Edwards: Clinton Campaign ‘Has No Conscience’
Responding to a remark by a Clinton aide belittling his use of Nataline Sarkisyan as a victim of corporate indifference, John Edwards said Hillary Clinton’s campaign “has no conscience.”
Seventeen-year-old Nataline Sarkisyan died on December 20, 2007, while waiting for a liver transplant that her insurance company initially refused to pay for, arguing the surgery was “too experimental.” After protests from hospital staff and Sarkisyan’s family, CIGNA Insurance Company agreed to the operation, but the girl died shortly after they reversed their decision. For Edwards, Sarkisyan’s death has become a symbol of the working middle class struggle against corporate control. Her family asked to join him in New Hampshire.
But today the Clinton campaign criticized Edwards for including Sarkisyan’s story in his campaign. Clinton’s traveling press secretary, Jay Carson, told reporters, “in order to be President, you need to do more than read articles about people who need help and talk about them.” Senator Clinton is “somebody who’s actually going to help people and not use them as talking points.”
At a media availability in Keene, New Hampshire, Edwards responded to those remarks:
“It’s an indication that they have no conscience about what’s at stake here,” he said. “This is not about them. It’s about families like the Sarkisyans…the Lowes…the Lakeys, who desperately need a voice. That’s who it’s about.”
done
The dispute came one day after the ABC News/Facebook Presidential debates in which both Edwards and Clinton shared a heated exchange over who among the Democratic candidates were agents of change.
Looking to gain more traction after his second place in Iowa, Edwards said during the debate that he and Senator Obama were the only candidates who stood for bringing about meaningful change, noting “we finished first and second in the Iowa caucus, I think in part as a result of that.”
Alluding to Senator Clinton, Edwards said, “Any time you speak out powerfully for change, the forces of status quo attack. That’s exactly what happens.”
Edwards’ words prompted a fierce response from Senator Clinton, who disagreed with his premise, saying that she represents both change and experience.
“I want to make change, but I’ve already made change. I will continue to make change. I’m not just running on a promise of change. I’m running on 35 years of change,” she said, while citing her work on specific legislation.
“I think I am the agent of change,” she continued. “I think that having a woman President is a huge change.”
Tags: Debate, hillary clinton, jay carson, john edwards, Nataline Sarkisyan, New Hampshire
Share
Instead of criticizing Edwards Clinton should join him in condeming the insurance corporations for denying care. Wait, oh she can’t, her campaign is taking money from them. Is that how she is going to bring about change, by being silent and only speaking out against people like Edwards.
Thank god people like Edwards are standing up and highlighting what is wrong with the corporations and then making a plan to change them.
Clinton would make a terrible president in my opinion. It is so incredibly difficult to tell what she stands for it is ridiculous, she never says anything meaningful. Edwards may be better, but he is still not a great option for our country, he takes alot of money from quite a few of the people he claims to be against. He is another typical politician, he claims to care about the common people, looking out for their interests, but I don’t believe he is completely genuine, he seems fake to me… His personal home is 28,000 square feet, that is both ridiculous and an insult to the people he claims to care about, not to mention his $400 haircuts, really, he spends more to have his hair cut than most people make in a week. He voted for the war, then said he is against it, he goes with the flow to much, no backbone. Obama seems to be better, but none of them is as good as Dennis Kucinich, or Ron Paul on the Republican side.
VOTE FOR OBAMA = A VOTE FOR THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL WIN 2008.
————————————————————————-
Obama = SURE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL WIN 2008.
Obama = No experience.
Obama = NO JFK.
Obama = BSO…..?
————————————————————————–
VOTE - HILLARY CLINTON - EXPERIENCED AND READY TO LEAD ON DAY ONE!!!
VOTE - HILLARY CLINTON - PROUD OF AMERICA!!!
VOTE - HILLARY CLINTON - COMMITED TO AMERICA!!!
VOTE - HILLARY CLINTON - SALUTES AMERICA FLAG!!!
VOTE - HILLARY CLINTON - CAN PRODUCE CHANGE FOR AMERICA!!!
————————————————————————–
VOTE - HILLARY CLINTON - SAVE AMERICA FROM A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT 2008!!!!
—————————————————————————
Edwards ; Here is another chance for me to make a few million more dollars in a lawsuit against yet another health care insurance company… corporate greed, ” I’ll prove my point and cash in at the same time, Hmmm maybe another wing on the Mansion…. Great way to make health care more affordable…… at least for me !!! heh heh heh…. “
When you cant make a real argument doesn’t it embarrass you? John stood beside injured and wronged families fighting insurance companies. Thats good work. We could all benefit by being willing to stand with the weak. And yes he made the insurance companies pay.
Now he wants to take the case of the middle class and working class and well he always wins. Sounds like a good idea to me. He has grown to recognize where the problem lies.
If people and bodies start floating downriver you can join in the effort to pull them out one by one, saving as many as you can, or you can go upriver to see whats causing people and bodies to be in the river. To find the cause and the solution. John has been upriver. He needs our help now to stop the problem.
I for one am willing to help him, for America.
I am amused by Clinton. In the debate she said: “Making change is not about what you believe,” and then went on to explain that it was all about hard work. But how every you spin this, her statement in the debate was revelatory. How can one be the agent of change, as she is saying now, without it being about belief? Sure, I get her point that words can be empty and accomplishments are the key. BUT of course making change is about beliefs.
As for the notion that we should elect Ms. Clinton because she salutes the flag and is proud to be an American — see Blondshag’s post — by that standard, Anne Coulter is fit to be president. Geez. . .
Not only is John fighting for us against them and big money but he also has to fight the media blackout imposed upon his campaign.
Grrrrr… Go get em John
Hillary keeps touting 35 years that she has made change. I would like to see a list of those changes that she directly had a part in (not Bill’s record or her party’s record - HER record.) If there is a comprehensive list, I would like an explanation on how those changes benefited the American people. I hear lots of talking - I want to see proof, not just “hear” that it has been happening for 35 years.
Hillary has had one elected position in her life. Her real political career began in 2000 when she somehow convinced New York to elect her despite never having a residence there.
The only thing she wants to change is her career.
She(HRC in ‘93) was put in charge of health care with a democratic president, democratic congress, and with polls showing 80%(??) support for universal health care. Yet she managed to fail.
I was leading towards Hillary initially but the more I hear her talk the less I like her. Her performance in the debate was antagonistic. I’m not sure where I heard this but it stuck in my mind and its true. “You can not antagonized and inspire at the same time”. Hilary did not inspire me. Hillary stated in the debate “pretty words” and speeches don’t amount to change. Every signicant change in this country began with someone’s “pretty words” that spark a nation to change.
America it is time for a new kind of leadership.
Amazing that in all the coverage of this issue there is no mention, so far as I can see, of the reality of the issue:
1) There is a very high probability this girl would have died whether she had a liver transplant or not. This not only would be a large expenditure of health care funds with little prospect of accomplishing anything positive, but it would take a liver away from someone else who would more likely have been more likely to have benefited from it.
2) Countries with “universal” health care systems, such as many of the candidates profess to admire, all have one way or another of controlling costs. It is highly unlikely that this girl would have received a liver transplant in any of them.
3) Cost benefit analysis is the only logical way to control costs in a medical care system. This case is a prime example of a very high cost procedure with very little likelihood of benefit.
HILARy CLINTON HAs A GOOd ChANCE IN WINNG BECAUSE ShE HAs SOMEWhAT EXPERIENcE BUt OBAMa ON ThE OThER HANd OBAMA DOES NOt HAvE ON BIt OF EXPERIENCE……SO HILARY HAS A 75%CHANCE IN WINNING ThIS DEBAtE!
John Edwards is the most viable candidate in the democratic party to beat a republican in Nov. Sure, Obama and Clinton have star power (shhhh! because they are a black man and a woman) and don’t forget Oprah. I say Edwards/Obama is the winning ticket. Combined, they’ve got enough experience. But not too much to be corrupt (Clinton). Also, Edwards can capture the southern /rural/heartland vote (important) and Obama would capture, the right/left coast liberals, young people, women, and the black vote. Together, they could do alot of good and turn this country around.
Is that too hard for the media to swallow? The first 10 or 15 minutes of the NH debate looked like the Obama/Clinton Show.
Finally when Edwards was given a chance to talk, he made mention a few times that in Iowa…. he came in second, he beat Hillary, now that she’s behind….
It’s about time somebody said it! Too bad he has to toot his own horn. The press should be saying it, calling it an upset, a surprise victory over Hillary, a second-place showing. Isn’t that what NEWS is? Something unexpected? Instead, they continue to talk like it’s a two-way race between Hillary & Obama.
Is it not newsworthy that Obama & Clinton outspent Edwards by about 4 to 1, and Edwards still managed to come in second?
Is it not newsworthy that Obama bussed in college students from Illinois to vote in the Iowa caucus, because in Iowa you can register and vote the same day?
Is it just a coincidence that the media is continually promoting the two candidates that the Republicans would most like to run against?
C’mon folks… Why are so many people falling for Obama’s smooth talking lies? He sings a lot of hoopla about what he wants to do but he NEVER says what he has already done!! What are his accomplishments? What has he done in the past in the best interest of us Americans? I HAVE HEARD NOTHING!! He is running on the same platform as Bush did. Remember Bush’s campaign as the slick talkin country boy charmer? Yeah, and look where that got us!!
Clinton is the only one who can back up the changes she has made, past and present! She has the leadership, education, and the determination to make changes to better the future of Americans!! So what if she is not charming like Obama, this is a presidential election people not a social popularity election!!
DON’T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE WE DID WITH BUSH BY FALLING FOR YET ANOTHER SILVER TONGUE …
VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON!!! SHE IS OUR ONLY HOPE FOR REAL CHANGE!!
[...] A feisty Edwards is gaining support in New Hampshire - he may even make it a tight race for third place with Hillary - as he nears what will probably be the end of his chances at the victory. His populist message and harsh attacks on “entrenched special interests” and his Democratic rivals have continued yesterday and today, with especially tough talk for Hillary: [...]
I heard an interesting comment that describes Hillary to a tee. Just because you are an airline pilots wife does not mean you can fly the plane. Old school mentality, politics as usual and does not realize majority of people do not want her. Americans want change and break the Washington quagmire.
That might be the only thing I ever heard Edwards say I agree with but then he doesn’t have one
either.
As an attorney who has fought, as has John Edwards, the corporate and right wing all my life, done civil rights cases for no money, represented blue collar unions in many fights, and supported the progressive Democratic candidates in election after election, I have to urge everyone to support Edwards as the only viable, experienced and consistently progressive choice. There is such a huge difference between “talking the talk” (Obama) and “talking the money game” (Hillary) and “walking the walk” (Edwards—all his life) that we progressives have got to “get real” about these primaries. If you listen to Obama and Hillary carefully you get the “code” language about centrism and that means we will get sold down the river—-to cite but one huge example, Hillary’s talk about “solving” the bogus Social Security funding problem by appointing a bipartisan committee——hey, have we forgotten so soon the jobbing the elderly got from Greenspan led bipartisan committees on Social Security in 1983 (Reagan) and 1993 (Clinton)??????????? Edwards is a savvy fighter and the only candidate who is smart enough to see through the smoke screens of “centrist” or right wing politics and slogans.
John Edwards got some campaign help Monday from baseball groupie Annie Savoy and pitching phenom Ebby Calvin “Nuke” LaLoosh.
Better known as actors Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins, the couple who starred in the 1988 movie “Bull Durham” campaigned for the Democratic presidential candidate in New Hampshire.
Rich…..one lawyer accusing another lawyer of an absence of conscience! Pot….Kettle…..Black….
Any objective observer with knowledge of the Elena Ruth Sassower story would agree 100% with John Edwards’ remark that the Clinton campaign “has no conscience.” The below press release supports that view of the Senator herself. Unfortunately, a media blackout has long protected Senator Clinton from exposure of the whole truth about her leading role in that Constitutional abomination and kept the electorate in the dark as to her most appalling on-the-job performance as the Junior Senator from New York and flagrant disrespect for human rights.
CENTER FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY, INC. (CJA)
A national, nonpartisan, nonprofit citizens’ organization, working, pro bono, to protect the public interest in the integrity of our judicial selection and judicial discipline processes. Its mission is to ensure that only the most qualified trial lawyers become, and remain judges.
E-mail: judgewatch@aol.com Web: http://www.judgewatch.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ON AND AFTER DECEMBER 23, 2007
MEDIA CONTACT: Zach Lorber Tel: 914-997-8105 ▪ Fax: 914-684-6554
SENATOR CLINTON CONDEMNED BY CENTER FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.
For Constitutional Violations In Not Protecting Her Constituent’s First Amendment Rights
When Her Own Staff Counsel Acted To Prevent Opposition Testimony At Judicial Confirmation Public Hearing
On May 22, 2003, White Plains, NY resident, Elena Ruth Sassower, Co-Founder and Coordinator of the Center for Judicial Accountability, Inc, rose, as the closing gavel came down at a U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Public Confirmation Hearing on Richard Wesley nomination to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and respectfully asked: “Mr. Chairman, there’s citizen
opposition to Judge Wesley based on his documented corruption as a New York Court of Appeals judge. May I testify?” Without answering the question, then Chairman Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) had Ms. Sassower forcibly removed from the hearing room by D.C. Capitol Police. She was handcuffed behind her back, arrested, incarcerated for 21 hours, and thereafter prosecuted by the
U.S. Attorney’s Office for “Disruption of Congress.”
Prior to the hearing, Ms. Sassower visited Senator Clinton’s Washington, D.C. office and requested her to withdraw her announced support for the Wesley nomination. Ms. Sassower supplied documentation substantiating his corruption of the NY Court of Appeals. Instead of probing the very serious documented charges of her constituent, a longtime judicial reform activist, Senator Clinton’s Staff Counsel called the Secret Service. In turn, D.C. Capitol Police telephoned Ms. Sassower threatening that if she came to the Public Hearing and requested to testify in opposition to the Wesley nomination, she would be arrested.
On June 28, 2004, despite recommendations of the Probation Department and the U.S. Attorney’s Office that there be NO jailtime, D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian F. Holeman sentenced her to the maximum six months in jail, with a maximum fine, without bail, and denied her repeated requests for a stay pending appeal, after she declined his long list of probation conditions. These included a direction that she “stay away from and inside the United States Capitol Complex,” have no contact with Senator Clinton and her staff, and “write and send letters of apology to Senator Clinton,” among others, “…which state…your remorse for any inconvenience caused.” When Ms. Sassower said she would not write such letters because she would “not lie,”
Judge Holeman ordered her taken straight to the D.C. Jail, with no opportunity to go home and settle her affairs. There she spent the July 4th weekend in solitary confinement. She was not released from prison until December 23, 2004. By contrast, at a May 7, 2003 U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, during testimony of then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, a group of eight protestors, loudly and repeatedly shouted “Fire Rumsfeld for war crimes!” and unfurled a banner that read “Fire Rumsfeld” before the protestors were escorted from the building. None of the eight were arrested or charged with “Disruption of Congress.”
Ms. Sassower’s arrest on May 22, 2003, a mere 15 days later, was an unprecedented
violation of her First Amendment and other constitutionally guaranteed rights. In all that time, before, during, and since Ms. Sassower’s arrest, imprisonment, and release after her six-month incarceration, Senator Clinton did not lift one finger to help her constituent, whose arrest and imprisonment her own office had instigated – closing her eyes and ears to the appeals of other constituents and outraged members of the public from all over the country and abroad that she
initiate remedial action. Ironically, following Ms. Sassower’s release from jail, she was voted 2004 “White Plains Person of the Year/Defender of the Constitution” in her hometown. Still no word on the subject from now Candidate Clinton. Yet, husband Bill says she is a “world-class genius”… with an unbroken record of making decisions that have had a positive change in other people’s lives.”
# # #
As a postscript to CJA’s foregoing press release, in light of Senator Clinton’s victory last night in New Hampshire, due, according to news analysts, in large measure to her appeal as a woman to women voters, I wish to make known that prior to the Iowa primaries, I called on the New York State Chapter of the National Organization for Women to withdraw its announced NOW-PAC endorsement of Senator Clinton for President for the good and sufficient reasons detailed in CJA’s press release. I pointed out that the Senator’s abysmal conduct toward her constituent, my daughter, Elena Ruth Sassower resulted in her unprecedented, unjustified, and unconstitutional arrest and prosecution by our government, as well, ultimately, in her imprisonment for six months in a DC jail for exercise of her free speech right to respectfully ask to testify in opposition at a Senate Judiciary Committee Public Confirmation Hearing, which Senator Clinton, as a lawyer herself, plainly, should have known is not, and constitutionally cannot be, a “crime” in America.
This is not just a women’s rights issue. It is a human rights issue — a cause I fought for all my professional life as a lawyer and as President of the New York Women’s Bar Association, nearly 40 years ago. At this moment in our nation’s history, much as it pains me to say so, Senator Clinton, despite women’s desire to support her effort to make history as the first woman president, does not deserve that honor. Because of a media blackout to protect the Senator from exposure of the whole truth about her role in the Elena Ruth Sassower Story, the electorate has been kept in the dark as to what it needs to know about Hillary Clinton, so that at long last, she can be held accountable for her desecration of our sacrosanct democratic values.
Democracy in America is no less important than democracy in Iraq - and the unjust jailing Senator Clinton caused her own constituent to suffer, one who is a true patriot, not a terrorist, must always be remembered, to the Senator’s eternal shame.
Ironically, I was the recipient in 1981 of a Special Award from National Organization-NYS to honor me “for outstanding achievements on behalf of women and children.” More recently, in 2006, I was honored by inclusion of my biographic profile in the new book “Feminists Who Changed America, 1963-1975,” University of Illinois Press (2006).
It is because of my longtime passionate commitment to womens’ rights that I am asking women’s organizations NOT to endorse Senator Clinton and that women NOT vote for her. Her on-the-job performance as a U.S. Senator reveals the hollowness of her commitment to women when her political ambition gets in the way. I am still waiting for a reply from the National Organization for Women.
cca418cfe746…
cca418cfe746e95d7d1d…