I put aside an important healthcare diary I was working on because who becomes the next President of the United States, seems as important as replacing our broken healthcare system.
How the media spins the courageous decision by John and Elizabeth Edwards to persevere in the face of great adversity is equally important.
It has already become a "sympathy" story to the great and intrepid morons who beat the war drums on behalf of Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney.
The announcement by John and Elizabeth Edwards is about one thing: leadership.
Just so everyone is clear, I have no connection whatsoever to the Edwards campaign. Truthfully, I haven't even decided whom to support, not that my support is worth a hill of beans. I was deeply impressed though by what I saw unfold this week. I am equally dismayed how many in the MSM are spinning it. Shame on them. Big time shame on them. But we should expect exactly nothing from the corporate media. They are a pack of worthless agenda-ridden, truth-challenged, lying bastards.
As I said, I've read many reports, as I'm sure you have, about the Edwards announcement which highlight the chasm between the genuine sentiments of millions of Americans who will vote for the next president, and the MSM.
The first was a letter to the editor in the New York Times. The word "sympathy" does not even appear in this letter.
Says it all, if you ask me. As I said, I think we saw a president emerge. So undoubtedly do many Americans.
To the Editor:
If indomitability of spirit were the measure of a candidate’s readiness to become president, the election would already be over. Seldom do we see, as we did with John Edwards on Thursday, a potential president in a real-time crisis. The integrity, resolve and intelligence were there for all to witness.
While the tragedy of cancer is devastating, the family courage and spirit under the circumstances can only enhance Mr. Edwards’s image and help his campaign.
Roy Lawrence
Syosset, N.Y., March 23, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Predictably, the Washington Post spun the news as straight up politics. Barely a mention of the courage, strength and leadership--yes, leadership, on display in the garden in North Carolina.
Someone commented in an earlier diary that many of the progressive positions embraced by John Edwards make him the biggest threat to the corporate media, hence they have the most to lose were he to become president. I don't know, you decide.
So Ann Kornblut, in the Washington Post, did the bidding of her corporate masters. Including in one of the first paragraphs the use of the wholly inappropriate verbiage "headline-grabbing". Damn, I don't know the Edwards, but I would guess they might have preferred total obscurity and no headlines, rather than headlines announcing incurable breast cancer. What a fool this Kornblut shill is.
No Ann, it's not about sympathy, it's about leadership.
Several Democratic operatives agreed that the couple's headline-grabbing appearance in Chapel Hill, N.C., on Thursday would probably boost former senator John Edwards at least temporarily, producing a groundswell of sympathy and raising his public profile.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Then of course the article follows with the requisite quotes from senior Democratic operatives. These are the people who "select" our nominee. But the focus is on the sympathy this tragic announcement might produce, not that it demonstrated true leadership in the face of overwhelming adversity.
Several Democratic operatives agreed that the couple's headline-grabbing appearance in Chapel Hill, N.C., on Thursday would probably boost former senator John Edwards at least temporarily, producing a groundswell of sympathy and raising his public profile.
And the "choreography". You know this phraseology makes me ill. It's all a performance, according to this moron reporter.
Others marveled at the careful choreography of the Edwardses' Thursday appearance, which was as visually striking as any campaign event in Iowa or New Hampshire, down to the lapel microphones the couple wore.
And here's a nugget from Howard Kurtz in a column he inappropriately, IMO, calls Heartbreak Hotel.
I have no idea if yesterday's announcement will have any political impact on John Edwards' presidential bid, other than as a distraction for the candidate. I do know that people make judgments about candidates' marriages -- look at all the focus on Hillary's, and Rudy's -- and that anyone watching television yesterday saw two people very devoted to each other. But how they would react to a potential first lady battling a serious disease is impossible to know.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
No Howard, let me tell you something, I do know how the American people feel. This is no Heartbreak Hotel. Iraq is a Heartbreak Hotel. Walter Reed is a Heartbreak Hotel. Six years of lies to the American people is Heartbreak Hotel. Sending our fine young men and women to war without armor is Heartbreak Hotel. 48 million Americans without healthcare is Heartbreak Hotel.
John and Elizabeth Edwards devotion to our horribly ill country is leadership.
John and Elizabeth Edwards decision to damn all the fucking torpedos and persevere is the ultimate test of strength, character, courage and resolve.
And frankly, I don't blame you for being blind to the truth. Because you too are an American citizen and you have had sand thrown in your eyes during the worst and most evil six years in the history of our once great nation. So your inability to see the truth about John and Elizabeth Edwards is sad, but expected.