Des Moines Register Editorial Board declares Edwards not Corporate friendly enough

[itsrobert]

I guess their endorsement of the corporate candidate says it all.

[MadBadger]

1. That part disgusted me

[babylonsister]

2. Wow. That explains a lot! nt

[Bullet1987]

3. It's indictive probably of the changing of the editors from 2004 until now...

[Donnachaidh]

4. is it a locally owned paper?

Or is it owned by the leeches at the upper 2 per cent?

[itsrobert]

6. It's own by Gannett

the same owners of the McDonald's newspaper, USA Today.

[rucky]

46. That's all we need to know. n/t

[Zueda]

5. What I found sickening was this...

Unfortunately, for many Americans, perceptions of Clinton, now 60, remain stuck in a 1990s time warp. She’s regarded as the one who fumbled health-care reform as a key policy adviser to her husband, President Bill Clinton, or as a driving force in the bitter standoff between the “Clinton machine” and the “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

emphasis mine...

Why does the Register hate Americans?

[K Gardner]

11. ::cracking up at last line of post::: n/t

[rocktivity]

7. Newspapers are corporations, too.

:evilgrin:
rocknation

[MonkeyFunk]

8. LOL

the lack of graciousness in some people surely is remarkable here.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

9. considering they endorsed Edwards in 2004

[OzarkDem]

23. Someone must have offered them a good deal

this time around.

[JDPriestly]

25. They endorsed Edwards in 2004 because they thought he was

the most conservative, the most business-friendly of the candidates. Now they see that he really is a populist and they don't like him any more. That is what they say, not what I say. Read the endorsement. You will see that the Des Moines Register backed Hillary because she is the most business friendly and least progressive of the candidates.

If you like Nancy Pelosi, you will love Hillary. That is the message.

[MadBadger]

10. Why do we have to be gracious?

[MonkeyFunk]

14. You don't have to be

in fact, I'm not sure my system could take the shock if you were.

[annie1]

15. yeah, they woulda been all hootin' and hollering if it had been edwards...

or obama. but now it's all "oh, they're corp. suckups" lol. Lame.

[MadBadger]

16. Do you know what I think is lame? You suckin up to a war monger in John McCain

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3843664&mesg_id=3843728

Now that is fuckin lame.

[Inspired]

34. LOL!!!!! McCain is crazier than a freaking loon!

[rocktivity]

42. But they ADMITTED that Edwards isn't a big enough corporate suckup for them!

And from a paper that's part of a Gannett media conglomerate, why are you so surprised?

:crazy:
rocknation

[JDPriestly]

24. The Des Moines Register stated that it did not endorse

Edwards because of his anti-corporate (read anti-corruption) stance. The editors of the Des Moines Register dared not displease the newspaper's advertisers. Clinton is the first choice of the corporate (read corrupt) media.

What companies now lead the "business community"? What companies is the Des Moines Register so concerned about working with? Halliburton, Eli Lilly, Blackwater, the various health insurance companies and the rest of the funders of the right-wing world. The Des Moines Register is primarily worried about getting along with the business elite -- the very people that are keeping the repressive Bush regime in power. In that the Des Moines Register is no different from the rest of the MSM which is trying to push Hillary on us. Thank heavens we have the internet and can learn about the other, better candidates.

Sorry, but if you think you are backing a progressive candidate when you back Hillary, you are mistaken. Read the Des Moines Register's statement. There you will learn the truth about your candidate: she is pro-business; she is Republican-Lite. It's fine if you back her because you want a Republican-Lite president. But, please be honest about your candidate. Hillary is the most corporate (read corruption) friendly of the Democratic candidates.

Hillary backs the use of torture. Her husband pushed the European Union to change its laws to weaken European privacy protections in order to allow surveillance of the electronic communications of citizens of European countries. Hillary is slightly better than Bush, but not much. The Des Moines Register is endorsing her because she is the most business friendly of the Democrats. The Des Moines Register says that, not me.

[Andy823]

30. Great post

I think their remarks may help Edwards more than their endorsment would have! :thumbsup:

[tired_old_fireman]

37. I know, isn't anti-corporate a good thing for a democrat?

The endorsement also made Obama sound more appealing to me than Clinton in a strange way. I used to have Obama low on my list, but the whole argument about playing it safe with Clinton's experience brought up memories of playing it safe with Kerry in '04. How did that work out for America?

[cascadiance]

41. BINGO!

[itsrobert]

43. Great post

:yourock:

[K Gardner]

12. And this is exactly the way it needs to be "spun".. hate to sound calculating, but %*$&, I do NOT

want to have to listen to Tweety chirping about this all week...

[ClarkUSA]

13. Same applies to Obama - I noted their endorsement seemed to applaud politics as usual

The part about Hillary being the one with the "skill" to navigate the halls of Washington power politics said it all.

You do know that Bill and Hillary wined and dined the Des Moines Register editors and staff two weeks ago and Hillary dined with Yepsen last week for
two hours, right?

Politics as usual wins another endorsement. Fuck 'em.

[Cha]

33. This is the lyin' excuse they

gave for endorsing hillary..

"The choice, then, comes down to preparedness: Who is best prepared to confront the enormous challenges the nation faces — from ending the Iraq war to shoring up America’s middle class to confronting global climate change?"

Do you recall hillary being concerned about those 3 issues the Des Moines paper gave as why they endorsed her? I don't.

[JDPriestly]

40. Absolutely! The Des Moines Register's endorsement

was simply pro-Republican, and Hillary is the most Republican of the Democrats.

[creeksneakers2]

17. That was the best part

"Edwards was our pick for the 2004 nomination. But this is a different race, with different candidates. We too seldom saw the “positive, optimistic” campaign we found appealing in 2004."

That's just what I've been saying all along.

[Zueda]

18. I wonder if Edwards is gonna come out swinging at Clinton now? nt

[cal04]

19. Campaigns Woo 3 Iowans for Paper’s Endorsement

The other day, as his sport utility vehicle idled outside, former President Bill Clinton held forth on a sofa in the publisher’s suite at The Des Moines Register, explaining why he believed Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton should win the newspaper’s coveted endorsement.

Only nine days earlier, the Clintons had played host to a few top editors for drinks and appetizers at one of Des Moines’s fashionable new restaurants. But on this visit, Mr. Clinton was the closer in the exhaustive campaign of persuasion. Even after an hour he had not made his full case to Laura Hollingsworth, the new publisher, so he called back later in the day.

“Hi, it’s Bill Clinton,” he said, speaking slowly after reaching only voice mail. “I’m just calling to thank Laura for the meeting today. There was one more point I wanted to make, but I’ll keep trying to find her. Anyway, I enjoyed it, and I appreciate the time. Thanks.”

(snip)
Presidential candidates of both parties have long dutifully appeared before the editorial board of The Register, Iowa’s most influential newspaper. But this year the Democrats, particularly Mrs. Clinton and Senator Barack Obama, have gone to extraordinary lengths to win over the publisher, the editor and the editorial page editor ahead of endorsements — one for the Republican field and one for the Democrats — expected to be published on Sunday, 18 days before the caucuses that kick off the voting to select the parties’ nominees
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/us/politics/15register.html?ref=politics

[williesgirl]

20. That solidifies it - I'm voting for Edwards!!!!!!!!!!!!! rec'd

[Cha]

21. And they were all pissy because

Kucinich didn't have an office office..just a home office.

[OzarkDem]

22. They want media consolidation rules lifted

Expect all the newspapers who are part of corporate media chains to endorse the candidates who will give them what they want.

That some of the Dem candidates are willing to sell out and allow media consolidation in exchange for endorsements says a lot about them.

[Quixote1818]

26. Big Kick and R!!! nt

[jenmito]

27. But they also said:

"We too seldom saw the “positive, optimistic” campaign we found appealing in 2004."

[K Gardner]

31. Geez.. this endorsement is RIFE with contradition ! n/t

[jenmito]

32. It really is. n/t

[Kucinich4America]

44. Well of course they seldom see it......

Since the whore media focuses all their attention on only two candidates, how would they see Edward's campaign at all?

Or Kucinich's campaign? Or Richardson's? Or Biden's? Or Dodd's? Or Gravel's?

[MadBadger]

28. They were willing to overlook Clinton's negativity I guess.

[jenmito]

29. Good point. I'm sure Iowans won't overlook it, though.

[BeyondGeography]

36. It's not even mentioned...so she's ready to lead after she's pissed off

all but her most loyal followers. It's the fundamental flaw in the whole endorsement, which is why this too shall pass.

[Horse with no Name]

35. The rag that excluded Kucinich

Who gives a shit what they think?

[MadBadger]

38. Edwards should campaign using this.

[tex-wyo-dem]

50. Totally agree, JE should use their reason to support Hil...

To his advantage. He should also mention who exactly owns the paper and why they might want to endorse a corporate freindly candidate...do a little connecting the dots for people.

[K Gardner]

39. Kicking for relevance

:dem: :kick:

[Little Star]

45. Wow! Not Corporate friendly enough?That's a bad thing in Iowa?

[mod mom]

47. I hope the American people had enough of corporatism to stand up to it & demand

regulation. De-regulation is running our economy into the ground for the purpose of profiteering of the few at the very top.

[tex-wyo-dem]

48. "not corporate friendly enough"...

Gosh, I'll have to say I agree with their opinion. I mean, we all know the corporations need all the help and welfare they can get. I'm sure that if JE became president their fragile existence would be severly compromised...massive loss of habitat, rampant poaching, etc.

:sarcasm:

[MethuenProgressive]

49. More negativity from ObamaNation.

:puke:

[MadBadger]

52. You realize this is about Edwards

[polichick]

51. So, are Iowans "corporate" then?? nt