Why I like Edwards the best out of the top 3 Dems.

I still like Dennis, but...

Out of the three top Dems (Hillary,Obama,Edwards), John Edwards appeals to me the most for a couple reasons, which have little to do with their policy ideas.

He seems to best understand what he'd be up against in the general election. I think he understands the dirty tricks, election theft, lying, bias media, ... better than the others. I think the others are going to "play it safe" like the losing Dems did in 2004 and other times. I think Edwards knows what's coming, will be more proactive (not just defense) and he's willing to call Bush a liar. WE CAN'T AFFORD another "play it safe" and "take the higher road" attitude and it appears Edwards does not have that attitude. I think if the election results were in question, Edwards is the most likely out of the three to fight it, and I won't be surprised if it comes down to some kind of legal battle again.

It's too bad that issues aren't the most important thing. But in today's world, issues don't matter as much when you lose to a lying cheater.

John Edwards: 'We Need Paper Ballots'
First Democratic Candidate to Answer Directly on the Issue, in Response to Why Tuesday?'s Candidate Challenge...
Blogged by Brad from the road...

"What we need, is we need paper ballots, so votes can be verified," says John Edwards directly in response to Why Tuesday's videoCandidate Challenge. He says a bunch of other good stuff on the topic as well in his brief response...


Edwards is the only Democratic candidate so far (12 candidates from both parties have so far answered the challenge issued by Why Tuesday's Jacob Soboroff) to speak that directly to the issue of paper ballots, and other needed reforms.


http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5307

:hi:

Dennis, Edwards, and Biden my three.

so cautious. Gives off the feeling. My beliefs are just as
valid as yours--GOPers and I am not embarassed to show it.

Nothing "Me TOO" about this candidate.

Feels passionately and shows it.

They seem to be the only folks who, to one degree or another, understand the obscene power amassed by corporations to establish egregious entitlements for PROPERTY at the cost of PEOPLE, especially WORKING people. They seem least compromised by the corruption inside the beltway. I just cannot see myself supporting Richardson, Biden, Obama, or Clinton (least of all).

as much as I don't trust Hillary and don't like her, objectively she would offer some degree of change. even the most centrist dems are a mile away from bush and the fascist regime.

So, I won't bother repeating it. :shrug:

i see, you're not saying those other's wouldn't change anything at all, but the corporate interest wouldn't change. I agree.

"There's a wall around Washington and we need to take it down. The American people are on the outside. And on the other side, on the inside, are the powerful, the well-connected and the very wealthy. That wall didn't build itself or appear overnight. For decades, politicians without convictions and powerful interests gathered their bricks and their stones and their mortar, and they went to work. They went to work to protect their interests, to block the voice of the American people, and to stop our country's progress. They went to work to protect, defend, and maintain the status quo.

"That wall around Washington, it protects a system that's rigged and guess who struggles as a result? Every single day, working men and women see that wall when they have to split their bills into two piles pay-now and pay-later; when they watch the factory door shut for the last time; when they see the disappointment on their son or daughter's face when there's no money to pay for college. Every single day they see that wall when they have to use the emergency room as a doctor's office for their son because they can't afford to pay for health care. This is not okay. That wall has to come down.


I am also a Kucinich supporter but I cant ignore someone when they speak the truth about the overall picture like this. Edwards has also taken part in the secret Bilderberg group meetings and would have a good idea of whats going on. The sad thing is that, even if we get a good candidate like Kucinich, Edwards or Obama in the White House, the corrupt side will just have him taken out.

Any connection with Bilderberg is a bad sign. What do you got on him? If he really has connections to Bilderberg that could change my entire view.

He went in 2004, somewhere I read that if you wanted to be president you must be approved by the bilderberg group. More or less saying that they had to make sure you would go along with what they wanted for the world. For him to be bringing up corruption like he is, maybe he knows something because he has seen it first hand and has decided to do the right thing? Its amazing how many high ranked people from all over the world that have attended but for some reason no one has been invited from lets say, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Venezuela or any other country that our government tells us to hate. You would think that if this secret annual meeting was about the future of the world like they say, they would include some of these people or someone at all from their country? Strange huh?

The funniest thing about bilderberg is the fact that they invite powerful people from politics, business and the media and make the pledge not to discuss bilderberg at all. Why invite anyone from the media if they can never speak of it? Gee, I wonder if there is something corrupt going on there, the powerful people of politics, business and the media in secret meetings discussing the future of the world. I cant believe it existed this long and I just discovered it this year, most have no idea what it is either.

About halfway there is a list of attendees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group

Here are a few of them:

Bill Clinton
Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Bill Richardson
Christopher Dodd
Chuck Hagel
Diane Feinstein
David Gergen
Richard Perle
Donald Rumsfeld
Colin Powell
Gordon Brown
Tony Blair