I thought the corporate media's strategy of ignoring Edwards

[senseandsensibility]

was working pretty well. So now why do they suddenly feel the urge to bash him and ask him to resign? I would have thought they'd have done that after Iowa when he looked stronger. Is it just that they want to clear the deck for Obama? I hope their smearing backfires, but somehow I don't think the corporate media would allow Edwards to appear as a sympathetic figure.

Just curious about why they didn't continue with the ignoring thing.

[Clarkansas]

1. Why do they ignore Ron Paul, the candidate who wants big business to regulate themselves?

It is because he is not a contender in their eyes. It has nothing to do with his message.

[GreenArrow]

3. Sure it does.

Think US foreign policy. Now, that's big business.

[senseandsensibility]

5. Fred Thompson seems to get coverage

So does rudy. Who has more delegates? Those two or Edwards?

[Clarkansas]

6. I think Edwards got as much coverage as Thompson, maybe more

before it became clear that going all in in Iowa didn't work out for him. The press loves Rudy because he happened to be mayor during 9-11, it has nothing to do with his message. Ron Paul is the most corporate friendly candidate out there. The media ignores him because he, like Edwards, has little chance of winning the nomination.

[senseandsensibility]

10. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one

The media does not care who was mayor during 9-11 or slant their coverage due to personal feelings. They are taking orders from their corporate masters. Period. Will they admit this? Of course not. "Mayor during 9-11" is a cover story for why they push him.

[surfermaw]

20. Thompson didn't come in 2nd in a Cacus

In fact in N.H. he almost got too few to count

[rudy23]

7. Ron Paul is anti-war: the biggest business of all

Other than that, I don't think Edwards is marginal enough to deserve this.

[jeanruss]

2. contacting the media worked

I think many of us responded with the letter posted here for the media outlets and saw good coverage of Edwards last night. I think they realized their ignoring of him will not work and are getting aggressive, because they know the economy is ready to implode and he has the right message that will resonate shortly. If we have another Great Depression I know Edwards could handle it. Hillary and Obama could not take the heat. She would cry and he would delegate.

[EFerrari]

15. Welcome to DU, jeanruss.

Lol. :)

[senseandsensibility]

17. Okay,, I basically agree BUT

I still think Obama and even Hillary would be much better in that situation than a repug. I mean, just think four more years of chimp. They're all the same.

[still_one]

4. You can thank the telecom act of the 1990's for the elimination of competition

equal time, and the fairness doctrine

[DJ13]

9. You can thank the telecom act of the 1990's for the elimination of competition

.........and who was the corporate friendly President that actively pursued that legislation and signed it into law?

[AndyTiedye]

16. It Was REAGAN Who Nuked the Fairness Doctrine

[still_one]

18. Yes and the final nail was put on by Bill Clinton /nt

[Generator]

8. They obviously think all Democrats are cowards

and surrender easily. Because they have been doing that for years. The one thing I'm counting on in John is NO FUCKING SURRENDER. I don't care if it rips the precious Democratic party to shreds. The Democratic party is almost in my opinion DEAD-it has achieved nothing, has turned farther and farther to the right, and has lost it's core principals.

It needs someone to actually point that out that is still a Democrat.

[EFerrari]

11. I can top that! Saw a replay of a talk given on Wednesday by

the head of the Commission on Presidential Debates.

He said this was now a two person race and he couldn't figure out for the life of him why the other candidates were holding on.

Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr. is the @ssholes' name, to be exact. He's a Republican.

This is their site: http://www.debates.org/index.html

[senseandsensibility]

12. Sounds like a real impartial guy

running our debates.:sarcasm: Was he advocating that any of the repug candidates get out?

[EFerrari]

14. NO, he wasn't. I wonder who the Repugnicants want to run against.

:grr:

[AndyTiedye]

19. The Repiglickans Will Be Happy to Run Against Hillary or Obama

They've had 15 years to dig up mud to sling at Hillary Clinton,
and they can count on old fashioned racism to defeat Obama.

They'll go with McCain for Prez, most people still think he is a "moderate" and a "maverick" because the MSM always uses those words every time the say his name.
They'll pick Fuckabee for VP to get the fundie vote.

They will enter the election united behind their candidates, as they always are, and we will be as divided as we are now, or worse.

Doesn't look good.

[Imagevision]

13. The corporate media will continue to show support for Hillary...

[AndyTiedye]

22. …Until the Primaries are Over

Then the swift-boating begins.

[Orsino]

21. Ignoring him's easy. When that doesn't work...

...they have to get off their asses to bash him.