And I mean to demonstrate exactly why I believe this. First, I intend to rebut the claims put forth in a certain Recommended diary (guess all that "let's all us Edwards and Obama backers get along" business evaporated when Edwards retook the lead in Iowa). Then, I mean to put forward a few bonus reasons why John Edwards can - and should - win.

Let's go ahead and get started below the fold.

That's something of a novel concept these days, isn't it? By, for, and of the people. Kinda stands in contrast to the system we've got now, which seems to be government by the lobbyists, for the corporate special interests backing them, and of an entrenched Washington elite that recent history has shown to be catastrophically arrogant and out-of-touch. And the people? Who needs 'em?

Fortunately, it doesn't have to be this way. And (my personal favorite) presidential candidate John Edwards has a plan to help fix it - one that I think ought to be of major interest to all progressive Democrats, regardless of who they're currently supporting or not supporting. His plan has three main parts. Follow me over the fold to see what they are.

Just opened an E-mail from John Edwards' Deputy Campaign Manager, Jonathan Prince. A lot of Edwards backers and observers in the blogosphere - most definitely including myself - have been hoping that the Edwards campaign would hit back against the slanderous smears our corporate media have been pumping out, and I'm more than happy to say that Mr. Prince delivers with gusto. Let's take a look at a few excerpts, shall we? (I've reordered them somewhat for clarity and ease-of-reading in a diary format)

I'm a Californian. Recently, I had a discussion with a friend who was ardently pro-Westly. I told him I was leaning towards Angelides. We argued about it for a little while, then he had to go, but he asked me to write up my top ten reasons for preferring Angelides. I did my research, got to know the candidates better (and found my preference for Angelides solidifying rapidly), and sent him my reasons. He read them over, and now he's gone from being absolutely committed to voting for Westly to leaning strongly towards Angelides. I thought people might be interested in the reasons I came up with, whether it's because they're undecided themselves, or if they're looking for ideas on how to convince others. Full reasons listed below the break:

This just in: Republican Congressman Michael Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania has introduced a bill requiring all American citizens and residents under the age of 18 to remain within their parents or guardians homes at all times. Most relevant parts of the news story reposted below:

...Fitzpatrick describes his new bill as "the logical next step" from his proposed bill to ban minors from accessing so-called "social networking" sites while outside the home.

As anyone who's ever seen MSM coverage of John McCain knows, if that was your only source of information on him you'd think that "maverick" was actually part of his name. Prime case in point: TIME Magazine's Time 100 entry on McCain ("The Maverick Gunning for the Oval Office") which cites, among other things, McCain's "pass[ing] through Congress an anti-torture bill widely seen as a rebuke to George W. Bush". Why is this noteworthy? Because (and I wouldn't be surprised if this applied to more than a few of McCain's other supposed signs of independence) according to the E-mail I just got from the ACLU, Mr. Bush issued one of those (in)famous "signing statements" upon receiving the bill, essentially making the bill meaningless - and to the best of my knowledge McCain hasn't said a damn thing about it.

(But wait, there's more!)