Updated: 11:42 a.m. ET April 23, 2007
DETROIT - Presidential candidate John Edwards said Saturday he opposes a
free trade agreement between the United States and South Korea, telling
Michigan Democrats it would be bad for the auto industry.

The deal needs the approval of both countries' lawmakers. It would
immediately eliminate U.S. tariffs on Korean vehicles, Edwards said, but
leave in place a discriminatory tax based on engine size that
disproportionately affects American cars.

"There are so many more Korean cars sold in the United States than are
sold in Korea," Edwards told about 2,000 Democrats gathered at their
annual Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner.

He added that South Korean workers are thrown in jail for fighting for
decent wages.

"We need trade that works for American workers, which means there need
to be real labor standards, real environmental standards" in the deal,
Edwards said. Message board
What do you think of Edwards’ candidacy?


The former senator and vice presidential candidate from North Carolina
praised Michigan's role in advancing the U.S. labor movement, calling it
the birthplace of the middle class.

Iraq a 'bleeding sore'
He also talked about some of his policy proposals, which include a
withdrawal of forces from Iraq, universal health care and a repeal of
some of President Bush's tax cuts.

Edwards called the Iraq war a "bleeding sore," and said Bush should sign
legislation that would fund the war but also set a withdrawal date for
troops.

Bush opposes a withdrawal date.

"If George Bush vetoes this bill, it is George Bush who's not funding
the troops _ not the Democratic leadership of Congress," Edwards told
about 2,000 Democrats gathered at their annual Jefferson-Jackson Day
dinner.

Edwards, who has been out of office since 2004, is competing in a tough
Democratic field that includes Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York
and Barack Obama of Illinois.

He has been trying to use his Southern roots to distinguish himself as
someone who can appeal nationwide. He has made alleviating poverty a
central theme of his candidacy.

Edwards, like other Democratic candidates, has been actively wooing
support from labor unions.

So does this mean you support Edwards?

I mean if he is trying to gain support from the unions what does that
tell me? Does that mean he is going to enact some sort of further
legislation that allows unions more power? Or Maybe he is in support of
an Idea that is being abused by those who control it?

"We need trade that works for American workers, which means there need
to be real labor standards, real environmental standards" in the deal,
Edwards said.

Funny thing about unions they Force employees to strike for wage
increases then complain about layoffs due to lack of earnings by the
companies they just screwed for another increase. It just happened here
in Oregon, 2 nation wide companies were forced by the unions for
increases in wages in other states, then 3-5 months later the companies
Laid off almost 500 employees locally, the unions got what they wanted
and when it came time to find the money the company was forced to Lay
off employees in a different area due to Union Agreements.

Message board
What do you think of Edwards’ candidacy?

Sorry I think its a bad idea, more taxes? Wow I pay enough as it is, I
am not interested in paying more. Are you aware that in California that
taxes on a single gallon of gas is at the $1.00 mark? I am not sure here
in Oregon it seems they are not required to post this at the pumps.

My taxes go up, however I have never seen them go down. The politicians
get the cost of living increases, however other than unions have you
ever seen anyone else get one? Its time for people to open thier own
eyes and stop walking around like sheep.




G

YES, I do Grymph. The more I read and watch how he stands for putting
the Taxes back on the rich and supporting keeping jobs in the US the
more I like him.

Huckalbee is ok too I think which shows I am not a one party coter. Im
independent!!!

coter,,,LOL Voter

He wants to pay for his med plan by replacing the taxes Bush lifted from
the wealthy, and putting a fine on companies whose profits exceed
ethical standards to the point of being gross. Like the fuel companies
Exxon.

If you go to the link they have a run down of all the candidates and
their current views.
Its a pretty good link. just ignore the poll results since you dont like
them... LMAO

Im sure you can find your candidate there too!!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/

Edwards: Tax hikes on rich possible
Says leveling with voters more important than the political consequences



Updated: 3:13 p.m. ET April 30, 2007
SAN DIEGO - Democratic presidential contender John Edwards said Sunday
he would consider raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to fund
programs such as universal health care.

Edwards has long said he wants to repeal the tax cuts on upper-income
earners enacted during the Bush presidency, but Sunday he seemed to go
further, by saying he was open to raising them higher than they were
before George W. Bush took office. He also said he would consider taxes
on "excess profits," including those made by oil companies.

Edwards said it was more important to level with voters than to worry
about the political consequences of advocating higher taxes.

Of course you might not appreciate an honest candidate
I think its refreshing esp after the last 8 years!!

What would be refreshing is a Tax break for the middle income bracket.
This is never done for one reason, fronts of tax breaks are always given
taken from the upper income Level, not from people like me or you. These
so-called tax breaks never make a difference to you or me. Why? I have
stated before that if I were to pay the same percentage in taxes I would
be able to live nicely, not extravagant or in a Posh home.

If my taxes were reduced by 10% I would have an added $5,000 a year to
do with as I feel. If the upper income level were taxed even one or two
percent($10,000 or more)this would be possible, however since we know
who really controls the politicians is the wealthy we know that will
never happen.

You wonder why I don't like unions? or anyone they support? They are
part of the problem, they are one of those "Special Interest" groups
that control the polititians and are contributing to our businesses
outsourcing the jobs to underdeveloped(cheaper) markets.

I wonder if a politician could be elected and honestly give the workers
of the world a real tax break?



G

He is for the middle class.....
And the enviornment,,, I like him..
Who do you like? Grymph



NEVADA, Iowa - Labeling global warming an international emergency,
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards called Tuesday for a cap
on greenhouse gas pollution and stricter auto emissions standards.

The former North Carolina senators said his proposal to limit emissions
could revitalize the economy and create up to a million jobs by creating
a new energy economy.

"Energy not only cannot be a hindrance to the American economy, it can
be the fuel for the American economy," Edwards said.

And he is talking about taxing his self...
Interesting for a politician.......

NEVADA, Iowa - Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Tuesday
defended the construction of a sprawling, 28,000-square-foot house in
North Carolina, arguing that his home is a model of energy efficiency.

"The house was built from the beginning, both in its location for
passive solar and the use of active solar, to help provide some of the
energy for the house," Edwards said in an interview with The Associated
Press. "It doesn't provide all of the energy, but it provides some."

Sitting on 102 secluded acres, the 28,000-square-foot estate that
Edwards and his family call home has a main house with five bedrooms and
six-and-a-half baths. It's connected by a covered walkway to a bright
red addition known as "The Barn," that includes its own living
facilities along with a handball court, an indoor pool and an indoor
basketball court with a stage at one end.

Edwards said he hired a design expert during construction to offer
energy efficiency options and his family has taken efficiency to the
smallest detail.

Five-star energy rating
"Elizabeth, I saw her climb up, I literally saw her with piles of
fluorescent light bulbs changing them out," Edwards said of his wife.
"We are also committed to making the house carbon neutral."

Edwards argued that his house meets top federal efficiency standards
because of the careful planning.

"It's the reason we got this five-star energy rating, which is a federal
standard," he said. He declined to discuss his monthly bill.


Edwards was in Iowa to tour a biomass energy conversion area where
researchers are devising ways of producing energy from renewable
sources. He used the tour as a backdrop to spell out his plan for
dealing with the international emergency of global warming, rejecting
suggestions that steps such as capping greenhouse gas emissions would
dampen the economy. Instead, he argued, facilities like the one he
toured can spark a new, energy-driven economy.

"Energy not only cannot be a hindrance to the America economy, it can be
the fuel for the American economy," said the 2004 vice presidential
nominee.

I'm not buying this line of bull. A 2,800 sq. ft. house is pretty good
sized. His is going to be 10 times that size, yet he is concerned with
energy consumption? Sounds like another case of, I know what is best for
you better than you do. The largest contributor of CO2 into our
atmosphere is coal burning power plants. The liberals don't talk about
this because they are the ones that put a stop to nuclear power.

Quote.
NEVADA, Iowa - Labeling global warming an international emergency,
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards called Tuesday for a cap
on greenhouse gas pollution and stricter auto emissions standards.

The former North Carolina senators said his proposal to limit emissions
could revitalize the economy and create up to a million jobs by creating
a new energy economy.

"Energy not only cannot be a hindrance to the American economy, it can
be the fuel for the American economy," Edwards said.

This is a pipe dream, until the oil companies are removed from being
able to control this economy they will control the market.
Being that I am involved with the Auto industry I see things you may
never see, and as a result I have seen the EPA control what can or
cannot be used on a vehicle for emmisions control.

Here is where one of the problems lay, the polititians pass stricter
policies for emmisions every year, and as a result the manufacturers are
required to change AND research another way to reduce emisions.
Are you aware that approx 5% of the vehicles on the road contribute to
90% of the pollution created? These vehicles have no emissions required,
they are older and since technology was lax in those days they will
never be required to have any.

PZEV, stands for Positive Zero Emissions Vehicle. These are being
produced at this time however you rarely hear of them. they are in the
Ford Line, I am sure GM and Chrysler have them also. This is a vehicle
that is given certain breaks by the government since they produce NO
measurable amount of TOXICs to the environment. How much did this
vehicle cost for R&D?

The majority of the Auto manufacturers have vehicles that far surpass
the emission requirements of this day. As we speak they are working on
producing these PZEV vehicles at a reasonable price. They have poured
Billions of dollors into research and a politician wants to ask for
more?

I have said it once and I will say it again, open your eyes and look
around you will be surprised at what you find.

I think its a joke that a politician thinks by getting lower vehicle
emissions he will create jobs. On the contrary each time you make
someone spend more money to comply it costs the end consumer more to
purchase it. Do you know what a normal mark up is for clothing or food
is? It is decieving, when a merchant claims it is a half off sale they
are still making money on the product. That will tell you what kind of
money it takes to run a business these days.

Each time the EPA acts the price of vehicles goes up. I can't afford to
buy a new car can you? Lets see the last time I had a new vehicle was
$428.00 a month,(plus insurance) Now the same car is $4,000 more can you
afford that payment, I know I can't.

Ask yourself why and you might finally see what I do. My wages haven't
gone up in years, what used to be a good income barely makes ends meet.
So when I see someone try to tell me he knows how to create jobs I turn
and walk away, because its not jobs I am looking for, its fairness in
how we are treated and the lies that go with them.

In a nutshell it isn't the vehicles produced today that are the problem,
its the sheep that keep following the leaders that are controlled by the
Big Bucks of this once great Nation.

JMHO.




G
And by the way when have I ever mis-spelled your name?

You ppl just like to critisize and offer no plan to solve anything. I
think you just like to hear your self *****.

I asked who do you like, Ill look at them and consider what they stand
for..
Tell me, Im interested.....

I mean I dont give a **** what you buy dazzling dave Im posting on
several candidates,,Im not selling anything,,,geezzz

I have not decided as of yet on who I like, I tend to be conservative
yet not much interests me so far. I have been more concerned about my
own current affairs with little time to investigate the current
possibilities.



G

Was only pointing out the hypocrisy of the statements made. At this
point in time, no one on either side really shines through.

****ing amazing!!
Do you Vote?

I try to vote responsibly, I honestly believe Bush is in office a second
time because of the sheep, and those who were the shepperds leading them
there.

G

Well we agree there, I voted for him once.. ashamed now

I will continue to vote for the lesser of the two evils (usually the
conservative, imo.) I, long ago, reached the point where the political
retoric means anything to me.

How long has it been since you even heard the word... 'statesman'?

abe lincoln comes to mind..