John Edwards for President

Debate in the Pink House over presidential candidates has not even considered the two top runners—Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama. I can’t speak for the other Pinklers, but, although I am thrilled and aware of what a huge step forward for the US it is to have a woman and a black man as the leading contenders for the presidency, I can support neither of them. Clinton began to lose me when she went from Ms. Rodham to Mrs. Clinton, worried more about her hairstyle than her politics, and stopped being a voice for women. Despite the whole sex scandal, Bill did more for women than Hilary has. Initially,I was interested in and hopeful about Obama, despite his inexperience, until I heard him say he wanted to INCREASE the size of the military.

Being from North Carolina, however, and having a hugely sentimental bias towards the state, I have wanted to support Edwards ever since 2000. Like other Pinklers—and indeed, the majority of my leftist friends—I questioned his “slickness,” his multi-million dollar residence, his record victories in high-priced law cases. And by the time Election Day 2004 came around, my enthusiasm for Kerry was so deflated, Edwards’ name on the ticket hardly caused a blip in my blood pressure. Like in 1988, however, when “Duke til you puke” was as excited as we leftists could get about the Dukakis-Benson ticket, I voted democrat. Fat lot of good that did.

John Edwards, however, really attracted my notice when, instead of taking a high-powered corporate or political job as his status as vice-presidential candidate would have allowed, he chose to head up the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. At that point, I would’ve thought, he could’ve traded his profile and charisma for either big money or heavy duty Washington power. He did neither, instead working for an organization that has neither glamour nor prestige. This, of course, may have had something to do with his wife, Elizabeth’s, breast cancer diagnosis on election day—I was exceedingly disappointed when, after stating with great passion and sincerity, “We will count every vote,” Edwards caved so easily when it was clear that irregularities in Ohio cast every shadow on the election’s legitimacy. But I forgave him with tears in my eyes when he and his wife announced her cancer; with such a heavy emotional blow (on a family that had already suffered so much), I thought, how can I blame him for conserving his energy to support his wife during her illness.

Since that time, however, I have given Edwards a lot of thought, and have concluded that he is the best candidate for president in the current race, for a number of reasons.

1) He’s a Southerner. In case the Democrats, and indeed, liberals, leftists and progressives, haven’t noticed, the last two Democrats to win the White House have been from the South. And unlike Georgia and Arkansas, North Carolina is not a “deep South” state, mired in the poverty and racism that traditionally characterize some of her neighbors. North Carolina was nearly evenly divided between seceding from the Union and staying, because its economic base consisted as much of small (non-slave owning) farmers as it did big plantations. That relative egalitarianism has developed over the last 150 years in NC—one of the first Southern states to “recover” from reconstruction, the state has maintained a better and more equal standard of living than almost any other state in the South. NC had its share of Civil Rights activities—and there were no Bull Conners, no dogs and water hoses turned on the folks at the Woolworth’s counter in Winston-Salem. There were some issues with integration, particularly in the southeast; but North Carolina also has several old and well-respected traditional black universities. Edwards was born—as is often touted to add to his “rags to riches” credibility—to a textile mill worker in South Carolina, a southern state never known for its progressive attitude. But that he chose to go to university and then to live in North Carolina is a fact I count to his credit.

2) I have yet to hear John Edwards spout the same old xenophobic rhetoric about how the US is the greatest nation on Earth, etc, etc—while it bubbles like an over-full septic system from the lips of every other mainstream candidate. WHAT, exactly, is the US greatest at? As Bill Maher recently noted, the US “isn't ranked anywhere near first in anything except military might and snotty billionaires” (http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/05/04/france/index.html). I have lived in a number of other countries, most of which have nowhere near the economic clout or democratic foundations the US claims; and yet the standards of living for the majority of the people in those countries is so much better than that of the US, it’s shocking. For one thing, they all have national health care, which is a great relief both financially and psychologically; when you never have to choose between eating, paying a bill, or going to a doctor, that’s a huge weight off your shoulders.
I love that John Edwards talks about the problems of this country, the two
Americas—older lefties may remember Michael Harrington’s book, The Other America, which heavily influenced JFK’s and Johnson’s “War on Poverty.” I haven’t researched his writing enough to know if his ideas come from the same populist movement that influenced Harrington, but it doesn’t matter where he got the ideas as long as he’s sincere about them. Coming from the textile worker’s background as he does, he surely has memories and experience of a lower working class lifestyle.
** Note on the $400 haircut: Maybe if the US people weren’t so damned shallow, choosing a president like they do an “American Idol”, Edwards (and other candidates) wouldn’t have to be so concerned about image, calling in top dollar cosmetic services because they are so busy on the campaign trail (raising money, mind you, not actually campaigning yet) that they don’t have time to go to their regular barber. Maybe, if the US people (and I’ll acknowledge that it might be the media who’s doing it, not the people) actually cared about substance instead of style, a candidate could appear in a public forum without having to worry about looking like a movie star—be it haircuts, makeovers, face-lifts, or teeth-whitening.

3) And speaking of which, let’s talk about that multi-million dollar house. Sure, it’s extravagant. But isn’t that the whole idea of the American dream, to come from poverty and go to wealth? It’s not my dream to be one of the super rich (which, incidentally, Edwards is not) nor clearly is it that of my fellow Pinklers; but isn’t it the dream—that has been touted and fostered as the ultimate possibility in this country—of many US people? Sure, Dennis Kucinich reflects, much more than John Edwards, my ideals in both his lifestyle and his politics—but does he reflect the ideals of the majority of US people? As Jeb Bartlett (you know, the guy who plays the President on TV) famously said, “I was elected to represent all the people, not just the ones who agree with me.” Who will be perceived as being better able to do that—Kucinich or Edwards?

4) Which brings me to my final point: Electibility. Yes, yes, that’s a defeatist attitude, if we keep saying Kucinich isn’t electible, he won’t be. Well, that’s what I said about Nader in 2000. Now, I don’t blame Nader (or my voting for him) for the theft of the White House by Bush. I blame the people who did actually vote for Bush (though to be fair who would’ve thought he’d be this bad?); I blame Al Gore for not having a more dynamic and appealing campaign; and most of all I blame the wimpy damn congress who allowed the whole travesty to be foisted upon the people and the world. Now, if Kucinich gets the nomination, he will certainly have my vote and my blessing. But I don’t believe he will, nor do I believe he can win the majority of votes in the US. And when you’re in a hole this deep, the first thing you gotta do is stop digging. As far as I can see, John Edwards has the biggest shovel.

5) Now, I would personally be thrilled to death for the US to make a huge surge to the left—hell, let’s put those damned French to shame!—and I would devote every waking minute to helping whoever achieved that surge succeed. But I don’t think it’s going to happen. US people are too scared, too timid, too uneducated, too unaware of their own history—let alone the history of the world—to make such a brave step. This timidity and lack of moral and political courage is all too evident in our elected representatives in congress. I’m furious with the Democrats for continuing to allow the neo-cons to set the agenda, even with a majority in congress. I do appreciate the courage of Kucinich and Gravel—as I applauded the courage of Cynthia McKinney and Barbara Lee (where were the Democratic senators in the Congressional Black Caucus’ calls for an investigation into voter fraud and disenfranchisement); even Republicans like Walter B. Jones Jr (from … wait for it … North Carolina …badum-ching) who challenge the warmongers on every step. I understand that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are working with a very slim majority and they have to be diplomatic—but I can’t help but think that, as smart as these people are, they must be able to come up with ways to outsmart the Bush cabal, whose responses (“I don’t recall” and “I don’t have time to answer a subpoena”) are certainly not evidence of membership in Mensa. Finally, in November, the US people got off their asses and said NO MORE to the neo-con railroad; we have, in fact, done the most that we can within the electoral framework to demand new leadership. Now where the hell is it?

6) And that may be the single most important reason to vote for Edwards. Although he spent one senate term in Washington and thus has some experience in how things work, he is NOT part and parcel of this yin-yang of corporate mouthpieces that both parties seem to have become. Edwards is a new, fresh face. He’s neither a Clinton nor a Bush nor a Reagan (although after 6 years of W, I’m sometimes nostalgic for the “kinder, gentler” Reagan years). We the people seem to have made an awful blunder here in the early years of the new millennium; let’s correct it by voting for a leader whom all of us can live with, and some of us can even admire. I envision an Edwards presidency as one of gracious charm, interested affability, and sincere willingness to listen to and work for the people. He’s been championing the individual against the corporate behemoth for years in private practice—well, isn’t that what we need in a president? Someone who will go against the multi-national Goliath’s to protect all of the individual, hardworking Davids, both in the US and abroad? He’s no Dennis Kucinich—but neither is the US Sweden—or New Zealand.

As a feminist and a long-time supporter of racial justice and equality, I’m saddened by the fact that I can support neither the woman nor the black candidate for 2008 (although I did see an “Oprah/Obama 08” sticker the other day—now, that would be just too damned hard to resist). At this monumental time in US political history, alas, my candidate is the rich white male. But hey, isn’t that the whole point—that it be not the “color of his skin” or her gender, but the content of character, on which we base our vote? Surely the choices we have this election cycle in the Democratic Party reflect how very far we have come in such a short time.