The Road Warrior

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

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

    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: tycity @ 12/17/2007 2:58:15 AM

    I hadn't really given Senator Edwards a fair shake. So I started doing some research. I started listening to everything these three said within the last two months. I started scouring their websites and remembering some of the vignettes of happenings of the last several years. One thing that always sticks out is the dubious dealings of Hillary Clinton - way back, from the Foster suicide incident, Whitewater, voting for the War in Iraq, etc. I think I originally wanted Hillary to win because she was (a) from New York (not really, but she did buy a house here to serve the state - yeah, that's lame, but I factored it in; (b) She was a woman, and experienced in Washington, no less; and (c) I was nostalgic for the Clinton years. But is that really enough of a reason to vote someone in? Because I missed her brilliant husband? No, not good enough for my vote.

    Then I thought about Obama. His electablility is slim, him being an African American in a quasi-White-Evangelical country that this is today, he's incredibly inexperienced, albeit well-spoken, and I can't stand Oprah running around saying we should vote for him. Okay, he's brilliant, certainly interesting, represents everything I believe in... but... His inexperience scares the crap out of me. How would he handle a war? Would he be another president who is just a puppet being led my more experienced cabinet members (like good ol' W being led by Satan's little helpers, namely Cheney)? I found he got quite nasty during the last couple of debates - and so was Hillary.

    That brings me to Senator Edwards. I really hadn't given him a fair shake so I started delving really into this man/politician. It was interesting to find he has been fighting corporate interests that has literally taken over during the current administration. He has been fighting them all his life. If anyone knows me, they know that I despise corporate anything. And the privatizing of every federal interest of this country has got to stop. I feel that Senator Edwards can accomplish this on a much greater scale as the President. And don't think that he's been fighting little battles. He's been fighting Teutonic battles - and WINNING THEM ALL.

    He's for Universal healthcare, he's for changing or ridding the No Child Left Behind nightmare, and pretty much everything we need to change in the United States of America.

    But it doesn't stop there... His wife, Elizabeth, is a force to be reckoned with. She's brilliant and quickly becoming my hero. He had a brilliant son, Wade, who died tragically in a car accident when he was 16, but he has a wonderful foundation set up for his memory. His daughter Cate, is also amazing - as smart and interesting as Wade was.

    • Posted By: NC_Mom @ 12/17/2007 7:46:11 PM

      No, I'm sorry. There is NO record of Edwards fighting for anything or anyone without self-gain being part of the formula. He has NOT 'taken on' special interests here at home--in fact, while they might not contribute to him as a PAC or lobbyist, many special interests support his campaigns (esp. the trial lawyers who were fighting a cap on law suits winnings). He has not helped any of the white hat interest groups that have fought predatory lending, the huge hog lobby, the many man corporate welfare checks and schemes going on in NC.

      He wasn't even a good senator, turning his back on his constituents AND his state party while he was in office to campaign for himself. We are still here beating our heads against the walls fighting the corporations that actually paid Edwards bills. (Think it through--if they didn't have money, neither would he--it's a symbiotic relationship). Nor did he ever do pro bono work (ie fight the corporations with no chance of ever being paid). Or contribute as much to the nonprofits that do that as other lawyers (to include the Republican lawyers).

      The truth is while he was getting rich, OTHER North Carolinians--mostly middle class or lower--were fighting and winning the Teutonic battles, without an ounce of support from Edwards.

      People in NC will tell you how nice he is, and will support him outwardly because he's good PR for the state, but privately most don't support him.

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 12:44:58 PM

      EDWARDS IS THE SAFE VOTE, BUT I ONLY HAVE ONE PROBLEM WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID, I DO AGREE, BUT SAVE FOR ONE ITEM. YES OBAMA IS INEXPERIENCED, BUT I TOO LISTEN AND SEE, HE TO LISTENS TO THOSE WITH MORE EXPERIENCE THAN HE, AND I UNDERSTAND A LISTENING PRESIDENT IS DIFFERENT, WAY DIFFERENT, BUT HE DOES LISTEN,LEARN AND INCORPERATES GOOD IDEAS INTO HIS-HE LISTENS TO EVERYONE! SO THIS ALONE IS DIFFERENT BUT VERY VERY DESIRABLE!! EDWAEDS/OBAMA WOULD BE NICE OR EVEN THE OTHER WAY AROUND, BUT I STILL THINK EDWARDS WOULD GIVE THE GOP A RUN FOR THE MONEY, AND DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO WIN! OBAMA LISTENS, NOT TO HARD TO FEEL SAFE WITH ONE WHO LISTENS TO ANYONE WITH MORE EXPERIENCE IN FORIGN PLOICY, LIKE RICHARDSON, HE WOULD LISTEN! I KNOW HARD CONCEPT TO GRASP FOR D.C.

  • Posted By: MarkNG @ 12/17/2007 10:59:31 AM

    I've been a voting Democrat for 20 years, since I was 18. I have seen only one Democrat win the Oval Office in that space ot time. It amazes me how we keep putting up loser after loser (with the exception of Bill Clinton) as our nomimee apparently without consideration as to how they will shape up in the general election. Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry and Gore (yes - Gore, I mean - his campaign in 2000 - talking about throwing away a sure thing). Mrs. Clinton is certainly bright and very clever, Mr. Oboma seems to be inteligent and articulate....but Mr. Edwards is the only clear winner in a general election in 2008. If we put up Clinton or Obama for the general we're once again a party of Dreamers and will lose. Did anyone notice CNN's national poll of likely voters last week showing Edwards defeating ALL of the Republicans? The only Democrat to accomplish this in the poll. Well, we all raised our heads for a minute to look at the headline, and then dropped right back down into the busy work of throwing up another loser for the General Election. Edwards is the only way to go!

    • Posted By: NC_Mom @ 12/17/2007 7:29:47 PM

      Mark it's so sad that you are right. But isn't it a very very sad commentary on our country's culture that so many think the only person who can beat the Angry White Male party is a pretty-boy southern lawyer? While I agree that Gore threw away the election (even if he won the popular vote, he should have won by a landslide but wrecked it), and anyone with a slice of political savvy knows you can't win a national election without winning the south, and that the south is never gonna vote for a Tax-achusetts guy, making Dukadai and Kerry inane choices...well, this time it's a bit different. This time it we might be a party of Don Quixote's, but to me, it's vitally important--especially on the world stage--that we at least TRY to take a step forward culturally, to really start to actualize all those wonderful "created equal" ideals upon which our country was formed. Don't you think it would do the world good to see that the most power of countries, and one of the last to give up the barbarianism of slavery, could elect an African-American president? Even if we can't, I think it does the world good to see that at least a large number of Americans were willing to CONSIDER him. Maybe there are still too many bigots to make that a reality, but I want to counted as fighting the good fight, standing up for those lofty ideals that were supposed to set America apart from all other countries. I will NOT concede this race to gender bigotry or racism. And frankly, as a North Carolinian, you couldn pay me to vote for Edwards after the way he abandoned his state and his perfect record of doing NOTHING for us here in NC.

    • Posted By: patnoeldavis @ 12/17/2007 11:24:02 AM

      To MarkNG: Gore and Kerry did not lose the elections in the popular votes, the Right Wing Machine stole the elections from them.

  • Posted By: lukeliberty @ 12/15/2007 8:35:22 PM

    John Edwards is a lightweight phony, another super-rich Democrat who, having money, moves on to power, and picks an issue that will buy the most available votes. If John Edwards thought he could become President by standing to the right of Dick Cheney, he would. As far as being a "fighter for the little guy" it has a nice ring, except the valor or gallantry of such service is ...um...mitigated by the millions of dollars at stake for him personally. So he worked the system and helped some people and helped himself more. But this is not fighting for the little guy out of virtue, it is fighting for vested selfish interest. The country needs better than this no-gravitas wannabe.

    • Posted By: kakie @ 12/16/2007 6:04:43 PM

      Enter Your Comment
      Edwards is not choosing his platform out of political convenicne---it is his life's mission to stand up for the "little guy." My friend worked extensively with his law firm and said he has always been "the real deal," taking cases no other attorneys would take against corporate abuse, because many of these cases were considered "unwinnable" and not worth their investment (remember, the attorney wins nothing in these cases unless the client prevails). She said Edwards would take these cases on behalf of working class and poor families because he always has had a passion for the underdog. He has been involved in community service his whole life and sponsored many community programs in North Carolina, long before his run for public office.

      Interestingly, I don't hear the press talking about any of the other, far wealthier candidates. Most are millionaries, including Obama, but I guess Edwards' big mistake was daring to talk about helping working class and poor families. I don't hear any of the other candidates with the moral conviction of Edwards. He has my vote.




      • Posted By: NC_Mom @ 12/17/2007 7:09:44 PM

        He does NOT have a record of public service. He has started two small organizations, one that is currently begging for basic supplies like pens and paper and snacks for the afterschool kids. He did NOT help fight for Healthchoice, the healthcare program for low-income kids, he did NOT fight the predatory lender, he has NOT fought the polluting hog industry, he has NOT fought the corporate welfare running rampant in this state, he has NOT used his influence with the Governor or Legislatoure to do any of this, or fight special interests in any way whatsoever. His only work for poor people was work that made him rich--he never did any pro bono work on the part of the poor and gave less than most lawyers to the program that helped the poor with things like disability, domestic violence, corrupt landlords. (And if the corporations weren't rich, he wouldn't be, so he's really beholden to them in a strange sort of way). He's a total phoney, and all talk, no action.

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

    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

    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 5:43:47 PM

      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: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 12:16:02 PM

    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 3:07:01 PM

      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 3:44:29 PM

        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!

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

    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: turbo @ 12/16/2007 6:23:43 PM

    I hope John Edwards wins the nomination because he can win in the general election.

    • Posted By: Ramus @ 12/17/2007 3:14:40 PM

      I agree. He is the one Democrat who will be able to win the general election. I believe the Republicans are most afraid of Edwards as the Democratic candidate. His proposals on health care are the best (read today's Paul Krugman in the NY Times) he has plan to get us OUT of Iraq. He is a man who has the interests of working Americans at the forefront of his issues. The coporatins who own this country will not be happy with him as the Democratic candidate and they will do whatever they can to stop him. The ruling oligarchy would be much happer with Senator Clinton of Senator Obama. Edwards has specific plans to deal with the problems of the working classes. Clinton and Obama..not so much.

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

    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: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 1:04:56 PM

    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 12:33:09 PM

    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 PM

      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: blahblahblah07 @ 12/17/2007 12:39:04 PM

    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: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 5:25:54 AM

    Eight years in the Illinois state Senate, Obama worked with both Democrats and Republicans to help working families get ahead by creating programs like the state Earned Income Tax Credit, which in three years provided over $100 million in tax cuts to families across the state. Obama also pushed through an expansion of early childhood education, and after a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, -Senator Obama enlisted the support of law enforcement officials to draft legislation requiring the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
    -Obama graduated from Harvard Law School where he was the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review
    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: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 12:23:39 PM

      NO DISAGREEMENT HERE ON ANY THING YOU HAVE SAID YA OBAMA IS AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN A GOOD MAN, AND IN ALL RELALITY AN EDWARDS/OBAMA OR OBAMA/EDWARDS WOULD SAVE US!! AS THE ONE TRUE REASON I DO LIKE OBAMA, AND HIS LACK OF EXPERIENCE! IS HE IS AND DOES LISTEN TO OTHERS WHO HAVE MORE TO OFFER, THAN HE. HE DOES WHAT NO PRESIDENT HAS DONE IN 7 YEARS-LISTEN, LEARN, AND INCORERATE GOOD IDEAS INTO HIS AGENDA. WHICH IS A VERY VERY IMPORTANT THING TO BE ABLE TO DO. HE LISTENS AND HIS CABNIT WOULD INCLUDE MANY WHO HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE THAN HE, BUT IF HE LISTENS TO THEM, THEN INEXPERIENCE IS NOT A BAD THING!1

  • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 12/17/2007 12:08:59 PM

    Nobody likes Clinton, nobody likes Obama, for reasons of either gender or race or even religion. GOP does not need a religious test but Dems have to? The best and safest way to the WH is through Edwards, who is in all relaity a very very good man, and OUR LAST HOPE TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY, AS EDWARDS IS THE ONLY DEMOCRATE WHO HAS NO BARRIERS BETWEEN HIM AND THE PEOPLE! LIKE EVERY GOP PRESIDENT WHO N-E-V-E-R ELECTS A VP WHO IS GOOD ENOUGH TO RUN THIS COUNTRY! WE ALL KNOW WHAT BUSH SR. DID, AND NO ONE IN ANY MIND WOULD WANT QUAIL, TO RUN OUR COUNTRY AS THE SAME GOES FOR CHENEY! ONLY THE DEMS GOT THE BRAINS TO GET A VP WHO IS CAPABLE LIKE GORE [WHO I WOULD TRUST OUR COUNTRY TO] EDWARDS/OBAMA, EDWARDS/GORE WOULD LEAD THIS COUNTRY BACK TO WHAT WE U-S-E-D TO BE!! THE GREATEST IN THE WORLD, LEADING BY EXAMPLE NOT FEAR!!! AS IT IS TODAY, OR BY GOD! AS HUKABEE WISHS ALL WOMEN IN THE HOUSE ON THERE KNEES , WHERE GOD WANTS THEM! NOT IN THE WORK PLACE OR IN OFFICE, AS BIBLICALY CORRECT, IN THE HOME SUBSERVIENT TO MAN! AS STATED BY HIM ALLREADY!!! EDWARDS IS OUR LAST GOOD HOPE TO REGAIN OUR COUNTRY FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE,, AND "WE THE PEOPLE' !! YOU KNOW EVERY RIGHT THE GOP TOOK AWAY, AND WILL KEEP AWAY!!! THIS TIME SHOULD IT BE CLOSE "WE THE PEOPLE" SHOULD ALL STAND AND IN ONE LOUD VOICE TELL D.C. WHO WILL BE PRESIDENT!!! OUR CHOICE NOT THERES!!! GO EDWARDS!!! WHO I DO HAVE FAITH IN TO CHOSE A GOOD MAN AS VP!! UNLIKE OUR RECENT CHOICE IN CHENEY WHO IS THE BIGGEST REASON BUSH WAS NOT IMPEACHED WHO WANTED CHENEY TO RUN OUR COUNTRY-ZERO!!!

  • Posted By: PatriotForObama @ 12/17/2007 12:03:15 PM

    Edwards is a fraud! He has too many votes in the Senate to apologize for, including authorizing the Iraq war and voting for NAFTA. He is a trial lawyer and promises to fight for us but the only thing he has fought for is MONEY. He lost his first bid for the presidential nomination, then lost as Kerry's running mate. He went to work for a hedge fund company as a consultant after speaking out about how crooked they were. He is a phony, just a pretty face!

  • Posted By: PatriotForObama @ 12/17/2007 11:59:00 AM

    Eddywhere: Where have you been? No other candidate has been more specific about judgments he has made, bills he has voted for, and bills he has designed. Senator Obama has held elected office for 11 years (four more than Hillary). Obama sponsored over 820 bills while serving in the Illinois Senate (serving 8 years, from 1996-2004). He authored the most sweeping ethics reform bill passed into Illinois law in over 20 years. He sponsored law enhancing tax credits for low-income workers, negotiated welfare reform and promoted increased subsidies for child care. Obama also led the passage of legislation mandating videotaping of homicide interrogations, and a law to monitor racial profiling by requiring police to record the race of drivers they stopped.

    In 2002 Obama spoke out publicly against the war in Iraq, saying he does not oppose all war, just dumb wars, and proceeded to accurately predict the quagmire of Iraq. Obama 08!

  • Posted By: PatriotForObama @ 12/17/2007 11:51:41 AM

    John Edwards made a statement in the media claiming Obama did not have the experience to become President of the United States. Well, let us see. John Edwards ran as a Vice Presidential candidate and could not deliver the state of North Carolina for John Kerry. Furthermore, we don't even see John Edwards campaigning in his home state. I'm from the Northeast but I lived in North Carolina for almost 10 twelve years where my family and I moved back to the northeast from North Carolina in 2004. When John Edwards ran for President of the United States in 2004, many of the residents of North Carolina criticized Edwards for his decision to run for President as a first term senator. Now, Edwards sounds like a hypocrite. If Edwards could not win North Carolina for John Kerry with experience, how could he win the presidency in 2008?

  • Posted By: MarkNG @ 12/17/2007 11:12:55 AM

    I have been a voting Democrat for 20 years ever since I was 18. I marvel at our consistency in putting up losers for the general election (with the exception of Bill Clinton): Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry and Gore (yes - Gore - I mean the election was his for the taking - what a throw away). In all my voting years I've seen us put one......one Democrat in the Oval Office. Did anyone even notice CNN's national poll last week showing Mr. Edwards beating ALL of the Republican candidates? - the ONLY Democrat to accomplish this in the poll. We all briefly lifted our heads at the headline, then went directly back down into the sad business of putting up another loser (Mrs. Clinton, Mr Obama) as our nominee. Mrs. Clinton is clearly competant and clever. Mr. Obama is obviously articulate and intelligent. Both will be defeated in a general election. Mr. Edwards is the only viable Democratic candidate for a general election and this fact is sadly lost on most voters.

  • Posted By: uuforyou @ 12/17/2007 11:06:21 AM

    A Clinton/Edwards ticket is a sure fire winner! With Clinton's experience and Edwards populist everyman qualities they can't lose! Go Clinton! Go Edwards!

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse