No timeline. No funding. No excuses.
And for one of the more insightful rationales about why Edwards is the real deal – and not Clinton or Obama – do read this recent analysis from Steve Kirsch.
His methodology? “The same as I used in 2000, i.e., if you want to know the truth about these candidates, you have to look beyond the surface. You must look at the facts that they are not telling you.”
So I felt I needed to do my homework because I was very confused as to who I should support. So in May of 2007, I started as an undecided voter and I spent about a month pouring over the voting records, legislation, statements, policies, actions, responses to my questions, and impressions of others who know the candidates. I wrote up nearly 40 pages of analysis with references, but that’s too long for most people to read, so I summarized it (in the link above.)
Here’s one small sample of what he found:
She’s been talking about the need for universal health care for more than 15 years, but as of September 6, 2007, she still hasn’t proposed a universal health plan! What more evidence do you need than this? If she can’t even come up with a proposal after 15 years of working on this issue, then how do you think she’s going to perform on other important issues? The answer is obvious: virtually nothing is going to get done under her administration because it takes her too long to decide what she is going to do.
A President Obama wouldn’t be much different than President Bush with respect to removing troops from Iraq. CNN reported that Obama announced his plan for reducing troops on September 12 in Clinton, Iowa. Obama would withdraw troops “at a pace of one or two brigades every month.” So it could take as much as 10 months under Obama’s plan just to reduce the troops to pre-surge levels. That’s not much faster than the rate that President Bush wants to withdraw the troops (reduce to pre-surge levels in 10 months). Contrast that with what Senator Clinton would do (she didn’t say), or with what Edwards would do (immediately withdraw 40,000 to 50,000 troops).
He’s a leader. Look at the same Iraq war funding vote for example. While the other two candidates voted silently and refused to tell people where they stood on whether to fund the war in Iraq, Edwards was repeatedly urging his followers to tell their Members of Congress to vote against giving Bush the money to keep the war going. Edwards was outspoken in his opposition to the war and the need to cut the funding. The other two candidates were silent. It is a stunning example of the huge leadership difference between Edwards and the other two top candidates. If you want someone who will lead us out of Iraq, Edwards should be your choice.
Kirsch is one of the few Silicon Valley serial technology entrepreneurs who puts his money where his mouth is, pouring millions of dollars into his own charitable foundation, and donating funds to environmental and world safety causes, not to mention his own community.
He’s also one of the smartest people I’ve ever met – and I say that even after deciding not to continue to pursue a job with him him back in the mid-90’s (I moved to Oregon instead.) And (if that’s not enough), the man’s out there actively fighting spam and gave the world the optical mouse. And I’m grateful to him for confirming the gut choice I made back in 2004 to back Edwards next time around!