Lawyers for Edwards

[penguin7]

I know from reading the posts here and on Dailykos that there is a large contingent of lawyers supporting Edwards. It is now pretty clear that Edwards is not electable.

Edwards is not a good progressive choice. He cheerleaded for the war in Iraq and his healthcare plan is a massive federal giveaway to the private insurance companies. Further the vote for Edwards will not be interpreted as a progressive movement. This vote will be seen for what it is, the trial lawyers supporting their man.

Edwards healthcare rhetoric is hollow since his healthcare plan is just a massive giveaway to the corporate interests he claims to oppose. And there is very little really concrete to his anti-corporate rhetoric beyond mere pretty words. Edward's work at Fortress further undercuts his anti-corporate message.

At this point neither Edwards nor Kucinich are likely to win the nomination. A vote for Kucinich is a vote against the war in Iraq, a vote for single payer health care and a vote for cutting the bloated military budget. A vote for Kucinich sends a genuine clear message.

I admit I have some major differences with the legal professional. This blind support for a seriously flawed reincarnated progressive makes me dislike the legal profession just that much more.

[PresidentObama]

1. How come Kucinich supporters hate when others steal their thunder?

Edwards is seen as very progressive, that's Kucinich's gig. No one can be progressive in this race if DemoGod Dennis is. So let's attack him, label him a phony, and go balls to the wall in attacking a fellow Democrat.

Barack Obama is anti-war. Wait, that's Dennis' position. Let's attack Obama.

Build up your own candidate, and stop trying to beat the others down.

[LSK]

2. so offering a medicare plan for anyone is caving to corporate interests how?

Also which lawyers? Corporate lawyers or plaintiff lawyers?

I cant believe people are still posting this ignorant stuff.

[asdjrocky]

3. First we kill all the lawyers right?

You really need to read your Shakespeare.

Isn't your act getting a little thin here? Any true progressive, in this day and age in American, knows that sometimes, the trial lawyer is the only hope for the poor, or injured.

[penguin7]

7. I was trying not to bash lawyers

But the legal profession is supporting Edwards en masse which I believe reflects poorly on the legal profession.

Further, the legal profession is a special interest like all the rest of them, and Edwards is too beholden to this special interest.

Of course we need lawyers, but we also need some rather serious reform of the legal system.

[asdjrocky]

8. So you're talking tort reform right?

That is such a joke. Did you go back and read Shakespeare like I asked?

[penguin7]

12. I would get rid of torts altogether.

But we need more fundumental reform than "tort reform."

The legal system is corrupt and broken, and in serious need of "change."

[Bake]

9. "The legal profession" does not back Edwards

Many lawyers in the plaintiffs' bar - the so-called "trial lawyers" - support Edwards. But to say that the "legal profession" as a whole supports anyone is simply erroneous. Even the term "trial lawyers" is misleading - there are both plaintiff and defense lawyers, civil and criminal, who try cases. There are also corporate, in-house, transactional, etc. lawyers.

By the way - THIS lawyer (defense trial bar) backs Edwards.

Bake

[penguin7]

11. Here is the opensecrets data for Edwards

http://opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=K01

Considering Edwards has raised far less in total than Obama and Clinton, this is a huge percentage of his financial support.

There are also is a huge block of lawyers on DU and Dailykos that are skewing the debate by proclaiming this very problematic candidate named Edwards the best choice for progressives. Edwards is not good on the war in Iraq, his health care plan is a giveaway to private insurance companies and he does not intend to end US imperialism.

[Bake]

15. We're "skewing the debate"??? By supporting a candidate?

Your "criticisms" are simply conclusory statements with no factual backup. But some are - gasp - skewing the debate by supporting their own candidates? I'm shocked, I tell ya, SHOCKED!

If you want to debate - especially with a lawyer - you'd best bring more than that.

Bake

[penguin7]

17. They are skewing the debate by promoting a very flawed candidate

as a good choice for the left wing of the party.

[Bake]

25. I think we're capable of making up our own minds.

But thanks for your concern.

Bake

[Hieronymus]

22. Opensecrets.org contributions from Insurance ...

Insurance

Christopher J. Dodd (D) $713,012

Mitt Romney (R) $629,167

Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) $530,615

Hillary Clinton (D) $525,938

Barack Obama (D) $390,513

John McCain (R) $246,524

Bill Richardson (D) $179,508

John Edwards (D) $129,600

[Hieronymus]

21. Here are the contributions from lawyers- www.opensecrets.org ...

Lawyers/Law Firms

Hillary Clinton (D) $9,596,748

John Edwards (D) $8,161,150

Barack Obama (D) $7,940,424

[demnan]

4. Early on I went to an Edwards fundraiser

at a DC lawfirm. One of the members of the firm actually ran for Congress in my area, and I became a friend of his and helped him with the fundraiser. He is a personal friend of Edwards and worked on the campaign. Many people in that lawfirm are aghast at what has gone on at gitmo and actually some of the firm defended them, but Edwards hasn't really hit on that message lately. He gave a fine Internationally oriented speech that day, back in March of last year.

I support Kucinich now, but I can see how he connected with this group, and my friend is a very well known and well liked lawyer and its a prominent firm and I know they collected a lot of money from that group.

[fenriswolf]

5. i do not agree with that

and as far as lawyers vote not all lawyers are bad. In fact lawyers by a profession study the law and how it is enforced and how justice is dispensed. Usually lawyers have a much better grasp of whats going on legally and constitutionally.

Been reading the news? have you been reading the news where the lawyers speak for the public when the public is being silenced. Instead of an indicator to not vote for edwards I would say is if he has the disdain of corporations and has curried favor with lawyers thats two pluses for edwards.

BTW I am a kucinich fan through and through.

[redqueen]

6. " It is now pretty clear that Edwards is not electable."

Pure BS.

:hi:

[Andy823]

10. I agree

Pure and simple BS to the highest!

[OzarkDem]

13. Why are you using GOP talking points

in a Democratic forum?

[penguin7]

14. So criticizing the legal system is a GOP talking point?

How convenient for the legal profession. The Democratic party is not allowed to ask the legal system to change.

[redqueen]

16. You're not "criticizing the legal system" you're broad-brushing an entire

group of Americans, in a VERY VERY ugly and RIGHT WING manner.

[penguin7]

27. My main point is that the lawyers in this forum and Dailykos

are skewing the debate in a dishonest manner by promoting John Edwards as the best left wing choice.

[redqueen]

28. "The lawyers" are doing no such thing.

You don't know them all, and you don't speak for all of them.

Please, just stop. It's nonsense.

[penguin7]

29. There is certainly an organized gang of lawyers promoting Edwards on this site

and on Dailykos.

I have read too many posts here and on Dailykos. I know damn well this is not nonsense.

[redqueen]

30. That's effin hilarious. (nt)

[Hieronymus]

18. The RNC would love having you writing ads for them.

[penguin7]

19. Maybe the Democratic Party gets too much money from the legal profession

I do not see how the poison money the Democratic party gets from the legal profession is any better than the poison money it gets from the "evil" corporations.

[redqueen]

20. Which evil corporations defend the little guy from the abuses of corporate giants?

Hm?

[penguin7]

23. I do not accept the proposition that lawyers protect the little guy

In the usual case where the little guy has a problem with corporations, resorting to a lawyer is not financially viable. I am not so ready to accept the claim that the exceptional cases that are financially viable are helping the little guy all that much. In fact, the argument can be made that these exceptional cases are simply a tax on us all helping noone but the legal profession.

[redqueen]

24. Lawyers are not a homogenous entity.

Why do you keep trying to spread that rightwing bullshit meme?

[Stop Cornyn]

26. Extra-Terrestrials for Kucinich ROCK!

[spooky3]

31. Go to Opensecrets.org; lawyers have contributed equally to all 3 front

runners, approximately. About $8-10 million each. And all three of the front runners are attorneys. So that shouldn't be a reason to single out Edwards for your unhappiness.

on edit--sorry to be redundant with others' posts above