John Edwards is a great presidential candidate. He speaks to the heart of the problems facing our nation. I think the best way for him to gain supporters is for people to hear him. With that in mind, I’ve put together a page of links to his recent media appearances.
I’ve compiled these links for two reasons:
1) Those of us who have already made our decision to support him and to reach out to others online will have the resources we need at our fingertips.
2) Voters who are still in the process of deciding on a candidate need to see this!
I hope these links give you a clearer picture of John Edwards as a person and a candidate. I find that usually the more people know about him, the more they like him.
Video
John's YouTube page John Edwards has a page on YouTube where he regularly adds new videos.
Campaign events and speeches:
John Edwards at AFSCME forum: opening statements Part 1 of 2. John Edwards speaks at AFSCME forum in Carson City, Nevada, February 21, 2007
John Edwards at AFSCME forum Part 2 of 2. John Edwards answers questions from George Stephanopoulos and gives his closing remarks at AFSCME forum in Carson City, Nevada, February 21, 2007
Edwards discusses his health care plan at a town hall in Dubuque, Iowa in February, 2007.
Edwards discusses universal health care in Charleston, SC
John Edwards speech to the DNC winter meeting February 2, 2007 (excerpts)
DNC winter meeting, full speech John Edwards speaks to the DNC winter meeting candidates forum. February 2, 2007
One Corps National Day of Energy Action The Edwards family helps another family winterize their house and John and Elizabeth speak to a conference call of One Corps captains. January, 2007.
Martin Luther King Day at Riverside Church John Edwards gave the annual “Realizing the Dream” sermon at Riverside Church in Harlem, NYC in January 2007.
Des Moines town hall, part 1 John Edwards gives his first town hall after his presidential announcement. He discusses One Corps and the meaning of “Tomorrow begins today.”
Des Moines town hall, part 2 Edwards discusses the war in Iraq, poverty, global warming, alternative energy, universal health care, and America’s responsibility to the rest of the world.
Des Moines town hall, part 3 Edwards discusses plans for lifting people out of poverty, unions, and making college more accessible.
Portsmouth NH town hall, part 1 Edwards discusses Americans taking responsibility for our own country and taking action now.
Portsmouth NH town hall, part 2 Edwards discusses the genocide in Darfur, global poverty and AIDS, global warming, and health care.
Tomorrow Begins Today John Edwards makes his presidential announcement from New Orleans, December 28, 2006.
TV shows:
Edwards on the Today Show February 22, 2007
Bill Maher interviews John Edwards on 2/16/07. As Bill Maher points out “that is a lot of straight talk from a politician.” This is a very entertaining interview.
Edwards on Meet the Press February 4, 2007, Part 1 of 6
Edwards on Meet the Press February 4, 2007, Part 2 of 6
Edwards on Meet the Press February 4, 2007, Part 3 of 6
Edwards on Meet the Press February 4, 2007, Part 4 of 6
Edwards on Meet the Press February 4, 2007, Part 5 of 6
Edwards on Meet the Press February 4, 2007, Part 6 of 6
John Edwards responds to SOTU on Scarborough John Edwards responds to the 2007 State of the Union address on Scarborough.
John Edwards on The Daily Show, part 1 John talks about his new book with host Jon Stewart.
John Edwards on The Daily Show, part 2 Edwards is put on the “seat of heat.”
John and Elizabeth Edwards on Hardball (clip)
Edwards on Hardball, December 2006, part 1 of 6
Edwards on Hardball, December 2006, part 2 of 6
Edwards on Hardball, December 2006, part 3 of 6
Edwards on Hardball, December 2006, part 4 of 6
Edwards on Hardball, December 2006, part 5 of 6
Edwards on Hardball, December 2006, part 6 of 6
Other video:
Edwards in 2004 and 2007 The New York Times compares the Edwards campaign in 2004 and his new campaign in 2007.
Four questions for John Edwards Bloggers interview John and Elizabeth Edwards.
AFL-CIO Paul Wellstone Awards Banquet John Edwards is a guest at
this union banquet.
Humor: Jay Leno comments on an Edwards Today Show appearance
More video pages from Edwards supporters:
Audio
Diane Rehm show on NPR Edwards is interviewed by Diane Rehm. The interview includes a lot of foreign policy information.
Talk of the Nation on NPR Edwards is interviewed on Talk of the Nation. He discusses his health care policy in detail.
Transcripts
Radio and TV:
Edwards on CNN’s Situation Room February 16, 2007
KGO Radio February 16, 2007
Speeches:
Speeches page on johnedwards.com
At Iowa Event, Edwards urges “Health Care for All”
DNC Winter Meeting speech text
John Edwards Announces Bid for 2008 Democratic Presidential Nomination
Articles and blogs
Paul Krugman: Edwards Gets It Right New York Times
My Trip to Uganda with IRC by John Edwards
Time to End the War by John Edwards
John Edwards On Iran, Iraq, and Israel interview by Ezra Klein
Edwards steps out front on health care by Dean Baker
Candidate John Edwards pushes for 'living wage' at Vanderbilt
Former NC Senator John Edwards to Walk In Our Shoes by SEIU
Edwards Calls On President Bush To Suspend Negotiations For A Free Trade Agreement With South Korea
Words and Wisdom of John Edwards: Speeches & Multimedia
Headlines page on johnedwards.com
YouTube testimonials from supporters
Evelyn reacts to town hall in NH
This is cross-posted, with slight modifications, from blog.johnedwards.com, where it was recently featured.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 66
"Rule Number 1: Don't mess with Christians" - what a crock of crap. The so-called Christians elected the idiot who currently resides in the White House, and he is single-handedly bringing down a nation that was once considered the greatest on earth.
I don't have a great deal of faith in Mr. Edwards' chances, because I never thought GWB would win the first time (which of course he really didn't) or the 2nd time..... The American public is not terribly intelligent.
But I appreciate your efforts. A lot.
Although liberals and negativity go hand in hand I do think Nancy put her miserable negative spin in the right place on this one. Edwards or any democrat won't win. Republicans will just steal the election. It works every time and far be it for me to accuse liberals of not being intelligent enough to stop it but.....
Nancy and Donna, thanks for the kind words. Nancy, I think things will be better this time around. The American public is wising up big time.
I don't want to be associated with anti-Christian bigots. When the KKK and neonazis do their marches and get yelled at and spit upon nobody feels sympathy for them. I certainly wouldn't want to see those girls get attacked or spit upon but If Edwards wanted those anti-Christian bigots on his campaign it's a reflection on him. Anti-Christian bigots that use the language they did are no different than those who hate people based on race.
As far as the death threats or rape threats, that seems like a pretty easy out. Why would they want to explain why they hate Christians when they can play the victim and demand sympathy? I have no reason to believe either of their stories of threats, it seems like typical anti-Christian cowards who don't have the courage to stand by their convictions. However if it was true, I condemn those who would do something like that. I would assume those who sent the threats(if there really were threats) were probably from Edward's supporters since the two twits effectively tanked his campaign. Put a fork in him.....he is done.
Jeff, I'm going to leave you to your sick fantasies. John Edwards is a man of deep faith himself, and he expresses it by doing the things that the great religions of the world tell us to do - help the poor, have compassion for others, forgive people. He walks the talk.
Where did I say that wasn't the case? You call me delusional? Get a grip woman.
Stay clear of the fallout.....
Greg, that's good to hear. Edwards IS a statesman, I think.
Don, I'm ducking. Well, actually, I don't really think this current spat between Hillary and Obama is going to be a big deal in the long run. But I certainly hope that Democratic primary voters, and then the American people, will see that Edwards is the best candidate.
Joe, I know. So many Catholics have said it's a "noncontroversy." As always, rightist extremists want us to believe they have an exclusive finger on the pulse of the Almighty and that anything they say is law. The majority of the religious people in this country simply don't feel that way and are getting tired of their religion being hijacked by extremists.
I am sorry but who is an extremist? Somebody who thinks "The Catholic church is not about to let something like compassion for girls get in the way of using the state as an instrument to force women to bear more tithing Catholics." and calls God a "sadistic bastard" or Christians who find it offensive. Astrogirl if it was a non controversy and "most people weren't offended, the door wouldn't have hit the twits in the ass as they left Edward's campaign. I give Edwards credit for admitting that those foul mouth anti-Christian bigots were offensive and are better off sticking to preaching to the drewits of America. There is no place in the mainstream for wing nuts like them.
1) while NOT working for the Edwards campaign
2) apologized
3) did not say anything offensive while working for the Edwards campaign
4) left the campaign quickly.
Good luck trying to fire someone for saying a personal belief, however offensive, outside of work before they were hired. They dont work for the campaign now. It's silly you bring it up. A month from now, the only people who would bring it up will be people like yourself who will not vote for him anyway and will be unable to convince undecideds that this nontroversy was important. That's just my opinion and you are entitled to your own, but as I read this thread, you're the only one who thinks it is an issue now.
John Edwards is a formidable candidate. I like him but for right now am backing Hillary. I think she will make the best president.
Here's another one: Are you familiar with the term Repoublespeak? That's what Jeff is doing when he says "Democrats hate Christians" and then claims not to be an extremist. Sorry, but people in the mainstream don't make such ludicrous assertions.
AG, glad you like the word. Seems to fit. I'm looking forward to hearing actual debate on issues not non-issues. For instance there was an excellent debate on the JRE blog about whether the constitution allows for congress the ability to create universal healthcare. It was a substantive debate discussing Article 1 section 8 of the constitution, the federalist papers, and supreme court decisions. The debate was at times heated but not personally destructive on any of the parties. I look forward to those debates.
Although I may have generalised and allowed you to play gotcha what I meant was that The anti-Christian bigotry comes from the left who support democrats. There is a lot of money from this group and democrats are imprisoned to the fact that they are the party of choice for people who tend to hate Christianity. When the connection is shown to people who don't pay attention to the behind the scenes events it has an effect. Like I said I converted 4 members of my family by pointing out this fact.
"""There is no controversy here. Some people see one whenever they disagree with a candidate or don't like the person. They have to demonize to feel good about themselves."""
Joe I agree there is no controversy in terms of people expressing their views. It is anybodies right to hate Christianity. I don't have a problem with that at all go nuts. But Edwards is a politicians trying to get elected. Democrats get roughly half the Catholic vote so to embrace those who hate Catholics is not only asinine but a very big controversy when put into context.
Edwards made a big mistake by hiring the twits and they left to stop the controversy from spreading like wildfire. In short his campaign is finished for the most part because of this. I will guarantee he wont get the nomination for either position. If he does I officially promise to vote for him in the general election in 08.
The religious right claims to speak for "Christians", but that boast is shown to be increasingly fantastic.
Focus on the Family, Jerry Falwell, Phyllis Schaffley, they will be the kiss of death in the next national election.
The tide is turning, and the shape of the new political alignment is hard to see at this point.
Way to speak up for your candidate, Astro Girl.
First of all I am a health nut and would bet I am in far better shape than you. But then again those who ridicule others pics but don't have the balls to post one of themselves have no credibility.
You sure seem to think about Ted Haggart quite a bit there Peter.... You might want to speak to a professional about that. But thanks for sharing your feelings about Christianity and good luck on your prediction.
I'd like to think that a man of great integrity and decency like John Edwards will be able to be seen by the majority of the American people for the good person he really is, in spite of the hatred that the lunatic fringe feels toward him. Someone who spends so much of his time trying to restore this country to its great potential really deserves our support. That's why I will stand up for him and stand up for America.
For the record I don't hate Edwards and agree that he is probably an honorable decent man. If a republican doesn't win in 08 Edwards is one of the better choices of mine to take the presidency in the democrat field. Liberal knee jerk reaction to defend the left wing extremists and Christian hating bigots is always going to be an advantage to the republicans. I thank you all for that:)
I think you blew your credibility way back at your comment "Democrats hate Christians," Jeff, so don't try to make up for it now.
You heard my explanation but I know you would rather believe I actually think all democrats hate Christians even though I obviously stated that democrats depend on their Christian support. That's the whole reason why Edwards admitted that the views of those twits was offensive.
What surprises me is that even though you support Edwards you, and all the others like you, refuse to admit that what those girls did was wrong offensive and yes it hurt Edwards big time. Keep defending them, I can't lose on this one.
Crude attempts to paint Democrats as "Christian-haters" is not credible.
It will be interesting to see how this very long campaign season unfolds.
In any event, Jeff must have generated about 20 Gather Points for you!
I don't think any employee should be subjected to scrutiny of everything they have ever said or written before being hired to a job, and I don't think any employer should be held responsible for everything every one of their employees has ever said or written outside their employment, so trying to blame Edwards for Amanda's own personal opinions is ridiculous. Like Joe Q said, it's a non-troversy.
Ah, the Gather points keep adding up. Let's argue the non-troversy for a bit longer, OK Jeff?
Like I said...I don't paint Democrats as Christian haters since most of my family is more religious than me and also almost all democrat. I believe that almost all Christian haters are democrats. Gather is a pretty good source that makes my belief a fact. Thanks for helping me as I can show more family members of mine how democrats really think as most of my family members don't believe me:D You get points I get conversions:D:D Fair trade:)
–adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun 14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Origin: 1325–75; ME < L līberālis of freedom, befitting the free, equiv. to līber free + -ālis -al1]
—Related forms
lib·er·al·ly, adverb
lib·er·al·ness, noun
—Synonyms 1. progressive. 7. broad-minded, unprejudiced. 9. beneficent, charitable, openhanded, munificent, unstinting, lavish. See generous. 10. See ample.
—Antonyms 1. reactionary. 8. intolerant. 9, 10. niggardly.
dictionary.com
Now, what were you saying about us being petty and liberal, Jeff? Kind of two contradictory terms, aren't they?
I don't think you're being very persuasive about your beliefs. You may in fact be converting people in the other direction, but maybe that's just me.
It's an honor to be here in this extraordinary place, in this hallowed place, in this sanctuary, where so many have stood together for causes of righteousness and justice. In this church, the faithful and the firebrand have stood together, and they've joined in the noblest pursuits in American history: the fight and struggle for equality, and for peace. And the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was, above all things, a man of peace.
And forty years ago, as others have said, a year to the day before he was shot and killed in Memphis, Tennessee, he stood in this pulpit, in this house of God, and with the full force of his conscience, and his conviction and his love for peace, he denounced the War in Vietnam, calling it a tragedy, a national tragedy, that threatened to drag America down, to drag us to dust.
As he put it then, there comes a time--not just for Dr. King, but for all of us--when silence is betrayal--not just betrayal of your own personal convictions, not just betrayal of your country, but a betrayal of our--all of our joint responsibility to each other, to our brothers and sisters, not just in America, but all across the globe.
And actually, the thing that I remember most about that sermon, given a year before he died, is that he did not direct his demands to the government of the United States of America, which was about to escalate the War in Vietnam. Instead, he spoke to the American people, calling on us to break our silence, calling on us to accept our own responsibility and to help lead what he spoke of as a "revolution of values"--a revolution whose starting place is with each of us. But the force of that revolution is the belief that we cannot--cannot stand by and hope that someone else will right the wrongs of the world.
And this is my view, is the heart and soul of what we need to remember. It is the heart and soul of realizing the dream. Because there does come a time, for all of us, when silence is betrayal. There does come a time when we have to each one of us refuse to wait for others to act--a moment when we realize, as one of Dr. King's great teachers, Gandhi, said, we have to be the change that we want to see in the world.
That time is here again. It's with us today. Dr. King taught us well. I believe, as I know many of you do, that it is a betrayal, a betrayal to stand silent and watch 37 million of our own brothers and sisters who literally worry about surviving, every single day. It is a betrayal to stand silent while the disparity between the rich and the poor gets worse and worse and worse, every single day in America, in the richest nation on the face of the planet.
And I also believe that it is a betrayal not to speak out against an escalation of the War in Iraq.
The issue, brothers and sisters, the issue is not only how we got into Iraq. The issue is how do we now get out of Iraq. And I want to say, because I just heard a gentleman ask the question a few minutes ago, I want to say for anybody in this room who doesn't know it, I voted for this War, and I was wrong. I take responsibility for that vote. It is not anyone else's responsibility. I accept responsibility for that.
--John Edwards, "Realizing the Dream" sermon, Riverside Church
Now those are the words of a moral person.
It's nice to hear a democrat admit those who bash Christians are wrong:) Thanks for the post.
I worked at a place and when I started there, I had all kinds of ideas, but I could not get people to work with me. One of the older employees told me, you can leave this place, come back 20 years later and nothing has changed, No body cares. I got so frustrated with one section not working together with the other that I quit. I think this is what happens in politics. To much bull crap to get anything accomplished.
Edwards was invited to a black church so he went Astro? Wow I didn't know that invitations was all it takes to get democrats to bring cameras and microphones to a place that has no business sticking it's nose in politics.....
Jeff, the reason why cameras were there on that particular day at the Riverside Church was that it was an event created by Martin Luther King III to discuss his new REALIZING THE DREAM. Check out Realizing the Dream website and you'll see that. Secondly, MLK III invited JRE. I can see why. MLK III statement about JRE was, as I far as I read in the news articles at the time, that he agreed with JRE's work at the poverty center (something that ties in correctly with MLK JR's philosophy) so it makes perfect sense. JRE went. Some cameras probably followed JRE because he is a presidential candidate but cameras were already there. And the place very much had business with politics as the very speech discussed.
Jeff, you wrote that you guarantee JRE wont win the primary but if JRE wins the primary you'll vote for him in the general election! Your vote is your voice to the future, a precious thing not to be bartered with. I hope you do vote for him in the general election because you come to see of the two candidates that he is the best candidate and what our country needs right now. But don't do it because of an implied bet here. Use your vote in the general 08 election to vote for the country you want to live in for four years and I hope that ultimately it will be for JRE. Best of luck to you.
Thanks for looking out for me Joe but I don't put a lot of stock in who our president is and my promise stands. Local elections and us congressional elections have more effect on my life than who the president is. Either way you are right that our votes ARE important and shouldn't be pissed away in a bet. But like I said.....this disrespect to Christianity on the part of the Edwards campaign tanked him. I am not gambling at all. He's finished.
George, I think it's way too early to tell if we are heading toward either Hillary or Obama. The M$M would like us to. That much is clear. However, Edwards is positioned very well in early polls in the key states.
I am not a Christian fundamentalist and haven't gone to church in years. There is more that one way to help the poor. New Orleans is in a democrat state and is a democrat city. I don't trust democrats with solving poverty as we see their results right there.
You must be joking. I think most Americans know who was at fault for the disaster that Katrina caused in New Orleans. Bush totally ignored the situation. "Heckuva job, Brownie." So, if you don't support Democratic efforts to change policy so that the poor are helped and you don't go to church, so maybe don't participate in faith-based efforts to help the poor, what ARE you actually doing to help the poor? What gives you the moral authority to judge John Edwards?
I am a member of the voting public.
As far as the New Orleans nightmare I still find it weird that democrats used all those school buses to get the people to the polls to vote for Democrats but couldn't think to use them to evacuate their constituents before the biggest disaster of our time.
Kathleen Blanco was caught on tape apologizing and regretting her decision not to give Bush the authority needed to call the shots after the disaster. And where was the democrats safety plan to evacuate their citizens? They were in power!!!! Oh yeah Democrats need to fall back on Republicans for EVERYTHING. I do blame Bush for assuming the Democrat Government down there knew what they were doing. I certainly don't what them calling the shots for me.....
Regardless, the idea that either major party is solely responsible for the post Katrina disaster is ludicrous. Louisiana state and local government did really stupid things. The federal government did really stupid things. The public officials who screwed things up came from both parties. The tragedy has nothing to do with political parties and everything to do with greed, sloth, and ineptitude with a little contempt for the poor and dark colored folks thrown in for fun.
Nippy it was reference to the fact that the Louisiana Government was run from top to bottom by Democrats. How many times have you heard the media refer to the previous congress as the "Republican Congress"? What have you finally pulled your head out of the sand? I find it hard to take seriously people who need explanations such as this.
January 30, 2007
'Democrat' - the Pejorative Adjective (Bill Press)
@ 11:27 am
I'm proud to be a Democrat, and proud to be a member of the Democratic Party. But I'm sick and tired of being insulted by George W. Bush.
Take his State of the Union address. This should have been a time for reaching out to the other side. Bush pretended to do so. Instead, he ended up insulting Democrats by saying: "I want to congratulate the new Democrat majority."
No, no, no. The noun is "Democrat." The adjective is "Democratic." And he knows it. But Bush deliberately chose to poke Democrats in the eye, as Republicans have been doing for a long time. Ronald Reagan did it. So did Dick Armey, Newt Gingrich, and Tom DeLay. Now it's George W. Bush.
Tony Snow insists the president meant no disrespect to Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats. Oh, no? Then why did the official, typed script of the speech read "Democratic majority" — yet he said "Democrat majority?"
And, besides, if Bush meant no disrespect, why does he continue the same, deliberate, semantic slur? This weekend, the president's slated to speak at the Democrats' congressional retreat. Yet his official schedule lists the event as remarks to the "House Democrat Caucus."
Please! Will the next president of the United States agree to speak correct English?
http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/01/30/democrat-the-pejorative-adjective/
BTW, I've been registered declines to state all my life. Both major parties are corrupt and the minor parties generally are single issue oriented. I've given up on either major political party offering me any inducement to support it. They're all beholden to lobbyists and the major corporations they represent. Why do you think big corporations generally donate to both parties? I like to think of it as swilling from the same trough.
As a registered Democrat, however, I do want to point out that the lobbyists and corporations consistently give LESS money overall to the Democratic Party than the Republican Party, and in my opinion, that's because the Democratic Party is not quite as much for sale.
By the way, I loved your comment that you know a noun when you see one. That gave me a good laugh. Thanks.
Jeff, your story is strange. First you're from a Catholic family and worried about attracting converts and you're hysterical about something an ex-employee of Edwards' once said outside of his employment, then you haven't gone to church in years. First you say sling a lot of insults at Edwards, then you say you'll vote for Edwards if he gets the nomination, then you say you're a Republican. Your story seems to me to keep changing.
Additionally, I find it very strange that someone has nothing better to do than to hang out waiting for comments on an article about someone you clearly don't like in order to relentlessly try to hijack the topic for your own purposes. If Edwards annoys you that much, why not ignore him?
Quite frankly, I consider your efforts to hijack this topic to discuss tangential ones that are only loosely related to be verging on harassment. Either you thrive on negativity, or perhaps you are a paid Republican troll. I've always been curious. How much do paid trolls make?
I agree, the Democrats receive less from corporate donors and it's probably because the donors see a smaller return on their "investment."
I think Edwards is a very attractive candidate. I just hope people aren't so fed up with the length of the campaign that the evangelicals and other highly organized groups will be the only one to vote. What did Will Rodgers say? Something like "I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat."
The fact that you can't grasp who I am after all I said makes me understand why you vote "democrat".
I am a non-practicing confirmed Catholic, from a very religious family who are in fact mostly democrats. I have converted 4 people from my family to vote "republican" using examples of anti-Christian bigotry. I said I am so confident that Edwards WONT win the nomination that if he does I would vote for him, in shame, for being wrong. It would not be because I support him....
"""I find it very strange that someone has nothing better to do than to hang out waiting for comments on an article about someone you clearly don't like in order to relentlessly try to hijack the topic for your own purposes. If Edwards annoys you that much, why not ignore him?"""
I am a recovering liberal and this is my therapy. If you really didn't want me to respond you would keep questioning me......at least that's what common sense tells me. "Democrat" logic is a tricky thing.
""" Of course using "democrat" as an adjective is intended to irritate. Unfortunately it makes the people who do it look stupid."""
Actually Nippy my use of "democrat" as an adjective isn't ungrammatical in modern English. I will continue to use democrat as an adjective and You will continue to be anal and complain about it. We can leave it at that.
**********************************************
Issues of grammar
Some believe that the use of the noun "Democrat" as an adjective is ungrammatical on the grounds that "Democratic Party" is not a proper noun, but a noun modified by an adjective.[19] Using a noun as a modifier of another noun is not grammatically incorrect in modern English in the formation of a compound noun, i.e. "shoe store," "school bus," "peace movement," "Senate election," etc. Americans commonly speak of "the Iraq war" rather than "the Iraqi war."[20][21] Others see the issue, however, as not one of grammar, but rather whether the party is to be only called what it calls itself, or also by what its opponents call it.
The use of "Democrat Party" could be part of a broader linguistic trend. As one linguist explained, "We're losing our inflections – the special endings we use to distinguish between adjectives and nouns, for instance. There's a tendency to modify a noun with another noun rather than an adjective. Some may speak of "the Ukraine election" rather than 'the Ukrainian election' or 'the election in Ukraine,' for instance. It's 'the Iraq war' rather than 'the Iraqi war,' to give another example."[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(phrase)
Main Entry: dem·o·crat
Pronunciation: 'de-m&-"krat
Function: noun
1 a : an adherent of democracy b : one who practices social equality
2 capitalized : a member of the Democratic party of the United States
No alternate part of speech.
Mind you, I don't use "impact" or "transition" as verbs either. I know that language evolves. E. g. the second person singlar pronouns in English used to be different. I think my junior high English teachers would have said expressions like "senate election" have an implied preposition. I think they would have said it to make the containing sentence easier to diagram. :)
You said to Don: "I'm ducking. Well, actually, I don't really think this current spat between Hillary and Obama is going to be a big deal in the long run. But I certainly hope that Democratic primary voters, and then the American people, will see that Edwards is the best candidate.
The electorate in general is getting wised up -- IN SPITE OF the major corporate media.
Bob Herbert, NYTimes columnist, was recently interviewed by Amy Goodman on DemocracyNow.org. He had some interesting things to say about the latest Clinton-Obama flap and how the media and the "money machines" are steam rolling in to STOP debate of the issues.
Fortunately, we have websites where we can go directly to candidates, instead of waiting for them to come to our town. Also, most of us have enough common sense to be able to read between the lines of the media and to assess websites accordingly. John Edwards has been forthright, forthcoming and more specific than any other candidate on the issues. I shouldn't have to say it, but he's the ONLY one who is putting himself out there for all to hear and see.
DemocracyNow.org is a good source [one of the few sources] of reliable, behind the scenes, information on issues we should be debating.
I just posted the second edition of my multimedia links on John Edwards.
Perhaps Jeff would like to come over there and tell me again about how much "Democrats hate Christians." (Jeff's words.) I think John Edwards would object to that statement (something in my new list of links tells me that).
David Kuo: "What has it taught you about God?"
Edwards: "That God will be there when you need him. That I believe in a benevolent and merciful God. That when things seem at their worst and their lowest, he will always be there for you. That no matter what you do, he will forgive you. And it is important to ask for his forgiveness. It's important in my case to have a personal relationship with the Lord, so that I pray daily and I feel that relationship all the time. And when I'm faced with difficult decisions, which I regularly am, I very often go to him in prayer."