it sounds ridiculous.
In the meantime, Edwards has nothing to say on foreign policy except a pledge to end "war profiteering by Halliburton". Once he discovered that you can't sue al-Qaeda, he seems to have lost interest in the subject, and his shallowness was embarrassing in some of the primary debates. As I wrote here in February, "His basic pitch is that the entire electorate are victims, and his candidacy is the all-time biggest class-action suit on your behalf." John Edwards's approach - the American people are helpless children - is the wrong message for dangerous times.
Back when his maudlin 'twas-Christmas-Day-in-the-workhouse shtick was still new, I offered to buy a brand new coat for every 10-year-old coatless girl the Edwards campaign could produce if in return he included one substantive passage on foreign policy in his stump speech. I'm still waiting on both counts.
Thanks for the graphic, I love it! (Dreamer?)
ROFLMAO
Edwards's shivering 10-year-old can get a brand-new quilted winter coat for $9.99 at JC Penney, or secondhand for three bucks at my local thrift shop -
Awesome points!
I've never seen the point made, but what kind of person do you have to be to deny your own father's accomplishments?
Think about that a second! I can see, perhaps, playing down being filthy rich. People often times won't take seriously someone who they feel has had an easy slide through life.
But if your dad was a hardworking man, who probably came from a lower background, but worked hard and became a manager and provided a better style of living that his own parents could have provided...would you denigrate that by making him poorer, a WORSE provider for you, than he was? How incredibly insulting is that?
My own daddy was one of those hardworking men. My grandparents had lots of kids and worked as janitors. My dad is hardworking and responsible, got into management and provided a much better life for us than he had had. I couldn't spit in his face by making my childhood sound deprived. I just couldn't do it.
Are Edwards parents still alive??? If so, I wonder if they are embarrassed to be painted as losers.
John Edwards is a shyster.
[Reprint entire article here as a way of highlighting good lines...]
If you do the math, Edwards was born in 1953. In 1963 he would have been 10. By 1973, he's 20. Not even close to being depression era. And, if his father was the Mill manager, his salary would certainly have been enough to eat out once in a while.
He just wants people to visualize some kind of depresson era kid growing up poor, which is a far shot from what was probably a middle class background. But then, some kids can come from that type of background and be grateful, others, like him, will only remember the things they couldn't have.
Thank you for a great, COMPLETE, Steyn!!!!
What I find interesting .. right after Edwards was picked there were all the prognastications about the "bounce" Kerry was going to get. A couple of days went by .. no bounce .. several of the very credible pollsters said .. no bounce. Then .. out of the blue here is Newsweak and Zogby showing that Kerry got a bounce and now he's ahead of Bush.
However .. none of these polls have Kerry above Bush's 53% which Gallup had several days ago .. and Newsweak and Zogby had Bush back down to the usual 44%.
If you go back and look at Reagan's '84 win .. the numbers were very similar .. like those same pollsters had done the same thing to Reagan .. making it appear Reagan was losing .. when in effect THEY ALREADY KNEW HE WAS WINNING.
This whole thing with the numbers has only one purpose. The purpose is to get us discouraged and defeated and TO GIVE UP. I simply refuse to allow that to happen.
Thought I'd put this funny comment on a reply to that wonderful pictire of Jenna. She will come in handy in October.
As a lawyer friend of Edwards said of him: "Edwards will work for the little guy, as long as there's a million or two in it for him." What a guy that John $$$$$ Edwards! ;)
Imagine these could be the next President and VP...
Ping
I ignore all the polls. They are all the prognosticators have to talk about at this time and they - the polls - are pretty much meaningless. I always take to heart what Ann Coulter says: there's only one poll that counts, and this year it will be taken on November 2nd!
You're a genuis!
FMCDH(BITS)
Hard to get excited about that. Never seemed to do much harm to Clintoon or algore.
You can't be a couch potato and write like Steyn! ;o)
Steyns' pen is a mighty sword indeed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.