More truth about Edwards' record (re: trade)

Edwards has a very good trade record. Let's compare him to St. Kerry, a prominent progressive who was in office the entire time Edwards was. Edwards is the closest thing to a protectionist that can get elected.

-snip-

Edwards voted against trade pacts with Chile, Singapore and Africa, which Kerry supported. But he voted in 2000 to grant most-favored-nation trading status to China, as did Kerry and most other senators.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15414-20...

St. Kerry

07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act NV
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act NV
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 Y
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill Y
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill Y
07/17/1997 Most Favored Nation Repeal Amendment N

Edwards

07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 N
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill N
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill N

Edwards voted right on every trade bill except one and that one was Bill Clinton's baby. It also was not as clear cut as it appears in retrospect. Edwards explained why he voted for it and it was a perfectly reasonable belief to have, a belief most of his Democratic colleagues shared.

Edwards can seriously be attacked for once supporting the war but the Big Lie, which picked up steam in February of 2007 (what happened that month?), that he was not a populist until recently and especially that he sucked on trade is nonsensical.

Bonus question, whose record is the following:

07/07/2003 U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
07/07/2003 U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act N
08/01/2002 Trade Act of 2002 N
09/19/2000 U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 Y
09/13/2000 China Nonproliferation Act Y
05/11/2000 Africa Free Trade bill N
11/03/1999 Africa Free Trade bill NV

Does this Senator suck on trade too? I hear he is a big Rethuglican in sheep's clothing! What has he done for the poor? Probably nothing. He is rich too I hear!

.

If you answer it correctly I can go to the back of the a very swift boat, the S.S. Hope, and get you a great prize.

If He Can't Do IT NOBODY CAN!

The other votes that way and talks protectionist.

So you think Edwards and, let's call him, Senator K, are free traders who talk like protectionists?

a) there are two senators in the OP- John Edwards (ex) and John Kerry, and there is a mention of Bill Clinton.
b) I am saying I never heard Senator Kerry wasnt for fair, free trade and enforcing our current agreements. Edwards, who voted that way, is now talking like a massive protectionist -- which I think is bad economic policy.

Edwards record is protectionist. See above.

Voting for and against legislation does not qualify you as either a pure free trader or a protectionist -- though voting yes on several different pieces of free trade legislation suggests you are not protectionist -- which again, i am fine with.

Followup question...

Which is one is now running for president against his own record?

I would like to see 99% of the Democrats in office start "running against their own records."

Then they get in and do what they have always done.

We are forced to divine or interpret from their double talk that they are kinda sorta on our side or are taking a stand on something. We think they said something and then are surprised that they don't follow through on what we thought they said. We settle for little or nothing again and again and roll over far too easily.

The responsibility is ours. Again and again we project our wishes onto what the candidates say and read tea leaves or something because we so desperately want to believe them.

They represent us. We don't give them much of any substance to represent, because we start with loyalty to them - "they are better than the Republicans!" and "any Dem is better" - and then wonder why we have no leverage.

Again and again we tell the Democratic party politicians that we will support them no matter what. How can they represent that position? They can't.

The point is that they TALK a great game. TALK about ending the war. TALK about helping the poor. TALK about government responsibility. However, once the power is given, they do what they want and shrug at us and say "politics".


This is why I only look at ACTIONS and not at words. If a candidate says they are progressive, but doesn't have the solid record to back it up... I tune them out. If a candidate spends 1/2 of their campaign telling us how they were wrong when they had the power... I am not interested, but I have no reason to believe they won't get into power and do the same thing they did before.

Why hasn't anyone come in this thread and spewed the "fact" that "his rhetoric doesn't match his record"? Did the Obamites pushing that for a year know it was a lie all along or did they just never bother to look up Edwards' record?