WASHINGTON POST: "What About John Edwards?"

[BigBearJohn]

Since the Iowa caucuses, the news has been filled with the names Obama and Clinton, Clinton and Obama. You've got the fresh young senator from Illinois against the famous, long-controversial senator from New York. But what about that former senator from North Carolina, who, with less money than his rivals, came in second in Iowa (as he did in 2004) with nearly one of every three Democratic votes?

Edwards is one of the most ferocious campaigners on the trail. At one point, he campaigned 36 hours nonstop in Iowa. He had the earliest event Friday morning (6:15 on the schedule) and will stump all day today with hardly a break to prepare for the night's crucial debate. There is no margin of error for Edwards, no backup plan: He has to find a way to stay at the center of the primary narrative, despite the almost reflexive tendency of the news media to frame the race as Front-runner and Challenger.

At a Shriner's hall here this morning, Edwards walked in with his million-dollar smile, without any obvious hint of the fatigue so evident among some other candidates. He's disciplined on the stump, sticking not only to the standard themes but also using identical sentences, even identical stressed syllables, regardless of venue

If there's anything new this morning, it may be the extra dollop of sarcasm that drips from his words when he talks about his chief rivals. For example, he took what sounded like a shot at Barack Obama's politics of hope, suggesting that it's naive to think that the entrenched special interests of Washington can be wooed into changing.

"You can't nice them to death. It doesn't work. They will drive through you like a freight train."

He mentioned a woman who had to raid her child's college fund to pay for a cancer operation.

"She needs more than a hug," he said.

---

MORE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/05/AR2008010502088.html?sub=AR

[Selatius]

1. His rhetoric is the kind that angers monied and powerful interests on Wall Street.

Of course they're going to try to steer away from giving him much media attention. The big news outlets are operated by Wall Street corporations.

[WA98296]

15. Bing. Bing. Bing. That's it exactly.

[goforit]

32. So true!!!.....And God forbid anyone use the resession word

[Double T]

2. Edwards has a sincere deep passion for his support of the middle class like none other.

How can YOU not favor and support John Edwards candidacy? Edwards will bring substantive REAL change to the 'thinking' in Washington.

[cali]

4. I prefer Obama

but I'd never say what you just did. Why do I prefer Obama? Partly because he actually walked the walk, spending almost 8 years first as a community organizer and then as a an attorney representing the disenfranchised. And this from a man who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law, and had school loans to pay off. He could have written his own ticket in any top drawer firm. He chose to sacrifice that to work with people who have little.

That's walking the walk.

[Naturyl]

8. Good on him, but...

That doesn't mean he intends to use government as a tool to improve people's lives the way Edwards would. There's a world of difference between community service in the private sector and having a commitment to make government work for everyone. Does Obama have what it takes to say NO to big business and big money when the going gets tough and they are pulling out all the tired old objections? I'm not convinced.

[cali]

10. He's got a better record of doing that than

Edwards does- by far. Take a look at his record in the Ilinois legislature. I see him as a far cannier fighter than Edwards. And someone who can accomplish much more. I just can't buy into a candidate who's changed virtually 180 degrees on the most vital issues, and has such a slight record of achievement in public life.

[Naturyl]

11. It's not always about the record

It's also about who we trust to get in there and do what they promise to do. I don't fully trust any politician in that sense, but Edwards has convinced me that he's as sincere as I can reasonably expect. I think Obama is sincere as well, but he isn't talking about change the same way Edwards is.

Only Edwards consistently and repeatedly talks about poverty in this country, even though it's not an issue that wins him tons of votes. As a poor person, that matters to me a great deal. I don't see Obama addressing poverty the way Edwards has.

[GreenArrow]

24. yes, it is about trust

and I don't trust John Edwards as far as I can throw him, and his record is one way of measuring that. It comes across as a vast catalog of expediency and pandering. As for Obama's adressing poverty, I'll let someone else handle that.

Kucinich talks about poverty as well, though he doesn't speak of it as some self-existent entity, that stands independently of a whole host of other issues.

[flyarm]

17. really? i was an elected dem at the 2004 convention Obama had the best party at the convention

yes he had a party that was the best at the convention ..millions $$$ spent on it..this was before he was a Senator..this was when he was running against Alan Keyes..in a cake walk..and i have been asking since that night..who paid for this expensive party..because until he spoke at the convention everyone in my state delegation was saying Obama who? who is Obama?????????

who paid for his expensive party?

i was at Planned parenthood party that same night and it was like all the other parties at the dem convention...you paid for your own drinks..and it was low profile..as most were..

Obama's party?? it was off the charts for all other parties at the convention..it was like it was set up to introduce him to the dem party..because none of us knew who the hell he was!!

fly

[amandabeech]

23. Perhaps lobbyists spotted a hot candidate and wanted in right then and there.

Of course, I could put on my tin foil hat and suggest that somebody spotted him a long time ago.

[flyarm]

25. hmmmthe same conclusion many of us came to that night and many since!! eom

[amandabeech]

27. Thanks for sharing.

I thought that I was the only one who thought that way.

I'm not sure whether I'll be able to hold my nose and vote for him if he gets the nomination because I'm not sure whom he really represents. I'm not in the mood for some Manuchurian candidate.

[Spiffarino]

51. Please, hold your nose and vote.

He's not ideal, nor is Clinton. Hell, for that matter John Edwards isn't my perfect guy (gay marriage, anyone?).

Fine. Now stack any one of them up against any possible Republican contender and think: Which one do you want to be the next president? In our winner-take-all system that's what we're left to do.

Please vote. Pretty please. The world is counting on it.

[earth mom]

69. Maybe Oprah paid for that party. nt

[mruddy]

33. self delete

[Divine Discontent]

42. 'a far cannier fighter'

let's talk issues and actions, because frankly, being able to be so aggressive and passionate in a court room without appearing like a jerk is incredibly challenging and he's fought for some very powerful problems people have faced against heavily financed corporations. So let's say they both are passionate about change, but, who sees the BFEE and their wall street cronies as people who will not follow the rules and worthy of impeachment, and thus, they must be brought to justice. I see John doing that better than Barack because of his experience. I will gladly vote for Barack or any DEM candidate, despite any reservations I have of all of them.

[Duncan]

52. Obama said he thougt impeachment efforts were

a waste of time back in August or so.
That was the end of my tentative support for Obama.

[Two Americas]

39. wait a minute

No one is attacking Obama. You keep repeating the same points against Edwards on thread after thread. Why?

On another thread you calmly explained the reasons why you support Obama. I think your points were valid, were well expressed, and I respect your reasons for supporting Obama. I am not going to go on every Obama thread and counter your opinion numerous times, just because I happen to disagree with you.

If the things you keep bringing up about Edwards were important in my decision making, I would perhaps support Obama, as well. But they aren't, and I don't.

You cannot sincerely believe that you are changing the minds of any Edwards voters, nor that you are contributing anything of substance to the dicsussion, can you? Edwards could be 100 times worse than how you portray him, and I would still support his candidacy. Can you accept and respect that?

[tavalon]

62. I think Obama is a stellar individual. The kind we would all do well to strive toward being

I think the same of Edwards. My distinction between the two is that Edwards knows what he will be coming up against with the Rethug smear machine. I think Obama thinks he can reach across the aisle - a worthy endeavor in different times, not when the bully hasn't figured out better manners yet. I think Obama will attempt the Kerry strategy with the Rethugs and it will backfire on him just as it did Kerry. I want an Edwards/Obama ticket but would be okay with an Obama/Edwards ticket as long as Obama actually listened to Edwards re: the Rethugs tactics, because he saw it up close and personal. I don't think Edwards wants to be in another situation where he knows how to handle something and is ignored. I saw how furious he was when Kerry conceded. I'm quite sure there were some very heated behing the scenes discussions throughout the night before.

I suppose for fairness, I should mention Senator Clinton. If she wins, she will give us pretty much the same WH as when her husband was President. She won't be as much of a war monger as she has been, she won't be as bending to corporations (though she'll still do that plenty!) and we will get a break from the relentless drumbeat of encroaching fascism. We'd best not make the mistake of going to sleep like we did during the first half of the earlier Clinton administration. That will be our time to gather our resources to begin primary challenges against the worst of our party in the Congress.

So, basically, I'm saying that while I think Edwards is the best one to become President, any of the top three will be okay.

[stickernation]

63. sorry i don't want to be anything like Barack Obama personally

No way, thank you. No problem with him being him, but he seems pretty boring and square and self-righteous to me. Not to mention so many of his fans, who have so much less positive to say about their candidate than they have vitriol for the others.

Edwards, however, is going to be my role model as an activist no matter WHAT happens in the election. I'll say it again - funding Edwards' campaign is like forcing the US electorate to watch "The Corporation" over and over again, and that to me is money well spent.

here's the difference:

* Obama: hasn't promised much that i care about; grudgingly mentioned single-payer, barely mentioned middle-class tax cut, yells "change! fired up!", and seems to be coasting on establishment media hype that I have *never* thought he deserved. Also, being brown myself, he gets no "white liberal guilt action" out of ME. (sorry if that sounds mean but that's the way I feel about the hyper-PC clique of his fanbase.)

* Edwards: every single time he gets the mic, he says something phenomenally awesome. Willing to change the subject to the economy if Charles Gibbleguts asks something inane. Specific enemies of the middle class called to the carpet. And a serious and direct catalyst of change within the Democratic Party itself - indeed, embodying its conscience.

Catty comments about Edwards' record are totally inane. He's been part of CFR and Bilderberger, but I have met him and spoken with him about it - his point is "would you really rather your candidate were IGNORANT of such things? I went there to FIGHT TOO!" If I were to be creeped out by JRE it would be because of that, not because of his house or his haircut or anne coulterisms.

The media blackout speaks VOLUMES. Well guess what, I and his other supporters are AMPLIFIERS LIKE THE MSM HAS NEVER BEFORE SEEN.

-s

-s

[DianaForRussFeingold]

47. I agree! What we need again, is government by the people,of the people and for the people

:hi: If Edwards is the next President of the United States. He will take on these out of control Corporations as did FDR.
No other candidate can, or will...

I agree, "Edwards has a sincere deep passion for his support of the middle class like none other."


Obama is too green and new to the system. He will be just another pushover for big Corporations, as they have contributed heavily to his candidacy.

All of the corporate media is aiming against Edwards who threatens their strangle hold, on OUR government...

:think: and msm's obvious agenda -- keep corporations in control...

[emanymton]

3. Do Not Think For A New York Second That Edwards Will ...

.
be acceptable to the Corporation. So why will one be surprised to learn Edwards is persona non grata.

As WC Fields said, "Never smarten up a chump." The Corporation will not willingly allow Edwards a voice.

"Don't give a sucker an even break." This battle is for keeps. Edwards will win despite the desires of the Corporation. But do not think the Corporation will smile about it. Benazir Bhutto is a warning, heed it.
.

[cali]

5. a myth. Corporate America is not worried about Edwards.

There are quite a few reasons for that. They're reassured by his large investments with Fortress, and his employment with them. They know that he needs Congress to change anything, and they know how to thwart him there. Actually, corporate interests are more nervous about Huck than Edwards.

[Naturyl]

7. You think?

I dunno. Huckleberry Hound is a Repuke, which means he is a tool (by default). Whether he spouts populist rhetoric or not, he believes the whole "free will/personal responsibility/hard work" line, which makes him an easy mark for big business interests and the ideological justifications they peddle. They have entire think tanks full of evil geniuses to sell their bill of goods to guys like Huck.

Is big business really more afraid of a Republican than a Democrat? I can't see why they would be.

[cali]

9. Wall street is panicked over Huck. He's a loose cannon

and a fundy wingnut. That is not the composition of the street. Edwards is not a nut. And he's an intelligent person who works from a rational basis. Huck scares the money part of the repuke party. They're frothing about Huck in a way that they are not doing about Edwards.

[Naturyl]

12. Perhaps so. But will a Republican ever raise taxes?

Will Huck raise taxes on the wealthy? Will any Republican?

If you think he would, you're giving him a lot of credit, from my perspective.

[CTyankee]

26. Yup, I agree. Just look at his "fair" tax, a whopping increase with a national sales tax!

And the trade off is getting rid of the income tax. All of this is music to the ears of the rich. It may sound populist to people who don't know about progressive/regressive taxation. Once you point it out to them, they usually get it.

Bet ole Huck favors getting rid of the "death" tax, too. Ain't it funny how that just benefits a tiny sliver at the top of the taxpayers in this country?

[struggle4progress]

61. Wall Street will love Huck's blather about big defense spending and no income tax

[stickernation]

65. It's actually quite a good argument here about Fortress.

My opinion is that "GREAT ! They'll let him actually WIN and NOT bomb/shoot him like Benazir (as a commenter above vaguely insinuated)". This experience with Fortress makes him MORE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND the important housing bubble problem.

I am all about the education of John Edwards over time. The negative things implied about his IWR vote etc simply make me know deeply that he is PISSED OFF ABOUT HAVING BEEN LIED TO. Same here with Fortress, where he has clearly stated in the media that he was unaware of Fortress' moves in the sub-prime market. At a certain point in 2006 - and this feels like a result of Elizabeth's health crisis - he said to himself NO MORE COMPROMISE AND NO MORE LIES. As Kerry's VP, JRE was forced to toe the line and go along for the DLC ride. He knows this is why the Kerry/Edwards ticket lost. HE WON'T BE FOOLED AGAIN. I acknowledge that is a statement of faith, but I don't stake my faith lightly.

[surfermaw]

30. Hucks two top advisers are Neacons

[mod mom]

38. yeah that's why msm is ignoring him despite finishing second. The populism he

speaks are definitely making a few powers that be nervous-which is why so many here support him.

[Duncan]

54. Yea, Everybody is more scared of Huck, not just corporations.

But its because he is a nutcase, not because he won't try to pander to them.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

6. K&R! Go John!!

:kick: :yourock: :patriot:

[FreeStateDemocrat]

13. Article was on page 8: unwritten M$M rule, Edwards is not allowed to be mentioned on the front page.

Nor can he mentioned in a sentence that contains Hill and Obama or even as the other person who beat Hillary in Iowa.

[OzarkDem]

18. That was going to be my first question

Which page did the story run on. Thanks for the answer, it confirms the MSM is still at it.

[fasttense]

14. He who must not be named, was named by WaPo, and they will pay.

The rule is don't mention him by name. That is what the corporate media is doing. They have Edwards on ignore.

Corporate media is very afraid of Edwards. They go out of their way to avoid the mere mention of him. It's like the protests against the war and the bushies, it never gets much air time and if it does, it will be downplayed and minimized.

[BigBearJohn]

56. "He who must not be named" GASP CHOKE CHORTLE hahaha THAT's GREAT

Voldemort is that you?

HA! That's a great image.


HEY MSM!

Go ahead and mention his name!
What are you afraid of?
You worried about the DEATH EATERS or what?

[Jacobin]

16. This:

"You can't nice them to death. It doesn't work. They will drive through you like a freight train."

:thumbsup:

He's my choice.

[snagglepuss]

19. Is is a brilliant retort to Obama's feel good message.

I think his campaign should focus on his point that he is not going to Washington to fight politicians, he is going there to fight corporate power.

[Hardrada]

68. Probably the best (and most accurate) line to come out

the 2008 campaign son far.

Go Edwards!

[solara]

20. Can anything be done abut the MSM blackout of Edwards?

Just askin'

:kick:

INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT IMPRECATE INCARCERATE :patriot:

[scarletwoman]

37. Yes, there is --

Go here: http://www.tbtmradio.com/geeklog/public_html/index.php

[solara]

75. Thank you

INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT IMPRECATE INCARCERATE :patriot:

[Triana]

21. He is sharp as a razor, fighting like a tiger and looks fantastic...

...as does Elizabeth. I don't know how those two do it. These are fine people and I hope to heavens they can end up in the White House. We NEED John Edwards.

To me, this is an epic battle. We've GOT to take this country back or we may never GET it back. Edwards is the guy who can help us do that - - IF we'll help HIM.

His work ethic, his convictions, his passion, his fighting spirit, his heart and his mind - all in the right place.

[earth mom]

70. John & Elizabeth are doing this for the RIGHT REASONS.

John is totally dead on when he said the status quo fights back when they are challenged. That's EXACTLY what Hillary did at the debates.

Meanwhile Obama is trying to nice everybody to death and be the guy everybody wants to have a drink with. :eyes:

The thing that neither Hillary or Obama realize is that the public has had enough of the bullshit and lies out of them and politicians like them.

And the public know what comes of wanting to have a beer with the president: lies, deception, fascism, war and misery.

[balantz]

22. The guy IS like a damn freight train!

Go John!

[DaLittle Kitty]

28. K and R

:)

[mzmolly]

29. Someone is finally talking about the Elephant in the living room?!

Or rather, the donkey :kick: some wish to ignore. :P

Don't replace corporate Republicans with corporate Democrats, he said, because it won't make any difference -- an apparent shot at Hillary Rodham Clinton. The only change, he said, would be that "different people will go to the cocktail parties in Washington."

[rambler_american]

31. K&R

:kick:

[wisteria]

34. I am not an Edward's supporter, but it is obvious the media is marginalizing him.

The media seems to have made our choice for us. all that is left now is to go through the motions. I hope I am wrong.

[McCamy Taylor]

35. This article still contains the same lies the WaPo has been selling for over a year

"Edwards is one of the most ferocious campaigners on the trail."

"Edwards walked in with his million-dollar smile"

"He's disciplined on the stump, sticking not only to the standard themes but also using identical sentences, even identical stressed syllables, regardless of venue."

"extra dollop of sarcasm that drips from his words when he talks about his chief rivals"

Message: Edwards is a millionaire, plastic, robotic campaign machine driven by the urge to win at all cost. He does not care how he does it or who he hurts in the process. Remember that Edwards scores high among those who care about a candidate who cares about people---the WaPo is trying to make him out as unlikable or even just plain mean . There is no mention of the passion he showed last night. Instead, they portray him as calculating and cold.

More WaPo corporate bs, from the people who brought us John Solomon.

:nuke:

[bjobotts]

49. Inuendo is an amazing tilting tactic. Compare-Obama/Kennedy; Edwards/FDR

The MSM never does the latter only the former. John is more impassioned than Obama and definitely more realistic about how to accomplish it. John is more aware of the urgency of dealing with what is rather than what we hope will be..
Obama's change will be too slow, like saying we really need to do something to reverse the effects of global warming vs raising emissions standards and changing energy policies immediately rather than continuing to give tax breaks to big oil to find alternative energy sources(they have no incentive to do that since it will decrease their profits. Remember for years they paid scientist to deny global warming so Obama's inviting them to discuss how to change...I think you see what I mean) John says we do it now in spite of these corps and their lobbyists.
Love 'em both but we need John Edwards as his is the only "real" change.
Big oil, Big pharm, Big ins, Big communications corps etc....are trying to give us Obama or Clinton because they feel they can "gum 'em to death" in discussions etc. but not so with John and they are going out of their way to stop him. Time for us to stand up and take the country back from these same "economic royalists" that FDR battled to save our nation. We need John Edwards.( ps. no matter which dem we nominate they will be the next president. Electability is not an issue in this election...period. None of the GOP field is electable...none. this last GOP debate should have reinforced that beyond doubt. You know this.)

[avaistheone1]

36. I think Edwards stamina and the consistency of his message are terrific strengths in this drive for

presidency.

[MissDeeds]

40. K & R

John Edwards makes me proud to be a Democrat. Give 'em hell, John. :kick:

[ooglymoogly]

41. Wapo could have made the same snyd remarks about all the candidates running

The diff is they are covering the other two. The last poll I saw offered no's on Hill/Billy and Obama with no mention of the 2nd place runner up yet on the pug side they offered no's on all three winners. Something stinks in corporate media but then it has stunk for some time now. It is just that finally, now we are taking notice.

[LaStrega]

43. k+r

:kick:

[DirtyDawg]

44. It's Obama stupid...

...John must make this point about Obama: 'With so many right-wing columnists, pundits and other assorted talking heads (David Brooks, George Will, et. al.) saying all those nice things about Obama, something's got to be terribly wrong with him. Looks like they're just trying to get the candidate they want the Republican winner to run against.'

[McCamy Taylor]

50. George Will just endorsed Obama (and all but called Edwards a red). If that doesn't stink of

corporate media interference in the Democratic primary election process, I do not know what does.

[midnight]

59. That's what I'm wondering about?

[deacon]

45. The MSM inists it picks our candidate. Just say no! n/t

[Plucketeer]

46. Kay & Are!

[bonito]

48. K&R n/t

[RufusTFirefly]

53. Quay and Aargh!

Corporations aren't people. People are people.

[DianaForRussFeingold]

55. I'd like to give John Edwards a BigBear HUG !

:hug: BigBearJohn, soooo-- inspiring! Thank You! :yourock:

[rockybelt]

57. I personally

would consider him with the likes of John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy and believe it or not, Jimmy Carter.

Jimmy Carter because he comes from a working family. Kennedys because of his commitment to the working class and justice in America.

His answer to Hillary that "you can't nice them to death" pretty sealed it for me. I believe he is authentic and will do what is right.

Dennis Kucinich MUST have a prominent position after this election. He is without a doubt an honorable man that has the interests of American citizens at the center of his universe. He was my first choice. Edwards or Obama will be fine.

[tom_paine]

58. Looks like someone is going to get chewed out on Monday.

Oh, they won't come out and say it straight up. Corporate Types never do.

But his boss' boss' boss will find some "fault" with the story, who will communicate to his boss' boss, who will communicate it to his boss, who will roll the shit downhill or Mr. Achenbach.

This is, of course, speculation but you don't get the media blackout on shit that is damaging to the Bushies (and for things truly damaging, the media blackout is something we have all seen works so very well in making something an UnEvent, to paraphrase Orwell), like David Brock's book, and so many other incriminating items that have been blacked out.

But whatever it is, SOMETHING will be done to let Mr. Achenbach know that he needs to focus his attention in more "appropriate" places, or so says his boss' boss' boss.

If it isn't this exactly, it is something like this.

[ClericJohnPreston]

60. Go, John Go!

I'm spent after a day blogging here.

However, there is absolutely no question that only Edwards has defined the beast we are fighting" CORPORATISM and the Corporate Aristocracy that runs Bushco.

Obama takes Pac and lobbyist dollars.

His N.H. campaign manager lobbies for the Health industry, which he lied about in the ABC debate.

I'm for the man who knows taking back our Democracy is a BATTLE, not an etiquette party.

Edwards all the way!

[jgraz]

64. Woohoo -- 100th Rec!

Go Edwards!

[BigBearJohn]

67. Go Johnny Go!

[Veracious]

66. Edwards Will Fight for America: Edwards 08!

I do think Obama is an ok guy, but he lacks the conviction and fight that John Edwards has. The kind of fire in the belly to stand up against corporate America. Obama is too busy taking lobbyist money and talking about playing nice with the dark side.

[subsuelo]

72. yeah, way to take a stand on impeachment, Edwards!

what a fighter.

[weeve]

71. NYTimes at it again

Their latest editorial on the NH debates doesn't even mention John by name. Get this :

"Then came the four Democrats: the woman, the African-American, the Hispanic American, the coiffed Southern lawyer. "

-- followed soon by ---

"The four Democrats debated ideas for ending the war, a service to American voters who overwhelmingly want it to end. Hillary Clinton, struggling for purchase against Barack Obama, who now owns the “change agent” mantle, came to life over this issue. She called for withdrawal but sensibly said it must be done carefully, and that Americans have to accept the consequences."


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/opinion/07mon1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin


I mean how much more of this crap do we have to take ?!

[FrenchieCat]

73. I do also agree that Edwards is not reported on much......

and I don't want John Edwards to be my president at all.

However, if they did talk about him, they'd be calling him a flip-flopper about all of his changed views and his mistakes, running through and comparing his current rethoric to his senate record. Maybe it's better for John not to be discussed too much by the media; might actually be a blessing.

[liberal N proud]

74. Someone actually noticed?

WOW!