Joe Q.'s Comments

Edwards Comes Out Strongly Against Media Consolidation, Challenges Other Candidates by John Edwards

Aug 2, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 18

Joe Q. Aug 4, 2007, 9:15pm EDT

I respectfully disagree with the assertion that where we get news is "inane". Multiple sources of information is extremely important and the "fourth estate" has historically been essential in issues of accountability of our elected officials. From a sociological perspective if one is able to control the language of an idea, then in essence that one has controlled the entire idea, has power over it. Consolidating news organizations does not add resources to this endeavor, it limits it, ensuring fewer voices control the language and discussion of ideas. For the record I did not approve of the CNN/TIME/AOL merger either which was in my opinion a disaster for all concerned and happened under Clinton's watch.
The difference between Bill Maher and Keith Olbermann and Fox News Channel and its hosts Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Gibson, Hume, et al, is that Maher and Olbermann do not hide under the guise of pretending to be the objective standard. Fox News's trademarked tagline is "Fair and Balanced" when objectively FNC is clearly NOT that. O'Reilly's show is called the "NO SPIN ZONE" (when in fact O'Reilly's show is ALL about Bill O'Reilly's spin-it's why he does TALKING POINTS! LOL) Neil Cavuto's "Common Sense" additions to the FNC website has nothing in common with the principles of Thomas Paine and implies objective understandings (which is what common sense actually is) and yet under that title he communicates his own blustery opinion. He's entitled to have and share those opinion but it is about truth in trade. It is about saying you are about objectivity and yet doing anything but being objective.
It is long past time for FNC and its programming was called out on that issue.
It is LONG past time.

Bill Maher is a comedian. He does stand up acts. He writes humorous books (if one finds him funny it is humorous, you would find his work under humor).
Keith Olbermann's show is called COUNTDOWN. He has the "worlds' worst person" feature. He has his own editorial dialogue. He does not imply or pretend to be objective when presenting his opinions. This is the difference between Maher and FNC and those in control of the microphones there.

When Keith Olbermann refers to Rush LImbaugh he says "Comedian Rush Limbaugh". Maher deserves the same title and if Fox News called itself the Conservative News network or the Republican network i would have no issue with it.

John Edwards Wants to Lower Your Taxes by Laura Serena aka AstroGirl

Jul 27, 2007 | rating: 7.8 | comments: 7

Joe Q. Jul 28, 2007, 4:23pm EDT

An excellent plan. Thanks for posting it AG

John Edwards and ACORN by Laura Serena aka AstroGirl

Jul 5, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 25

Joe Q. Jul 8, 2007, 9:44am EDT

What is remarkable is that suddenly NOW the idea that illegal immigration has
created a scenario where the "poor and working class are in perhaps the
biggest fight of our lives" when the topic hasnt been touched since 1986 is
a testament to the neo-con talking points getting out there
for wedge issue 08.

We are literally a nation of immigrants already and people legally arrive
in the US and get jobs and this falls under Robert F's definition of outsourcing.
Outsourcing is the common vernacular for "offshoring" which is the main
issue of discussion when one addresses the outsourcing issue.

The story of identity theft in the Lou Dobbs report should focus on the
fact that it is IDENTITY THEFT which is rampant and is an important topic
regardless of whether an illegal alien did it or a criminal within the US did it.
Hoping someone else becomes a victim of a crime whether its identity
theft or any other crime does not serve the purpose of furthering an agenda.

The main issue, however, is that the TRILLIONS of dollars being spent on the Iraq
war will have more of an impact on our lives and benefits Americans deserve
and need more than this illegal immigration issue.

The Democratic party consistently attempts to assist the poor and working
families compared to the Republican party which attempts to assist the
wealthy and priviledged but use wedge issues like this one to keep their
rank and files full.

John Edwards and ACORN by Laura Serena aka AstroGirl

Jul 5, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 25

Joe Q. Jul 7, 2007, 7:55pm EDT

Coming from Irish ancestry the "No Irish Need Apply" rings solidy in my ears as I listen (or read) the debate on immigration. The current laws are different from the laws in place at the time my ancestors arrived on US soil and I could not allege that my ancestors were more worthy than those arriving now because regardless they weren't welcome when the arrived by those who were struggling and felt jobs and benefits were being taken away from them by my ancestors.

What is striking to me NOW is that a very large percentage of the people who currently vehemently argue an extremely strict "jail them, then send them back" policy (which is really financially unviable) are struggling to make it in this economy and perceive jobs and benefits are being witheld from THEM supposedly in favor of a horde of immigrants who are taking them away. (not making any judgments on any particular posters here at all, just the people I've been able to actually TALK to on this issue).

If those arguing this "jail and and send em back" policy couldnt get their much valued job in the restaurant or agricultural industry they should certainly share their story. I haven't heard one yet.

The cost of the Iraq war was (in September 2006) 2 Billion a WEEK
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2006/09/28/cost_of_iraq_war_nearly_2b_a_week/

As of January07 it was 2.1 billion that was PRE-SURGE dollars folks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/business/17leonhardt.html?ex=1326690000&en=7f221bfce7a6408c&ei=5090

The larger picture is far more important to understanding this issue.
The war in Iraq is not making the US safer and costs more than benefit programs combined that could be funded for at least a decade.

But welcome to wedge issue 08.

If "gay marriage", abortion and stem cell research kept you up at night in 04, do you feel like you're living in a "culture of life" nowadays? Anyone? Bueller?

AG has a point when she says that unless you are a Native American, you have no inherent claim to this land and I'll put an even finer point to it when I say that there is no legal justification for the "Trail of Tears" beyond "Might makes Right" and we'll all just have to deal with that.

I don't have the silver bullet that will solve the whole immigration issue but I can smell a cooked up controversy a mile away. This issue didnt become really big until 06 but no immigration policy has really been dealt with since Reagan in 86. But we're still in Iraq and the repubicans may lose in 08 so let's focus on immigration NOW.

Or we can try to salvage our country....they choice is ours.

Cacoethes Scribendi:Libby Prison Sentence Commutation Exposes More Hypocrisy by Troy Stouffer

Jul 5, 2007 | rating: 9.2 | comments: 125

Joe Q. Jul 7, 2007, 6:48pm EDT

GWB
1) appointed the judge who sentenced Libby within the federal guidelines
2) appointed the special prosecutor who prosecuted the case and then requested the punishment within the guidelines
3) appointed 2 supreme court justices who held in a similar case that 33 months was NOT excessive
4) is instrumental in pushing a current crime bill that literally STRIPS judges from imposing lesser sentences than those found in the federal guidelines.

GWB commutes the sentence because it is "excessive".

The funny part of this whole matter is the alleged "reason" why he commutes a sentence when he tacitly accepts the fact that Libby is guilty.

This is why the commutation is not supported by anyone other than the fox-addicted.

John Edwards Calls for Action to Stop Global Warming by Laura Serena aka AstroGirl

Jul 6, 2007 | rating: 9.4 | comments: 10

Joe Q. Jul 7, 2007, 6:15pm EDT

"It's time for the President of the United States to ask Americans to be patriotic about something other than war."

So true.
Our greatest president in the 20th century (FDR) was attacked for being wealthy and standing up for the poor as if the two were mutually exclusive.

Whereas our worst president of the 21st century is the epitome of hypocrisy. I find hypocrisy to be a president who puts forth a crime bill that strips federal judges the power of reducing sentences and mandating only the use of federal guidelines or HIGHER, appointing a no-nonsense judge and appointing a no-nonsense special prosecutor and then when your lackey is caught obstructing justice, prosecuted by that same special prosecutor and sentenced to 30 months in prison which is within the federal guidelines by your appointed judge, deciding to commute the sentence under the really weak assertion that the decision was ambiguously "excessive" (after the supreme court that you stacked with your own judges decided in a similar case that 33 months is NOT excessive)

The hypocrisy of this failed president is proven WEEKLY nowadays.

The hair thing (the best the coulterites can come up with) is a non-troversy that means nothing to the sad fox-addicted.

Thanks for the post, AG

Edwards backs up rhetoric with action by Scott Goldstein

Apr 12, 2007 | rating: 8.4 | comments: 18

Joe Q. Apr 13, 2007, 12:30pm EDT

I fully support John Edwards' position on this matter. The campaign is attempting to tackle the problem with actions, not just rhetoric. That's laudable. It appears some simply wish to personally attack the messenger on other matters which is fine because if that's the best there is the campaign will do quite well.

A Photo by Joe Q.

Apr 8, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 2

Joe Q. Apr 9, 2007, 5:06pm EDT

Get ready for MORE AG! More on the way (in fact in probably two days I'll post the next three or four)

A Photo by Joe Q.

Mar 26, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 2

Joe Q. Mar 26, 2007, 8:46pm EDT

Thanks AG. I'm glad gather has the images large enough to read without having to click on it. Wish the JRE blog did that as well! Let me know if you saw the "casting for cheney one." didnt post it on the gather yet. But i will

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 25, 2007, 4:47pm EDT

Thanks, AG. You know I've gone back and forth on whether to continue the light hearted thing I was doing, or whether I could make a more classic depiction of the JRE storyline/bio. After hearing the news I started working on a more classic depiction (and I'll work on that some more too I guess) but today I'm going to submit on the JRE blog a blogtoon that is actually just comic than serious so people can have a laugh.

Elizabeth. by John Edwards

Mar 24, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 17

Joe Q. Mar 24, 2007, 6:34pm EDT

Our family supports you and Elizabeth during this time and in the future.

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 23, 2007, 7:01am EDT

It is unfortunate that this point has to be explained to you but married people do not look for ways to give their spouses and parents of their children cancer or diseases.

But if we stick to the issue about poverty, this topic deserves more discussion and warrants a separate article to outline thoroughly the information that you seek. So I will do that when I have time. please use this link as a resource for some information in the meantime. http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/poverty/

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 22, 2007, 6:24pm EDT

Pretty classless Rich, but that appears to be a trademark of your postings here.
But I will answer some of your questions.
First of all I am not sure what "income distribution" idea you're referring to. Now if you are referring to "redistribution of wealth" which is a neo-conservative talking point, often that idea is put forth whenever affluent people are required to pay taxes they owe. To answer the first issue: No, John Edwards is not a socialist.
To answer the second question, about organizations he has set up please refer to www.wade.org and www.onecorps.com. That should answer your questions there.
To answer the third basic issue regarding where John Edwards came from, he was born in Seneca, South Carolina. His father had to borrow fifty dollars to get him home from the hospital. They moved from town to town depending on where his father could find work at the textile mills in the South. When John got older he pushed a broom in one of those mills. He did overcome adverse conditions. His point is that the America he grew up in with the opportunities he had is not the same America that my children are growing up in or will have. If necessary I can write a whole blog about the disparity between the working conditions for poor and middle class people in America in the 50's and 60s versus today but I can sum a basic issue up in a few words: unions assisted the middle class during those times and helped lift hundreds of thousands of people out of poverty during those decades. Since Ronald Reagan, the systematic attack on unions that persist to this day in addition to the globalization of the market place has eroded a lot of the gains the union movement made. As Jim Webb put it succinctly in a speech he gave
during the time we are discussing "the average corporate CEO made 20 times what the average worker did; today, it's nearly 400 times. In other words, it takes the average worker more than a year to make the money that his or her boss makes in one day." I hope the point is well made.
As to Elizabeth Edwards, read Saving Graces, then get back to me.

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 22, 2007, 6:28am EDT

Ha! That's funny, Michael.

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 21, 2007, 11:38pm EDT

David, I appreciate your thoughts and comments. I've read your work here on Gather. To address one particular point, it's never been fully explained why a wealthy individual who fights for workers rights, universal healthcare, and who will fight for the poor and the middle class in a political office is somehow "hypocrital" by having a big house. A politician does not make a vow of poverty, nor could one in today's climate. Some of the greatest champions for the underpriviledged in America were wealthy people. FDR was a great champion and world leader and he was incredibly wealthy. The pundits who complain about JRE's house are also wealthy but unlike JRE, they havent put forth any plans for helping under priviledged people. I am far more concerned about wealthy people born into wealth who dont seem to care at all about the underpriviledged.
To finish off the house thing bear this in mind: The description of the JRE house was that it was 28,200 square feet of connected space but that the main house was 10,400 square feet and has two garages. In order to the large square feet figure you have to add two other barn like buildings that are connected to the house by a covered walkway. Take a look at the photo of the building here: http://carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3848.
Tell me why this would be any different than Crawford texas other than this sits on 102-acre estate whereas Crawford is a 1583 acre (6.4 km²) estate
In reality, this house thing is not a real issue, its a NON-troversy.
I hope you look into JRE further when making up your mind on who to support!
Thanks once again for responding

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 21, 2007, 7:36pm EDT

Dale, that's right. November 2006 is only the precursor to 2008.

Remember (all factual information from wikipedia below:)
"(for the house: The final result was a thirty-seat pickup for the Democrats, including the pickup of the Vermont At-Large seat, previously held by Independent Bernie Sanders who caucused with the Democrats. Democrats defeated twenty-two Republican incumbents and won nine open Republican-held seats. Republicans won no seats previously held by Democrats in either the House or the Senate, and it was the largest seat gain for the Democrats since the 1982 elections.
(For the Senate) Democratic candidates defeated six Republican incumbents. No Democratic incumbents were defeated.
(For Governors) Democrats won open Republican-held governorships in Colorado, Arkansas, Ohio, New York, and Massachusetts and defeated one GOP incumbent Robert Ehrlich of Maryland, while retaining all of their currently-held seats.

By the way I deleted a duplicate posting of this article. I hope you enjoy the next blogtoons. We're dealing with trying to cast "Dick Cheney". Will post it tomorrow!

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 21, 2007, 6:09pm EDT

"Im not peeing on Edwards (although I have to admit that would be fun)"

...and none of us here question your sexual orientation. Truly.

A John Edwards Houseparty by Joe Q.

Mar 20, 2007 | rating: 9.5 | comments: 23

Joe Q. Mar 21, 2007, 6:25am EDT

That's an excellent point, Michael. Yes, the house party has been done for documentaries, and political documentaries especially in recent years, but i hadnt seen a candidate do it.
I'm so glad you're planning on attending a JRE house party locally. I hope it goes well!

Multimedia Recap of John Edwards news by Laura Serena aka AstroGirl

Feb 23, 2007 | rating: 8.6 | comments: 66

Joe Q. Mar 13, 2007, 10:40am EDT

Maybe in a month or so (after mulitmedia recap3!) you should do a "best of" multi-media segment (top ten or something) for people just browsing. just a thought.

A Photo by Joe Q.

Mar 13, 2007 | rating: 9 | comments: 2

Joe Q. Mar 13, 2007, 10:02am EDT

Thanks, AG! From the posts on the JRE blog, apparently Paul is not alone!