Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
Group Lobbies for Reform of Funeral Industry
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
Focus on elk as disease persists near Yellowstone
 
 
expand
COVER STORY: POLITICS

The Road Warrior

Even if he loses in Iowa's bigger cities, Edwards can still win by wrapping up smaller, far-flung precincts.

By Arian Campo-Flores and Suzanne Smalley | NEWSWEEK
Dec 24, 2007 Issue

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: Gingerivers @ 12/27/2007 8:19:59 PM

    Comment: The links referred to in the post have been apparently deleted by Ed Cone, sometime recently, perhaps even tonight. They were degrading, little more than a gang-bang and show what kind of a man John Edwards collaborates with, a man who allows the sexual degradation of women on his blog and then apparently goes on to delete the posts to save face. However, I made copies of the posts in question and will post them in their entirety as they have been saved at gingeriverseast.blogspot.com at the earliest opportunity.

  • Posted By: Gingerivers @ 12/27/2007 8:18:30 PM

    Comment: The links referred to in the post have been apparently deleted by Ed Cone, sometime recently, perhaps even tonight. They were degrading, little more than a gang-bang and show what kind of a man John Edwards collaborates with, a man who allows the denigration of women on his blog and then apparently goes on to delete it to save face. However, I made copies of the posts in question and will post them in their entirety as they have been saved at gingeriverseast.blogspot.com at the earliest opportunity.

  • Posted By: Gingerivers @ 12/27/2007 7:40:02 PM

    Comment: Edwards isn't the champion of the individual, nor of inclusiveness, nor is he or his wife a great builder of community that truly values fairness and objectivity. He is a politician who has been campaigning nonstop for years, crisscrossing the county with that and other well crafted sound bites for the hungry American public to digest.

    Ed Cone, politico who mostly reposts news, has been a John Edwards supporter and collaborator in North Carolina. Read the whole behind the scenes post on Cone, links included for clarity, here http://cone-word-up.blogspot.com/and here http://gingerriverseast.blogspot.com/

    Greetings to the editor of Newsweek and kudos for fair, unbiased and as always, accurate reporting.

    Ginger Bush

  • Posted By: schrutearmy05 @ 12/27/2007 3:53:45 PM

    Comment: And FWest10, what do you know about having your rights infringed upon by President Bush? Have you been wiretapped? I sure haven't. And how has President Bush utilized corporations any differently than Clinton or any other President? You're just spouting the same garbage that you hear on the news. You have no argument, only theatrics and talking points. And in regard to civil rights, lest we forget that President Bush's decision to go after Saddam Hussein has led to a tyrant-free Iraq, which has seen its first democratically run elections ever.

  • Posted By: schrutearmy05 @ 12/27/2007 3:39:10 PM

    Comment: To FWest10: Universal healthcare IS nationalized healthcare. Who do you think is going to pay for it? The government funds everything with our TAXES, ergo it's nationalized. Nationalizing anything is not equivalent to democracy; it's equivalent to socialism. With universal healthcare, you don't get to choose your doctor. You don't get to decide when you need to see him/her. You don't get to decide how much to pay for it. Look into any of these other societies you compared the US to, and you will see this. You will also see that their healthcare systems are failing, their tax rates are ridiculous, and the wait time for a hospital visit is dangerous. There is no way a nation can support a universal healthcare system without massive tax increases, and if you're willing to put your faith in the government to decide what doctor you should see, when you should see him/her, and how much you should pay for that visit, vote for someone who supports universal healthcare. When our taxes go through the roof, we'll have you to thank.

  • Posted By: FWest10 @ 12/27/2007 12:49:53 PM

    Comment: To Schrutearmy05: Edwards has never shown the slightest desire to "nationalize everything." He does want us to have universal health coverage, just like every other industrial democracy in the world. We are the only advanced industrial society in the world without universal health care. Heck, my Irish ancestors at the time of Christ had universal health care. Every clan maintained a hospital, and anyone could go there for free. It was just something you did for your people. It's far and away time the US caught up. As for civil rights and freedom, no President has ever attacked our rights the way Bush has: spying on Americans, suspending habeas corpus, letting corporations write our laws. For the sake of democracy, we have to get this current crop of corrupt Republicans out of office.

  • Posted By: schrutearmy05 @ 12/27/2007 11:56:03 AM

    Comment: To sweetwilli: You do understand that Edwards IS big government, right? He's telling you how much he's going to expand the government, raise your taxes, and nationalize everything. This is the DEFINITION of big government, and it results in less freedom of choice, fewer civil rights, and us having less control over our own lives. I don't need a huge bureaucracy to tell me how to live my life, and I bet you don't either.

  • Posted By: sweetwilli @ 12/26/2007 6:01:01 PM

    Comment: John Edwards has spent an entire lifetime protecting people fro big corporations and govenrment. Anyone who says trial lawyers are sleazy is either ignorant of what they trial lawyers actually do or they're just working for the big corporations he's taking to court. Edwards is an American hero. We should hope he does become president. If not we're stuck with just more greed and self serving politics. http://www.care2.com/c2c/group/Edwards08

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/26/2007 19:32:19

      Comment: Edwards aggressive pursuit and suing of OBGYNS and other Doctors is the reason that health care is un-affordable to the poor and middle class because of the excessively high malpractice insurance that doctors must pay due the high number of lawsuits filed by Edwards and other trial lawyers.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/25/2007 9:06:33 PM

    Comment: John Edwards still needs to come clean on his pregnant girlfriend who's pregnant with his illegitimate love child.

    John as put the lady up in a gated community in Governor's Club near Chapel Hill, NC to hide her from the public spotlight.

  • Posted By: vineguy @ 12/22/2007 4:50:09 PM

    Comment: Okay, tarheels.....blahblah. FACT---You cite National Enquirer as your source of the FACT that you stated as "rumor has it". National Enquirer? Boy, I really believe your drivel now. Such a reliable source of facts they are. FACT---National Enquirer story cites ONE UNAMED SOURCE for their libel. If that is what it takes for you to believe something about someone you obviously hate (I daresay if it was a story about someone you support you would be crying "they have NO FACTS") then I was right in my original post about you. You don't speak for this tarheel.
    By the way----a big Right on to rphernan!

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:56:22

      Comment: vineguy, the National Enquirer broke the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky story. They have a good track record of breaking scandals earlier than mainstream news sources.

      • Posted By: FWest10 @ 12/27/2007 12:59:34

        Comment: tarheelsarenotforedwards, even a broken clock is right twice a day. The National Equirer publishes some true things from time to time, and lots of gossip and lies. You know that. No one able to type on a computer is dumb enough not to know that. So if you treat their "news" as fact, it's just because you've decided you want to, out of your dislike for a particular candidate.

  • Posted By: vineguy @ 12/22/2007 4:49:34 PM

    Comment: Okay, tarheels.....blahblah. FACT---You cite National Enquirer as your source of the FACT that you stated as "rumor has it". National Enquirer? Boy, I really believe your drivel now. Such a reliable source of facts they are. FACT---National Enquirer story cites ONE UNAMED SOURCE for their libel. If that is what it takes for you to believe something about someone you obviously hate (I daresay if it was a story about someone you support you would be crying "they have NO FACTS") then I was right in my original post about you. You don't speak for this tarheel.
    By the way----a big Right on to rphernan!

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:54:30

      Comment: vineguy, the National Enquirer broke the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky story. They have a good track record of breaking scandals earlier than mainstream news sources.

  • Posted By: rphernan @ 12/22/2007 4:02:47 AM

    Comment: What "facts" behind the article? You can spin facts any way you want by the way you present and/or write about them. Anybody who considers themselves informed about politics knows that this was not an accurate accounting of the "facts". Tarheels did you watch the vicePres. debate last year? He slammed Cheny constantly and there was a concensus that he won the debate, yet this highschool article indicates he was "unprepared" after they indicate he is famous for his preparation. Again, give me a break!

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:53:04

      Comment: rphernan, as much as you dislike this "highschool" article. There is a 4 * 5 inch area on the www.johnedwards.com website encouraging people to read this article. It's obviously not as bad as you think it is, if the Edwards campaign website is encouraging people to read this "highschool" article.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:51:04

      Comment: During the VP debate in 2004, Edwards attempted to tell us that he was the next John F Kennedy or the JFK of this time. Then Cheney said that he knew JFK well and that John Edwards was no John F Kennedy. Edwards didn't know what to say when Cheney made this dig at him. Edwards was sitting there with his dumb smile on his face and nothing to say. It was hilarious.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:36:55

      Comment: Thank you for the paid political add from "Edwards for President, 2008". You and the Edwards camp are the only people that think Edwards held his own with Cheney. Edwards looked like the Christians that were being to the Lions by the Romans when Cheney got a hold of him. It was a clear case of Cheney's years of experience dominating the political wannabe and newcomer. Cheney is a mean dude.

  • Posted By: borntoraisehogs @ 12/22/2007 12:08:08 AM

    Comment: Who would vote for a multi- millionaire who wears a dorky digital watch ?

  • Posted By: rphernan @ 12/21/2007 6:27:11 PM

    Comment: I have to hand it to News Week; they really dropped a bomb at the last minute, which I assume was the point. They follow and perpetuate the idea that John Edwards doesn't exist, outside of reality of course, and then when they finally do put in their misnamed "Sleeper" cover story, it turns out to be an Attack Piece. I usually don't pay attention to who actually writes the stories, but I had to do so now because I wanted to see who the Clinton Campaign is employing. I'm convinced that either Campo-Flores and Smalley either have partisan reasons for their story, or they are politically incompetent, or both. John Edwards is not an infallible person, and maybe he doesn't have the background of Mother Teresa or Ghandi, but he is the only one speaking about Poverty, Corporate Greed, and the need to do something about it. I can understand bad writing, but what makes this even worse, is that this story was actually approved for publication. I dropped Time Magazine because I felt the writing was sub-par garbage. Time for reevaluation of Newsweek. Give me a break!

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 19:20:14

      Comment: This article is definitely a case of shooting the messenger for printing an article that you don't agree with because you don't agree with facts behind the article.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 19:16:49

      Comment: Seeing that Edwards has been a distant third behind Hillary and Obama in the first four caucus and primary states, I can see why Newsweek treated him like he didn't exist. Even now, his chances aren't that good. My bet was that Newsweek did the article to hedge their bets in case he pulled off a miracle like Kerry did in 2004.

  • Posted By: rphernan @ 12/21/2007 6:22:36 PM

    Comment: I have to hand it to News Week; they really dropped a bomb at the last minute, which I assume was the point. They follow and perpetuate the idea that John Edwards doesn't exist, outside of reality of course, and then when they finally do put in their misnamed "Sleeper" cover story, it turns out to be an Attack Piece. I usually don't pay attention to who actually writes the stories, but I had to do so now because I wanted to see who the Clinton Campaign is employing. I'm convinced that either Campo-Flores and Smalley either have partisan reasons for their story, or they are politically incompetent, or both. John Edwards is not an infallible person, and maybe he doesn't have the background of Mother Teresa or Ghandi, but he is the only one speaking about Poverty, Corporate Greed, and the need to do something about it. I can understand bad writing, but what makes this even worse, is that this story was actually approved to publication. I dropped Time Magazine because I felt the writing was sub-par garbage. This is definitely a time for reevaluation of News Week. Give me a break!

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 19:20:42

      Comment: This article is definitely a case of shooting the messenger for printing an article that you don't agree with because you don't agree with facts behind the article. I'm replying twice since rphernan spamed this forum twice with his posting.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 19:17:19

      Comment: Seeing that Edwards has been a distant third behind Hillary and Obama in the first four caucus and primary states, I can see why Newsweek treated him like he didn't exist. Even now, his chances aren't that good. My bet was that Newsweek did the article to hedge their bets in case he pulled off a miracle like Kerry did in 2004. I replied a second time since you spamed your posting twice.

  • Posted By: OhHowILovePolitics @ 12/21/2007 5:59:11 PM

    Comment: I'm not a fickle voter so things like this don't sway me, BUT, Edwards is SMOKIN' HOT in the cover photo! I've made my decision about who I would like to see in the WH. It certainly isn't a Republican.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 19:18:57

      Comment: No wonder politics in this country are a mess. Seeing that we have a woman's hormones driving who she's going to vote for instead of the issues, no wonder we elect such poor quality politicians.

      • Posted By: OhHowILovePolitics @ 12/23/2007 09:30:41

        Comment: Apparently tarheels....can't read either - I just said it didn't sway my vote - I vote on issues, qualifications, etc. Not hormones. You apparently see and hear what you want to see and hear - not what was actually said - taking lessons from Bill O'Reilly?

      • Posted By: rphernan @ 12/22/2007 04:15:05

        Comment: So Mr. Tarheels has spoken for the entire Carolinas, bravo. Anything else oh wise one?

        • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:43:54

          Comment: I hear that Edwards poor working class neighbor that Elizabeth Edwards bad mouthed because he was poor is getting together a petition to have the Edwards move out of the neighborhood. The 25,000 square foot McMansion doesn't fit well with poor working class neighborhood that it was built in.

          • Posted By: montegoteam @ 01/01/2008 00:25:41

            Comment: You've been watching too much Fox News or reading the National Enquirer. Any any case, you don't sound very informed or enlightened.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 3:37:05 PM

    Comment: Edwards tells you that he has blue collar roots and values because his dad worked in the mill all of his life. What he doesn't tell is that his dad was a manager in the mill and he actually had white collar roots and values. Knowing the whole truth changes how you view Edwards story.

    • Posted By: rphernan @ 12/22/2007 04:33:25

      Comment: So his dad was a "Mill Manager". Woopdedoo. I think what matters here is that John Edwards was the first in his family to put himself through college; he is a man who worked hard and acheived the American Dream. He also sees that there are 35 Million American people who are working poor, where college is a stretch. What Republican Candidate has that understanding?

      • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:39:37

        Comment: Edwards is not alone in what he accomplished. I was also the first in my family to graduate college because I worked full time and attended school full time. I did what I had to do and I didn't expect a government handout to give me the college education that I worked long and hard for. America is the land of opportunity and you have to work to take advantage of opportunities. You can't rely on freebes from the govt.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 2:53:12 PM

    Comment: American politics is humorous to watch. Seeing that most Americans don't have a good understanding of civics (how American Government works), they believe what the United States government does is the responsibility of the President. In reality, the President can't hardly do anything without the approval of the House and the Senate. Yet the Presidential candidates are promising everything to everybody they talk to knowing that they won't have the power to honor the promise without the House and Senate approving what they want to do. They make this empty promises because they know that the majority of Americans don't understand civics.

  • Posted By: vineguy @ 12/21/2007 1:58:45 PM

    Comment: People should know that this group "tarheelsarenot...." are nothing but a bunch of right wing swift boaters. They are lying and misrepresenting the truth. This latest "Rumor has it" posting proves how "low road" they are. How tacky. They probably shop at Walmart and buy stuff from China, even though they complain about Edward's voting history in that regard. He admits he's not perfect and made some voting mistakes but does our President? NO. He just continues to lie and our soldiers continue to die. Why don't we talk about what is REAL instead of drivel like "Rumor has it". What a bunch of losers. THIS TARHEEL IS FOR EDWARDS ALL THE WAY.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 14:34:47

      Comment: vineguy, why don't you actually dispute the facts in my posting with true facts that dispute my facts if you have them. When somebody attacks the messenger instead of what was posted, you can tell that the attacker isn't able to dispute your facts.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 14:32:20

      Comment: tarheelsarenotforedwards is one person. I post on wral.com on most Edwards articles. For anybody who wants to know how people from North Carolina feel about Edwards. Go to www.wral.com and look for stories about Edwards and review the comments. It's 99% against Edwards. I also posted on Edwards 2004 website and told the world the truth about the ambulance chaser from North Carolina.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 14:28:44

      Comment: The rumor about Edwards pregnant Mistress who's pregnant with Edwards illegitimate love child was broke by the The National Enquirer yesterday. From a credibility perspective, The National Enquirer was the first to break the Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton story as well. It was on The DrudgeReport (www.drudgereport.com) and other news sites yesterday and today.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 11:34:18 AM

    Comment: Rumor has it that Edwards girlfriend is pregnant with their illegitimate love child.

    Looks like Edwards has the girlfriend waiting in the wings until Elizabeth dies of cancer.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 11:30:29 AM

    Comment: Edwards strategy in Iowa for 2008 saying that he can still win if he loses the large cities and by some miracle all of the rural precincts vote exclusively for him. This sounds like the same could be, might be, should be, maybe strategy that he had in 2004 as he continue to lose primaries and caucuses, his team continued to tell us that it was all part of the greater strategy and that Edwards was going to be President in 2004.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 10:11:36 AM

    Comment: To all of the poor that have scrimped and saved to donate to Edwards. The $400 haircut was initially paid for by the Edwards campaign fund. Only when called on this issue did Edwards reimburse the campaign for $400.00.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 10:10:12 AM

    Comment: Edwards tells us how Bill Clinton supported NAFTA which sent jobs overseas. What Edwards doesn't tell you is that he voted to allow China to be admitted into the WTO and also granting China favored nation status for trading with the United States. His votes allowing China unlimited access to our markets has done significantly more damage than NAFTA did. NAFTA only involved the United States, Mexico, and Canada.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 10:08:10 AM

    Comment: Edwards has made numerous promises to the poor with his proposed Populist and Socialist programs. Unfortunately, he doesn't tell us how much taxes will have to be raised to pay for all of his promises. He will bankrupt the middle class and this country with the required tax increases to pay for all of his Socialist and Populist promises.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 10:07:50 AM

    Comment: Edwards was a questionable sleazy trial lawyer. He will say and do whatever it takes to get what he wants. He once claimed to have channeled the spirit of a dead woman in court to get the jury to take his clients side in the trial. Edwards suits against doctors drove up the price of malpractice insurance raising the cost of health care higher than the poor that he claims to represent can afford.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 10:07:32 AM

    Comment: The people of Iowa should understand that the people of North Carolina don't support Edwards. If the people who know Edwards don't support him, the people of Iowa should be careful and not make a mistake by supporting him based on his campaigning in their state. In 2004, Edwards couldn't help Kerry carry his home state of North Carolina and his birth state of South Carolina. Be careful with Edwards.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 9:52:55 AM

    Comment: John Edwards did nothing for the poor that he claims to represent during his six years in the Senate. Instead of representing the people of North Carolina from 1998 to 2004, he spent the entire time campaigning for President. Other than voting to authorize the war with Iraq, he didn't do a lot in the Senate.

  • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 9:39:37 AM

    Comment: Edwards isn't talking about his Girlfriend who's pregnant with his love child. He needs to address this issue to have credibility with the voters.

  • Posted By: D Silva-Surpha @ 12/21/2007 12:13:39 AM

    Comment: It's very clear by the comments here that the Republican party is scared to death that Edwards will get the Democratic nomination. BTW, what patriotic American gives a flying **** about $400 haircuts, when our best and brightest young Americans are being maimed and dying in a country where we should not be. In that country because of the criminality of this Adminstration and their cronies. Cronies that have been running for cover until the sheeples of this country's short attention span won't remember their names anymore - anybody even remember the name Feith? Honestly... the Pres and VP should be begging not to be impeached - and the Iraq War is only ONE reason that should be! Wake up people. The time is now. Hate-mongering under the veils of religion and the subversive influence of Corporate America - yes, I mean YOU Haliburton, Exxon-Mobil, and ALL of the pharmaceuticals has very nearly destroyed this country after 2524 days of Purgatory with the sloppy, slobbering gloats of Limbaugh, Coulter, and other homophobes (translation - "In the Closet"). It isn't a time to be a proud Republican -- or at least it WASN'T a good time to be a proud Republican. I've now registered as a Democrat, and it's because of Edwards.

    Edwards is the best candidate for anyone that actually works for a living. Yes, he's got a 25k sqft house. So WHAT? Like John Houseman used to say... "He EARNED it." And don't talk about his not having support in his home state... it's irrelevant. That's the talk of (1) the ultra-conservatives that have always hated his drive for equality and ending poverty, and (2) the Democrats that were annoyed because he had the audacity, ambition, and success to be in a position to be short-listed for VP in 2000 by Gore, and then to not run for a 2nd term in 2004. They knew what they were losing by him sowing his ambition! So what's wrong with him having ambitions - as long as it's for the right reasons? Don't each of you?

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 09:44:37

      Comment: The people of Iowa should understand that the people of North Carolina don't support Edwards. If the people who know Edwards don't support him, the people of Iowa should be careful and not make a mistake by supporting him based on his campaigning in their state. In 2004, Edwards couldn't help Kerry carry his home state of North Carolina and his birth state of South Carolina. Be careful with Edwards.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 09:42:10

      Comment: Edwards was a questionable sleazy trial lawyer. He will say and do whatever it takes to get what he wants. He once claimed to have channeled the spirit of a dead woman in court to get the jury to take his clients side in the trial. Edwards suits against doctors drove up the price of malpractice insurance raising the cost of health care higher than the poor that he claims to represent can afford.

      • Posted By: rphernan @ 12/22/2007 04:25:32

        Comment: Wow, Mr. Tarheel, are you sure you don't have a sickness or something? You talk about "shooting the messenger" and then you proceed to call Edwards a "sleazy trial lawyer". It's obvious that you're an Edwards hater given your chosen name, but maybe you should write a little more rational and people would take you more seriously.

        • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/22/2007 16:57:08

          Comment: Trial lawyers by definition are sleazy. Edwards has this reputation in the North Carolina Courts. He's your typical ambulance chaser.

  • Posted By: Radical Joe @ 12/20/2007 9:22:20 PM

    Comment: John Edwards is the only Democratic candidate who has openly identified what must be changed in Washington ,that is the inordinate power that the wealthy corporations have gathered onto themselves the last six years.We need a President of the Teddy Roosevelt mind set that will constrain the monopolistic power that corporate America has foisted upon America thru deregulation,mountains of cash and control over much of the media.We middle class Americans have that power thru the ballot,but we must use it!Our time is running short,get out and support John Edwards,the only person speaking for All Americans!

  • Posted By: barbie @ 12/19/2007 4:09:45 PM

    Comment: I believe JohnEdwards has some of the best thought-out plans for the future of this country. I like the idea of him being what I would call a "populist progressive" . I do not know if that is the correct term but he is the person I would feel the most comfortable with being president. John, please continue to show people that you are the best possible presidential candidate!! I look forward to you being sworn in as our 44th president on January 20, 2009.....I, and I am sure many others, are counting the days.

    • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 09:47:00

      Comment: Edwards has made numerous promises to the poor with his proposed Populist and Socialist programs. Unfortunately, he doesn't tell us how much taxes will have to be raised to pay for all of his promises. He will bankrupt the middle class and this country with the required tax increases to pay for all of his Socialist and Populist promises.

  • Posted By: wothe @ 12/19/2007 1:17:21 PM

    Comment: I hope he is our next President ! Most are middle income people in the US.
    We need someone who knows what it means to work for a living and not born rich.

  • Posted By: mattfan1 @ 12/19/2007 12:41:55 PM

    Comment: I totally support waht Edwards wants to do, he is the only hope this country has at getting the Government back to the people. He is the only Democratic Candidate that can possibly beat the Republican in general election, and he is the only one with the vision and fight in him to change the things we so desperately need. Go John Go!

  • Posted By: AmericanVeteran @ 12/19/2007 4:17:44 AM

    Comment: I'd like to know what each candidate would do to change practices at the Social Security Administration, to help disabled citizens obtain SSA Disability without having to fight for 10 years. Once the SSA physician agrees with the citizen's physician, there should be no issue. Yet, in case after case, disabled citizens are denied the assistance they earned while able to work.

  • Posted By: AmericanVeteran @ 12/19/2007 4:16:10 AM

    Comment: I'd like to know what each candidate would do to change practices at the Social Security Administration, to help disabled citizens obtain SSA Disability without having to fight for 10 years. Once the SSA physician agrees with the citizen's physician, there should be no issue. Yet, in case after case, disabled citizens are denied the assistance they earned while able to work.

  • Posted By: PatriotForObama @ 12/18/2007 4:13:58 PM

    Comment: Wake up people and remember how pretty boy John voted in the Senate. Patriot Act, NAFTA, Iraq war ring a bell? He has only six years experience in public office and thats what he has to show for it. Barack Obama has 11 years in public service and thats 4 more than Hillary and 5 more than Edwards. Edwards is being endorsed by Tim Robbins. Obama has the endorsements of many Republicans as well as Democrats because Obama stands for unity and strength. He draws large crowds without celebrity. I've been to the town hall meetings and the rallies so I know. Obama has more offices in Iowa than any other candidate and has visited more towns than your so called road warrior. Obama has risen above the others in the polls without the recognition advantage Clinton and Edwards enjoy. Everyone that knows Barack , likes him! What is John going to do about foreign policy? Kick ass like he says he'll do against the special interests? That ought to put us in a war with Iran pronto. No thank you! We've lost enough lives as a result of the Iraq war which John and Hillary voted for. I choose Senator Barack Obama!

  • Posted By: donaldbondphd @ 12/18/2007 3:37:25 PM

    Comment: Comment: Hillery Clinton has served in the Senate for 7 years as a colleague of Edwards. I have asked more then 20 "Hill Lovers" to name for me at least one piece of legislation that she has AUTHORED and had passed for each year served, seven in all. Their responses: BLANK STARES. It is obvious that time serves is not equivalent to effective leadership.

    The Chief Chef served in the White ;;House for 7 years, but he is not ready for prime time leadership of our belovedcountry any more than Hillary is.

    If you want change, REAL CHANGE,,

  • Posted By: Lindain Austin @ 12/18/2007 2:02:06 PM

    Comment: I am an Edwards fan and have been from Day 1. Mr. Edwards reminds me most of the "populist" Democrats of my parents' and grandparents' generation. It irritates me no end that the press had focused on the Clinton/Obama race while ignoring Edwards' positions that are detailed, founded in logic, and just make sense! As pinkpanther says, voting Democratic is the most important thing, and I will vote for whoever that candidate may be. But I believe Edwards has the best chance at winning what in truth is a "centrist" nation. The Decider's Administration has done enough damage country- and world-wide to cause my sister and several friends to leave the Republican party in disgust - AND to say they'll vote for any of the three Democratic leads. However, I still think Edwards has the best opportunity to win over the Independents and disgusted Republicans. -- I agree with MarkNG over that 100%. One thing I would like Edwards to talk about is how he will build a strong INDEPENDENT Cabinet and appoint Agency Heads who actually know the business of the Agency (think about "You're doing a great job, Brownie" to the former horse/race track owner after Katrina). We have to have domestic and foreign policy experts who are allowed to do their jobs to even begin restoring the U.S. to what it should and still can be. I don't think Gore would accept a VP position, but he would make a great head of the EPA. Is it 2008 yet?

    • Posted By: mattfan1 @ 12/19/2007 12:46:43

      Comment: Way to go...Get all you know to fight for the right man for the job!!!

  • Posted By: ragtopdodge @ 12/18/2007 12:47:36 PM

    Comment: Sarah, save your money. He has no chance.

    He can use some of his own $50M to run. He doesn't need your crumbs. just tell him to stop w/the $400 haircuts, which he used CAMPAIGN FUNDS to pay for it! Cheapskate!

  • Posted By: sarahjaneASU @ 12/18/2007 12:24:01 PM

    Comment: Edwards has my support 100%. If I was not putting all of my money into tuition right now, a good bit of it would go to him. I believe he would do the best for our future, my future and the future of my children I will one day have. This sums up alot about the candidates running - http://www.skirsch.com/politics/president/comparison.htm - I suggest you check it out.

  • Posted By: sarahjaneASU @ 12/18/2007 12:23:55 PM

    Comment: Edwards has my support 100%. If I was not putting all of my money into tuition right now, a good bit of it would go to him. I believe he would do the best for our future, my future and the future of my children I will one day have. This sums up alot about the candidates running - http://www.skirsch.com/politics/president/comparison.htm - I suggest you check it out.

  • Posted By: frajaka @ 12/18/2007 12:22:00 PM

    Comment: John Edwards giving all you got. Then, let God take over, you are a sure winner!

  • Posted By: ragtopdodge @ 12/18/2007 11:22:03 AM

    Comment: Which of the two America's does John belong to?

    Recall his $400 haircut and his 30,000' house.

    ONE-TERM Senator who didn't accomplish anything except to vote for the Iraq War.

    • Posted By: mattfan1 @ 12/19/2007 12:50:48

      Comment: He belongs to the One America that has not forgotten that the people are the ones who are supposed to be running things, He is from the One America that realizes we are all sinking fast courtesy of corporate greed. He is from my America, one that cares.

      • Posted By: tarheelsarenotforedwards @ 12/21/2007 09:51:00

        Comment: The people of North Carolina were conned by Edwards in 1998 when he ran for Senate. They figured him out. That's why they didn't vote for him and Kerry in 2004. If the people that know you best won't vote for you, that should tell the rest of the country about your character.

  • Posted By: uuforyou @ 12/18/2007 9:45:47 AM

    Comment: HUCKABEE DROPS IN NATIONAL POLLS !!!!!
    Go to real clear politics!
    Anti-Huckers Blog this story!!
    End the Huckabaloo!!!!

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/18/2007 5:04:07 AM

    Comment: OBAMA"S EXPERIENCE?
    Let's be fair to Obama. He has served 8 years in the Illinois State Senate prior to becoming a Illinois Senator. Dealing with the same issues and gaining the same experiences a Governor would have in those same 8 years. He has over a decade of elected experience. He started from nothing and was voted in and re-elected by his constituency because of his steady progress as a solutions oriented representative. As a Senator in Washington D.C he has continued his progress by serving on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, In addition, he is a member of the the Foreign Relations Committee and served the Veterans Affairs Committee and In 2005 and 2006, he served on the Environment and Public Works Committee. Obama has always excelled beyond his years and his peers have always looked to him for leadership. At Harvard he had to be twice as good as everyone else in order to attain the status as the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.

    Hillary Clinton rise is much different than Obama's. From the time she was a student she has been involved in politics. She served as first lady; and then as a Senator. She never represented Illinois but rather New York. She has gained invaluable experience in the White House and is a successful Senator. I think the fact that Obama had no WHITE HOUSE PLATFORM TO REACH TO THIS POINT IS A TESTIMONY to his Wisdom, Skill and Determination. You cannot be "inexperienced" and Have OBAMA's Credentials.

    To; Nika: Who's Health Care Plan would best benefit your situation. And WHY?

  • Posted By: nawawimohamad @ 12/18/2007 4:47:10 AM

    Comment: Edwards may sound good on domestic issues, but the president deals a lot with foreign policies and it will be a double blow to the US if Edwards is elected into office. He will make the US look so bad in the world view that Bush will be the best president the US has ever had. As for the domestic issues, if you belief the politician you will believe anything! As for integrity have you seen what Edwards said on CNN over the past few years pertaining to the same issues? He has been saying different things to different audiences.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/18/2007 4:45:23 AM

    Comment: OBAMA"S EXPERIENCE?
    Let's be fair to Obama. He has served 8 years in the Illinois State Senate prior to becoming a Illinois Senator. Dealing with the same issues and gaining the same experience a Governor would have in those same 8 years. He has over a decade of elected experience. He started from nothing and was voted in and re-elected by his constituency because of his steady progress as a soltions oriented representative. As a Senator in Washington D.C he has continued his progress by serving on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, In addition, he is a member of the the Foreign Relations Committee and served the Veterans Affairs Committee and In 2005 and 2006, he served on the Environment and Public Works Committee. Obama has always excelled beyond his years and his peers have always looked to him for leadership. At Harvard he had to be twice as good as everyone else in order to attain the status as the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.

    Hillary Clinton rise is much different than Obama's. From the time she was a student she has been involved in politics. She served as first lady; and then as a Senator. She never represented Illinois but rather New York. She has gained invaluable experience in the White House and is a successful Senator. I think the fact that Obama had no WHITE HOUSE PLATFORM TO REACH TO THIS POINT IS A TESTIMONY to his Wisdom, Skill and Determination. You cannot be "inexperienced" and Have OBAMA's Credentials.

  • Posted By: nikasmomma2001 @ 12/18/2007 3:06:00 AM

    Comment: I have a magnificent 6 year old daughter who has Autism, so I don't have a lot of time or money to
    donate to help ensure the future of her generation, just my words in this letter.

    John Edwards is a viable candidate, who has the integrity to change
    things for the better. Edwards has a comprehensive healthcare plan and
    unlike most politicians, actually understands what it is like to be in
    dire circumstances. Though I am not as eloquent as Harry Belafonte was
    when he endorsed John Edwards, I agree with Belafonte that it speaks
    volumes that Edwards is the only viable candidate focusing on poverty,
    but that should not be a surprise to anyone who is aware of his work
    as Director of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Center
    on Poverty, Work and Opportunity. I am certain that Edwards will do
    his utmost for fight for the betterment of all, on a myriad of issues.
    I urge you to take a look for yourself, then decide.
    http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/
    http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/
    Bickering politicians are everywhere we look. There are far too many
    suffering and dieing to just bicker. It's time to get something done.
    John Edwards is a positive force. I feel confident that John
    Edwards will be an inspiring President that will leave office with the
    world in a much better state then it was when he entered office.

    P.S. Just one more thing???I know people tend to instinctively think
    "Oh, how terrible!" when I say my daughter has Autism. There is no
    need to use any energy feeling sorry for us. My daughter has been
    making wonderful progress since we started doing the
    Son-Rise Program from the Autism Treatment Center of America.
    Peace!

  • Posted By: nikasmomma2001 @ 12/18/2007 3:00:28 AM

    Comment: I have a magnificent 6 year old daughter who has Autism, so I don't have a lot of time or money to
    donate to help ensure the future of her generation, just a few words in this letter.

    John Edwards is a viable candidate, who has the integrity to change
    things for the better. Edwards has a comprehensive healthcare plan and
    unlike most politicians, actually understands what it is like to be in
    dire circumstances. Though I am not as eloquent as Harry Belafonte was
    when he endorsed John Edwards, I agree with Belafonte that it speaks
    volumes that Edwards is the only viable candidate focusing on poverty,
    but that should not be a surprise to anyone who is aware of his work
    as Director of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Center
    on Poverty, Work and Opportunity. I am certain that Edwards will do
    his utmost for fight for the betterment of all, on a myriad of issues.
    I urge you to take a look for yourself, then decide.
    http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/
    http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/
    Bickering politicians are everywhere we look. There are far too many
    suffering and dieing to just bicker. It's time to get something done.
    John Edwards is a positive force. I feel confident that John
    Edwards will be an inspiring President that will leave office with the
    world in a much better state then it was when he entered office.

    P.S. Just one more thing???I know people tend to instinctively think
    "Oh, how terrible!" when I say my daughter has Autism. There is no
    need to use any energy feeling sorry for us. My daughter has been
    making wonderful progress since we started doing the
    Son-Rise Program from the Autism Treatment Center of America.
    Peace!

    • Posted By: NC_Mom @ 12/18/2007 22:48:02

      Comment: With all due respect, Edwards little think tank at UNC has done nothing substantial. Nor has he helped with any of the issues regarding the disabled here in NC, to include our terrible situation with mental health facilities and care. Or autism (our other hometown boy, Clay Aiken, has done far more) . He as done NOTHING for North Carolina. He isn't a positive or negative force--he's no force whatsoever here. His own nonprofit is currently begging for basic supplies. Sign me, another mother of a special-needs child

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 11:50:41 PM

    Comment: Why do politicians make promises and then come up with excuses as to why they were unable to keep their promises. Are they doing this on Purpose; or are they just Nieve. Are they serving the interests of a few or many.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 11:42:37 PM

    Comment: It was not just one vote on the war; it was many votes; democrats voted with the Republicans on many foreign policy issues that have proven to be failures. IT WAS NOT JUST THAT ONE VOTE ON THE WAR. Numerous calculated mistakes have been made by Democrats. Combine this with the fact tha the democrats never ammended the Patriot Act and you are left scratching your head. . SOMEONE HAS TO WRITE AN ARTICLE CALLED::WHY DO ELECTED OFFICIALS BUCKLE WHEN THEY GET INTO POWER; WHAT HAPPENS THAT MAKES THEM CHANGE; WHAT FORCES CONTROL THE PRESIDENCY. WHY CAN;T ELECTED OFFICIALS CARRY OUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE'S AGENDA HAS BEEN STOPPED IN IT'S TRACKS BY THE POWERFUL CAPITALIST FRATERNITIES. It is this IRRESPONSIBLE CORPORATE CULTURE that has left so many behind. Every decision a politician make has a reason behind it, the trick is to find what their real agenda is. Why is it that powerful interests in D.C. are always able to sneak their agenda through. They admit last minute "add- ons" to bills in order to satisfy the special interest. .While the avergage person sits at home with no health care and high tuition bills the special interest is racking in record profits It is time for Change; a Responsible Corporate Culture. Capitalism with Social Justice.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 11:42:24 PM

    Comment: Ramus excellent point: Political families have emerged as a way for politicians to pool resources of savVy and experience and share the increasingly demanding burdens of office - and sometimes to ensure that the political legacy of a family leader is carried on.
    TO: I.D I do not know too much about Huckabee. However I do know he represents a large faction of the conservative party who feel Nick Romney and Guilliani are disguising themselves as "Republicans"/ Both Romney and Guilliani have very divisive agendas. Their plans do not include ALL AMericans. Romney thinks people should get health care on their own. He believes the best solution is to give poor people a choice of privatized Health Care THEY CANNOT AFFORD. Guilliani is a nut. The way he "pimps" 9/11 is really bad. He wants to build a wall which he will fund with ARAB Money donated by terrorist sympathizers. If i recall those who carried out the 9?11 attacks were Saudi, they were not of Iraqi or Afgan descent. We all know that we were betrayed by factions within the Royal Saudi Family(Who have strong connections in Egypt, and Syria) but because they own 13% of our economy we had to divert attention away from that; and focus on weapoins of mass destruction that never existed. In the process we let Bin Laden escape. He is now free to inspire a whole new generation of terrorists. Huckabee gets "his people" excited and energized. He is very articulate and seems to connect with the Republican Base. This is a big problem for McCain; and the main reason he did not win the 04 nomination(did not connect with the Republican Base). I think democratic politicians have been in Washington for too long and have moved too much to the center causing them to loose touch with the deomocratic base(anit-war, pro-choice, labor movements). This created a narrow opening for OBAMA; which he has widened. The majority of the democratic candidates when in office did not vote according to their base's agenda. They took the safe road and gave the President a "blank check". This to me is mind boggling.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 10:56:53 PM

    Comment: Ramus excellent point: Political families have emerged as a way for politicians to pool resources of savVy and experience and share the increasingly demanding burdens of office - and sometimes to ensure that the political legacy of a family leader is carried on.
    TO: I.D I do not know too much about Huckabee. However I do know he represents a large faction of the conservative party who feel Nick Romney and Guilliani are disguising themselves as "Republicans"/ Both Romney and Guilliani are very divisive agenda. Their plans do not include ALL AMericans. Romney thinks people should get health care on their own. He believes the best solution is to give poor people a choice of privatize Health Care THEY CANNOT AFFORD. Guilliani is a nut. The way he "pimps" 9/11 is really bad. He wants to build a wall which he will fund with ARAB Money earned by terrorist sympathizers. If i recall those who carried out the 9?11 attacks were Saudi, they were not of Iraqi or Afgan descent. We all know that we were betrayed by factions within the Royal Saudi Family(Who have strong connections in Egypt, and Syria) but because they own 13% of our economy we had to divert attention away from that; and focus on weapoins of mass destruction that do not exist. In the process we let Bin Laden escape so he can inspier a whole new generation of terrorists. Huckabee gets "his people" excited and energized. He is very articulate and seems to connect with the Republican Base. This is a big problem for McCain; and the main reason he did not win the 04 nomination(did not connect with the Republican Base). I think democratic politicians have been in Washington for too long and have moved too much to the centre causing them to loose touch with the deomocratic base(anit-war, pro-choice, labor movements). This left a narrow opening for OBAMA; which he has widened. The majority of the democratic candidates did not vote according to their base. They took the safe road and gave the President a "blank check". This to me is mind boggling.It was not just one vote on the war; it was many votes; democrats voted with the Republicans on many foreign policy strategies besides the war that have had a negative impact not to mention the vote on the Patriot Act, Iraq funding and foreign policy I WISH SOMEONE WOULD WRITE AN ARTICLE CALLED::WHY DO ELECTED OFFICIALS BUCKLE WHEN THEY GET INTO POWER; WHAT HAPPENS THAT MAKES THEM CHANGE; WHAT FORCES REALLY CONTROL THE PRESIDENTIS SO GREAT THAT THEY CANNOT KEEP THEIR PROMISE OR GO ALONG WITH THING THATs THEY KNOW ARE WRONG AND IRRESPONSIBLE.

  • Posted By: ajain @ 12/17/2007 9:41:29 PM

    Comment: Edward is so far behind that Iowa is now a two way race:
    Here is an in-depth, thoughtful analysis of the top three Democratic candidates: http://theleftcoaster.com/archives/011500.php
    Thanks for your time and remember to vote in your respective states on Super Tuesday.
    For a little election snapshot click: http://uselectionatlas.org/2008.php

  • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 8:38:40 PM

    Comment: LAST WORDS TO THINK ON!!!
    NO MATTER WHO WINS THE DEMOCRATE PRIMARIES NO MATTER WHO, OBAMA,CLINTON,EDWARDS, WILL GET MY VOTE! EVEN IF I DON'T CARE MUCH FOR THE PERSON, THEY ARE FAR MORE DESIRABLE THAN ANY GOP CANIDATE!!! JUST VOTE DEMOCRATE NO MATTER WHO WINS AND CHANGE FOR THE BETTER WILL FOLLOW!!! :)

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 7:12:55 PM

    Comment: OBAMA has shown that he has excelled at every level of government. He really has a grasp for issues, domestic and foreign. He has proven he can overcome gridlock to get things done. What more experience does he need? I think he is ready to take his agenda to the National Level. He is very fimiliar with the obstacles that stand in the way of progress(his experiences in the Senate). Being a Harvard Law School Graduate and an Editior; I do not think anyone is going to fool this guy. The other candidates have one BIG PROBLEM. They all voted for the "War"(Except Ron Paul).It is like all those years of experience did them no service when it came time to vote for the War. They all lacked the courage to make the right decision. They backed down because they were scared for their political careers. This is why PERSONALITY is so important. Obama just has something the other candidates do not. The Republicans led by my friend Karl Rove bullied and scared the democrats to vote for the war. Where were the tough democrats that we see parading today. There irresponsible funding of the war has also led problems like Blackwater. Many of the foreign policy issues in place today; democrats voted for. Do you really think something like Blackwater would happen under an OBAMA Presidency. . All the experience in the world cannot guarantee you will have the courage and the skill to make the difficult decisions as President of the United States of America. Are the American people really taking a risk with OBAMA or have they already taken bad risks with the candiates that already exist. Ask that question to the Anti-War movement. Ask that question to the Senate Finance Committee. Do the American people want a fresh start. Do they want old animosities and vandetta's to resurface. I like Edwards, Obama, and Clinton. I think they are all capable of handling the job.

    • Posted By: i.d. @ 12/17/2007 21:14:05

      Comment: eddiewhere, I would be interested in your view on Huckabee. I read all of your postings when I am on this site. Thanks.

  • Posted By: brian@rentlv.com @ 12/17/2007 6:59:08 PM

    Comment: FIRST OF ALL IT SCARES ME THAT iOWA CAN SHAPE THE FUTURE OF PRESIDENTIAL CANIDIATES. Are they really the "Heartbeat of America? Sorry, don't think so. Secondly, I thought the article was outstanding and I have a better understanding of Mr. Edwards. This country needs a strong, intelligent person who is a hard worker just to get us out of the mess that G. Bush is going to leave us in. I love "Underdogs" that have heart and commitment and Mr. Edwards has it!

  • Posted By: CivilServantBradley @ 12/17/2007 4:17:27 PM

    Comment: NEWSFLASH: This is not the place for political debate. The people who comment pro-Edwards, anti-Edwards, anti-Obama, pro-Paul, whatever, need to stop wasting their time. People who post on these forums will re-affirm their already solid beliefs in candidates. Nothing you say or post will sway them. Think about it. Will some faceless antagonistic stranged on the internet change -YOUR- mind?

    I commend each and every person who has spent time arguing in this comment section on the biased reporting that Newsweek consistently dumps out. The rhetoric used in this piece is highly disappointing.

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 17:43:47

      Comment: your right no on line faceless wounder will sway my or there views. I do not arguee or agree i read what the people say, not what newsweek or any other media has to print say or interpet biased reporting. the comments and anti-comments is what, and for now, will get my info, and LISTENEING to the ones i lean to, as yet i have made my opinion on any one yet. so in what catagory are my kind who prefere to the peoples thoughts to or against a furture president. Scrag the article, i read what folks say about what the article is not, but the person is.

  • Posted By: Capt Bruce @ 12/17/2007 3:40:37 PM

    Comment: Why isn't Ron Paul's record setting fund raising getting more press coverage??
    Dr. Ron Paul raised $6.2million in 24 hours from individual donors. This should be the headline on all political pages today... but it is not, one should ask why not?
    www.ronpaul2008.com

    • Posted By: blau @ 12/19/2007 17:59:24

      Comment: Why should we care?

  • Posted By: Capt Bruce @ 12/17/2007 3:40:09 PM

    Comment: Why isn't Ron Paul's record setting fund raising getting more press coverage??
    Dr. Ron Paul raised $6.2million in 24 hours from individual donors. This should be the headline on all political pages today... but it is not, one should ask why not?
    www.ronpaul2008.com

  • Posted By: montfort @ 12/17/2007 2:54:28 PM

    Comment: So a guy who has to appear on television early in the morning, and in a country where people who look odd on-screen are said to be not presidential enough, pays four hundred dollars for a haircut. And in an era where investing in your home is the only politically safe thing to do, builds a big house. And gains a lot of experience in the financial community by working for a big-time investment fund (do you know what sort of mortgages your own banks hold by the way) and the media never fails to fault him for it. Why not spend some of the space you use attacking the guy over things that have absolutely nothing to do with what he wants to do as President, talking about his policies for our future? And honestly? If these are the worst things you can come up with on a candidate, then you've picked someone I feel comfortable pitting against the Republicans, especially on issues of character.

  • Posted By: thrasher32 @ 12/17/2007 1:19:44 PM

    Comment: I agree, whoever the democratic candidate is, they get my vote. UNLESS Ron Paul wins the republican nomination, in which case hell will freeze over and I will cast my first republican vote ever.

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 13:37:39

      Comment: isn't Ron Paul [who i need to listen to more often i guess] a registered independent?

      • Posted By: i.d. @ 12/17/2007 21:23:04

        Comment: according to www.nationalplatforms.com, his party affiliation is republican

  • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 1:04:56 PM

    Comment: LAST WORDS TO THINK ON!!!
    NO MATTER WHO WINS THE DEMOCRATE PRIMARIES NO MATTER WHO, OBAMA,CLINTON,EDWARDS, WILL GET MY VOTE! EVEN IF I DON'T CARE MUCH FOR THE PERSON, THEY ARE FAR MORE DESIRABLE THAN ANY GOP CANIDATE!!! JUST VOTE DEMOCRATE NO MATTER WHO WINS AND CHANGE FOR THE BETTER WILL FOLLOW!!! :)

  • Posted By: blahblahblah07 @ 12/17/2007 12:39:04 PM

    Comment: I also like the fact he does not "owe" or "is owned" by special interests groups. He can work for the people and not be caught up in bills with pork thrown in just to get them passed because of donations from certain companies, unlike our current so called pres with his hands in oil.

  • Posted By: blahblahblah07 @ 12/17/2007 12:33:09 PM

    Comment: I really like Edwards and at this point, he has my vote. Its too bad the media has articles written in the tone as the" The Road Warrior". Some people who have not made up their minds will be influenced by the power of the pen. In this case, the author paints the picture of a rich, smiling candidate in third place. Why not talk about the debates that show him finishing strongly and the positives? Slanted articles or news reporting are more of FOX's tactics. Leave your own opinion behind and report the facts.

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 12:51:33

      Comment: I DO AGREE WITH BOTH YOUR POST AND EVEN MORE AGREE WITH YOUR VIEW ON THE MEDIA SO RIGHT YOU ARE AND IM UNDECIDED BUT I DO SO LIKE EDWARDS AND WHO EVER HE DECIDES AS VP WILL BE A GOOD PERSON AS ALL DEMOCRATE VPS ARE. I DO LIKE HE IS VIRGIN PROPERTY TO SPECIAL INTREST GROUPS HE HAS NOT BEEN BOUGHT. AS AN ATTY HE GOT RICH, THEN DID PRO BONO, AND IF PRO BONO DID NOT EXSIST MANY LOW-INCOMED FOLKS WOULD NEVER HAVE HAD THE CHANCE TO SEE OR GET JUSTICE!!! WHICH COST THE NORMAL CEO TO DO!

  • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 12:16:02 PM

    Comment: PATRIOT
    WHAT A FU** IDIOT YOU ARE!!! NO ONE IN THE DEMS OR GOP HAVE TO APLOLIGIZE FOR THE WAR VOTE!!! WE ALL WERE LIED TO PEROID A-L-L GET THE PICTURE? EVEN IF YOU HAD BEEN THERE LISTENING TO BOGUS INTELL YOU TO WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR WAR! SO STOP BLAMING ANY ONE FOR THAT VOTE,[ ALL BUT FOR BUSH WHO SET UP THE BOGUS INTELL AND PLANNED TO INVADE PRIOR TO 9/11]!! YOU MORON, NO POLITICIAN HAS TO SAY "SORRY I WAS LIED TO AND VOTED TO SAVE THE USA FROM HUSSAIN" AS WE WERE ALL TOLD!!! GET A LIFE AND VOTE SAFE!! EDWARDS IS SAFE, NO RACE, OR GENDER, OR RELIGIOUS TEST FOR HIM, AS IT APPLIES TO THE OTHERS IN THE DEM PARTY, BUT NOT THE GOP!

    • Posted By: Ramus @ 12/17/2007 15:07:01

      Comment: There were 27 Senators who did not vote to give Bush a black check for this war..Graham, Feingold, Kennedy among them. So not everyobody was duped by this Preisdent on October 11. 2002. Edwards is correct to apologize for allowing himself to be misled. I think Edwards has excellent plans on universal healthcare and getting out of Iraq and creating more jobs for Americans. He has my vote. I also believe he's the most electable Democrat and the Republicans do not want Edwards to be the Democratic nominee.

      • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 15:44:29

        Comment: A blank check is not exactly what i was refering to and i am glad the dems don't like blank checks after being taken for a ride. i was refering to the vote to go to war prior to the real intell came to light right after 9/11 when we were ALL lied to as we were told Iraq could attack today if they chose to do so when they could not even get an army up to assult us anywhere in the next 250 years YOU KNOW LIKE iRAN IS TODAY, but when we figured that out we were dug in deep allready there! the vote on fear, no politician should have to apologize for EXECPT BUSH! Soldiers NEVER FAIL, Leaders do! Edwards will not fail our country, as Bush has!