Analyzing John Edwards

Like I said, I want to look at the policies of John Edwards, who seems to be gaining popularity over Dr. Hulk and Wesley "Anti-American Propagandists Endorse Me" Clark. I'm kind of curious myself, as I haven't really taken a close look at him. I've been too busy making fun of Mad How and Crap Weasel.

To make up for that, I'll look at a few of his positions from this page on his campaign website and the related links. I won't be linking to individual pages here, but you can check my quotes for yourself if you want by clicking on the above link and going to the appropriate sections.

First of all, as far as his economic policies go, I can't say much, being more or less economically illiterate. However, he does want to repeal the Bush tax cuts, and he makes a lot of references to the legendary "Top 1 Percent" of Americans who supposedly don't pay taxes. Basically, he wants to tax the crap out of rich people. Pretty standard left wing stuff there.

Now, we come to civil rights, which is more or less my favorite area of politics because of how warped the whole concept of civil rights has become. Let's look at a few of Edwards' ideas:

Ensuring Fair Admissions To Colleges And Universities
Edwards has fought Bush administration efforts to weaken affirmative action programs, and personally signed a brief that urged the United States Supreme Court to uphold affirmative action at the University of Michigan.

Well, that answers the question of what he thinks about racial preferences.

At the same time, Edwards has encouraged colleges and universities to make college admissions fairer by eliminating legacy admissions that favor the wealthy.

Eliminating legacy admissions=good. Doing so just because they "favor the wealthy"=stupid. You people really take that "money is the root of all evil" stuff to heart, don't you?

Fighting For Judges Who Will Support Our Civil Rights Laws
As a member of the Judiciary Committee, Edwards has questioned, and later opposed, judicial nominees who would put their personal views above the law, including Charles Pickering, Bill Pryor, and Miguel Estrada.

And the current judges haven't put their personal views above the law? What about your support of the UM affirmative action plan? That didn't gain popular support, but you seem to want the judges to institute it anyway. Once again, we end up positively drenched in liberal elitism. "Only we on the left know what's best for The People™, and if you disagree with us, it's only because your personal views are blinding you to the truth!"

By the way, why would Miguel Estrada, a Hispanic judge, be against civil rights? Does he hate himself? What about Bill Pryor, who is very religious? Does he not want civil rights for Christians?

Moving ahead...

Punishing Hate Crimes
Edwards supports legislation to punish crimes motivated by hatred of people based on their race, national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.

Of course, the lawyer wants to make sure that his profession has plenty of ridiculous cases to keep them employed. What is it with liberals and focusing only on motivation?

-"Bush only went to war for oil!"
-"The tax cuts were only meant to help the rich!"
-"You only murdered him because he's black!"

Ensuring America Is Strong And Free
Edwards believes that we don't have to sacrifice our liberties or our equal rights in order to preserve our security. America cannot allow this administration and John Ashcroft to use the war on terrorism to take away our civil rights, take away our liberties, and take away our freedom.

What exactly has Ashcroft done, anyway? That's one of those "abuses of the Patriot Act" situations. They always claim Ashcroft wants to take our rights away, but can't actually provide an example. Incidentally, why would you be worried about your own rights because of policies designed to catch terrorists? Have you been hanging around Al Qaeda types lately?

There's more, but it's all about frickin' taxes again. I really need to take an economics class. Let's move on to his education policy, which contains one of the dumbest ideas I've ever seen, known as "College for Everyone."

Offer "College for Everyone"
Edwards will provide one year of free tuition to public universities and community colleges.

In return, students will be required to come to college academically prepared and to work or serve their communities for an average of 10 hours each week.

Idea...so...stupid...that...I...can't...stop...using...ellipses! How can you possibly think that's a good idea? Do you see this? He wants to pay a year's worth of tuition for EVERYBODY. Do you realize how freaking expensive that would be? Where does he think this money is going to come from? Why, the "Top 1 Percent," of course. That explains it.

I didn't know about this policy until a few minutes ago, but I can already tell that it's horrible. I don't get it. Did it ever occur to him that some people just weren't meant to go to college, and those who were can usually afford it if they really try? Why don't we just take the next logical step and make college compulsory and government-funded. Gotta control the uneducated masses, right? Moron.

End "Legacy" Admissions
Many colleges are more likely to admit students whose parents attended. The "legacy" admissions preferences stack the deck against students who may be the first in their family to go to college.

While strongly supporting affirmative action to open the doors of college, Edwards believes colleges and universities should eliminate legacy preferences.

This really bothers me. I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm against legacy admissions AND affirmative action. How can you be for one and against the other? APPLY THE SAME STANDARDS TO EVERYONE!!!!!!

Since there's still a chance this guy might be president, I'm glad I already got into a private university. These policies are insane.

Moving on to foreign policy...

Protecting the safety and security of the American people. * Winning the war on terrorism. * Maintaining the world's best military. * Winning the peace. * Forging a global coalition against weapons of mass destruction. * Promoting America's highest values - democracy, freedom and human rights - around the world. * Rebuilding relationships with America's allies and friends. * Working to resolve conflicts. * Revitalizing institutions that make America stronger.

Edwards apparently supports the Iraq War and the WoT, so there's not a lot to say here. I still don't know if I can trust him, but he at least seems to realize that we have a military for a reason.

Moving on again to health care, I'll just cover one main problem:

A plan that will work
It is wrong that 12 million children are without health insurance. My plan will, for the first time in history, cover each and every one. It takes care of our most vulnerable adults. It helps regular Americans who work their hearts out pay for the high cost of health care. It does so in a way that families and the country can afford.

Draw your own conclusions. Frickin' socialism.

Edwards looks fairly sane on homeland security, and unlike Dr. Douche, he has an actual plan to fight terrorism. Sounds slightly better, but I still think Dubya has the right idea and doesn't need to be replaced at the moment. Now, we move on to the "women and families" section, where I will quickly cover his views on abortion:

Supporting Roe vs. Wade, Fighting For a Federal Freedom of Choice Act
Edwards is a strong supporter of Roe vs. Wade and a woman's right to choose. At a January 2003 NARAL event, Edwards said he would "help lead a fight to pass a federal freedom of choice act so that your right to choose is guaranteed and protected no matter what the court does."

I feel nauseous already. "Let's make murdering unborn children an undisputed right!" Crap, this disgusts me.

He has voted against Republican efforts to prohibit funding for choice for federal employees, DC residents and women overseas at international family planning centers.

If it's a frickin' choice, don't make the government pay for it. If these women are so set on killing their kids, let's see them do it with their own money.

He also voted to eliminate a ban on abortions at overseas military facilities, which would ban abortion even if the woman paid for it herself.

"Even if." Well, I guess he really does think the government should pay for it.

Opposing a Global Gag Rule
Edwards opposes President Bush's reinstatement of the "Mexico City policy" or "global gag rule," which prevents an organization from receiving federal funding—or UN funding—if they provide abortions or counsel patients about abortions.

I don't know what to say. He really does want abortion to be a government-financed right. Tell me, when did you realize that you hate children?

Opposing Anti-Choice Nominations
Edwards, a member of the Judiciary Committee voted against the nominations of John Ashcroft, Priscilla Owen, and Bill Pryor each strongly opposed by pro-choice groups such as NOW, NARAL, and Planned Parenthood.

Why, exactly, did you do this? I don't understand that at all. What is it about being anti-abortion that automatically makes someone unfit to be a judge? If I can offer a bit of related commentary, what does it say about the moral state of this country when people who OPPOSE the destruction of innocent children are considered extremists? Think about it.

Anyway, that's just a small sampling of the information available on the Edwards website. My first impression:

He's good on homeland security and national defense, but he seems to hate anyone with money, he can't see the problems with racial preferences despite his opposition to legacy admissions, he wants to socialize health care and college, and he's about as pro-abortion as you can get.

CD gives John Edwards a thumbs down. The rest of you can make your own judgments. I'll analyze Johnkerrywhowasinvietnam another time.

Posted by CD on January 25, 2004 07:18 PM
Category: