|
|
|
|
John Edwards And The Myth of Liberal Populism
by Isaiah Z. Sterrett
15 July 2004
Instead
of joining a youthful populist with an experienced legislator, John Kerry's
campaign joined a rich snob from the south with a richer snob from New England.
|
|
Democrats fancy themselves
the working man’s representatives, crusading against corporate greed and
fighting for unions, a higher minimum wage, and redistributionism.
But the self-proclaimed Party of the People is really just the Party of Lobbyists,
Bullies, and Snobs. Populism is no longer their métier.
Liberal populist aspirant Jim Hightower, the former Texas agriculture commissioner,
believes that he’s just an average American, working toward what every other
American wants. He calls himself “America’s #1 Populist,” and spends
his days traipsing through the country wailing about the ugly oppressiveness
of capitalism and democracy. The Houston Chronicle called him “one of the dynamic populist voices of his era.”
But what exactly has Hightower accomplished? What achievements can liberals
attribute to him? On the tundra of American politicking, where is Hightower’s
footprint?
He isn’t “dynamic,” and -- to draw upon his trademark Texas lingo -- he ain’t
no populist. He appeals not to an angry sect of Americans fed up with
their plight in life, but to a few thousand ideologues scattered throughout
America who hate George Bush.
Democrats don’t understand that. They think Hightower and his lowly
ilk have a respectable following. They think there’s a sizeable group
of Americans silently praying for the day that John Kerry “takes back America.”
Kerry’s selection of John Edwards, another supposed “populist,” is a testament
to that.
The man who would like to replace Dick Cheney won kudos from the lovestruck
press during the Democratic primaries when he spoke about our allegedly divided
country. He grimly reported that there are “two Americas,” one for
the swine with money, and one for the rest of us.
He said there’s “[o]ne America that does the work, another America that reaps
the reward; one America that pays the taxes, another America that gets the
tax breaks; one America that will do anything to leave its children a better
life, another America that never has to do a thing because its children are
already set for life."
Figuring out what Edwards meant by that speech is a process similar to watching Gone With the Wind
in one sitting. Though it doesn’t physically hurt, it does make you
pine for the more exciting things in life, such as reading books about weed
removal.
One could spend his life searching for truth behind Edwards’ diatribe and
never come up with anything even loosely coherent, principally because the
premise of his speech is a lie. Americans who work always reap the
reward of their efforts. That’s why they work. If American workers
weren’t reaping what they sewed, they’d quit sewing and take up canasta.
The people who work are also the ones paying the taxes, because they’re the
only people who can afford them. In fact, here in this America -- I’m
not sure which America it is -- making more money means paying more taxes.
This is further evidence that work provides profit.
And how did Edwards’ “two Americas” drivel lead to all this talk about Democrats’
keen optimism? Do Kerry and Edwards really represent hopefulness? President
Bush gets teary-eyed when he talks about bringing democracy to the Middle-East.
He speaks around the country about the importance of faith and family.
But Edwards and Kerry are the optimists?
Instead of joining a youthful populist with an experienced legislator, the
Kerry campaign joined a rich snob from the south with a richer snob from
New England.
In Colorado the Kerry-Edwards campaign is still without an office.
The “communications director” for that state, 26-year-old Steve Haro, was
just hired several days ago, and he’d visited the state only once when he
got the job. You’d think they could have found a Democrat in Denver
or Boulder or Colorado Springs, but, alas, Haro is from LA.
This is a perfect illustration of the myth of liberal populism. Liberals
don’t care what they stand for, and they certainly don’t know what they’ll
do if elected. They don’t care about the “little people,” and they’re
not populists. They’re power-hungry fear-mongers, out to hoodwink Americans
into supporting them.
Jim Hightower once called the radio “a very democratic little box.”
The ballot box is also democratic, and if it turns out to be as good to Mr.
Edwards as the radio was to Mr. Hightower, we can anticipate four more years
of George W. Bush.
Isaiah
Z. Sterrett, a resident of Aptos, California, is a Lifetime Member of the
California Junior Scholarship Federation and a Sustaining Member of the Republican
National Committee.
Email Isaiah Sterrett
Send
this Article to a Friend
|
|