so what the hell happened to edwards saying he wouldn't endorse anyone?

I guess it's okay for him to change his position, when it's for the candidate of your choosing.

t's Official: John And Elizabeth Edwards Will Not Endorse In Prez Race
By Greg Sargent - May 5, 2008, 6:20PM

John and Elizabeth Edwards have finally made their endorsement plans -- or lack of them -- official.

On the eve of potentially decisive voting in Indiana and North Carolina, with political tensions at white-hot levels, John and Elizabeth revealed all in an interview with People magazine, of all outlets.

The news in the interview is that they confirmed they will not endorse either candidate in the presidential race, because they are "saving their political capital for their own causes -- his, fighting poverty; hers, fighting for universal health care," reports, um, People mag.

John also shared his thoughts on the pros and cons of Hillary and Obama...

. . . .
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/its_official_john_and_elizabet.

Starting with Iraq.

Not like Zellary, who has the "strength" to never, ever admit that the blood on her hands from the IWR was a mistake.

But you know Barack Obama will shift ever slightly to the right, a bit more, a bit more, a bit more as the GE moves along.

One day, you won't recognize him. Or maybe you finally will.

that therefore, I should've supported HILLARY this whole time - Hillary, who forgoes being a "moderate" altogether and is just and all-out RWer?

Bye, now. :hi:

iraq, ever has any response to the jeremy scahill piece:

February 28, 2008
Blackwaterweb4
Jeremy Scahill: Despite Antiwar Rhetoric, Clinton-Obama Plans Would Keep US Mercenaries, Troops in Iraq for Years to Come

Jeremy Scahill reports Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama will not “rule out” using private military companies like Blackwater Worldwide in Iraq. Obama also has no plans to sign on to legislation that seeks to ban the use of these forces in US war zones by January 2009. Despite their antiwar rhetoric, both Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton have adopted the congressional Democratic position that would leave open the option of keeping tens of thousands of US troops in Iraq for many years.


Jeremy Scahill, Democracy Now! correspondent Jeremy Scahill joins us now in our firehouse studio. Author of the bestselling book Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army. His latest article is “Obama’s Mercenary Position.” It appears in the upcoming issue of The Nation magazine.


JUAN GONZALEZ: “A senior foreign policy adviser to leading Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has told The Nation that if elected Obama will not ‘rule out’ using private security companies like Blackwater Worldwide in Iraq.” That’s the lead sentence from a new article by independent journalist Jeremy Scahill. The adviser to Obama also said that the Illinois Senator does not plan to sign on to legislation that seeks to ban the use of these forces in US war zones by January 2009, when a new president will be sworn in.

AMY GOODMAN: Democracy Now! correspondent Jeremy Scahill joins us now in the firehouse studio, is author of the bestselling book Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army. His latest article in The Nation is called “Obama’s Mercenary Position.” It appears in this issue of The Nation.

Welcome to Democracy Now! So, what did you find out, Jeremy?

JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, I started looking at Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s Iraq plans, and one of the things that I discovered is that both of them intend to keep the Green Zone intact. Both of them intend to keep the current US embassy project, which is slated to be the largest embassy in the history of the world. I mean, I think it’s 500 CIA operatives alone, a thousand personnel. And they’re also going to keep open the Baghdad airport indefinitely. And what that means is that even though the rhetoric of withdrawal is everywhere in the Democratic campaign, we’re talking about a pretty substantial level of US forces and personnel remaining in Iraq indefinitely.

In the case of Barack Obama, I wanted to focus in on what his position is on private military contractors, particularly armed ones like those that work for Blackwater. And the reason I focus on Obama instead of Hillary on this is because Barack Obama has actually been at the forefront of addressing the mercenary issue in the Congress. In February of 2007—this was way before the Nisour Square massacre, where Blackwater forces killed seventeen Iraqis and wounded twenty others—in February of 2007, Barack Obama sponsored legislation in the Senate that sought to expand US law so that—

JUAN GONZALEZ: This is just after he got into the Senate, right?

JEREMY SCAHILL: This was in 2007. This was a year ago. And so, this was a major piece of legislation by Obama, and it was done in concert with Representative David Price from North Carolina in the House, a Democrat. And Obama’s legislation basically said we realize that there are loopholes in the law that allow Blackwater and other contractors to essentially get away with murder, and so what we need to do is make it so that US law applies to not only Defense Department contractors, but State Department contractors like Blackwater. If they murder someone in Iraq, we can prosecute them back in the United States.

. . . . . .
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/2/28/jeremy_scahill_despite_anti_war_rhetoric

:shrug:

I can think of many reasons why a person would change their mind on a decision previously made. Especially if they're prone to being wishy washy, but that's not Edwards (that I know of).

Lord knows Hillary's message on racial divisions in America was sending a horrible message all across our nation!

edwards had had enough.

Time to come together now. He's not dissing Hillary.

losing a primary by 40 points makes that nominee look weak.

They can't just vote for him to "send a message" -- they need to
accept that these are their choices and that HIS choice is that
they vote for Obama.

GREAT NEWS!

her day, and now it's time to end the race.

Just a guess.

I could be wrong.

;)

I think Edwards, like many others, wants to get this show on the road to Nov.

All I can say is Thank You John!!!

which side of the bread the butter was on.

He has always maintained when he sees the right timeto endorse , he'll do so.

The other stories are basically spin on his previous comments.

Guess what? It's the right time.

The race is over. Now he's standing with the nominee. :)

The news in the interview is that they confirmed they will not endorse either candidate in the presidential race, because they are "saving their political capital for their own causes -- his, fighting poverty; hers, fighting for universal health care," reports, um, People mag.

As an icon of what is right about the democratic party. He could not sit by and watch as Hillary single handedly turned a chance for America to right it's wrongs into a poo slinging self depriving binge of malignant narcissism.

Of course I could be wrong and he could be doing it for the AG spot!

how did that turn out?

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

The quote says they're "saving their political capital for their own causes." And that doesn't rule anything out.

NGU.

it will be interesting to see what he was promised.

now we just have to wait and see what the highest bidder paid.

continual devisive destruction of the Democratic Party.

Edwards to endorse Sen. Obama
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama receives John Edwards' endorsement in Grand Rapids, MI

Watch it here----->http://edition.cnn.com/video/live/live.html?stream=stream3

it's the new kind of politics Obama will be bringing to DC...