The Failing of John Edwards is the Least Disturbing Part of this Story

John Edwards admitted to his affair yesterday, finally. If what he is saying is true, then why do we give one f*** about this? Listen, I do not condone stepping out on people and screwing them over as Mr. Edwards has clearly done, but this is a private matter. If the affair happened in 2006 and he told Elizabeth about it in 2006 why should we care? I think the coverage is preposterous, like he offended us somehow, as if he cheated on all of us. That is simply preposterous. He is a public figure, yes, but do we think it truly affects us. He and his wife worked through this. Why should we judge either of them? Does the dry cleaner's affair down the street affect us? How about your mailman? The waitress at the local bar? Donald Trump? Why do we care at all?

Do I think people who have affairs should be considered for public office? Why the hell not! This is ludicrous for all of us to sit here and act like we are holier than thou and know what is in one another's heart. People's marriages and even more so people's sex lives are theirs and theirs alone. No one else's. If, in fact he fathered a child (according to him and Elizabeth he did not) and there is much more to the story, then I stand corrected. But, if this is the story I think the much more disturbing part of this story is the public and the media and this incessant need to be in one another's business. We sure don't care when we hear the screams of domestic violence in the neighborhood. We don't care when the people next door had their house foreclosed. We turn and look the other way. We turn and look the other way when another soldier dies or another Iraqi is butchered. We seem to not care about that. In the end it is between Elizabeth and John Edwards. And here is what Elizabeth said:

Our family has been through a lot. Some caused by nature, some caused by human weakness, and some – most recently – caused by the desire for sensationalism and profit without any regard for the human consequences. None of these has been easy. But we have stood with one another through them all. Although John believes he should stand alone and take the consequences of his action now, when the door closes behind him, he has his family waiting for him.

John made a terrible mistake in 2006. The fact that it is a mistake that many others have made before him did not make it any easier for me to hear when he told me what he had done. But he did tell me. And we began a long and painful process in 2006, a process oddly made somewhat easier with my diagnosis in March of 2007. This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage as well. Because of a recent string of hurtful and absurd lies in a tabloid publication, because of a picture falsely suggesting that John was spending time with a child it wrongly alleged he had fathered outside our marriage, our private matter could no longer be wholly private.

The pain of the long journey since 2006 was about to be renewed.

John has spoken in a long on-camera interview I hope you watch. Admitting one’s mistakes is a hard thing for anyone to do, and I am proud of the courage John showed by his honesty in the face of shame. The toll on our family of news helicopters over our house and reporters in our driveway is yet unknown. But now the truth is out, and the repair work that began in 2006 will continue. I ask that the public, who expressed concern about the harm John’s conduct has done to us, think also about the real harm that the present voyeurism does and give me and my family the privacy we need at this time.

Edwards Endorses Obama

Adding to Magda's good news below, John Edwards decided to get off the fence and endorse Obama. In the great words of someone, "what took you so long?" Edwards gave a spirited endorsement, no doubt which marked many of his own campaign promises, ending poverty, universal healthcare, ridding Washington of the special interests and ending the free ride for corporations. Though, I have to admit it was not as complimentary of Obama as one would have liked. He barely mentioned him, but that seems to be just fodder for the pundits and he was there to give Obama the credibility with those so-called blue collar white voters. Since Obama got 27% of the vote in W. Virginia and Edwards who has been gone for three months got 7%. That is a shocking statistic. Anyway, they looked good together. Who will be the VP? McCaskill? Sebelius? Webb? Edwards? Richardson? Who knows? But, let the conversation begin. When the video is available I will put it up.

Update: Videos below.

John Edwards Ends His Presidential Bid

Democrat John Edwards is exiting the presidential race Wednesday, ending a scrappy underdog bid in which he steered his rivals toward progressive ideals while grappling with family hardship that roused voter's sympathies but never diverted his campaign, The Associated Press has learned.

The two-time White House candidate notified a close circle of senior advisers that he planned to make the announcement at a 1 p.m. EST event in New Orleans that had been billed as a speech on poverty, according to two of his advisers. The decision came after Edwards lost the four states to hold nominating contests so far to rivals who stole the spotlight from the beginning — Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

There is also a story this morning that says Obama would love Edwards support. We will see where this goes. On a personal note Edwards campaign has been just what the democratic party needed. He has been the true democratic message voice in this campaign. Not to take anything away from Obama or Clinton for that matter, but Edwards message of corporate greed and labor rights is where our democratic party needs to go.

Edwards Making Gains in South Carolina

From Politicalwire:

Yesterday, we noted a couple polls that showed John Edwards surging in South Carolina. Today's Reuters/C-Span/Zogby poll finds even more proof.The survey finds Sen. Barack Obama leading with 38%, followed by Sen. Hillary Clinton at 25% and John Edwards at 21%.Said pollster John Zogby:

"The real movement here is by John Edwards, who is the only one who continues to gain ground in our three-day tracking poll. His increase appears to be coming from African American voters who are slowly making up their minds."The State: "Watch John Edwards. With only a day left before Saturday’s S.C. Democratic presidential primary, the former U.S. senator from North Carolina and S.C. native is making a move."

I am Supporting Obama and Edwards

I have tried desperately to choose between Edwards and Obama to make an endorsement of one of them for the nomination, but voila I cannot. Both of them have embraced a message of change (and in light of yesterday's developments it is needed more than ever) that is both believable and inspiring. Both men possess extraordinary political skills and the message of change together by both candidacies is the best avenue for this blogger.

Why I am not supporting Dennis Kucinich.

First, obviously, Kucinich possesses the best democratic message that harkens back to the new deal. If he had a chance I would most likely support him (I can hear my friend in law school telling me: "if you supported him he would have a chance"). Regardless, this is Kucinich' second time around and he has not gained the necessary traction and it appears he is the wrong messenger. I loved Nader's candidacy more than Kucinich because of his massive political skills and believe if given the chance he would have caught fire. Regardless, Kucinich is a monumental Congressman - from his organizing of a rebellion in the house to vote against the war in 2003 to his impeachment of Cheney that is where he belongs and he should focus as he has two primary challengers. Mike Gravel has been wonderful, but he too never had a chance in this media driven society. And I think his candidacy was more of a message anyway.

Why I am not supporting Joe Biden, Bill Richardson and the rest.

More of the same across the board. From Richardson's leadership in the DLC to his oil ties, to his ridiculous comments about gay people, no thanks. Is there any doubt however if Senator Clinton wins the nomination he will be the V.P. choice?

Why I am not supporting Hillary Clinton.

There was a tremendous opportunity for Hillary Clinton to embrace change and embrace the message of peace, workers rights, and the shrill of corporations. But, at heart Senator Clinton is much like her husband in that they adore corporatism over democracy. Her health care plan which did not receive the scrutiny it should have was essentially a pay-off to the insurance industry in placing a mandate upon us, the people, rather than a mandate upon the government to insure people. It is this philosophy that I find the most dangerous, aside from her abysmal foreign policy record in support of the war and the dreadful Iran resolution that she so willingly voted for.

Our country needs a different direction, one embracing openness of government, Mrs. Clinton will be more of the same secretive deals that the Bush administration has shown us. We need transparency in government, not hiding one's records as to repel scrutiny. I don't think we really want the 90's back with the hatred spewed our way. We need a different direction and that is precisely why I will not support her. She does not offer one.

Why I support John Edwards

I don't much care about the $400 hair cut or the hedge fund stories. They are minor in my mind when you consider what former Senator Edwards stands for right now. Let me be clear, I did not support him in 2004. I was irritated by his vote for the war and his saber rattling regarding Iran during the 2004 election. As the election proceeded it was clear, however there was something likable about Edwards and his "two Americas" did not seem to be just fodder for the media.

Today, as we approach the Iowa caucuses Edwards message has been pointed and steady. As John Nichols wrote in the Nation: "Edwards has struck at the heart of issues that should matter most in the race to replace not just George W. Bush, but the Bush agenda of corporate giveaways, job-crushing free trade deals, war profiteering in Iraq, and subprime mortgage profiteering in Indiana, Idaho, Illinois and, yes, Iowa." And again: "What makes America America is at stake: jobs, the middle class, health care, preserving the environment in the world for future generations."

"But," he added, "if you look at what's happened with American trade policy, look at what America got: Big corporations made a lot of money, are continuing to make a lot of money in China. But what did America get in return? We got millions of dangerous Chinese toys. We lost millions of jobs.

"And right here in Iowa, the Maytag plant in Newton closed. A guy named Doug Bishop, who I got to know very well, had worked in that plant, and his family had worked in that plant literally for generations. And his job is now gone. The same thing, by the way, happened in the plant that my father worked in when I was growing up. It is so important that we stop allowing these corporate powers and corporate profits to run America's policy, whether it's trade policy, how we engage with China. This is not good for America. It's not good for American jobs. And it's not good for working people in this country."

This has been the central message of the campaign and strikes at the heart of what is happening in America. We are a corporatist nation. Whether it is Blackwater and Halliburton in Iraq or New Orleans, or Exxon or Walmart, we are a nation that takes care of the capitalists and not its people. Edwards understands this better than any other candidate and is delivering a populist campaign that is truly inspiring. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both voted for the recent trade agreements that will be a handout to corporations and not to the workers of these countries. Edwards clearly stands for regular people, unlike any Presidential candidate since Ralph Nader.

Why I support Barack Obama

I was and am becoming increasingly angrier at Obama mainly for his sell-out on the free trade agreements and his skip of the Iran vote. Though, he has increasingly embraced the message of change mainly due to Edwards haranguing of him. He has his own message of change; to stop the bickering and just get things done, which Paul Krugman has called incredibly naive. But, is there something more to Mr. Obama? Are we judging Obama as a change candidate through the lens of all the other change candidates we seek: mainly Kucinich, Nader and now Edwards.

My interest in Obama peaked and I headed toward Edwards fast, but that momentum stopped when I went to France. Speaking with French citizens about the possibility that a person of color named Barack Obama could represent the free world was to put it mildly, "foreign" to them. "It will never happen in France" was the response which incited a discussion of all of Europe with the same results. An African-American President would truly be historic much like a woman President in America that is without question.

You combine this historic opportunity with Obama's change message, he believes in universal healthcare (though his proposal is not quite universal) he no doubt wants an end to the occupation in Iraq and is the only "top tier" candidate that did not support the war from the beginning. His policies about energy, ending the war, the environment are virtually the same as John Edwards. He has embraced the need for New Orleans to be rebuilt not in the fashion as is currently being done ala the Shock Doctrine. And he has been the most vocal of the candidates about crisis in Sudan.

So, it is either Edwards or Obama for me. I know, it is a little chicken s***, but both are acceptable to lead the democratic party into the future. I don't know who I will vote for on February 5th. I will let Iowa decide for me. It certainly looks like Obama has the best chance to challenge Senator Clinton for the nomination. But, if Edwards wins Iowa, which many feel is the most likely scenario, one never knows.

Edwards New Ad in Iowa - Heroes

Edwards is seeking to capitalize on his performance from Tuesday with a new ad. In the ad, which goes up in Iowa today, Mr. Edwards refers to the moment when he and his wife Elizabeth made a decision after getting results that her breast cancer had returned, to pursue his campaign for the Democratic nomination.
“If you are looking for heroes,” Mr. Edwards says, “Don’t look to me, don’t look to Elizabeth. We have support, we have health care, we have the American people behind us. Look to them; they are the ones that we speak for,” he said, referring to American workers. The ad has a definitive lack of diversity (because of the state Iowa I am sure), though it is effective.

A challenge by John Edwards

I am beginning to think Edwards is our only hope. By "our" I mean people who want the people to run our government, not corporations.

The Moral Test of Our Generation

"I saw the chase for campaign money at any cost by the frontrunner in this race — and I did not join it — because the cost to our nation and our children is not worth the hollow victory of any candidate. Being called president while powerful interests really run things is not the same as being free to lead this nation as president of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. If protecting the current established structure in Washington is in your interest, then I am not your candidate. I ran for president four years ago — yes, in part out of personal ambition — but also with a deep desire to stand for working people like my father and mother — who no matter how hard things were for our family, always worked even harder to make things better for us." - John Edwards -

John Edwards gave a stirring speech yesterday called "The Moral Test of Our Generation." He attacked corporate greed and all those politicians who engage in it. He hits Hillary hard, but more than that he makes the case for what our country can look like without the corruption that is commonplace. Read the speech, it is remarkable.