MLK III Urges Edwards To Fight On

Not an endorsement, but strong words of encouragement:
So, I urge you: keep going. Ignore the pundits, who think this is a horserace, not a fight for justice. My dad was a fighter. As a friend and a believer in my father's words that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, I say to you: keep going. Keep fighting. My father would be proud.
I agree with Yglesias that Edwards has largely been a positive force in this campaign, though I have disagreements with him on some key issues. Like Jeralyn, I would like to see him fight on as well.

< Rezko and Obama: Nothing Here Folks | Fred Thompson Quits Presidential Race >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Hear, hear! (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by scribe on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 02:10:17 PM EST
    At the risk of setting off a flame war, it's clear to me that HRC and Obama are more about ambition - personal ambition - than about anything else.

    And, HRC's comment to Edwards last night about taking money from trial lawyers (like we have and give cooties, or something) - well, if you (dear readers) bother to remember, it was Dan Quayle who started to take up the cudgel on that (on the candidate level) back in '88, with his snarky remarks about tassel-loafer-wearing trial lawyers.  The WSJ had been pitching that line of crap for some years prior to that, but Quayle was where it went into wide release.

    So, Hillary - regurgitating Republican talking points without thinking, much?  You who once (in the 90s, when people looked at your billing records) remarked no one could be a real lawyer unless they'd represented a bank?

    Y'know, being a contingent-fee lawyer has its advantages.  Your bills can be expressed on one page, and without worrying about whether the number of hours both add up and are reasonable.  It's simple.  Take the amount of the settlement (after expenses) and divide by the percentages established by state law.  And, remember, zero divided by three is still zero.

    And, Hillary, what of all those grubby trial lawyers who did the grunt work of litigating for all the precious womens', gay, consumer and minority rights you talk so convincingly about?  Without them, you'd have been compelled - by the force of the law - to stay home and be baking cookies.

    I get the feeling you, HRC, couldn't find your way to the correct table in a courtroom.  Don't go after trial lawyers.

    Hmmmmm (none / 0) (#2)
    by athyrio on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 02:17:53 PM EST
    chauvinistic comment me thinks...I think it is highly possible that Hillary and Edwards will join forces.....

    Hmm (none / 0) (#3)
    by Clark on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 02:32:56 PM EST
    And let's not forget that Clinton has actually outraised Edwards among trial lawyers. So even granting her point that trial lawyers are awful special interests (which I do not,) she's still the candidate of special interest money.

    To me, the problem for Edwards is his (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 02:35:14 PM EST
    repeatedly saying he is not beholden to special interests and doesn't take any money from PACs etc.  What does he consider the trial lawyer donations to be?  Speak with somewhat forked tongue.  Just get it out there and move on.

    you're equating trial lawyers (none / 0) (#6)
    by Clark on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 02:58:03 PM EST
    with insurance execs, defense contractors, and oil and gas companies?

    No (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by BDB on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:15:46 PM EST
    A lot of what trial lawyers do is in the public interest.  But let's not kid ourselves, trial lawyers are not monolithicly wonderful people.  They are an industry like any other and sometimes their interests align with the public good and sometimes they do not.  Some of them represent worthy causes and some of them care about nothing but advanincing themseleves and making a buck.

    They are human beings, not angels.

    I don't think they should be demonized, but the idea that they give money to Edwards out of the goodness of their hearts, hoping only that he will help the people, is BS.  They give him money to have influence like every other industry.  And like every other industry some of the things they want will be in the public interest and some of the things will not be.  Because their interests and their clients' interests do not line up perfectly.  


    Not at all. (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:01:33 PM EST
    I've had it with the other two (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by chemoelectric on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 05:44:27 PM EST
    I'm planning to support Edwards at my DFL party caucus.

    this new poll (none / 0) (#5)
    by athyrio on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 02:40:03 PM EST
    that shows Obama getting now 70% of the black vote in South Carolina will ultimately hurt him as he is now going to be perceived as the black candidate....that is a shame in my opinion...

    News Flash (none / 0) (#8)
    by athyrio on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:05:12 PM EST
    apparently robo calls are going out in South Carolina against Hillary Clinton...cutting her down pretty good....reported by TPM....

    He will only be perceived as the black candidate (none / 0) (#15)
    by NaNaBear on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:29:25 AM EST
    If bloggers on here and the media turn it into a race issue.  Was Hillary votes, in NH a white vote?
     I used to love Talk Left until you decided to talk more about politics and your love for Hilary and calling Obama stupid ect, ect

    The adjectives used on this board to describe Obama are rather disturbing. I will vote in the VA. primaries. Afterwards,  am going to do like a lot of my friends are going to do. We have said we want vote in November if our black votes are dissed now. If Obama is the VP , Bill will want him to stay in his place, because he will consider himself as the president or VP. Bill is running for office.

      We also don't want four years of Bill Clinton  running around the White House  picking arguments if people disagree with his wife.  It will also mean he will be runing around the world with Bush Sr.  Hillary, like Pelosi will not want to investigate Bill's knew found friend's(Bush SR)  son.

    My view on this is not alone in the black community. Why should we vote all these years for a Dem. for President?  I hope the Dems can get more people elected in the House and Senate.

      I hope things change before November, right now its disgusting the way Dems are giving Reb. amunition.


    I loved (none / 0) (#16)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:00:16 AM EST
    Dr. King and was privileged to march on his behalf more than once....I was devistated when he was murdered...However, I highly doubt he would approve of all the vehemence and hatred being displayed to various players in this political fight....He always said that at the root of non-violence is Love....I try to remember that...We would all do well to do so....He was truly a magnificent man and the bravest one I have ever seen....As I remember he was always trying to elevate the discourse to a higher and nicer plane, perhaps we should too....

    What adjectives are you objecting to? (none / 0) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:35:30 AM EST
    Edwards (none / 0) (#11)
    by koshembos on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 06:43:11 PM EST
    Edwards is the only progressive candidate; no other candidate is even close. Without him we have to choose between Hillary and Reagan and that's sad.

    He has $500 of my money (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:30:17 PM EST
    these past two weeks.  I know, it is dollars and isn't worth a whole lot but it meant a lot to me!  He'd better fight on ;)

    to me, the problem with edwards (none / 0) (#13)
    by cpinva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:52:03 PM EST
    is that he's a complete non-entity, as far as this presidential campaign is concerned. while clearly a bright, engaging, smart guy, he's almost totally lacking in charisma: that undefinable "it" that gets people roles in movies, and elected to public office.

    in part, it's due to the historic nature of this crop of democratics, not much he can do there. in part, removing himself from the senate removed him from the public eye; distance makes the heart forget. this was self-inflicted. i don't question his decision, merely point out the obvious affect.

    lacking anything truly compelling to add to the fray, he comes off as a well meaning guy, with some good ideas, who seems a bit lost.

    hardly someone who makes you want to rush out in the wind, rain and snow to vote for him.

    democrats! sheesh! (none / 0) (#14)
    by cpinva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:54:16 PM EST

    MLK III self-interest (none / 0) (#18)
    by diogenes on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:43:58 AM EST
    A vote for Edwards is a vote for Hillary.  If Obama wins, then he will be the "spokesman" for black America, and what will that do to the soapbox for MLK III?  

    WTF (none / 0) (#19)
    by squeaky on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:55 PM EST
    Spokesman for Black America?  Is Bush spokesman for white america? Is Lieberman spokesman for Jewish America.

    What an idiotic comment.


    spokesman (none / 0) (#20)
    by diogenes on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:02:45 PM EST
    When there is an incident (Jena, etc), if Obama says that it's OK, then the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world will get no traction in the media. Right now if there is a racial incident the press goes straight to these two, who are at least media and self-styled spokesmen.  If MLK Jr. were still alive most would call him a "spokesman" for black America.



    You're Daft (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 12:44:48 AM EST
    It is hard to believe that an educated person could make a comment like that. I guess you must be a white republican.

    DId GWB, a white christian steal the "soapbox" from James Dobson,  Jerry Fallwel, or Pat Robertson?

    Or does your system of shutting people up only work for Black People.