Edwards versus Mushiness

[Armstead]

That's what the nomination process is boiling down to, IMO.

I like Obama. I sorta like Hillary and could tolerate her as President if she's the only choice over being trapped in a room full of skunks.

But neither of them is really getting to the core of what this election should be about. We're at a historic turning point, and they are trying to mush it up.

Hillary says the only real problem is that not enough people are benefiting from the success of Big Bizness and Wall St. so we should do some tweaking to encourage them to share the wealth a little bit more. And maybe give the middle class some packaged programs -- like a cash gift -- to lend us a hand.

Barak seems to be saying "We're a better nation. We just need to heal our divisions. And I am the one who can do that healing." He talks about the abuses of special interests some, but, like Hillary, he also seems to lack the beef in terms of actually taming these beasts.

Other than Kucinich, Edwards is the candidate who is really pointing out the truth. It's not merely that Big Business isn't being fair enough. It isn't that average and disadvantaged Americans need a little bonus check. It isn't simply that we al;l need to be nice.

Edwards is pointing out the basic Big Truth, which is that over the last 35 years our country has undergone a fundamental structural deformation that has skewed the entire system against the majority. This has distorted the overall balance of power, and has siphoned money from the bottom and middle up to the top. It has also given the Elites far too much power to shape our policies and actions as a society.

The simple fact that Edwards points this out in stark terms is a major step forward. We can't deal with problems without admitting the scope of the problem. Acknowledging it is the first step.

More importantly, almost everyone recognizes this problem in the gut. It's not simply a "left" position anymore. Anyone with any sense realizes it. That is why, IMO, it is also an opportunity for the Democrats to take back the White House and strengh=then their position in Congress in a meaningful way -- IF they seize the moment.

Most likely, once elected, Edwards would end up doing his share of bargaining, negotiating and compromising. That's the reality any leader has to do.

However, by framing his message as he has, he is articulating something that the other candidates are trying to downplay or gloss over. And, by running on this message, Edwards knows he is putting himself in a position where he would have to start from a basic position that the majority should have the upper hand over the Corporate Elite.

[MaineDem]

1. Well put! n/t

[kentuck]

2. Right on, Armstead!

It's like they live in gated communities and have no idea what has gone on in this country for the last 15 years?

[frogmarch]

3. Yes, Edwards

if elected, would have to bargain, negotiate and compromise. But he wouldn't sell us down the river. He'd be a champion for the rights of the working/middle class.

Super OP, Armstead. :kick: and Recommended.

[Hieronymus]

36. Edwards will win Iowa, and do for the common man what FDR did.

[sk8rrobert2]

56. To do what FDR did took 3 3/4 terms To say that Edwards will do

the same maybe a little much but the stage is set and There is alot of potential. I could very likely be eating my words in a few years.

[jsamuel]

4. Great read.

Thanks

[rwenos]

5. Damned Right!

I've made up my mind. It's Edwards. I'm sick of the corporatist buggery. I LOVE Big Bill, always will. But Hillary is just another sellout. Sorry.

[Armstead]

6. And we're the ones getting buggered

[European Socialist]

7. 35 years of getting kicked in the gut by cheap labor.

Edwards is Lou Dobbs without the foaming at the mouth.

[Yuugal]

54. Ha!

I love Dobbs for his "war on the middle class" rants. Even when I don't agree with him I still admire him for not just parroting the company line like the hairdo-heads we usually get on the news. He calls BS when he sees it and so does Edwards. Hillbots sure hate Dobbs because he knows what she did last summer:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cLNOSGM2jK4

[European Socialist]

70. Thanks for the link. I think Lou might run in 08 if someone...

like Edwards or DK dosen't get the nomination--and I would vote for him too, if it didn't mean putting a repuke in as a result.

[asdjrocky]

8. Great post K&R!

And Edwards said this:

"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.

[lisainmilo]

9. The truth is.....The fact is......

Edwards is our only hope for this country.....our last chance to make a stance. His message is bold, honest, and he has presented the whole package in all aspects that have compromised in this country. Anyone wondering where John Edwards stands can simply go to his website and check out "issues" http://johnedwards.com/

What have the huge corporations done? Well for starters, I believe and it is coming out that the 2000 elections were tainted, that is what big money buys! They buy a president, laws etc. GWB has significantly changed the balance of power in this country. Laws have changed to benefit few, such as No Child left behind, noted in Pams House Blend: http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/01/no-child-left-behind-bush-family.html, it was NOT for our children, it was for the Bush's wallet. Iraq, (after no WMD were found...uh duh?) was it to get Saddam? Maybe, but huge private corporations have benefitted, Halliburton/KBR, Oil Companies, Blackwater, Titan, CACI (MY TAX DOLLARS AT WORK). We all know about the healthcare loobyists don't we? In case we need a refresher here is a NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/politics/23health.html?pagewanted=print. I can't even begin to count the number of republicans going into the healthcare business as a lobbyist or manufacturer of healthcare service ( knee replacement parts, etc ). You know those expensive pills that we buy, for our heart, high cholestrol, or upper respiratory infection....etc are probably made in China? http://www.genengnews.com/articles/chitem.aspx?aid=2049&chid=4 And we were worried about the lead paint! But don't worry it seems we are cracking down a bit. http://www.in-pharmatechnologist.com/news/ng.asp?n=82048-fda-sfda-china-api
I do believe if one has a creative idea, makes a profit and becomes a successful business, so be it. That is the American dream. Usually a business is created out of a need, something that is useful and beneficial. Sometimes it is something that people simply enjoy, but once the American worker helps a corporation become successful, well basically it's a "screw you attitude" we are going overseas. This type of practice has done NOTHING for the American consumer, or the American worker, and it can be LINKED TO THE DECLINIG DOLLAR, as noted in this link from Press TV:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=35109§ionid=3510304

So is corporate greed a problem in the US? Maybe a smigeon

[asdjrocky]

13. Lisa-

That's a fantastic post. You should make it an op.

[ChiciB1]

39. I Agree... Good Points And Well Stated! Thank You... n/t

[bvar22]

10. That's how I see it too.

K&R


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[asdjrocky]

11. k

[tom_paine]

12. Exactly. Well said, Armstead!

:hi:

[MethuenProgressive]

14. Edwards v Edwards?

The mushiest of the mushy.

[asdjrocky]

15. Just look how clever it is! n/t

[elizm]

16. Bingo

"Most likely, once elected, Edwards would end up doing his share of bargaining, negotiating and compromising. That's the reality any leader has to do".

I live in South Carolina...Edwards home state. And what I don't like is that he does not own up to this truth. Just because he is no longer in the Senate and doesn't have to vote, he can pretend to be all things to all people. Sorry, but I see through it. Why anyone believes that Edwards would the more 'populist' candidate just floors me. Look at Obama's record before he ever even entered politics and look at Edwards' record before he 'decided to run for president'. Obama STARTED from "a basic position that the majority should have the upper hand over the Corporate Elite". But somehow you trust Edwards more??? I just don't get it. Can you enlighten me somehow?

[mirrera]

24. Read his book "Four Trials" he has fought major corps. for the little guy.

You really will understand who he is. I love Obama and i am reading a second book by him right now. Read the book and a lot will be more clear. He is who he is. Do any of u8s walk our talk as much as we would hope? All I know is his TALK is exactly the right talk to be having. Personally I would love to see him take Kucinich or Obama as VP.

[Clark2008]

74. For the little guy?

:rofl:

More likely for his pocketbook. He never took pro bono cases and he never took a case he didn't think he could win - regardless of how right it might have been to at least try.

I'm sorry - that smacks of greed, not populism.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

76. You have no idea how a plaintiff's lawyer works, do you?

A plaintiff's lawyer takes a case and has to pay ALL the expenses leading up to and including trial. Filing fees, expert witnesses, depositions, paralegals and trial time. He is NOT reimbursed if he loses. Therefore, he picks good cases with a good fact situation, where he has a good chance of winning. Because if he loses, he is losing his own money he puts up front.

Depositions and expert witnesses and all those costs of litigation can run into thousands of dollars. He earned his cut of the final judgments. He worked hard for it.

Example: Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General, was out jogging one day in Houston. He was hit by a tree that fell on him, and he was severely injured. He's in a wheelchair now. And he sued the homeowner for damages that paid for his medical care.

Yet, because Greg Abbott is a repuke, he wants injured people like himself to NOT be able to sue for personal injury and wants to severely restrict the ability to sue. Tort reform is a fraud.

Please notice that the Repukes who represent big business have no problem collecting huge legal fees to defend big corporations when they do wrong, yet they go after plaintiff's lawyers. They also have no problem with collectiong huge legal fees for appealing a judgment against them.

A good lawyer like Edwards will NOT take a case with a bad fact situation, known as a "dog" case. A good lawyer can tell from the fact situation if he has a good case. A good lawyer can tell if the corporation is responsible, or at least sue everyone in the chain of custody of the defective product, for example, and then dismiss the non-responsible parties one by one (called a nonsuit).He or she can tell if the plaintiff has pre-existing conditions or has vague symptoms, which mean no award, and rightly so.

There is a real quick remedy for a "dog" case. It's called a Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by the Defendant. If the judge hears the facts of the case, and rules that there are no issues of fact and no cause of action, and the suit is frivolous, he can dismiss it. Very easy to do.

I know all this because I was a legal secretary and later a court stenographer. I have seen literally thousands of hearings and trials, most of them civil. I also have a law degree.


I've seen good cases where the plaintiff was profoundly injured by the negligence of a hospital, but the jury awarded the plaintiff nothing. Then the plaintiff became a burden on the taxpayers.

John Edwards worked hard for his money, and he knows what he's doing practicing law. If he was an ambulance chaser, he'd be broke.

[mirrera]

77. Thank you! Couldn't say it better.

[Armstead]

38. You left out the end of that paragraph -- The important part

I don't expect Edwards to wave a magic wand and do all he says he will do.

However, because he is running on a progressive platform, I do expect that he will look at any negotiations and compromises from our side, rather than starting out from a position of giving in to the Big Corps and the Wall St. Elite.

I like Obama okay...But Whenever I hear Obama, I wonder "Where's the Beef?" he is too conciliatory to the forces that got us into this mess.

[balantz]

17. Edwards Is Straightforward And Focused On The Real Work

:kick: :hide:

Kick down that Washington wall Johnny!

[elizm]

18. He really kicked it down when he was there, didn't he?

:sarcasm:

[harmonicon]

42. hahahaha

[pauldg0]

33. A Hard worker he is....

Would you think that a guy who can run a low cost campaign such as John Edwards and be in the spot he is, would know how to manage our tax dollars too???!!!!

...........and the answer is an almighty YES !!!

Lets hurry up and get this man in the white house before this country goes in debt ...

Go JOHN EDWARDS 08 !!!

[polichick]

19. What would make the difference for Edwards is US...

As he says, the people are more powerful than big business ~ he'll use the bully pulpit on our behalf, with all of us standing right beside him. I don't get that message from the others.

[ellisonz]

20. Fairy Tale Edwards.

[ShaneGR]

21. Honestly, aside from the snide remark, what's wrong with a candidate making people dream?

I seem to remember Clinton, after 12 straight years of Republican rule, making people dream about the future. He inspired confidence, and his rhetoric at the time seemed outlandish.

[ellisonz]

29. "Demands"

[Jim Sagle]

31. Sorry 'bout yer empty suit of a candidate.

[ellisonz]

34. Nice mansion!

What empty suit?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3870386

[Jim Sagle]

41. Obama himself.

[indimuse]

55. Lobbyists on Obama’s ’08 payroll Wal-Mart, British Petroleum and Lockheed Martin

Lobbyists on Obama’s ’08 payroll
By Alexander Bolton and Brittney Moraski
December 20, 2007
Three political aides on Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) payroll were registered lobbyists for dozens of corporations, including Wal-Mart, British Petroleum and Lockheed Martin, while they received payments from his campaign, according to public documents.


The presence of political operatives with long client lists on Obama’s campaign contrasts with his long-held stand of campaigning against the influence of special interests. Obama has even refused to accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees (PACs).




Obama was using PAC money secretly to pay- YES PAY other members of congress who would endorse him. For all those "feelings voters" - this meant quid pro quo

i.e. I'll contribute to your future election if you endorse me. Please review Obama's statements about not taking any PAC money. This was a direct contridiction to the fact, let alone using it to push monies to other

cnadidates who ONLY chose to endorse him.

[PVnRT]

61. Such an intelligent post

Oh, wait, it wasn't. Maybe you could explain to us why Edwards is a "fairy tale" candidate.

[mirrera]

22. Agree...n/t

[K Gardner]

23. Very, very well said ! K&R

[sandyd921]

25. You've nailed it Armstead!

This is what distinguishes Edwards' message!

[depakid]

26. Pretty much my sentiments exactly

Even though I've had plenty of criticism for Edwards in the past, seems to me he's about the only one who has a reasonable shot at turning things around in America.

[Quixote1818]

27. My exact feelings! Thanks for putting my feeling in writing. nt

[onehandle]

28. Edwards is the real deal. Listen to Granny D. nt

[ozone_man]

30. Huge kick and recommend!

You really nailed it Armstead.

[eridani]

32. Big improvement over 2004, IMO

Kucinich was there first, however.

[mcg]

35. K&R.

[ChiciB1]

37. You Speak For Me... Everything You Just Said Is How I Feel...

John Edwards IS talking about real truths, but too many people don't really want to hear. But whether they want to hear it or not this stuff is beginning to hit everyone smack in their face!

I hear too many people talking and grumbling, and Edwards is giving his all to make them hear. I also realize that he can't do it alone and I'm sure he knows it too, but he DOES have a vision of what he wants to do! As he says in his speeches, it's not about him, it's about US and we need to help him help US!!

Donate, please!

[Armstead]

59. He wouldn't be a lone voice if he wins

The primaries are as much about the direction of the Democratic Party as anything.

If Edwards were able to pull it off, it would amplify all of the Democrats and independents who agree with his basic positions, and steer the party in that direction.

[ChiciB1]

72. I Did Hear A Woman On C-Span This Morning When They Were Asking

Repukes ONLY to call in about what they thought about Huckabee. What she said surprised me. She said that she WAS a PUB but didn't like any of their candidates, but maybe Huckabee or Romney "might" do something, but then she said she could see herself voting for EDWARDS because of his populist message!

The only problem we have now is getting HIS message to a broader audience, and stop the Clinton/Obama tit-for-tit, who's up, who's down, and WHY Clinton would prefer Edwards to win Iowa as opposed to Obama.

I don't know what it is, I have nothing to base this on and I have NOTHING I dislike about Obama, but when it comes to crunch time... I DON'T think it will be Obama! And if Clinton is seen as harsh and negative then Edwards could grab the ring! However, time is short and Iowa is close. I don't think ANYONE really has the REAL pulse on Iowa despite "polls" but I'm wondering about NH. Edwards needs money and while I've donated quite a few times and have bought yard sign, posters and bumper stickers, my finances are limited!! So I keep telling everyone to DONATE!

Even though I've supported him for longer than most, I do see many people changing their minds.... but he HAS to win Primaries! Living in Florida, I won't get to vote and I wonder about states like New York and Texas AND California! Clinton has tentacles with the Hollywood crowd, and Obama has some biggies too. What Edwards has are long time activists who have remained activists for years. As a matter of fact, Jackson Browne is almost my favorite male singer, and so many songs he's written have been political and "right on!" I have mentioned some of his CD's and some of the more important songs, and I would LOVE to see Joan Baez come on board too.

I've got to stop the rant... just babbling along here.

[sjdnb]

40. I am so sick of the Obama/victim vs Hillary/the shrew campaign I could puke!

Obama = waaa, waaa, waaa
Clinton = I wanna win, win, win

It's an EGO-Fest!

I'm voting for Edwards. He appears to be the only person running who cares more about us than himself.

[harmonicon]

43. really, the only one?

[sjdnb]

75. Yes ... until quite recently, Dodd, Richardson and Biden

Have played along with the DL quite nicely.

Watching them on C-Span, the last several years, I have to wonder where all this new-found 'progressiveness' has come from - Lord knows they've left a few of their peers hanging in the wind when it came to voting for progressive principles or holding the Admin accountable - when it really counted.

[frogcycle]

50. ding ding ding

of the top three, I agree with you. Dodd, Biden, Kucinich, Richardson are all more of his ilk than the top two are

[harmonicon]

44. you don't give up, do you?

Well, I suppose I admire your tenacity, but when you have to say someone is "the only one, except for Kucinich", being the only one doesn't mean much, does it? Edwards is mushiness as far as I'm concerned. He says one thing and does another. I'd much rather have a candidate who's pro union and labor (for real), anti "free" trade, and, most importantly, would work for universal single-payer healthcare. Why people wouldn't want those things is beyond me. Oh, and get rid the the WTO.

[Armstead]

45. I'm as tenacious as you are

I want those things. I doubt you were around DU in 04, when I was defending Kucinich to the max before he officially announced his first campaign.

If you can convince the 95 percent (approximately) who have chosen to reject Kucinich in the primaries to change their mind, I'll give him another look. But in the meantime, Edwards is the best we got in my opinion.

[harmonicon]

47. you're more tenacious than I am - no question

I'm not really interested in convincing anyone to change their vote, apart from one-on-one conversations (man.... a friend told me yesterday that he's voting for Ron Paul... I certainly tried to talk him out of it), but I am interested in having a political process where everyone votes for a candidate based on their platform and record, pure and simple. I feel that we're squandering our right to a participatory democracy if we do otherwise - let the chips fall where they may.

[frogcycle]

48. you don't either, do you?

regardless of what Kucinich says, regardless of his record, he does not stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting the nomination, and if he overcame those odds, it would be handing the neocons a blank check. You think they made Dukakis look foolish in the tank? Just wait 'til they finished with DK. I like the guy. I like my Scottish terrier too. But I want to frigging win this election. And I'd rather win it with someone who is willing to take on the corporatists.

[harmonicon]

51. I'll give up eventually, don't worry

Ok, no, I won't. It's not that I'm super crazy about Kucinich (I voted for Dean last time, because I really wanted him to be president), it's just that I think we won't know who the people as a whole really wanted as our nominee if we start making calculations about things that are unpredictable. If someone really wants Clinton or Edwards, I think they should vote for them, and wouldn't want them to do otherwise, but if someone votes against their own interests, I'm afraid our democracy is in serious jeopardy. Really what I'd like to see is for states to adopt a uniform instant run-off primary process (I'd want that in the general election as well, but that wouldn't be as easy to get done), and to change this crazy ordering of what states vote when (I've already had my state's delegates stripped, so who I support doesn't matter this time) where two largely white, sometimes Republican-voting, not largely industrial states with small populations have a huge role in choosing the nominee for the Democratic party.

[asdjrocky]

46. k

[frogcycle]

49. well said

except I think "mushiness" is a little too... well, too kind

[Seabiscuit]

52. A big BINGO! from an Average Joe who never had to be a "leftist" to "get it".

Edwards is the only competitive candidate who "gets it".

[syberlion]

53. What galls me...

Is the fact that everyone has off-handedly discounted Kucinich, based on polls. Not a single vote was taken, not a single election run and he's already scratched off everyone's list.

MSM is framing this primary as the Obama/Hillary show and just like other reality shows, they put gray dots over the others, because they aren't playing by the MSM rules. Some of those "other" dems are actually speaking the truth, omg watch out, they might wake the sleeping public from its hypnotic slumber. After being fed a steady diet of nonsense, all those empty brain calories from MSM; it's amazing if we as a society can even fire off enough neurons to lift our collective thumb to turn off this useless stream of drivel.

We talk about NOT being sucked in and yet I read here, in all places, how Kucinich is already discounted... oh really? Was there a primary that I am not aware of? How the heck did this country SURVIVE without pollsters?!?

Before pollsters we actually had LEADERS. Yeah, that's right, those things people decry there aren't enough of in this country. Everyone's so all fired glued to the polls, no one's leading anymore. A leader bucks the trend, a leader looks beyond what is and takes the point and leads. A leader is someone framing the discussion, not waiting for the discussion to be framed for them. A leader makes the hard choices and stands by them when they are made.

I believe there were very few leaders of this country in this modern era and we are partly to blame. We as a society have grown complacent and just like the person leaving the keys in the car so all they have to do is jump in and go in the morning. We are waking up to the fact, there is someone stealing our car.

What we have is precious and important. It takes vigilance and it takes work. We've grown very lazy as a country, if you doubt that, look at the voter turn out in this country. MSM working with those wanting to maintain the status quo are winning. Even among those thinking progressively. I was taught to question authority, now that is being taught as being "un-american." I was taught "innocent until proven guilty." Now we are finger printing everyone, as if they've already committed a crime. I was taught "Rule of Law." Now we have blatant and open disregard of law at the highest levels.

The two candidates speaking the clear and honest facts about what is going on are being marginalized and no one from the other side has to lift a finger to do ANYTHING because this party splinters. While we stand around complaining about which door to go outside, or if it would be alright to take a weapon out there to defend our property to stop the thief, the thief is driving away laughing his ass off because we're so stupid.

I've sat on the sidelines far too long because of the level of idiocy involved in getting involved. I've been involved in state level, county level and city level politics. There are idiots at every level. However, when you get up to and past the state level, just like professional sports, you expect there to be a higher level of people. There aren't and it's been very discouraging. Well, the time is drawing near where there won't BE an American political system, at least a real one, and I believe we are at that cross road where we need to get up off our collective kesters and get a leader into the white house.

I believe Kucinich is that person, and if he's available by the time this state has their primary, I am voting for him. If he isn't available then Edwards is in solid second. Beyond that, anyone the MSM touts, I wouldn't trust to carry my trash cans. Nothing personal on the other candidates, just don't trust the MSM, never have and never will.

[sk8rrobert2]

57. Love It.

excellent post syberlion

[Usrename]

58. Kucinich, Edwards, even Cynthia McKinney...

anyone who is being actively marginalized by the MSM should be given the benefit of the doubt in these times.

Those that are being promoted by the corporate MSM are all suspect as being more of the problem, and less of the solution.

[Tarc]

60. Ugh. McKinney?

You slander Kucinich and Edwards buy putting that fruitbat's name alongside. Thankfully she's just an afterthought now, but should have been drummed out of the party long ago, after that comment on Gore's "Negro tolerance".

[Usrename]

65. She just announced.

Green Party.

http://blogs.forbes.com/trailwatch/2007/12/mckinney-in.html

[cali]

62. Edwards is on the cover of Newsweek

He's all over the MSM. Comparing him to McKinney or Kucinich is ludicrous.

[Usrename]

64. Whatever.

I hadn't noticed the corporate media trying to ram Edwards down my throat like they do some of the other candidates.

But if you say so.

[cali]

66. lol. I don't have TV or read any MSM stuff, and I knew about

his being on the cover of Newsweek and that he's been on a lot of MSM shows and discussed favorably there. Whereas Clinton and Obama have both been slammed recently by the MSM.

But hey, stick with your revisionism.

[Usrename]

69. As far as I know, Edwards is leading in Iowa.

I only know that because of this place. Not a peep on the teevee. It weird. Nothing on Edwards. And they keep harping about how Obama beats Hillary in all the match ups against all the Rethugs. And we all know that Edwards beats them by a bigger margin than Obama, but only because we read about it here. Not a peep on the teevee. That's one way they try to influence the horserace.

I don't think they even try to slam him because that would just allow his populist message to get more notice.

[ChiciB1]

73. Hey I'm Done Here Where You Are... I Gave Two Other People Yards

signs in my neighborhood for Edwards, but basically I don't SEE very many if any bumper stickers on cars for anyone, except mine and my husband. My daughter lives in a deed restricted area and can't have signs or bumper stickers. But I talk about him all the time! I even have 2 bumper stickers on my mail box, one on each side! The nice COLORFUL ones. Blew my budget to order all the stuff I did, but I'm BIG FOR EDWARDS!!

[undeterred]

63. I am with you. Kucinich is my first choice.

Edwards is my backup choice.

[onehandle]

67. Kick against corporations. nt

[Myrina]

68. Indeed!

:applause:

[ooglymoogly]

71. And the very big plus is that if he wins the nomination

HE WILL WIN THE ELECTION AND BECOME PRESIDENT. That is why the corporate media are pulling out all the stops to derail him at the pass as they did to John Dean.