by Rick Pearson
DUBUQUE, Iowa — John Edwards today linked presidential rival Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, to a "crowd of corporate Democrats" who have no more interest in changing Washington's culture than Republicans.
Edwards criticized Hillary Clinton's acceptance of donations from special-interest lobbyists and pointedly reminded a regional conference of the United Auto Workers that it was a Democratic White House under Bill Clinton that failed to advance universal health care but delivered what he said were job-jeopardizing trade agreements.
"That's what I mean when I say it's not going to change anything if we trade a crowd of corporate Democrats for corporate Republicans," Edwards said.
Among Democratic rivals,Edwards has been the most direct critic of the Democratic senator from New York. But his rhetoric has taken on an even harsher tone as the time to Iowa's nation-leading presidential caucus on Jan. 3 draws nearer.
In soliciting labor support by portraying himself as the candidate most attuned to union issues, the former North Carolina senator repeatedly cited Clinton's continued acceptance of campaign donations from federal lobbyists, which both he and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois eschew.
"The person who has raised the most money from Washington lobbyists, the presidential candidate, is not a Republican. It's a Democrat. The person who has raised the most money from the drug industry, from the health insurance industry is not a Republican. It's a Democrat. The person who has raised the most money—and this is most startling to me—from the defense industry is not a Republican. It's a Democrat," Edwards said. "The answer to every one of those questions is Sen. Clinton."
Asked by reporters afterward if Clinton was a "corporate Democrat," Edwards said, "She is part of a system that includes a lot of corporate Democrats."
Edwards also noted that in the early 1990s, when Hillary Clinton as first lady failed in trying to construct a universal health care plan, Democrats controlled the House and Senate as well as the White House.
"We were in charge of every branch of government and those (special-interests) still killed universal health care," he said. "And we didn't get what we needed—universal health care. Man, we got something we didn't need. We got NAFTA. And NAFTA, just to remind you, did not pass and was not pushed by a Republican administration. NAFTA passed in a Democratic administration."
Organized labor has been highly critical of the North American Free Trade Agreement pushed by President Clinton, and subsequent free-trade agreements, contending they have led to huge job losses in the country, particularly in the manufacturing sector.
Hillary Clinton, who appeared earlier in the week before the UAW's Region 4 conference, which includes representatives from Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota, told the group that the nation should take a "time out" from NAFTA to examine its negative effects on labor.
Edwards also defended his call to act, as president, to take away federal health care from members of Congress until they approve a universal health care plan. Hillary Clinton and others have questioned Edwards' rhetoric by noting that the president does not have the power to take away federal health benefits.
"The response of Sen. Clinton and members of Congress is to circle the wagons and focus on protecting their health care instead of what needs to be done for America," Edwards said.
Edwards also touted his own universal health care plan, which mandates coverage. "Sen. Clinton's plan is similar to mine," he said. "Some would say she copied it. Understand, I didn't say that."




Comments
Enough already.
Posted by: Andy Dick | November 14, 2007 3:50 PM
We're supporting a Truth-teller - John Edwards!
The Centrist Clintons will continue moving the Dem Party to the right, as they did in the 90s - and cultivating Blue Dogs that vote with Repubs against The People's interests.
Posted by: anne | November 14, 2007 4:04 PM
John Edwards is a very desperate man. Yes, he is in the race but play responsible. He finds all kind of excuses and no remedies.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 14, 2007 10:30 PM
Edwards is calling it right here. Go John.
Posted by: Vivian | November 14, 2007 10:58 PM
edwards was endorse by the trial lawyers thats why he got his money also e recievd pac money bundler. of course hes third. oabma was endore by the billionare george soos- he one sided. as well. these two boys are nasty.no issue just criticize- wait when hillary ebcame pres, and urn around this country so good.
Posted by: laura | November 14, 2007 11:22 PM
I'm supporting Edwards simply because he's the most electable of the three frontrunners. Also, he doesn't carry Hillary's high negatives and the rightwing won't be able to slime him to the same degree they will Hillary and Obama. Besides, he's very much on the side of ordinary working families--like many of those he represented successfully in court.
Posted by: Judith | November 15, 2007 11:31 AM
Edwards of the $400 haircuts said this?
The same Edwards who became a multi-millionaire chasing ambulances as a lawyer?
The same Edawards who in every respect is an establishment old boy in Congress?
Gee, some guys will say anything to get elected.
Posted by: John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada | November 15, 2007 11:44 AM
Chuckman,
It would be $500 in Toronto. Holy Cow, I was just up there and felt lucky to get away with my shirt. Take a city as expensive as New York, add a depressed dollar, and what do you have?--$12 Burgers and $20 pitchers of beer (or is it Loonies?).
Anyway, I disagree with you on Edwards. I don't think it's fair to characterize all trial lawyers as "ambulance chasers". And if we condemned every millionaire in Congress as being old boy establishment, well that would clear a large swath.
I like Edward's stance on the war. I like his message on the inequalities inherent in this country. I don't think you have to live in a log cabin to be sincere about your convictions. The haircut thing--I'm not prepared to take the measure of a man on such a silly issue. It does seem ridiculous though, I pay my hairdresser $15 bucks for the cut and $5 for the tip. Of course, I thought the $350 a night for an average hotel in downtown (Trawna) was pretty outrageous too.
So..eh..cmon eh hoser! Lightnup on the Maircan Breck boy, eh? He's diffurnt from what you say, he's all aboot 2 Maircas, eh? He's a hoser you could have a good screech with, eh?
Posted by: dt | November 16, 2007 1:34 AM