Wednesday, July 07, 2004
John Edwards
It makes sense for John Kerry to pick Edwards as his running mate. The vice-presidential choice will inject energy into a campaign that is increasingly viewed as flat and not particularly relevant to the major issues America is facing. However, the lack of experience of Edwards says one thing loud and clear; Kerry does not take our defense seriously. In the new post 911 world we need someone who can step in as President to be extremely experienced in national security issues. Perhaps there was no really good choice out there and this is the best that he could have done. Also, maybe Kerry to listen to those who were lobbying hard for Edwards to be the one.
His selection will not reduce or eliminate the prominence of some of the issues we discussed here recently. Because Edwards is extremely liberal his views will exaggerate the fight between the reds and blues in this country. The only way to truly reduce political tension is to rely more on civil society to solve our problems. A society that depends on politics necessarily means that there will be conflict over scarce resources. These arguments are becoming more and more viscous as the consequences of having political power mean that a party in charge can exert more and more influence over the lives of average Americans. It is not a pretty sight.
Specifically, in the area of education, an Edwards candidacy will just mean more of the same. Where some people thought that the selection of Lieberman by Gore would raise the visibility of vouchers (word had it that Lieberman was warm to the idea) Edwards will interpret yesterday's post on the differences between money spent on kids in the classroom versus in prison as another reason to call for increased support of failing and dangerous inner city schools. (By the way, Kerry did quote the article by Block and Weiszin his speech in Pittsburgh.)
I guess then my view of Edwards has not changed since my post on him in March of this year:
At first, John Edwards campaign message about the two America's was emotionally appealing. As I'm sure you know, it's central conceit was that we have two healthcare systems in America, two educational systems, two tax systems, two (you fill in the blank) systems; one for the tiny percentage of the wealthy and one for the rest of us. Never mind the fact that his solution is to turn to the same benevolent government for help that is strangely the malevolent one that put us here in the first place (through high taxes, regulations, intrusion into healthcare, education, employment law, zoning, welfare rights, etc.). But I think the bottom-line problem in his stump speech was that when he was trying to ignite the fuse of class-warfare, he was actually striking a cord in the minds of the audience. When he spoke about the advantages of being rich in America I could see Mr. and Mrs. Average Citizen saying to themselves, "I want to be like them. I really want to be like them."
PermaLink | 4:42 AM |
|
His selection will not reduce or eliminate the prominence of some of the issues we discussed here recently. Because Edwards is extremely liberal his views will exaggerate the fight between the reds and blues in this country. The only way to truly reduce political tension is to rely more on civil society to solve our problems. A society that depends on politics necessarily means that there will be conflict over scarce resources. These arguments are becoming more and more viscous as the consequences of having political power mean that a party in charge can exert more and more influence over the lives of average Americans. It is not a pretty sight.
Specifically, in the area of education, an Edwards candidacy will just mean more of the same. Where some people thought that the selection of Lieberman by Gore would raise the visibility of vouchers (word had it that Lieberman was warm to the idea) Edwards will interpret yesterday's post on the differences between money spent on kids in the classroom versus in prison as another reason to call for increased support of failing and dangerous inner city schools. (By the way, Kerry did quote the article by Block and Weiszin his speech in Pittsburgh.)
I guess then my view of Edwards has not changed since my post on him in March of this year:
At first, John Edwards campaign message about the two America's was emotionally appealing. As I'm sure you know, it's central conceit was that we have two healthcare systems in America, two educational systems, two tax systems, two (you fill in the blank) systems; one for the tiny percentage of the wealthy and one for the rest of us. Never mind the fact that his solution is to turn to the same benevolent government for help that is strangely the malevolent one that put us here in the first place (through high taxes, regulations, intrusion into healthcare, education, employment law, zoning, welfare rights, etc.). But I think the bottom-line problem in his stump speech was that when he was trying to ignite the fuse of class-warfare, he was actually striking a cord in the minds of the audience. When he spoke about the advantages of being rich in America I could see Mr. and Mrs. Average Citizen saying to themselves, "I want to be like them. I really want to be like them."
PermaLink | 4:42 AM |
| 
