Associated Press - July 13, 2007 2:23 AM ET
DETROIT (AP) - Democrats John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton consider themselves among the top presidential candidates.
They were caught by Fox News microphones discussing their desire to limit future joint appearances to exclude some lower rivals after a forum in Detroit Thursday.
Edwards says, "We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group."
Clinton agrees, saying, "We've got to cut the number" and "they're not serious." She also says that she thought their campaigns had already tried to limit the debates and say, "We've gotta get back to it."
Others taking part in the forum sponsored by the NAACP were Senators Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel.
One Republican, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, also participated.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
I recently saw the You-Tube clip of a conversation between Hillary Clinton and John Edwards after the presidential debate with Edwards stating that the fringe candidates should not be allow to debate because they were not "serious" enough. Clinton agreed and stated that her campaign had tried to derail them previously. They agree to try again in the Fall.
http://www.youtube.com/...
They are apparently very bothered by the First Amendment and the whole Democratic process. This strikes at what is wrong with the whole election process. The system ensures that those who are in power and are "serious" (approved by the corporate funding and the major media channels) are the ones who get to address us. The people who may be giving us the most honest evaluation and have the best advice for our nation, but who do not fit in this "serious" category, disappear from our view.
Who are Clinton and Edwards to decide who is serious? Does getting the most money from the corporate sources make you "serious"? I thought that just makes you "bought".
May I suggest a voting strategy to dismantle this attitude? "Voting from the bottom up." Go to www.opensecrets.org and find the candidate in your party that takes the least in corporate campaign contributions. Examine his/her website and see if you could support that person in an election. If you can’t agree with them, then move to the next lowest person. In this way you will vote for someone who owes the major corporations the least possible and will be more responsive to you, the voter.
I for one want Mike Gravel to continue to give 'em hell. Dennis Kucinich should continue be Frodo, the Ring-bearer of the Democratic Party. And I really hope to see them all back in the Fall.