Eugene Debs, Meet Bobby Kennedy

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


If Edwards can’t win, somebody’s forgotten to tell the candidate. With a day left before Nevadans caucus Saturday morning, John Edwards is pulling out all the rhetorical stops to wow his supporters.

Several hundred fans, a large number of them blue-collar workers, crammed into the Carpenters’ Union hall in Reno Thursday evening to hear the candidate deliver an impassioned plea for change.

Eleven months ago, when the Democrats held their first candidates’ forum, in Carson City, Nevada, I covered the event for Mother Jones. Back in ’04, I’d found Edwards somewhat syrupy. In Carson City, by contrast, he was magnetic. And in the year since he has honed his message and his delivery still further.

Dressed in a casual black shirt and jeans, in the sweaty intimacy of a crowded union hall—big carpenters sitting on the platform behind him, muscular 1930s-styled union posters adorning the walls—Edwards decried the state of Bush’s America. There was a rage, and a passion to his presentation that went well beyond simply hamming it up to the crowd.

To my mind, his words are worth quoting at length. They have the barnstorming fury of a Eugene Debs, perhaps a later-years Bobby Kennedy.

On the war on terror: “Here’s a radical idea. How about we have a President of the United States who believes in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? I will close Guantanamo, which is an embarrassment. No renditions. There will be no torture permissible.”

On labor: “When I am President and it becomes necessary for you to go on strike, when you’re walking that picket line, nobody, nobody will walk through that line and take your job from you.”

On corporate profiteering and widespread poverty: “I see an America where last year Exxon Mobil made $40 billion and the CEO of one of the largest health care companies made $200 million. And I contrast it with a picture of 40 million Americans who have no health care coverage and have to go to the emergency room to get treatment. Thirty seven million will wake up literally worried about feeding their families and children. Children are living on the streets in America—while Exxon Mobil made $40 billion. Last year 35 million went hungry in America. Enough is enough. We’re better than this.”

On the need for change: “We can start a tidal wave of change that spreads across this country with a power and with a force that cannot be stopped. And when that wave of change is done and that wave has spread across America, every one of us will be able to look our children in the eyes and say, ‘We did for you what our parents and grandparents did for us. We made absolutely certain that we left America better than we found it and we gave you a better life than we had.'”

Edwards may well not win the nomination—though he’s still a serious contender. And if he doesn’t, he will have lost not to a novice but to another heavyweight candidate. In a sense, there’s a refreshing luxury of choice between quality candidates this time around. But as long as Edwards is in the race, the issues of poverty and justice are going to be talked about in a way, and with a passion, that hasn’t been seen in mainstream politics for decades.

Edwards’ booklet, The Plan to Build One America [pdf], outlines in great detail the candidate’s plans to tackle poverty, hunger, the health care crisis, the growing income gaps in the country, and the decline of America’s international reputation. Perhaps most importantly, he goes to bat for organized labor in a way no other candidate is doing.

Equally refreshing is what’s not in the plan. While he does write about crime and drugs, neither merits its own section—a welcome change from the years of tough-on-crime hysteria when every candidate, of whatever political persuasion, had to prove that they were tougher and badder and meaner than their opponents, with the end result that America became the leading incarceration nation on earth.

Win or lose, Edwards campaign is raising the bar, pushing social justice issues center-stage, and fighting the good fight for a constituency at the wrong end of an awful lot of changes these past several years.

—Sasha Abramsky

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate