Time magazine without the least hint of irony says this:"But even Edwards' boundless optimism and energy has his limits, and today he is admitting what all the pundits and politicos have been saying for the past month: the Democratic contest is a two-person race, and Edwards is not one of them."
Jeez, Time Magazine maybe if you and the rest of the liberal left wing media had covered Edwards campaign, your little self-fulfilling prophecy wouldn't have come true.
When basement dweller Giuliani garnered more press after Iowa than Edwards' second place finish, I guess we can assume that populists are not welcome at the banquet. Suck it little people.
8 comments:
For a minute there I thought that this might even be a non-rigged election. The lack of press coverage on Edwards proves that this beauty pagent is a scam just like the last two. Edwards was not my favorite candidate, but he certainly deserved equal footing in the election process. I feel like somebody just killed Santa Claus.
Santa Claus, like the Grimace, can not be killed by any means known to man. On the other hand, beauty pageant is a nice summation. I mean, has Miss Idaho EVER been given a fair shake?
Jess, so totally right on. Rudy got more attention in a week than Edwards did during his whole campaign. Dr. Z summed up my level of bummed-out-ness exactly.
I'm bummed cuz we voted for him here in Florida and next day he quits. I truly believe that even as you write here about the MSM doin him in, he still, still could have had that outside shot at it. We'll never know.
Your last paragraph so nails it. Rag on the Corporacrats and you're electoral toast; stand up for the "Little Guy" and you can kiss your prospects good-bye.
We're going down fast here, people.
WTF-- me, my parents and pretty much everybody I know voted for or was going to vote for Edwards (our primary is on Super Tuesday in Illinois). And yet, he got no media coverage.
I agree with everything you've written and with pretty much every other commenter, but for the sake of completeness Edwards had some problems. He was short-stacked as to campaign finance. He was a relatively recent convert as a politican to the POLITICS of left-wing populism. He campaigned for Senate as a DLC man. He voted like one. He campaigned for president in 2004 as a pro-war, pro-death penalty Southern alternative to Dean and Kerry. I don't think he was particularly comfortable with his new ideological clothes. The absolute booting of a gay-rghts question in one of the debates this fall certainly showed that. To his credit, he did indeed run to Clinton and Obama's left and while he was more forthcoming than them, he, too, was vague when pressed for MORE on why he was all of a sudden the liberal in the race.
For plenty of reasons I've marbled my blog with, I do not like Barack Obama at all. So, I am left supporting HRC, which I do without fear. My favorite candidate, Dennis Kucinich, had an ideology I really liked and a "story" that is far more inspiring that Obama's is, but the MSM wasn't going to let Kucinich get anywhere because as easily as he and HRC were always numbers 1 and 2 in every debate, and he did what was necessary in marrying a very attactive and intelligent woman, no matter how good he looked in profile, the MSM was NEVER going to promote Kucinich and there was nothing artificial at all about DK's left-wing populism.
Post a Comment