Edwards has led on many of the agenda issues for the democratic party for the primary and his policies are much better on most. I like Obama but I don't think he is ready for this election. He is a follower, not a leader

John Edwards has led with issues throughout the Democratic primary. His policies have been the best to date. Obama is a follower not a leader. He is a great man but not ready this election. Edwards is.

Edwards just wants attention

Is anyone out there dumb enough to believe that either the "well coffed ambulance chaser" or the "untried neophyte" has ever had an original thought? Meanwhile "Elitist Shrillary" is laughing it up as she pulls away from both of them.

Saying that Edwards just wants attention, or that Obama is a neophyte, using the phrase Shillary, etc. is falling into media generated stereotypes that have no real basis in fact.

The truth is in my opinion that Obama has many deep, considered and original thoughts. I have read and studied his books and believe that he is as experienced as anyone can be for the presidency. He is my choice at this time, but that can change as time goes on.

Edwards is not just trying to get attention, he is trying to establish differences with the other candidates. Unfortunately he just looks silly doing it in this way.

Hillary Clinton is not 'shrill'. This is a term derogatory to woman and is used simply because she is a woman. It is a detestable use of an anti-woman stereotype.

All three of these candidates would make a far far better president than Bush.

As the presidential debates heat up and tensions increase, the candidates need to be reminded of the critical issues that still trouble our society today. Issue such as global poverty needs to be address by our candidates to each and to the general public. As one of the nation that has pledge to fulfill the goals of Millennium Development Project, whose goal is the elimination of world hunger and poverty, the Bush Administration has not shown any substantial action to bring this fundamental problem to a stop. According to the Borgen Project, dedicated to fighting and ending Poverty around the world, only $19 billion dollars are needed annually to stop world wide poverty, hunger and malnutrition. However, more than $340 billion dollars has been poured into this "war on terror." And each year, our country has a military budge of $522 billion dollars. It's time for a new leader who will be addressing an issue that affects 1.2 billion people everyday worldwide.

Mr. Bush has declared the Northwest Passage of Canada international territory. Starting a Trade War with Canada and claiming Canadian Territory. Canada is the largest supplier to America of energy, electricity, oil and gas included! Are you shore that a trade War is a Good Idea ?

Why is this silly "issue" getting copy?
obama will not be elected and we all know this. he should change his muslim sounding name to avoid questions later when he has some experience under his new name/belt. edwards is the only competition for clinton. period. if these non-contenders would donate their campaign funds to the American poverty issue THAT would speak to the public. in the mean time they will enjoy the ride.

Obama SUPPORTED the Iraq War from DAY ONE OF HIS SENATE TERM, when he kept voting to fund it.

At least John Edwards had enough sense to see that Bush's policies there weren't working, when he voted against the $87 billion, and never voted for any funding for it.

Obama got to the Senate in 2005, well after Iraq was a bloody mess, and continuously voted to give Bush money to keep screwing up.

Obama's spokespeople need to get a new line, or a brain, if they think that Obama is against anything that he keeps supporting with money.

Mstessyrue, formerly known as Erica, $19 billion may be all that is required, IF it could be distributed directly to those who need it. The UN and all of the nations involved would create bureaucracies to administer such a program. The costs for overpaid bureaucrats and associated criminal elements in many corrupt governments will siphon off vast amounts to make such a program much more expensive than $522 billion a year. Don't be so simple minded and think realistically about how the world actually works.

As an Obama supporter i won't stoop to the level of some of these posters.

Lets talk about what needs to be done and not who is a blabber mouth.

I believe Edwards is much better than Clinton on the topic of the Iraq war. I also believe Barack has realized just how we need to stop this stupid war and that is working across party lines to get the 16 needed republican votes to stop it and overide Bush's veto.

Cya in sept (15th) in wash dc

Action speaks louder than words!

You should report on Obama's GREAT showing on The Daily Show -- http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2007/08/video-barack-obama-with-john-stewart-on.html
-- and not forget that Senator Clinton has EXPRESS SUPPORT for the Iraq War and even the current strategy! :

http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2007/08/hillary-clinton-neocon-surge-is-working.html

Here's an idea ... let's let the wives of Edwards and O.bama take center stage. Ms. Edwards is 10 times stronger than Johnny boy, and Ms. O.bama speaks in complete sentences, a skill undeveloped in starbama.

Candidates--both Democratic & Republican--would not need to steal "clichéd and pithy one liners" from one another if they would all stop talking in one-line sound bites that pander to different interest groups but mean absolutely nothing.

As a member of a union and a supporter of unions, I'm frankly pleased that two of the Democratic candidates are talking about unions at all. I really don't care which of them began the conversation, I just want it to continue until they're all talking about the value of unions.

It is only silly to see some posts depicting either Obama or Clinton in derogatory terms wont to unfounded stereotypes.

Be a little creative for all the three would take America to greater heights than Bush and
his cartoonish dick

I entirely agree with blogger "Fed Up With All Politicians." If a candidate has something they want to address to a certain "interest group" they should create a well developed, thoughtful speech or address instead of just trying to coin a one-liner.

I entirely agree with blogger "Fed Up With All Politicians" because if a presidential candidate does in fact have something to direct towards a certain "interest group", then thy should have developed a well-written address instead of thinking up a smart one-liner that is only trying to compete with another candidate.

This is not just "silliness." Here's one very stark example:

"Our campaign is not based on the politics of cynicism; it's based on the politics of hope"

- John Edwards in a stump speech, 1/28/04

"Do we participate in the politics of cynicism or do we participate in the politics of hope?"

- Barack Obama in his signature Democratic convention address, 7/27/04