Thanks to WeLikeEdwards.com
4.18.2008
3.21.2008
3.14.2008
The Fight for Iowa Delegates Heats Up
As you can see in most of my news articles tonight, the talk is surrounding John’s Iowa delegates and what they are going to do. The NY Daily News reported,
"Edwards’ campaign co-chair in the state, Rob Tully, tells us the Edwards Team will be sending out an e-mail tonight asking their delegates to hang tough.
"Neither of these candidates can make it all the way to the nomination on their own, and it allows us to reiterate our loyalty to John Edwards and the issues he championed," Tully said."
I couldn’t agree more! Why should they throw their support to Clinton or Obama? Sure, it would help one of them gain more delegates but they honestly don’t deserve them. I don’t say this because I am bitter over the fact no one paid attention to John. I say this because we all know John was the best choice when America is in a recession. And this is just looking at the issue of the economy. Anyways, The Quad City Times went on to report this e-mail is coming from John’s own mouth stating,
"Tully said he had talked to a top Edwards campaign official about how to proceed this weekend and expected to send an e-mail sometime Thursday.
"I’m speaking for John. The word came from him," Tully said."
With all of the chatter, guess who’s campaign is the most active in getting Edwards delegates. Hillary. In Newsweek, an Iowan web designer Lance Jenkins received a solicitation from the Clinton campaign. Listen to their strategy:
"....both campaigns are actively pursuing the 30 percent of county delegates pledged to John Edwards; his estimated 14 statewide delegates--now free-agents--would be a major boon. "Absolutely they’re fair game," says Karen Hicks, a senior adviser to the Clinton campaign. "We are reaching out to a lot of them, trying to persuade them to join our team." But Jenkins says that the Clintonites are going a step further--and cites himself as evidence. According to Jenkins, the robocall he received from the Clinton campaign was a solicitation. "It said something like, ’As the county convention nears, we ask that you consider Hillary,’" he recalls. "It rattled off a bunch of Clinton’s talking points, like experience, substance, ready on day one, etc." The only problem? Jenkins is committed to Obama--meaning that, in Jenkins words, "Clinton is actively pursuing pledged delegates."
This isn’t to say Obama’s people aren’t fighting too because all of the articles below tonight mention that his people are doing so.... it just appears that Hillary’s people are being more aggressive about it. The thing is, this is a lose-lose situation for both Hillary and Barack because the NY Daily News reported,
"Hillary herself called me," said Edwards’ co-chairman Rob Tully
"All of a sudden we matter again," said Edwards backer John Heitland, the Hardin County Democratic chairman.
The bad news for Clinton is she left a poor impression with many Edwards supporters and other Iowans when she bad-mouthed the state’s caucuses after she finished third, calling them undemocratic. And some blame her for the negative tone that’s crept in.
"It’s gotten kind of nasty, and I think most of that’s come from the Clinton side," said Heitland.
The bad news for Obama is that Tully planned to ask his people to go to the conventions and stick with Edwards. "It gives us a chance to say that we are not happy with the fighting that’s been going on," he said.
I like to consider myself a hardcore Edwards Democrat. I want to say thank you to all of the Iowans who are sticking with John at the convention. I want to make sure the Democratic Party knows that I think they made the wrong choice in supporting the "firsts" and not the "issues". A Clinton delegate or an Obama delegate do not speak for me. An Edwards delegate speaks for me. If McCain wins the election you can bet I will be helping in the mass production to make bumper stickers which state, "Don’t Blame Me.... I Voted for Edwards".
"Edwards’ campaign co-chair in the state, Rob Tully, tells us the Edwards Team will be sending out an e-mail tonight asking their delegates to hang tough.
"Neither of these candidates can make it all the way to the nomination on their own, and it allows us to reiterate our loyalty to John Edwards and the issues he championed," Tully said."
I couldn’t agree more! Why should they throw their support to Clinton or Obama? Sure, it would help one of them gain more delegates but they honestly don’t deserve them. I don’t say this because I am bitter over the fact no one paid attention to John. I say this because we all know John was the best choice when America is in a recession. And this is just looking at the issue of the economy. Anyways, The Quad City Times went on to report this e-mail is coming from John’s own mouth stating,
"Tully said he had talked to a top Edwards campaign official about how to proceed this weekend and expected to send an e-mail sometime Thursday.
"I’m speaking for John. The word came from him," Tully said."
With all of the chatter, guess who’s campaign is the most active in getting Edwards delegates. Hillary. In Newsweek, an Iowan web designer Lance Jenkins received a solicitation from the Clinton campaign. Listen to their strategy:
"....both campaigns are actively pursuing the 30 percent of county delegates pledged to John Edwards; his estimated 14 statewide delegates--now free-agents--would be a major boon. "Absolutely they’re fair game," says Karen Hicks, a senior adviser to the Clinton campaign. "We are reaching out to a lot of them, trying to persuade them to join our team." But Jenkins says that the Clintonites are going a step further--and cites himself as evidence. According to Jenkins, the robocall he received from the Clinton campaign was a solicitation. "It said something like, ’As the county convention nears, we ask that you consider Hillary,’" he recalls. "It rattled off a bunch of Clinton’s talking points, like experience, substance, ready on day one, etc." The only problem? Jenkins is committed to Obama--meaning that, in Jenkins words, "Clinton is actively pursuing pledged delegates."
This isn’t to say Obama’s people aren’t fighting too because all of the articles below tonight mention that his people are doing so.... it just appears that Hillary’s people are being more aggressive about it. The thing is, this is a lose-lose situation for both Hillary and Barack because the NY Daily News reported,
"Hillary herself called me," said Edwards’ co-chairman Rob Tully
"All of a sudden we matter again," said Edwards backer John Heitland, the Hardin County Democratic chairman.
The bad news for Clinton is she left a poor impression with many Edwards supporters and other Iowans when she bad-mouthed the state’s caucuses after she finished third, calling them undemocratic. And some blame her for the negative tone that’s crept in.
"It’s gotten kind of nasty, and I think most of that’s come from the Clinton side," said Heitland.
The bad news for Obama is that Tully planned to ask his people to go to the conventions and stick with Edwards. "It gives us a chance to say that we are not happy with the fighting that’s been going on," he said.
I like to consider myself a hardcore Edwards Democrat. I want to say thank you to all of the Iowans who are sticking with John at the convention. I want to make sure the Democratic Party knows that I think they made the wrong choice in supporting the "firsts" and not the "issues". A Clinton delegate or an Obama delegate do not speak for me. An Edwards delegate speaks for me. If McCain wins the election you can bet I will be helping in the mass production to make bumper stickers which state, "Don’t Blame Me.... I Voted for Edwards".
3.08.2008
Interested in VP? "No Comment"
I am excited to share an article with you tonight called, "Chance meeting fails to score a scoop". Journalist Rosemary Roberts had the pleasure of scoring seats next to John and Elizabeth this past Sunday at an UNC-Duke women's basketball game in UNC's Carmichael Auditorium. Don't worry -- she didn't pester him as they were all there for the game and not a impromptu interview for the inside scoop to where John's head is at. However, she did manage to get a little bit out of him.... nothing groundbreaking but I will take ANYTHING at this point! Here are some of my favorite questions and answers:
"Senator Edwards," I began. (I'm never sure how you address former senators but I stuck with "senator.") "Are you going to endorse Hillary or Obama?"
I knew Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had flown to Chapel Hill seeking his endorsement. After all, Edwards had finished third in the Democratic caucuses and primaries before dropping out.
Edwards smiled and replied to my endorsement question: "I haven't decided."
Next question: "Would you be interested in the office of the vice presidency?"
I was hoping for a scoop with this one. Headline possibility: "Edwards eager to be Democratic veep candidate!"
Edwards smiled and replied: "No comment."
John was as gracious as ever and all smiles. I was expecting, "I haven't decided yet" in terms of the endorsement. I am amused by his "No comment" response about VP because during the campaign he said he wasn't interested in being anybody's VP.... of course.... he was speaking as a man running to be the President of the United States and didn't want to look like he would settle for second best. Ms. Roberts also mentioned Elizabeth looks like she is doing fine considering her continuing cancer battle and recent loss of her father. I will leave you with a little note to make sure you read the article as there is a cute snipet in there about Emma Claire and her involvement in the pregame activities. Thank you Ms. Roberts for a little piece of Edwards post-suspension announcement news.
"Senator Edwards," I began. (I'm never sure how you address former senators but I stuck with "senator.") "Are you going to endorse Hillary or Obama?"
I knew Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had flown to Chapel Hill seeking his endorsement. After all, Edwards had finished third in the Democratic caucuses and primaries before dropping out.
Edwards smiled and replied to my endorsement question: "I haven't decided."
Next question: "Would you be interested in the office of the vice presidency?"
I was hoping for a scoop with this one. Headline possibility: "Edwards eager to be Democratic veep candidate!"
Edwards smiled and replied: "No comment."
John was as gracious as ever and all smiles. I was expecting, "I haven't decided yet" in terms of the endorsement. I am amused by his "No comment" response about VP because during the campaign he said he wasn't interested in being anybody's VP.... of course.... he was speaking as a man running to be the President of the United States and didn't want to look like he would settle for second best. Ms. Roberts also mentioned Elizabeth looks like she is doing fine considering her continuing cancer battle and recent loss of her father. I will leave you with a little note to make sure you read the article as there is a cute snipet in there about Emma Claire and her involvement in the pregame activities. Thank you Ms. Roberts for a little piece of Edwards post-suspension announcement news.
John's New Speaking Engagement
I am pleased to share that John has an upcoming event scheduled. He will be a speaker at the Manufacturers' Association's 103rd Annual Event Wednesday, June 18 at the Bayfront Convention Center (Erie, PA). I encourage you all to send a 'Thank You' note to the association for recognizing John as a man of the people.... particularly those in the manufacturing industry (like my father and his father).
3.06.2008
Take Action: Tell the Senate to Veto the FCC
Please act swiftly to overturn the FCC's Dec. 18 vote to relax media ownership rules. By co-sponsoring the Resolution of Disapproval (SJ Res. 28) introduced by Sen. Byron Dorgan, you will be taking a stand for investigative journalism, local news and competition in our state.
Research shows that media consolidation means fewer perspectives and less of the news our communities need. This is especially troubling in an election year when citizens depend on our media for the information they need to make fundamental choices about the future of our country.
When the FCC voted this December, it ignored nearly universal public opposition -- just like it did in 2003, when the Senate voted to overturn similar rule changes.
The FCC's decision to let Big Media get even bigger will erode localism, diminish minority ownership and decrease competition.
Please support the Resolution of Disapproval and take a stand for better media today.
Research shows that media consolidation means fewer perspectives and less of the news our communities need. This is especially troubling in an election year when citizens depend on our media for the information they need to make fundamental choices about the future of our country.
When the FCC voted this December, it ignored nearly universal public opposition -- just like it did in 2003, when the Senate voted to overturn similar rule changes.
The FCC's decision to let Big Media get even bigger will erode localism, diminish minority ownership and decrease competition.
Please support the Resolution of Disapproval and take a stand for better media today.
2.28.2008
Do You Want Me to Say What You Want to Hear?
I have a bone to pick with Mark Weisbrot over an opinion piece he wrote titled, Media Has Large, Often Unnoticed Role In National Politics. By first looking at the title, I am sure many of you were thinking the same as me.... "Finally, someone who is going to really put it out there that the media fed to our country who the frontrunners were going to be for the Democratic nominee." He really disappointed me when he compared John Edwards to Barack Obama. He described John as,
"The media can also veto candidates, as in the case of John Edwards. He was not by definition a "marginal" candidate: a U.S. senator and vice-presidential candidate in the last election, at various junctures he polled better against potential Republican contenders than the other Democratic candidates. He led his rivals in introducing a serious health care plan, and arguably transformed the contest in his appeal to the Democratic base on that and other issues.
But the media rejected Edwards, by a combination of ignoring him and subjecting him to much more negative reporting than the other major contenders. The same was true in 2004 for Howard Dean, who rallied the Democratic base but found himself with five or six times as many negative articles in the media than his major democratic primary opponents.
The media does much more than directly influence the opinion of voters. Most donors, politicians, institutions and other important political participants will not waste resources on a candidate that they think is unlikely to win. They often look at how the media treats a candidate in order to make this decision. If the media does not take a candidate seriously or is obviously hostile to him or her, these potential supporters will look elsewhere."
That's not to say that Edwards would have won if the media had not rejected him; most likely he would have lost anyway. But he would have been a more serious contender."
I didn't have a problem with the first part. John did make the Democratic Party this election cycle. He also was leveled with the most criticism because of his more progressive approach to really make change in this country. This is a bad thing apparently? Now listen to what he said about Obama,
"On the other hand, Obama knew how to define his candidacy within the limits of the media's constraints and still have a mass appeal. From the beginning of his campaign he mostly avoided challenging powerful interests, and talked about "getting all sides to the table" and overcoming "decades of bitter partisanship." The media and punditocracy lap this stuff up like honey. At the same time he was able to tap into the voters' deep desire for change, with inspirational speeches, transcendental narratives, and celebrity-studded videos."
Instead of standing up for John and pointing out exactly what was wrong with this election, he later in the article called Obama's campaign style as "genius". This is exactly why so many of us Edward Democrats are still on the fence about who we are or aren't going to vote for in the remaining primaries and caucus' and the general election. Mr. Weisbrot is basically supporting the idea that as long as you say what everyone wants to hear, the media is going to eat up because he can give a good speech. The whole "bring all sides to the table" is.... and I hate to use a Bill Clinton line here.... a fairytale. I don't care if you are Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.... John Edwards had it right. We need to stop sitting at home on our couches and hoping for change. We need to FIGHT for change. I don't want to HOPE for something to happen because you know what.... I've been hoping for a long time and what has honestly changed THAT much besides things getting worse versus getting better? How many Americans are going hungry every night? How many American soldiers are overseas away from their families? How many Americans don't have health care? And this is what gets praised? The status quo campaign tactics the media has dicated from the beginning? When are people going to stand up for John Edwards, who in my opinion, is still VERY relevant. This is a man who set the Democratic platform. You can call this sour grapes but when articles like this come out it really angers me. I hate to say it but in the end both Clinton and Obama's statements of representation on what John and we stand for will be nothing but empty promises. They will do as Mr. Weisbrot said.... tell us what we want to hear until they are "President of the United States". We cannot become voiceless because all of those people I spoke of are who John and Elizabeth spoke for and continue to speak for. This is why I come back here day after day. I will not let the media run the show. I may be just a small blog on myspace but I hope you, your family, and friends talk about what you read and really have dialogue because I think our fight was Edwards Democrats has just begun. What could be more exciting than that? MY tomorrow begins today!
"The media can also veto candidates, as in the case of John Edwards. He was not by definition a "marginal" candidate: a U.S. senator and vice-presidential candidate in the last election, at various junctures he polled better against potential Republican contenders than the other Democratic candidates. He led his rivals in introducing a serious health care plan, and arguably transformed the contest in his appeal to the Democratic base on that and other issues.
But the media rejected Edwards, by a combination of ignoring him and subjecting him to much more negative reporting than the other major contenders. The same was true in 2004 for Howard Dean, who rallied the Democratic base but found himself with five or six times as many negative articles in the media than his major democratic primary opponents.
The media does much more than directly influence the opinion of voters. Most donors, politicians, institutions and other important political participants will not waste resources on a candidate that they think is unlikely to win. They often look at how the media treats a candidate in order to make this decision. If the media does not take a candidate seriously or is obviously hostile to him or her, these potential supporters will look elsewhere."
That's not to say that Edwards would have won if the media had not rejected him; most likely he would have lost anyway. But he would have been a more serious contender."
I didn't have a problem with the first part. John did make the Democratic Party this election cycle. He also was leveled with the most criticism because of his more progressive approach to really make change in this country. This is a bad thing apparently? Now listen to what he said about Obama,
"On the other hand, Obama knew how to define his candidacy within the limits of the media's constraints and still have a mass appeal. From the beginning of his campaign he mostly avoided challenging powerful interests, and talked about "getting all sides to the table" and overcoming "decades of bitter partisanship." The media and punditocracy lap this stuff up like honey. At the same time he was able to tap into the voters' deep desire for change, with inspirational speeches, transcendental narratives, and celebrity-studded videos."
Instead of standing up for John and pointing out exactly what was wrong with this election, he later in the article called Obama's campaign style as "genius". This is exactly why so many of us Edward Democrats are still on the fence about who we are or aren't going to vote for in the remaining primaries and caucus' and the general election. Mr. Weisbrot is basically supporting the idea that as long as you say what everyone wants to hear, the media is going to eat up because he can give a good speech. The whole "bring all sides to the table" is.... and I hate to use a Bill Clinton line here.... a fairytale. I don't care if you are Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.... John Edwards had it right. We need to stop sitting at home on our couches and hoping for change. We need to FIGHT for change. I don't want to HOPE for something to happen because you know what.... I've been hoping for a long time and what has honestly changed THAT much besides things getting worse versus getting better? How many Americans are going hungry every night? How many American soldiers are overseas away from their families? How many Americans don't have health care? And this is what gets praised? The status quo campaign tactics the media has dicated from the beginning? When are people going to stand up for John Edwards, who in my opinion, is still VERY relevant. This is a man who set the Democratic platform. You can call this sour grapes but when articles like this come out it really angers me. I hate to say it but in the end both Clinton and Obama's statements of representation on what John and we stand for will be nothing but empty promises. They will do as Mr. Weisbrot said.... tell us what we want to hear until they are "President of the United States". We cannot become voiceless because all of those people I spoke of are who John and Elizabeth spoke for and continue to speak for. This is why I come back here day after day. I will not let the media run the show. I may be just a small blog on myspace but I hope you, your family, and friends talk about what you read and really have dialogue because I think our fight was Edwards Democrats has just begun. What could be more exciting than that? MY tomorrow begins today!
2.27.2008
If you care about a populist progressive platform...
...And if you want John Edwards as your president,
Please go to the link below and sign this petition and forward to all your friends:
http://www.petitiononline.com/DraftJRE/petition.html
Thank you MySpace profile's "Kristin - a 'John Edwards Democrat'", for giving us the heads up on this very important petition.
~~Diane & Todd
Idaho (STILL) for Edwards
Please go to the link below and sign this petition and forward to all your friends:
http://www.petitiononline.com/DraftJRE/petition.html
Thank you MySpace profile's "Kristin - a 'John Edwards Democrat'", for giving us the heads up on this very important petition.
~~Diane & Todd
Idaho (STILL) for Edwards
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
