Cheat Sheet

I agree. This is abysmal primitive behavior, where people are apparently "catering to the top dog" in order to keep their jobs and in the process a huge wasteful campaign was conducted. I applaud these folks for not doing anything at all, but I am Democrat and am appalled that they let things go on as long as they did.

Amen! (Irony intended.)

Edwards starts a new family while his wife has incurable cancer? Criticizing this behavior makes us parochial? I guess I am parochial then. I voted for him in the California primary but now I despise him.

I agree - I am not a fan. He seems to think he's better than everyone and he has no compassion that I've ever seen. That being said, he does sometimes make some points worth listening to, but they then need heavy editing.

I'm a big fan
Of the way he
Says any crazy pants
Thing
Off the top of his head
Whether it can be
Substantiated
Or not.

Joe McCarthy would be proud. And the House and Senate would be nearly emptied (because most of their members are flawed human beings like the rest of us).

I agree with everything you say except with having no problem with how long they let it go on. What about all the campaign contributors and workers and primary voters who were duped into thinking this was a legitimate campaign with a mentally & emotionally healthy, responsible candidate?

I am a Democrat and I agree with what you say in large part but I believe that this is not really about "morality" but about adult mental & emotional health and keeping your word. Edwards has problems with all of these: (a) if he & his wife had an agreement of monogamy between them, which they apparently did, he unilaterally violated this in some sort of arrogance, (b) if he is too lacking in self-awareness and understanding of primitive female and male behavior to fall into Rielle Hunter's inane seduction, he is not adult enough to be President and (b) if he can't take responsibility for knowing himself whether he spent campaign funds on Rielle Hunter (and instead says this is "government's job") he is also not adult enough to be President.

So what does disqualify someone from a particular job? Being a child molester...how about animal sex...or a rapist...maybe a just a little homicide...Edwards killed ideals, hopes and faith of many who trusted him. He raped the system, and screwed the people who supported him. And for the record, it wasn't Repubs that dug up dirt, it was the relentless work of a news rag that make money selling sensationalism. So what is it about the American voter that keeps supporting bags of crap! That goes for both sides of the political system. Part of the reason dems are in power is that the conservative voters figured out that we were being screwed to the wall by people we sent to fix it!!! How many months/years will it take for the libs to wake up (like the Edwards supporters) and figure out they too are being screwed out of their liberty and their childrens prosperity!

Amen, milkman. But we don't want to think of our politicians as sexual beings, especially if their sexuality is expressed outside of their marriage. Despite the fact that the majority of American men and a hell of a lot of American women have extra-marital affairs,it is easier and more in keeping with our Puritan heritage to pretend that politicians are not like the rest of us in this regard.

As a result, we end up with asexual weasels like Georgie- boy Bush, who felt compelled to express his machismo by invading other countries and torturing people.

Will we, the electorate, ever grow up?

BTW, I am tired of seeing these cheesy, staged romantic moments between the Obamas. Who falls for this stuff? Have they no dignity? Really, I love the Obamas but it makes me wonder if their marriage is a sham. They seem compelled to present such a juvenile, exhibitionist and sanitized version of their marriage. It not only becomes distracting and rings false, but it makes me question if they understand the seriousness of the office and the overwhelming problems facing the world.

John Edwards was in favor of the little guy. The little guy should be in charge, new directions nude erections and all the wrest. But J.E. couldn't win regardless because the country liked his wife and the American people, in consideration of her cancer, simply could not bear going through her wasting away - then a state funeral for our dead first lady everyone liked so much before we found out she was just the female version of little guy J..

Not necessarily a broke starving person but someone who for example might have enough money to be doing fine and instead live in a more down-to-earth, modest manner using the rest to do something more worthwhile like print leftist literature to leaflet somewhere or something more useful than living a lifestyle of bourgeois decadence then pretending to identify with the working man when he's campaigning. Maybe you missed the part that I mentioned about him being a puppet of the Bilderberg Group. The guy's as phony a liberal as he is a husband. He's another marionette like the rest.

Thanks for the idea, I just checked them out. They unfortunately seem to be much too incrementalist, bound to the idea of improving the conditions of their wage slavery rather than ending the slavery itself.

It sounds like they're on the right track but are way too timid in their goals so they could really only be one of two things: 1.a party from top-to-bottom full of good, honest workers who want what they think is in the best interests of the working class/working poor/desperately poor but haven't yet expanded their consciousness to such a degree as to be able to understand the whole scope of the class struggle and instead are focusing on a smaller aspect of it, or conversely they know that the people need far better and far more meaningful, radical changes to be made to completely upend the entire status quo to remake it in such a manner that it's designed around what's best for the average worker, but feel that they would all be assassinated if they tried so they neuter their objectives and try to get what minimal, incrementalist b.s. improvements that they can;

or 2.just another cutout "leftist" micro-party sponsored by the elite, like the C.P.U.S.A., for the dual purposes of channeling sentiment for radical change into avenues "safe" and controlled by the elite and also as a tool for their operators controlling it to find out by who identifies with it (thinking it's genuine) who the more radical leftists are.

But either way they are not advocating anywhere near what's necessary. But I thank you for the suggestion.