Showing posts with label John Edwards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Edwards. Show all posts

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Edwards Endorsement Pays Off For Obama

I am, personally, glad that Edwards came out for Obama. Being an Edwards supporter from the beginning, it's good to know that he made the same choice that I did, immediately after he dropped out. I couldn't help but wonder, as I saw them on television together, is that the ticket?

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press WriterThu May 15, 9:33 PM ET

Barack Obama collected the support of seven of John Edwards' Democratic convention delegates on Thursday, then gained the backing of four superdelegates and a large labor union as he marched steadily toward the party's presidential nomination.

The fresh support brought Obama's overall delegate total to 1,898, compared to 1,718 for his rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton. It takes 2,026 to clinch the nomination at the party convention in Denver this summer.

Ferchrissake, will the rest of you people get on board? It's time for this thing to be over!

Edwards, who bestowed his long-sought endorsement on Obama on Wednesday, won 19 delegates before departing the presidential race in January.

Within hours, Obama picked up the backing of five of them from South Carolina, one in New Hampshire and one in Iowa.

In addition, three superdelegates — Reps. James McDermott of Washington, and Henry Waxman and Howard Berman of California — endorsed Obama.

"I believe now is the time to unite behind Barack Obama so we can be in the strongest place possible to win in November," McDermott said.

Amen!

Waxman said in a statement: "I have the greatest respect and admiration for Senator Clinton and former President Clinton ... It is now clear, however, that the Democratic Party is nearing a broad consensus on our nominee."

Edwards had been backed by the United Steelworkers Union, which announced it would now support Obama. The union has 600,000 active members, many of them blue-collar workers of the type that have favored Clinton in recent primaries.

Obama also picked up the personal endorsement of superdelegate Larry Cohen, the president of the Communication Workers of America union.

Campaigning in Rapid City, S.D., Clinton spoke for the first time about Edwards' endorsement.

"I have a great deal of respect for Senator Edwards," she said in response to reporters' questions. "He and I have a lot in common ... I imagine that Senator Edwards' endorsement will be of some help to Senator Obama in Kentucky, but I think that what matters are the people who actually vote."

Senator Edwards is a person ans he does vote, I believe.

Clinton said she had not spoken with Edwards but had spoken with his wife, Elizabeth, about the endorsement. Clinton declined to discuss their conversation.

The delegate and labor support came despite Obama's overwhelming defeat in Tuesday's primary in West Virginia, and suggested that Clinton's argument that she would be a better general election candidate was not finding a receptive audience.

Oh, who cares about West Virginia? That is probably the most racist state in the Union and hasn't voted for a Democrat for president since, maybe, Kennedy. No big loss there. If the people of West Virginia want to remain poor as church mice and considered "hicks with sticks" by the rest of the nation, even the people of the south, let then keep voting for the party that only cares about the owners of the coal mines, not those who labor in them; the party who allows the safety standards to not be enforced.

The former first lady is favored to win next week's primary in Kentucky, while Obama is expected to win in Oregon the same day.

The delegates won by Edwards are not bound by his endorsement of Obama, but several said it is important to their decision.

"I will cast my vote for who John Edwards asks me to," said Robert Groce, a South Carolina delegate won by Edwards.

Arlene Prather-O'Kane, of Cedar Falls, Iowa, said she is a backer of Edwards but "I will support who he is endorsing — which is Barack."

With the primary season winding down, both Clinton and Obama have turned their attention increasingly to the superdelegates, the members of Congress and other party officials who have seats at the convention by virtue of their positions.

Obama long trailed Clinton among superdelegates, but overtook her last week, and has pulled further away despite suffering one of his worst defeats in the campaign in West Virginia.

Clinton spent the day campaigning in South Dakota, one of two states that closes out the primary season on June 3. Obama was home in Chicago.

Both rivals had avidly sought Edwards' endorsement, particularly in the weeks after he dropped out of the race. The former North Carolina senator and 2004 vice presidential nominee had campaigned as a champion of the working class, and in the wake of his departure, Clinton consistently drew more blue-collar votes than Obama did.

"We are here tonight because the Democratic voters have made their choice, and so have I," Edwards said Wednesday as he endorsed Obama in Grand Rapids, Mich. He said Obama "stands with me" in a fight to cut poverty in half within 10 years, a claim Obama confirmed moments later.

If Edwards says it, I believe it.

___

Associated Press writers Matthew Daly and Jesse J. Holland in Washington, Jim Davenport in Columbia, S.C., Amy Lorentzen in Des Moines, Iowa, and Sara Kugler in Rapid City, S.D., contributed to this report.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

The Edwards Endorsement

P.M. Carpenter

Events move too quickly. I was prepared to write this morning only about the GOP's increasingly sticky wicket and what it portends when John Edwards, with daring belatedness, up and endorsed his party's surefire nominee last night and thereby became the political centerpiece du jour. I wish he had checked with me first; but that's OK, I'll fit him in.

Actually, unlike the hordes of talking heads that crawled before a camera to wax profoundly on the Edwards endorsement, I question how much of real worth there is to say about it, other than renoting the obvious: the Obama campaign outsmarted the Clinton campaign once again, and but good.

I almost felt sorry for Hillary. There she was, all primed and pumped to exploit her little victory in West Virginia on network television, when boom, out popped the news of Edwards' new adventure. It was a tactical stroke of Obama's genius that had all the pundits wondering if the timing was intentional. Well, gee, I don't know. Was the timing of Eisenhower's final assault on Europe intentional?

Other than that, there was speculation aplenty about Edwards' move as an application of further pressure on undeclared superdelegates -- who, let's face it, seem lastingly impervious to that sort of thing -- and of course lots of meditation on whether the endorsement would help Obama in Kentucky and beyond. The fact that no endorsement in the history of the Republic has ever really done the recipient any perceivable good dissuaded the pundits not from this latter speculation, but it was jolly good fun to ponder anyway.

No, Edwards' endorsement, along with NARAL's, was that of an exquisitely timed and well-executed pincer movement on an already dead campaign: "The reason I am here tonight is that Democratic voters in America have made their choice and so have I," said Edwards with retrospective finality.

In short, aside from grabbing the evening's headlines away from Hillary and keeping the proper focus on Obama, Edwards' endorsement was an exhortation to party unity, nothing more.

Which could, of course, help tremendously downticket, which leads us to what I had wanted to write about in the first place: Mississippi's 1st Congressional District election. It was the third, explosive confirmation of late that things, to put it mildly, are looking rather good for Democrats.

I knew they were looking explosively bad for the GOP when I saw former Miss. senator Trent Lott in an interview the other day discussing the upcoming election. He sniffed and snorted with that air of otherworldly unconcern he always demonstrates when he's in full panic mode -- Special election? Well, uh, yeah, I've heard there's one around the corner. As I recall, however, that's solid, traditional Democratic territory. It was only a fluke we ever held it. Nevertheless our prospects are looking good.

His remarks really did suck all the suspense out of it for me. I knew, at that very moment, that Republican Southaven Mayor Greg Davis was absolute toast.

But what a marvelous breakfast he made by Wednesday morning. The GOP had thrown its own special version of Hillary's "kitchen sink" into defeating Travis Childers, especially deploying the nightmarish bogeyman of Jeremiah Wright. Woe to our nation should the antiAmerican Grand Conspiracy of Obama, Wright, Childers & Co. ever come to fruition, charged the GOP, to which Northern Mississippians responded en masse: Up yours. You shall spook us no more. "Boo!" is so 2004.

And, as the New York Times reported, the GOP invested in the race those whose reputations now represent the party's very soul, "sending Vice President Dick Cheney to campaign for Mr. Davis, along with Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi and former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas; President Bush and Senator John McCain recorded telephone messages that were sent to voters throughout the district."

All -- each and every one -- were soundly repudiated by voters. The tactics of fright-wigged fearmongers were dispatched by a comfortable margin of electoral sanity. Nothing could bode better for the GOP's autumnal devastation and doom.

Which -- and this is why I was eager to write about the 1st District thing -- opens the reasonable plausibility of Barack Obama, as we approach the fall, proposing some version of FDR's "100 Days."

The similarities between 1932 and 2008, in the electorate's mind, at least, are increasingly striking, and so may be voters' receptivity to a general-election campaign conducted on a platform of immediate and frenetic but thoughtful action once in office, backed by a solid and unbreakable Democratic majority in Congress.

From busting the plutocratic hold on tax policy to imperial retraction to moving healthcare reform to the forefront, such a thematic campaign could add the much-demanded substance to Obama's rather vague promise of revolutionary "change." It would lend a sense of focused purpose again -- of definite objectives, (perhaps) achievable goals and spirited national unity.

Pleasant indeed would be the feeling that we're all part of one country again -- a fair, humane and honorable country, again. It worked for Roosevelt and launched a 75-year coalition that, Lord knows, could use some rejuvenation.

True, It worked for Roosevelt, but that was before the Republicans had their very own propaganda machine, spewing out misinformation 24/7. Until these idiots are properly off the air, there will still be heeps of trouble?

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Friday, May 9, 2008

Boniors To Endorse Obama

ABC News has learned that David Bonior, the campaign manager for the 2008 presidential race of Sen. John Edwards, D-NC, will endorse Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, today.

Hey, Hillary, IT"S OVER!


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Mark McKinnon: I Won't "Run" Against Obama

McCain's Media Mastermind Will Quit if Obama Is Nominated
By Rory O'Connor
AlterNet

Wednesday 20 February 2008

McKinnon, the media mastermind who helped launch Bush into office, says he won't attack Obama.

If you're a Democratic primary voter in Ohio, Texas or Pennsylvania, and you're still torn between Obama and the Clintons, here's the best reason I know to throw your support to Obama: Mark McKinnon.

Love him or hate him, there's general agreement that McKinnon - the chief media adviser and strategist for presumptive Republican nominee John McCain - is a genius at what he does. So it's no surprise that, even though it's relatively old 'news,' word that McKinnon will stop working for McCain if Obama is the Democratic nominee has been freshly burning up cyberspace of late.

Citing his admiration for the Illinois senator, McKinnon says he cannot face being part of a campaign that "would inevitably be attacking" Obama. "I have met Barack Obama. I have read his book. I like him a great deal, he told National Public Radio. "I disagree with him on very fundamental issues, but it would be uncomfortable for me, and it would be bad for the McCain campaign."

But who is Mark McKinnon - and why does his unusual stance matter so much? For starters, because as the chief media adviser and strategist for the Bush-Cheney campaigns, he arguably deserves more credit (or blame, depending on your politics!) than any other individual for George Bush being in the White House. Anyone who can get George Bush elected president of the United States twice (and governor of Texas before that) is a danger to Democrats everywhere, and the fact that McKinnon will withdraw his services from McCain in the event of an Obama nomination should be music to the ears of anyone who wants to see an end to our long national nightmare - aka the Bush administration and its possible successors.

I first met McKinnon in 2004 while covering the presidential media campaigns for the television industry journal Broadcasting & Cable. He returned my first call immediately - unlike his inept Democratic counterparts, who failed to return 14 calls and then hung up when I finally got through. After telling me to check in with presidential counselor Dan Bartlett (who also promptly returned the call), McKinnon then invited me to spend a day at the Bush/Cheney campaign offices in suburban Virginia.

Upon arrival, I asked McKinnon what his media plan for the campaign against John Kerry would be. To my surprise, instead of dodging, filibustering or ignoring the question, he answered in a forthright manner. "We plan to spend $60 million in the next 90 days defining John Kerry before he can define himself," McKinnon told me.

"How are you going to define him?" I shot back.

"As a flip-flopping liberal who's wrong on defense," McKinnon replied.

I then watched in amazement over the next three months as he proceeded to do exactly that. Within weeks of our conversation, ordinary people all over the country suddenly began saying that they had doubts about Kerry - particularly, they parroted, because he seemed like such a "flip-flopper." The mainstream media lapdogs soon followed suit.

Kerry never recovered from the preemptive assault on his authenticity, which was later reinforced by images of windsurfing and clips of him saying, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." Game, set and match to the Republican side.

So who, then, is Mark McKinnon? And why is the man who first elected George W. Bush, and later rescued John McCain from the land of the politically dead and then took him to the brink of the nomination, saying he won't help McCain in November if Obama is the Democratic candidate? The high-school dropout, one-time staff songwriter for Kris Kristofferson, formerly Democratic political operative who once denounced Karl Rove, and friend of such liberal heavyweights as onetime Clinton advisers Paul Begala and James Carville, seems an unlikely choice as President Bush's or candidate McCain's campaign media director. But politics is first and foremost about winning - and McKinnon's candidates win.

"It all started with Hank the Hallucination," McKinnon recalls. "Hank and Paul Begala are the reasons I got into politics." Hank, an illustrated comic strip character in the Daily Texan, the student newspaper McKinnon edited, ran with his backing against Begala in a 1982 contest for student government president at the University of Texas in Austin - and won. "I was a bit of an anarchist in those days," McKinnon recalls.

Hank was the first in a long series of winning candidates that McKinnon has backed. "I was a volunteer for Lloyd Doggett in my first real campaign in 1983," he says. "Carville was the campaign manager, and Begala was in the upper echelon. He brought me out of the basement."

McKinnon continued to work in winning Texas Democratic campaigns after that, helping to elect Ann Richards as governor in 1990 and Bob Lanier as mayor of Houston in 1991, among others. But by 1996, as he explained in a Texas Monthly essay called "The Spin Doctor is Out," he had burned out on partisan politics and "last-minute attack and response ads." Instead he planned to concentrate on corporate clients and public affairs, such as a successful 1997 effort to preserve affirmative action.

Then he fell in love, and everything changed. As he famously told a reporter, McKinnon saw Bush at a party and had the feeling that a man has "when he's at a party with his wife and sees a beautiful woman across the room."

The object of his newfound affection was George W. Bush, then governor of Texas. "It is unusual" for a conservative Republican politician and a liberal Democrat media maven to hook up, McKinnon admits. "The nexus was [Democratic] Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock, who was my mentor." McKinnon and Bush became jogging partners and fast friends. Soon Bush began courting McKinnon professionally as well.

"Even as governor, President Bush was famously skeptical about political consultants," McKinnon says. "And at the time, all the typical Republican hired guns were circling. Hiring me was certainly a counter-intuitive move. I think he liked the idea that I wasn't looking to work in politics anymore."

In the end, McKinnon says, he decided to work for Bush "out of respect, loyalty and friendship - which as you know are qualities that are very important to the Bush culture." Those feelings were reciprocated by Bush, who put McKinnon in charge of two of the most well-financed media operations in history.

The strategies McKinnon employed in the past decade may seem awfully negative for a man who says, "Negativity drove me out of politics in the mid-'90s." (After all, McKinnon was the architect of the ads that trashed John McCain in South Carolina and beyond in 2000, ensuring a Bush nomination.) But McKinnon says it isn't so.

"It's not negative to define John Kerry. We're not doing attack ads, we're doing strong contrast ads," he told me four years ago. "That's legitimate, not negative. We aren't saying Kerry is 'weak on defense,' we're saying he's 'wrong on defense.' There's a big difference."

As I wrote at the time, "The war of words matters a lot, and while McKinnon concedes that the Bush campaign is busy testing them in focus groups, he offers no details. Still, it's clear he is attempting to position the president as a "steady" leader and Kerry as a "flip-flopper" who changes positions often for political expediency. If the words work, they will be repeated over and over as part of that 'coordinated blitz' aimed at defining Kerry as 'indecisive and lacking conviction.'"

Despite the fierce hatred he has engendered in some of his former friends, McKinnon generally remains an approachable and affable figure. Even Begala - who eventually did become student body president by winning a runoff between the "two top humans" after Hank the Hallucination was gunned down - extols him. "I love him!" Begala told me. "He's a wonderful, terrific guy."

Even though he went over to the Dark Side?

"It's a free country. Sure, he was way to the left of me in college, and now he's way to the right," Begala responded. "But hey - James Carville goes home every night and goes to bed with Mary Matalin ... Mark has changed his life, but I don't believe he had a conservative epiphany.

"I believe him when he says this is based on a deep and personal love of George Bush. But this is not a race for student government president," Begala concluded. "Still, if Bush is ruining the country, I say let's attack the organ grinder and not the monkey."

"I haven't taken as many shots as I thought I would," McKinnon conceded at the time. "Probably because Begala blessed me."

Would he describe himself as a Republican?

"Let's just say I'm a man of evolution," he responded with a grin.

His many critics now contend that, far from "evolving," McKinnon is just an opportunistic turncoat, a lustful chameleon, a bizarre sellout ... and worse. In any event, now it's time for another hallucinatory campaign, and McKinnon is once again in the thick of it.

Just ask John McCain - or Barack Obama, for that matter!


Filmmaker and journalist Rory O'Connor is now completing AlterNet's first-ever book, which is on the subject of right-wing radio talkers like O'Reilly, and will be available early in 2008. O'Connor also writes the Media Is A Plural blog.


Go to Original

Give Dennis Kucinich His Due
By Steve Cobble
The Nation

Tuesday 19 February 2008

Five years ago, this month, the world said no to the Iraq War, with massive demonstrations all around the world involving 10 million people. In the United States, more than 100,000 people came to New York City to challenge the Bush/Cheney rush to war-and one of the speakers, one of the very few elected officials to speak that day, was Dennis Kucinich.

So what, you say? Well, maybe it's time to give Dennis his due.

Compare the outpouring of affection and respect for John Edwards with the snark and abuse offered Kucinich when they each bowed out of the presidential race last month. Most liberal columnists and progressive bloggers offered kudos to Edwards for forcing and/or encouraging Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to move left on healthcare, on trade issues, on poverty and inequality. John and Elizabeth Edwards did exactly that, and I offer my own thanks for the issues they ran on, especially given everything that was going on in their family. They deserve our appreciation for boldly putting good issue positions on the table, fighting hard for them and opening the door for the other candidates to get bolder, too.

But why stop there? Why not ask who opened the door for Edwards? Because on almost every issue that John Edwards battled hard on in 2007, helping move Obama and Clinton closer to the light, it's indisputable that Dennis Kucinich pushed on those same issues back in 2003, again in 2007 and every year in between. In other words, Kucinich was against the war, for fair trade, against NAFTA and the WTO, against the Patriot Act, for single-payer health care, for an infrastructure plan to rebuild America and put forward a plan to bring the troops home-all long before not just John Edwards, but long before almost anybody.

Consider the Patriot Act vote, cast by the Congress in October of 2001, only a few weeks after 9/11, in a scary time of threats and intimidation from the Bush/Cheney Administration. This vote had our lawmakers so scared that only a few brave House members stood up to oppose it, and in the Senate, only Russ Feingold had the guts to say no. But Kucinich voted no. Why? Because he read the bill. He risked his political career to oppose an intrusive, liberty-violating, fundamentally un-American bill. Very few others did, especially House members from ethnic urban districts.

So give John Edwards his due. But give Kucinich his due, too.

Because the truth is, Dennis Kucinich has the best voting record in Congress of anyone from a mostly white, ethnic district. No one else who shares most of Kucinich's positions-even those who are much less outspoken than he is-also has a district like his. He's not from Berkeley or Madison. He doesn't have a huge, liberal base constituency. Dennis Kucinich is consistently braver than his district would suggest he should be; and perhaps no other progressive is as brave compared to the people they represent. If you disagree, I offer impeachment as an example. Or gay marriage. Or animal rights. Or the abolition of nuclear weapons. Or a ban on weapons in space. Or his early opposition to pre-emptive war.

Maybe those brave votes are a big part of the reason that Kucinich currently has four opponents for his House seat, including at least one who's being massively funded by outside corporate interests. Maybe his tough race is not all due to his absences, but to his outspokenness. Maybe it's not his ears but his votes. Maybe it's not his size that irritates the big corporate boys but his willingness to act on his beliefs.

Maybe the special interest money that's pouring into Cleveland these days for his opponents is not really because they're dissatisfied with his constituent service but because they don't like his commitment to ending the war economy; because they're irritated by his feistiness on behalf of canceling NAFTA, for fair trade, for living wages, for card-check union organizing; or because they hate his years of leadership on behalf of getting the insurance and drug companies out of people's healthcare.

Think about this: Kucinich campaigned in 2007 on almost exactly the same key issues he ran on in 2003-ending the war, fair trade and single-payer health care for all. Since that time, the Democratic Party as a whole has moved more towards his early positions on these issues, as have all his opponents (to greater or lesser degrees) in the presidential primary last year-but he hardly moved at all. He was right then, and he's right now, on most of the fundamental issues that base Democratic voters care about.

Here's a fun experiment. Go to ActBlue right now, pick out any House candidate randomly, and see if their proposed issue positions outdo Kucinich's existing votes. And then think about the fact that progressive groups will in the coming months spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the blogosphere will correctly exalt and extol many of these challengers, and activists will offer up thousands of words and hundreds of hours and dozens of dollars each, all to elect people who do not now-and likely never will-measure up to Kucinich's existing track record.

Then consider treating him with a bit more respect.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Sunday, February 3, 2008

Edwards Is No Loser

The Democrats will find that out if they drift away from his vision of one America.

The Edwards EffectPaul Krugman:

"So John Edwards has dropped out of the race for the presidency. By normal political standards, his campaign fell short. But Mr. Edwards, far more than is usual in modern politics, ran a campaign based on ideas. And even as his personal quest for the White House faltered, his ideas triumphed: both candidates left standing are, to a large extent, running on the platform Mr. Edwards built."


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Friday, February 1, 2008

What Happened To John Edwards

The most Media Coverage Edwards has had was his speech telling his supporters that he was dropping out.

By Teilhard

Mysterious Traveler

Dwarfed by the drama of the Obama's resounding victory in South Carolina and Ted Kennedy's resultant Obama blessing ~ John Edwards has become the mysterious stranger who came to town with his positive vision of the future ~ who just as abruptly left town but not before he made a lasting impression: Allen L Roland

John Edwards was my first choice this year and my favorite ticket was an Edwards/Obama ticket but Obama's resounding win in South Carolina along with the recent Kennedy blessing has swept over Edwards like a fast rising tide.

Edwards had already caught the need for change as witness by his speech after the Iowa caucuses when he said: "the status quo lost, and change won."

Later his remarks were even more astute when he was asked if he was surprised by the results in Iowa: " I actually am not that surprised. People were looking for something different - looking for change. I mean Senator Clinton to many is the status quo, and people are tired of the status quo. And as is well known she was and has much organization and money as she had - she still finished third ! I think what that is - is a very powerful indication of a wave for change in this country, and I think what happens now is we go to New Hampshire and other states where the voters are going to have to decide who - between myself and Senator Obama - can best bring about change. "

The media froze out Edwards because of his open threat to the establishment and corporate interest groups but John Edwards left a lasting impression on this election campaign.

Politics are like the ocean tide and when it changes ~ everything changes or disappears including candidates.

The Onion satirically takes note of this political reality and calls Edwards the mysterious traveler, from another planet, who visits a small hamlet in New York with his vision of the future ~ but is America listening to Edward's vision? See this amusing two minute Video of this political phenomenon and then vote for the only other true candidate for change ~ Barack Obama ; http://www.theonion.com/content/video/mysterious_traveler_entrances

Also see Tom Hayden's recent endorsement of the Obama movement and his acknowledgement of John Edwards and the role he has played in driving the Democratic Party towards a progressive agenda.

Allen L Roland http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2008/01/30.html

Freelance Online columnist Allen L Roland is available for comments , interviews and speaking engagements ( allen@allenroland.com )

Allen L Roland is a practicing psychotherapist, author and lecturer who also shares a daily political and social commentary on his weblog and website allenroland.com He also guest hosts a monthly national radio show TRUTHTALK on www.conscioustalk.net





Authors Website: www.allenroland.com

Authors Bio: Allen L Roland is a practicing psychotherapist, author and lecturer who also shares a daily political and social commentary on his weblog and website allenroland.com He also guest hosts a monthly national radio show TRUTHTALK on Conscious talk radio www.conscioustalk.net


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Will Edwards Be The Comeback Kid?

We can only hope so!

By Mark Binker
Staff Writer
Saturday, Jan. 26, 2008 3:00 am
John Edwards stops to campaign at Tommy's Country Ham House on Friday in Greenville, S.C.
Credit: Mary Ann Chastain/Associated Press

John Edwards stops to campaign at Tommy's Country Ham House on Friday in Greenville, S.C.

VOTING TODAY

The South Carolina Democratic primary will be held today. Polls open at 7 a.m. and close at 7 p.m. The Edwards campaign will monitor the results from Columbia.

GREENVILLE, S.C. — John Edwards' presidential campaign awoke Friday to the news that he was within striking distance of second place in the South Carolina Democratic primary today.

But second place wasn't on anyone's mind as the former N.C. senator prepared to address the crowd at Tommy's Country Ham House.

"The Yankee pundits can say all they want," said Carlyle Steele, a local lawyer and self-described "envelope stuffer," drawing on an epithet that's used only half in jest. Steele suggested that national media players were out of touch with realities on the ground.

That has been a theme of Edwards' stump speeches here throughout the week.

Lacking an early primary win, Edwards was asked Friday if he was becoming a divisive force in the national primary race, led by Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois.

"Exactly the opposite," Edwards said, standing in front of his campaign bus as it idled in a cold wind outside the restaurant.

"The two of them are spending their time and their energy tearing each other down. Our party needs somebody speaking in a loud, clear voice for all those Americans struggling literally to survive every day ...

"I'm going to continue to speak for (those Americans), not for me. And I'm not interested in the squabbles between the two of them."

Indeed, radio and television ads aired by Obama and Clinton launch salvos at the other candidate but never mention Edwards' name. In his own ads here, Edwards criticizes this tit-for-tat campaign that he says distracts from the issues at hand.

Clinton has victories in New Hampshire and Nevada to her credit, while Obama kicked off the primary season with a win in Iowa.

Obama hopes to even the win-loss columns in advance of Super Tuesday voting on Feb. 5. That's when more than 20 states will hold Democratic primaries and caucuses.

Edwards hopes a strong second- or surprise first-place showing will win him equal time in the national political conversation rather than being viewed as a potentially divisive third wheel for the Democrats.

Steele, who was a volunteer for the Edwards campaign in 2004, said he didn't know the candidate well, except through his policies and rhetoric.

When asked if he was worried that Edwards would stay in the race until the convention, running third and leaving the party divided at midsummer, Steele said that wasn't his concern.

"I'm just going to do what I can to get him elected here," he said. "We're going to surprise a lot of people."

Throughout South Carolina, those volunteering for Edwards express the same kind of determination.

The facts that until this week polls showed Edwards running a distant third here, that he trails in the money race and that national media has spent relatively little airtime and ink on Edwards only seems to stoke their vigor.

Later Friday, after a gathering hosted by the Student Association for Voter Empowerment in Columbia, Edwards was asked if he needed to place second in order to remain viable — a code word for having enough support in money to carry on the campaign.

"Absolutely not," he said. Earlier this week, Edwards said his campaign had budgeted for the long haul.

That said, Edwards told reporters Friday that his chances might be better here than some people expect.

"We've got a lot of energy and momentum right now. It's clear from my events that we're moving and I think there is a real opportunity for a surprise, but we are coming from behind," he said.

And in fact, at least some top-tier politicians see Edwards emerging from South Carolina with a major role to play going forward.

"If he stays in the race and keeps getting 15, 20 percent, he will be a big factor in the convention because you've got to get 50 percent plus one to win," House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said Friday. The S.C. Democrat has not endorsed a candidate.

Tracking polls have shown Edwards gaining ground throughout the week, the only candidate to do so.

Pollster John Zogby said in an e-mail Friday morning that Edwards was picking up support among previously undecided voters, particularly African Americans who make up half of the Democratic primary electorate here.

"I want to hear what all three candidates have to say," said Howard Ffrench, 29, an assistant manager for a local hotel.

The Columbia resident said that he was leaning toward Clinton but, "I could choose Edwards."

French is attending campaign events for all three candidates in an effort to solidify his choice before heading to the polls today.

Edwards' campaign announced a list of endorsements from local political figures on Friday, and at his Columbia campaign event, his support from environmental organizers was evident from a number of folks in the crowd waving signs and sporting "Friends of Earth Action" campaign buttons.

"We think the contrast between Edwards and the other two candidates is going to drive people to Edwards," said Brent Blackwelder, president of the national group. Edwards opposes nuclear power, a hot topic of debate here in South Carolina.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Contact Mark Binker at (919) 832-5549 or mark.binker@news-record.com



(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Friday, January 25, 2008

We, Indys, Don't Like Ugly.......

....while we sit here, watching as the Dem-bulbs (Obama/Clinton) do their best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, shaking our heads in wonderment and despair.

There is an obvious alternative, if the rank and file Democrats would think for themselves and ignore the efforts of corporate America's news media to shut out the one Democrat they fear the most and the one that can wipe up the floor with any Rethug the GOP chooses;
John Edwards.

Personal and political divisions add up for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama

Eric Zorn

January 24, 2008

I think it's exciting." -- Bill Clinton, Tuesday, referring to the barbed exchange between his wife and Obama in a Democratic primary debate Monday.

Yes, the slash and burn, thrust and parry of political infighting is fun and exciting.

We get to see how well candidates respond when they're knocked off script by fair shots and foul blows. We get to see real emotion rather than the canned passion of stump speeches and position papers.

It's also destructive. Negative campaigning and the obsession with candidates' inevitable flaws breeds voter cynicism, apathy and disrespect.

So far, so pat.

The above observation could apply, conservatively, to 95 percent of all races ever run: Hypocritical Bum vs. Unprincipled Rascal.

But what's going on now in the Democratic presidential primary contest feels particularly destructive and therefore less fun and exciting (if you lean Democratic) or more fun and exciting (if you lean Republican).

Just in the last couple of weeks, the campaign between front-runners Obama and Clinton has gotten ugly -- deeply personal, openly hostile and racially divisive.

Never mind who started it, whose elbows are sharper or which candidate is the most chronically, reflexively mendacious. I have my view, and I'm sure you have yours.

Either way, the poisonous rhetoric is infuriating backers of Obama and Clinton and creating a rift that may not heal by November, even though their positions on issues are substantially the same.

This observation is purely anecdotal, and I base it on the sudden, sharp increase in the number of self-identified Democrats I've communicated with recently who've said something like this:

I used to think I could support either one of them, but now I'm so disgusted I could never vote for (him/her).

It's traditional to set aside grudges formed during the primary race and support the party in the general election, holding your nose if necessary.

But it's hard to hold a voting stylus while holding your nose with one hand and sticking your finger down your throat with the other. Look for some of these fierce loyalists to sit out the election in November.

Particularly if the GOP nominee is John McCain, whom many Democrats and independents see as the LOR (least objectionable Republican). And particularly if the Democratic nominee is Hillary Clinton, whom many Republicans and independents see as the MOD (you know).

Clinton gets the edge here in what may be an early or a late round in the primaries, depending on when the nomination is decided: She's not the one who's been running on the promise of a new high-tone style of politics, after all.

The Clintons' bloody political knuckles have been obvious since the early '90s, which explains both their successes and their comparatively high disapproval ratings.

So each squabble is a little victory for her. For now, this is true even when she loses on points or is caught in a deceitful contradiction, such as when she contended the other day that Obama had said Republicans had better ideas than Democrats (he said no such thing), and she blasted Obama for praising the same political skills and vision of Ronald Reagan that she herself has publicly praised.

The Republican field is also dramatically split, but for now the divisions seem to be more ideological than personal.

It will be ironic, though somehow predictable, if it turns out to be the heavily favored Democrats who fall at the hands of the "Anybody But Coalition."

I believe the technical term for this is "losing ugly."

We call it sickening beyond belief.

Never has there been a more obvious need for a multi-party system


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Thursday, January 24, 2008

The latest On Edwards

Just a reminder: I.U. has not endorsed anyone for president yet. We might not.

But it is fairly obvious who Pelican6 supports. (D. Dedman)

Fresno Bee Endorses John Edwards For President
Press Media Wire (Press Release) - Sterling,VA,USA
23, 2008 – Today, California's Fresno Bee endorsed Senator John Edwards for President citing his leadership in standing up for middle class families and ...
See all stories on this topic

US Democratic rivals Obama and Edwards compete in South
Reuters South Africa - Johannesburg,South Africa
By Deborah Charles BENNETTSVILLE, SC (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and John Edwards appealed for votes in South Carolina on ...
See all stories on this topic

All hail King(maker) Edwards
Politico - Washington,DC,USA
Photo: AP John Edwards is not going to win this presidential race. He has now slipped to 9 percent in the national polls, trailing Sens. ...
See all stories on this topic

Agents of Change
Valley Advocate - Easthampton,MA,USA
John Edwards, are cautious about expanding government, especially on the key issue of health insurance. They sense—with some justification from public ...
See all stories on this topic

Overshadowed Edwards vows to plug ahead
Chicago Tribune - United States
John Edwards is it. Four years ago, he dazzled the Palmetto State, but this time his glitter is getting lost in the glare surrounding his two celebrity ...
See all stories on this topic

Edwards’ (Seriously Flawed) Electability Argument
Donklephant - USA
The Edwards campaign latest justification for remaining in the race is that John Edwards is the ONLY electable Democratic candidate (as opposed to a similar ...
See all stories on this topic

Still 47 states to go for Edwards
The Independent Weekly - Durham,NC,USA
BY BOB GEARY After his wipeout Saturday in the Nevada caucuses, John Edwards was hoping, as he said gamely, "that what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. ...
See all stories on this topic

Edwards visits OKC
Midwest City Sun - Midwest City,OK,USA
OKLAHOMA CITY — Senator John Edwards, Democratic presidential candidate, spoke at the Oklahoma City Teamsters Local Union 886 Friday evening. ...
See all stories on this topic

Edwards traveling SC, trying to close the gap
WIS - Columbia,SC,USA
STATEWIDE (WIS) - South Carolina native John Edwards has been criss-crossing the Palmetto State in recent weeks, looking to close the gap with Senator ...
See all stories on this topic

A Look at the 2008 Presidential Race
The Associated Press -
___ Edwards jabs Clinton for leaving SC BENNETTSVILLE, SC (AP) — Democrat John Edwards criticized rival Hillary Rodham Clinton for leaving South Carolina in ...
See all stories on this topic

John Edwards on FISA
By Jane Hamsher
John Edwards:. In Washington today, telecom lobbyists have launched a full-court press to win retroactive immunity for their illegal eavesdropping on American citizens. Granting retroactive immunity will let corporate law-breakers off ...
Firedoglake - http://firedoglake.com

"I hope Democrats don't take another look at John Edwards"
By Jed
Though their back and forth threatened to drain all substance from the debate, John Edwards showed leadership, and stuck to the issues, urging Hillary and Obama to focus on what's really important. We have got to understand, ...
The Jed Report - http://www.jedreport.com/

Fresno Bee Endorses John Edwards For President
John Edwards' campaign for president offers a much-needed vision that recognizes the hope and promise of America," the editorial board wrote. "It's a view that includes solidifying the plight of working families and others in the middle ...
John Edwards for President: Full-site... - http://www.johnedwards.com/

John Edwards On Countdown: I Will Support The Democratic Nominee ...
By Logan Murphy
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards has been getting some much needed media attention lately, appearing on The Late Show with David Letterman last night and appeared on Countdown today and talked with Keith about the ongoing ...
Crooks and Liars - http://www.crooksandliars.com/

John Edwards Visits David Letterman
By Brian Stelter
John Edwards joked with David Letterman on Tuesday. (CBS) Former Senator John Edwards did not receive an endorsement from David Letterman on CBS’s “The Late Show” Tuesday night, but he did receive eight valuable minutes to woo voters. ...

Submitted by Pelican 6


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Why Shouldn't John Edwards Be Angry?

Why shouldn't we all be mad as hell?

Late Edition: John Edwards Still Fighting Accusations He’s “Angry”
By: Logan Murphy @ 2:01 PM - PST


This morning on CNN’s Late Edition, The Beard uses a hit piece by the Washington Post’s Dan Balz to show how some people see John Edwards as an angry, partisan and divisive candidate who has angered many Democrats.

video_wmv Download (113) | Play (128) video_mov Download (141) | Play (69)

To be honest, I’m happy with all the Democratic candidates we’ve had to chose from and I’m ecstatic about the huge number of Democrats who have shown up so far to vote this primary season — but Edwards has gotten the shaft from the media and is not well liked by the wealthy elite who own them, so it’s not surprising to see him being attacked for his populist message. There has been a growing chorus of pundits referring to Edwards as a possible “Kingmaker,” giving his delegates to Obama at the end of the primary season, but it doesn’t appear that’s even a consideration for him. Edwards handles the angry accusations exactly the way you’d expect him to:

Edwards:”…What I have said, and I stand by it and I believe it, is there are very well financed, entrenched interests in Washington that stand between America and the progress that needs to be made. And until we have a president who’s willing to take those interests on, nothing will change…”


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

The Terrifying Mr. Edwards


US Corporate Elite Fear Candidate Edwards
By Kevin Drawbaugh
Reuters

Friday 11 January 2008

Washington - Ask corporate lobbyists which presidential contender is most feared by their clients and the answer is almost always the same -- Democrat John Edwards.

The former North Carolina senator's chosen profession alone raises the hackles of business people. Before entering politics, he made a fortune as a trial lawyer.

In litigious America, trial lawyers bring lawsuits against companies on behalf of aggrieved individuals and sometimes win multimillion-dollar settlements. Edwards won several.

But beyond his profession, Edwards' tone and language on the campaign trail have increased business antipathy toward him. His stump speeches are peppered with attacks on "corporate greed" and warnings of "the destruction of the middle class."

He accuses lobbyists of "corrupting the government" and says Americans lack universal health care because of "drug companies, insurance companies and their lobbyists."

Despite not winning the two state nominating contests completed so far, with 48 to go, Edwards insists he is in the race to stay. An Edwards campaign spokesman said on Thursday that inside-the-Beltway operatives who fight to defend the powerful and the privileged should be afraid.

"The lobbyists and special interests who abuse the system in Washington have good reason to fear John Edwards.

"Once he is president, the interests of middle class families will never again take a back seat to corporate greed in Washington," said campaign spokesman Eric Schultz.

Open attacks on the business elite are seldom heard from mainstream White House candidates in America, despite skyrocketing CEO pay, rising income inequality, and a torrent of scandals in corporate boardrooms and on Wall Street.

But this year Edwards is not alone. Republican candidate Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, sometimes also rails against corporate power and influence, tapping a populist current that lies just below the surface of U.S. politics.

One business lobbyist, who asked not to be named, said Edwards "has gone to this angry populist, anti-business rhetoric that borders on class warfare ... He focuses dislike of special interests, which is out there, on business."

Another lobbyist said an Edwards presidency would be "a disaster" for his well-heeled industrialist clients.

After this week's New Hampshire primaries, where he placed a distant third behind New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, Edwards might not seem so scary. He ran second in the Iowa Democratic caucuses last week, trailing Obama and just ahead of Clinton.

Edwards suffered a blow on Thursday when Massachusetts Democratic Sen. John Kerry snubbed him and endorsed Obama. Edwards was Kerry's vice-presidential running mate in Kerry's failed Democratic bid for the White House in 2004.

Business's Favorite Unclear

Asked which candidate their clients most support, corporate lobbyists were unsure. Clinton has cautious backing within the corporate jet set, as do Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain and former Republican Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, they said.

These candidates represent stability to executives who have much to lose if November's election brings about the sweeping change some candidates are promising.

Obama and Huckabee register largely as unknown quantities among business owners, both large and small, say lobbyists.

"My sense is that Obama would govern as a reasonably pragmatic Democrat ... I think Hillary is approachable. She knows where a lot of her funding has come from, to be blunt," said Greg Valliere, chief political strategist at Stanford Group Co., a market and policy analysis group.

But Edwards, Valliere said, is seen as "an anti-business populist" and "a trade protectionist who is quite unabashed about raising taxes."

"I think his regulatory policies, as well as his tax policies, would be viewed as a threat to business," he said.

"The next scariest for business would be Huckabee because of his rhetoric and because he's an unknown."


Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh; editing by John Wallace.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Friday, January 11, 2008

News Media Misses The Story: N.H. ObEdwards Win

As media commentators proclaim Hillary Clinton's rebirth from the ashes of defeat, they miss a critical story -- Obama and Edwards won the New Hampshire primary. Add together Obama's 36 percent and Edwards's 17, and they beat Clinton's 39 percent by 14 points. And because the Democratic primaries have proportionate representation, they'll in fact come out with more combined delegates -- 13 to Clinton's 9. Though polls are elusive, I've talked or corresponded with hundreds of supporters of both of them, pored through hundreds of blog responses, and from everything I can tell, those backing Obama or Edwards solidly pick the other as their second choice. So if only one were running, they'd be opening up an unambiguous lead. But because Clinton's two main opponents have effectively split the vote, her three-point victory over Obama has revived a campaign that seemed on the verge of meltdown just a few days ago, and left her again the media favorite.

Or, more accurately, the "corporate favorite."

So what are Obama and Edwards or their supporters to do about this? First, remind those covering the race that although Clinton got a split-vote plurality, most Democrats still don't prefer her as their nominee. Some serious polling could help to verify the convergences between the Obama and Edwards supporters and their shared discontents, and maybe we could encourage that.

...."Most Democrats still do not prefer her as their candidate". What's more important, for the all-important general election is what the independents want, as it will be the independent vote that will decide which of the candidates will be our next president. According to every poll we have seen, including our own I.U. internal poll, done over the Holidays, it is Edwards who mops up the floor with every Gooper candidate consistently, head to head, including McCain, who is the most threatening to the Dems in general, as he is more popular with independents than any other Republican candidate, including Ron Paul. We found that surprising, since there are so many of our members who like Paul a lot.

Real political differences separate Clinton from both Edwards and Obama, and we need to at least try and get the media to talk about them. All of these candidates have their flaws and strengths -- on global warming, for instance, they all have excellent plans. But John Edwards wasn't just being rhetorical when he said that both he and Obama represent voices for change, versus Clinton's embodiment of a Washington status quo joining money and power -- albeit a far saner status quo than the crazed Bush version. Clinton recently held a massive fundraising dinner with homeland security lobbyists. Her chief campaign strategist, Mark Penn, is CEO of a PR firm that prepped the Blackwater CEO for his recent congressional testimony, is aggressively involved in anti-union efforts, and has represented everyone from the Argentine military junta and Philip Morris to Union Carbide after the 1984 Bhopal disaster. Clinton supported an Iran vote so reckless that Jim Webb called it "Dick Cheney's fondest Pipe Dream," and did so, according to her campaign insiders, because she was covering herself for the general election. She's still not apologized for her Iraq vote, and her hoarding of scarce 2006 campaign dollars may well have cost the Democrats an even larger Congressional victory.

Those who make up the Obedwards constituencies recognize the problems with so many of Clinton's approaches and stands. That's part of what's driving them, along with a genuine passion for Obama and Edwards, and a sense, confirmed by the polls, that either of the two has a better shot at beating the leading Republicans than does Clinton. If we look just at delegates, both Iowa and New Hampshire advanced the Obedwards combined cause. But because the coverage has focused so exclusively on the Obama/Clinton match-up, they've missed that a solid majority of Democrats in both New Hampshire and Iowa rejected a candidate who a short while back was proclaiming her nomination as nearly inevitable.

If all those wary of Clinton coalesced around Obama, he'd become the odds-on favorite to become the Democratic standard-bearer. But at least for now, Edwards is staying in. I think he genuinely wants to keep raising fundamental issues about how divisions of wealth and power have damaged our democracy -- and the people left behind without health care, jobs, or hope. He's also hanging in there in case his message belatedly catches fire, or both Clinton and Obama unexpectedly melt down. So at least for the moment, the Obedwards constituency may keep amassing a majority of elected delegates, while making it more difficult for Obama (or a far longer-shot Edwards) to become the clear front-runner and clinch the nomination.

There are some partial solutions, though, even with both in the race. Beyond reminding the media of their convergences, Obama and Edwards could also keep using their speeches, debates, and ads to highlight the real differences they have with Clinton and her approach, while minimizing their attacks on each other. Of course their main message needs to focus on their own strengths and visions, and the issues about which they feel passionately, but they also need to draw some clear political lines.

Edwards has begun doing this. Obama needs to do it more, and respond more forcefully to the Clinton campaign's attacks and distortions, like their misstatements of his record on Iraq and abortion choice. I think he can do this while continuing to flesh out a more specific vision of what he stands for, in stories that people can understand.

It's a tricky dance, since Hillary, Bill, and their surrogates will continue to dismiss any criticisms as "the boys" ganging up on the woman. This narrative indeed seemed to work when Clinton's tears set off a wave of sympathy and female solidarity that most likely swung New Hampshire. But so long as Obama and Edwards keep talking about real issues, and do so in a civil way, I think Hillary's complaints about being picked on will yield a diminishing return, especially if they highlight the Clinton campaign's own history of attack dog politics--like their successfully killing a major negative story in the men's magazine GQ by threatening to deny the publication future access to Bill Clinton for a separate cover story they were writing.

For me, personally, it would be great if Bill Clinton had less exposure. I'm still suffering from Clinton fatigue after all these years. I know that there are those of us who suffer from Clinton nostalgia but would they, if we had not had 7 years of America's number one crime family (extended) running the country, into the ground?

But the fundamental fault lines in this campaign are about whose interests the candidates are likely to heed, and they need to be articulated. Think back to Clinton's six years on the Wal-Mart board, during which she said nothing to protest the company's relentless union-busting and destruction of small-town businesses. Obama, meanwhile, was working as a community organizer, and then at a law firm that represented local organizers. Edwards pursued and won lawsuits on corporate malfeasance. The two of them need to highlight the links between their past history and their joint refusal to take donations from lobbyists, and their strong and early stands for fundamental campaign finance reform: Obama pushed a major bill while still in the Illinois legislature -- Clinton signed on only after Common Cause ran a full-page Iowa ad. They should also challenge Clinton's argument that the way to make change is to reduce our expectations and hopes.

Obama and Edwards could also make an even more explicit alliance. Each could pledge, for instance, to nominate the other for Vice President, or publicly state that if no candidate got an absolute majority going into the Democratic convention, whichever of the two trailed would throw their support to the other. Given the rules on proportionate representation, this would allow both to keep campaigning as passionately as possible without falling into the trap of political spoiler.

This last might be particularly attractive to Edwards, since otherwise, those who feel he'd still be the best candidate really do face the choice between risking helping Clinton defeat Obama, or eroding their support for Edwards so much he'd have little choice but to leave the race. Edwards might not even have to make a formal pledge, but just to keep reminding voters -- and the media -- that if no candidate gets an absolute majority before the convention, he'd encourage his delegates and those of Obama to join together at that point. The approach is probably less likely for Obama, because he still has a major shot without it, but he might consider it if the votes continue to divide and we end up with gridlock.

Most likely, all three candidates are going to stay in the race, at least for a while. Even if Obama does not prevail outright, if he and Edwards keep gaining delegates at their current rate and can convince the uncommitted Super-Delegates to respect the will of the voters, they should go into the convention with enough combined votes for one or the other to win. The more they can keep reminding us all how much their supporters want a politics no longer ruled by money and fear, the more they'll increase their odds.

Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association. His previous books include Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time. See www.paulloeb.org To receive his articles directly email sympa@lists.onenw.org with the subject line: subscribe paulloeb-articles


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.