Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
CLINTON TO CALL FOR A "POVERTY CZAR."
In one of her savviest and classiest moves recently, Hillary Clinton is using today, the anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s death, to call for the creation of "poverty czar." In Memphis, she will say:
When I say solutions, I mean finally addressing the scourge of poverty that continues to afflict so many of our families in this country. I mean appointing a cabinet level position that will be solely and fully devoted to ending poverty as we know it in America, a position that will focus the attention of our nation on this issue. That's the kind of solution I'm talking about, a solution for which Dr. King's son, Martin, has been such a passionate and effective advocate.
Who'll fill the position? I nominate John Edwards.
--Dana Goldstein
COMMENTS (15)
Can we stop naming "government functionaries who will be ignored" after deposed autocratic leaders?
Posted by: dbt | April 4, 2008 12:02 PM
This is a good proposal because all of the previous _____ czars have been effective at combating their appointed problem. Oh wait...
Posted by: mikem | April 4, 2008 12:13 PM
In theory it is a good idea. But I find the title troubling in this type of rhetoric. After all, one reader at First Read (which is where this news is coming from) said this: Isn't Bush the Poverty Czar? Doesn't he oversee all of the poverty his administration has created?
Bingo.
As for Edwards, I'd rather he made a documentary with some Hollywood help about the problems of poverty, and/or be an Ambassador to the UN, whereby he would take on global poverty.
Posted by: Benny | April 4, 2008 12:23 PM
Thirding the comments above about issues 'czars'-- those offices are where real problems go to be suffocated. I imagine that even those damned bipartisan-commission gabfests (aka kicking the can down the road) are more helpful.
Posted by: latts | April 4, 2008 12:28 PM
She needs to appoint a poverty czar right now - for her campaign.
Posted by: MarvyT | April 4, 2008 12:37 PM
Help us, Obi Wan Edwards, you're our only hope!
Posted by: Tom | April 4, 2008 12:46 PM
Geoffrey Canada, the guy who created the Harlem Children's Zone.
Posted by: Nicholas Beaudrot | April 4, 2008 1:06 PM
CLINTON TO CALL FOR A "POVERTY CZAR."
It is precisely things like this that causes politically intelligent moderates and independents to roll their eyes at the utter stupidity of the Democrats.
Hello, haven't we been waging a 40+ year war on poverty since LBJ's "Great Society"? Despite the trillions of dollars that have been completely wasted on liberals' policies for more than a generation, Hillary now says that all that is needed to defeat poverty in this country is another government employee.
Yeah, I'm sure that will be the final straw that breaks the camel's back.
Go Hillary Go!!!
Posted by: Chicounsel | April 4, 2008 1:44 PM
It all sounds like a great idea! Hillary can nominate Edwards for it, and then he can do what his voters want him to do.
Over half of his voters support a similar immigration plan to that proposed by... FredThompson.
If the Democrats were really serious about reducing poverty, the first thing they'd do is... stop importing poverty.
Unfortunately, the Democratic Party is too corrupt to do that. They just want to look like they're doing something.
Posted by: TLB | April 4, 2008 2:05 PM
I appoint Hillary Clinton pander czar.
Posted by: joejoejoe | April 4, 2008 3:07 PM
All these czars ain't gettin' shit done.
It's time to appoint a poverty kaiser. See? Doesn't that already sound more effective?
(Seriously, if it's a cabinet level post, how about the tried and true "Secretary"?)
Posted by: chiggins | April 4, 2008 3:41 PM
Edwards should just sue the pants off all the health insurance companies. Once we stack the courts, they'll be begging Madame Defarge to put them out of business for 2 dollars a share.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 4, 2008 6:55 PM
If czars (tsars) and kaisers don't work, lets move on to the duces and the fuehrers....
Posted by: I'm totalitarian against poverty | April 5, 2008 3:42 AM
@Chicounsel
Why blame "the democrats"? This is pure Hillary.
And pretty silly to boot.
Posted by: leo | April 5, 2008 5:58 AM
Why not appoint Obama what do you think 92% of the black vote think they are getting! HOODWINKED or just BAMBOOZLED!
Posted by: ricksramblings | April 5, 2008 6:37 PM