A Shyster, a Socialist, and a Man of Color

By: Nancy Morgan (View Profile)

The current crop of Democrat candidates for president is a testament to America’s recent obsession with form over substance. Each candidate represents a façade totally at odds with the qualities and character required to be an effective leader.

Let’s start with John Edwards. By any measure, he qualifies as a shyster. A smooth talking, totally persuasive individual who has made his enormous fortune by fooling people into acting on their emotions rather than the facts. This has become a hallmark of the left, even outlined in a DNC memo a few months ago.

By “channeling” a dead girl, he persuaded numerous juries to award multi-million dollar settlements against doctors by blaming cerebral palsy on medical care during delivery. This argument has since been debunked but only after many doctors have been sued out of existence and thousands of patients have lost their health care. Thanks to John Edwards. 

Edwards has chosen the proven strategy of class warfare to advance his political fortunes. He claims to be a champion of the downtrodden middle-class. The only problem is, this too, is a false argument, as Thomas Sowell points out in his article Dangerous Demagoguery: Part 2 .

Edwards promises to “ban all lobbyists from the White House staff.” Not from the White House, not from Congress, but from the staff of the White House. Americans may now rest easy knowing the White House chef won’t be persuaded to vote for specialized earmarks. Whew.

Edwards got into this race knowing he had no chance. His motive, however, was to accrue power and influence. It’s worked. The media now refers to him as a “king-maker,” and he has both Hillary and Obama promising him the world for his endorsement. Robert Novak reports that Obama has offered him the post of Attorney General. Hillary has to top that. Scary stuff. Oh, I almost forgot. What kind of man enters a campaign he knows he can’t win, as his wife and the mother of his children is dying of cancer? 

Barak Obama, however, is even more dangerous than Edwards. Obama presents as a totally sincere, articulate (can I say that?) educated, savvy, and very smart politician. To his credit, he has not played the race card, probably understanding that he already has the “white guilt” vote sewed up.

Obama’s façade is presidential, no doubt about it. It’s only when you scratch the surface that one realizes his radical underpinnings and total lack of experience. A glaring example was Obama’s off the cuff statement that he would “invade Pakistan.” I don’t doubt his sincerity. I’m just horrified by his naivety.

2 readers liked this story.
bookmarks
Comments
posted: 01.29.2008
Nancy Morgan
have you not noticed it is verboten to criticize blacks? If you do, you're immediately branded a rascists and lose Senate seats, radio host jobs etc. The race card has been played since 1964, to great effect and to the detriment of the black race. Americans are so eager to prove their not racists that they spend a lifetime trying to prove a negative. That's white guilt.
posted: 01.29.2008
Shyla Batliwalla
I appreciate your article and opinions and think you bring up some great points. I am a little confused by this statement: "To his credit, he has not played the race card, probably understanding that he already has the “white guilt” vote sewed up." I am not sure I understand what you mean. What exactly is the "race card?" I think that people are aware that Barak is not white and I don't think they need to feel guilty about it. I think Barak is who he is, an American-born man just trying to make it to the top and make our country a better place.
It feels good to write.

Your stories, musings, and advice are welcome here. We know you've got something to share, so jump in—maybe get a little famous. And don't worry—you can save a draft!

most liked
Loader_buff
Other topics you might appreciate
Neighborhood & World