Edwards calls on supporters to take action

In an email message entitled "Congress backed down. We must stand up," John Edwards stated:

About an hour ago, the Senate caved to President Bush and sent him another blank check to continue the war in Iraq.
This is a serious blow for all of us, but
no one lost more today than the troops in the field who continue to sacrifice so nobly and their families still waiting back home.
It's a hard moment, but
you and I don't have the luxury of getting discouraged. We must remember: This is not over. For those of us committed to change, it has only begun.
This weekend, thousands of us will take action in our communities to support the troops and end the war. We will speak out in public. We will send care packages to soldiers in Iraq. We will gather letters for Congress and the president. And on Memorial Day, we will remember and honor those who sacrificed everything for their nation.

Edwards' Campaign says Bush Twists Meaning of Patriotism

In an email message sent out to Presidential hopeful John Edwards’ supporters, deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince, called the War on Terror a sledgehammer used by Republicans to crush opposition. Prince was referring to Congress backing down to the President and authorizing more war funding, instead of withholding of funds in order to end the war. The White House had been claiming that cutting off war funding would deny the troops adequate equipment, hinting that those who supported such action were unpatriotic and did not support the troops. Of course the point of cutting off funding is that the President would be forced to bring the troops home. Otherwise it would be he who left the troops in a war without adequate funding.

According to the email, Edwards “went to the heart of America's foreign policy establishment and called out the Bush crowd for their misuse of patriotism.” Prince further stated that “the Bush Terror Doctrine has failed our troops and failed America by straining our military to the breaking point and sowing chaos around the world.”

Prince stated that the Republican party was also using the war to personally attack Edwards, who has come out against the war. Prince wrote that Republicans were accusing Edwards of war profiteering by getting support for his opposition to the war and the selling of tee shirts. Prince pointed out that “if the RNC really wants to attack someone for profiteering, they should call Dick Cheney's friends at Halliburton and ask them to return the billions of dollars they've made on a war that Dick Cheney promoted from day one.” Dick Cheney is the former CEO of Halliburton, a company that received “no-bid contracts” in Iraq and elsewhere. Halliburton recently moved its headquarters from the United States to Dubai, a move some believe was an attempt to avoid investigation.

Prince finished with a call to action stating that opponents of the war “have a right to speak out…have a right to stand up for our beliefs…and…have a responsibility to support the campaign that is leading the way and working to end this war.” He was obviously referring to the Edwards campaign.

Should Edward’s Daughter be Drafted First?

Monday Presidential Candidate and Former Senator John Edwards called for mandatory national service. “One of the things we ought to be thinking about is some level of mandatory service to our country, so that everybody in America – not just the poor kids who get sent to war – are serving this country,” Edwards said according to the AP.

I’m always amazed at how politicians who have avoided military service want others to be forced to “serve their country.” Congressman Charles Rangel has called for a draft for the same reasons as Edwards, but at least the Congressman was in the army himself.

There is an old saying that states “one should lead by example.” But Edwards must be following the other old saying: “do as I say not as I do.” If the former senator is so keen on drafting your sons and daughters into “service” surely he would be willing to draft his eldest daughter Cate first. Cate is of military age afterall. But then Edwards did not actually use the term “military service”. He simply said “mandatory service.” I’m sure he believes he fulfilled his obligation by “serving” in the highly paid and powerful position as U.S. Senator. That gives me an idea. Let us draft each American to serve in the U.S. Congress or Presidency, or Judiciary. Each American can do one term and then we’ll draw a lottery to see who is next. That would certainly end the debate over term limits.

But I have a feeling Edwards would not like that idea. No he’d rather your children were drafted into less lucrative jobs. However, Edwards should at least convince his daughter to voluntarily join the military as an example, before demanding that other children are drafted. Afterall, the American people will only put up with hypocrisy for so long. I think Americans are getting a little tired of these elites demanding that we make sacrifices while they live in luxury. I know I am.

Huckabee Wants Your Haircut Money

In the South Carolina Republican Debates Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee joked that Congress spends money like John Edwards in a beauty shop, referring to Edwards reported $400 haircuts. That certainly gained the former governor the biggest laugh of the night. This gave the folks over at the Huckabee campaign the idea to ask people how much they paid for their haircuts, finding that most spend between $10-$15. Huckabee himself spends $15. (I spend $18 just for the record).

At the suggestion of a creative staffer, Huckabee decided to turn the running joke into raising funds. The campaign is asking people to contribute the amount they pay on one haircut to his campaign. He even has a barber poll on his campaign site (pictured above) that will mark off as contributions come in.

Huckabee is certainly turning out to be an inventive and humorous candidate, and maybe he can turn that humor into real money...money enough to compete with the so-called "first tier." Of course since Huckabee only spends $15 on a haircut he doesn't need to raise as much money as ...say...John Edwards.

The "Second Tier" Candidates

The mainstream media has a dividing line between candidates. Their method of choosing which candidates are first tier, and thus worthy of news reports, and which candidates are second tier, and thus not newsworthy eludes me.

Why is Former Governor Mitt Romney more qualified to be President than former Governors Gilmore, and Huckabee? Why is former Senator Gravel less qualified than former Senator Edwards? The only distinction that I can draw is that Romney and Edwards have been anointed by the media. Certainly Romney has not brought forth new ideas. To the contrary, he has changed his position on issues like abortion to mimic more traditional pro-life candidates such has Huckabee and Gilmore, yet Romney is a media darling. That brings with it large sums of money and ready volunteers. Gravel is anti-war. Most Americans today, and certainly an overwhelming majority of Democrats want the United States out of Iraq, yet Gravel is treated as a crazy old man out of step with the voters, by the establishment media.

The media is beginning to give Congressman Ron Paul some attention since his now famous confrontation with former Mayor Rudy Giuliani over the reasons terrorists don't like us, but most of the press has been negative. The media pretends that somehow a former mayor knows more about foreign policy than a sitting Congressman who has served on the foreign relations committee for years. Not to mention that CIA reports, and the 9/11 Commission Report itself backs up Paul, but somehow the mere happenstance of being mayor of NYC on September 11th has made Rudy Giuliani a foreign relations guru.

The point is that any of the Republican or Democratic candidates could be "first tier" candidates if the media treated them the same way as they treat those referred to as "first tier". Qualifying them as second tier alone, hurts a candidate's chances of grabbing the nomination. This is a blatant attempt by our media to choose the next president (or at least narrow it down) and should be seen as nothing less than that. People like John McCain claim that our election system is unfair because of campaign finance, but the real reason is because the media has decided ahead of time who is a viable candidate and who is not.