Obama is the progressive agent of change, no John Edwards.

Sorry about the wording, I realize it's not very clear. By progressive change, I don't mean putting up a different colored Bill Clinton, and looking at what Obama's policies would be (minus cutting the cap) he's almost lock-step with Clinton. Obama has made very few promises, and I don't think its wise to expect anything from someone who doesn't make it clear what they're going to do. Edwards has a 70 page document that outlines his entire plan towards building 'one America'. While it's probably true that creating a truly 'one' America is impossible, John Edwards is not saying that there won't be rich and poor people. He simply wants to change what the definition of poor is in the US. Poverty being the root of the majority of our social problems, it is essential to bringing real change in America. In terms of foreign policy, Edwards was the first one to be clear that the 'War on Terror' was flawed by design, and that more positive intervention (ie building schools in poor countries) by the US to combat the negative image we have in the world is key. Edwards argues that the reason why terrorism is such a problem in the world is because of all the poverty that people see and live in. People feel hopeless, desperate and angry, and the US is an easy country to blame. Edward's attitude about fighting terrorism is truly different. Obama is an African-American, and had a Muslim father, but this doesn't mean that he's going to be different. In fact, Obama has picked a team of foreign policy advisers that are all linked to very things that got us in this mess in the first place. This is from a report that came on Amy Goodman's show a little while ago: "Obama's top adviser is Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski gave an interview to the French press a number of years ago where he boasted about the fact that it was he who created the whole Afghan jihadi movement, the movement that produced Osama bin Laden. And he was asked by the interviewer, "Well, don't you think this might have had some bad consequences?" And Brzezinski replied, "Absolutely not. It was definitely worth it, because we were going after the Soviets. We were getting the Soviets. and.... Another key Obama adviser, Anthony Lake, he was the main force behind the US invasion of Haiti in the mid-Clinton years during which they brought back Aristide essentially in political chains, pledged to support a World Bank/IMF overhaul of the economy, which resulted in an increase in malnutrition deaths among Haitians and set the stage for the current ongoing political disaster in Haiti." Imperial Democrats. Edwards continues to take most of his advice from his wife. Edwards also usually tops Obama and Clinton when polled against leading GOP candidates. Lastly, what does Obama offer? Hope? Hope for what? What is he going to 'bring us together' to do? He's not clear at all in terms of what his stated goals are. Edwards' plan may not be practical, but if just a handful of his proposed policies would do incredible good for our country, and at least an attempt at combating poverty in the US (again, if you count LBJ) by our president would only benefit America.