Today, Friday, January 18, 2008, you can be part of really taking back the power in this country from an arrogant media elite. The media and "pundits" seem to believe that the American people can't think for themselves and don't deserve honest and fair journalism.
A grassroots effort unaffiliated with any campaign or organization has sprung up to show the media that while they don't take their responsibilities as journalists seriously, we take our role as citizens very seriously.
Today, we're going to send them a message in the language they understand: money.
We must not let them make our decisions for us by tailoring the news coverage to fit their agenda. Study after study has shown that the media is deliberately erasing one candidate, John Edwards, from the news. Let's make sure the media finally understand that they are there to report the news, not to create it.
By thrusting John Edwards's visibility forward with financial support that makes the press do a double take, we are effectively slapping the collective faces of the reporters who think they know what they're talking about; of the pundits who think they know what's best; of the blowhards like Bill O'Reilly who dismissively wave off our candidates as phonies and losers.
I'm going to contribute what I can to John Edwards today, because I believe his ideas deserve to be heard just as those of Clinton or Obama.
Please give what you think is fair, whether you support John Edwards or not, to send a message to the media. Go to the secure contribution page at the John Edwards website (https://www.johnedwards.com/...) and be part of this grassroots effort.
Thank you, for sending a message, for standing tall for a fair and honest press.
Please spread this message far and wide.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 14
Edwards is a good man but other than the hair cut a little too boring for media coverage which is a shame because he is very much for the people. Would be a great president.
Edwards is far and away the best choice for president. Unfortunately, the sex and race factors are eclipsing his message. I hope this effort makes the difference.
The reason the media is not covering him (and they're not) is much more sinister than because it would be exciting to have a woman president or an African American president. By the way, the Project for Excelleng in Journalism has measured the coverage of Edwards vs. the other Democratic Candidates, and this is what they found:
So this is not anyone's imagination that there's an attempt to shut him out of coverage.
The reason for it is because he has spoken out against corporate influence on government. The big corporations that run the media don't want that. Also, many of them are Republican owned, and guess what? They don't like Edwards because he would win in a general election.
So if we want our democracy back, an important part of that is honest media. Otherwise we're just being fed propaganda. And if we want honest media, at some point we need to be intelligent enough and bold enough to reject the media's spin and vote in favor of our own interests.
I agree he would make a wonderful president.
A candidate needs 2025 pledged delegates to win the nomination. In other words, the difference in delegate count right now is miniscule and a win in NV or SC would likely put Edwards ahead.
Secondly, even if he does not win, having a lot of delegates at the convention gives him a lot of power to press his agenda for change. So even if he does not become the nominee, he can make deals with the other candidates to make them adopt some of his plans. So that's a really big reason to support him whether or not he ends up winning.
They're not bad candidates but Edwards doesn't seem to get as many questions as the others...does he?
Good luck, btw. We've been doing these things for Ron Paul for months. We raised $4 mil on Nov. 5, $6 mil on Dec. 16 (record), and a couple smaller ones recently for a couple mil each.
Know what happens? They report it on the news as "Qixotic, dark-horse, long-shot candidate Ron Paul takes in record fundraising, but still won't win nomination."
I'm sure they'll do the same with Edwards.
I think John Edwards would be almost as disasterous a president as Hillary or Obama. But at least his heart seems to be in the right place. I just don't think it's occurred to him yet that socialism can never work -- if what you're aiming for is freedom and prosperity, that is.
But the media elite hate him, so that to me is in indicator that he's at least doing something right.