Obama borrows from Edwards

Ummm... they all poach from each other. How many times did Edwards use Obama's favorite word, "Change," in his speech on Wednesday? Edwards has been poaching from Obama for months now, it's about time Obama took some back.

This article was supposed to be about Edwards. It was just as much about Obama!

All of them are poaching 'Change' from Obama -- Edwards, Clinton, Mitt, Huckabee. Obama has always been for the working class and middle class. Read his books.

Change is not exactly a unique theme in elections. I am pretty sure I heard it before Obama wrote a book or Edwards discovered the "two Americas."

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Obama's been doing his best John Edwards for weeks. Edwards is the one who's lived it. While Obama was lecturing in a Harvard Law classroom, Edwards was fighting for working class families in the courtroom against the types of entrenched interests both are railing about now. There's this idea that somehow Edwards has changed, but Obama's the one who took lobbyist money in his previous campaign. With Obama, it was an election year conversion; with Edwards, it's more than a tactic--it's a commitment. I think people are shrewd enough to grasp these distinctions when they're presented, but the mainstream corporate media insists on continuing to frame the race as being between the two big money candidates. There's nothing that frightens these powers more than an Edwards nomination.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Sasha Issenberg:
Former Senator Edward has been railing against corporations and their profits. Among the cadre of Democratic candidates in this election, Edward is the richest ($50+ millions). How did he come about his wealth since he did not inherit one? It was as a trial lawyer.

Senator Edward has won many out of court medical insurance malpractice claims from insurance company. Most malpractice claims are not always due to doctor’s or hospital’s negligence but human errors. Each time Edward wins out of court negotiations with the insurance companies, these companies will raise the premium doctors pay in their insurance coverage. Doctors in turn pass their premium to the consumers and the poor are always hard hit. When Edward says that he has always fought insurance companies and won, he is fudging the story. He ought to say that as a trial lawyer he has won out of court settlements for his clients that made him the millionaire he is today. It is fudging the story because some people would think that he did what he claims as a politician. Let us ask a simple question.

Why Edward, on graduation from law school, did not choose to practice his career as a public defendant? Lawyers who serve in their capacities as public defendants or government prosecutors can lay claim of serving the public because they are earning far less than trial lawyers in private practices.

If you compare the trajectory of Obama’s career and opportunities that are beckoning to him to become a multi-million attorney but he chose to serve the public. It is not only that Senator Obama was the first African American President of Harvard Law Review, but he finished on top of class.

Edward talks about poverty but lives in super-luxury and spends $400 haircut which was billed to his campaign expenses underwritten by public donations. What Edwards is looking for now is not fighting for the middleclass but to use credulous middleclass to ascend to the highest political apex.

Politicians of all strips have always use the verb “to fight” in their public campaign speeches. Bill Clinton used as well as Al Gore, John Kerry etc. This verb is not the Edward’s property rights.

Edwards talk about fighting insurance companies, oil companies etc. But what if these companies fight back against Edward’s administration and how would he respond. If oil companies were to shut down for 3-months, would Edward’s administration not collapse in a heartbeat. Western liberal constitutional democracy is about negotiations, compromises, building bridges and consensus among stakeholders in the country. It is only in central economy (communism or socialism) where governments dictate to all the stake-holders but not in constitutional democracies. Edward is not an honest broker but a phony opportunist. Let me give an example.

Edward says that if Congress does not pass his universal health insurance he will revoke their insurance coverage. But appropriation of funds is the sole responsibility of the Congress per Constitution. Constitution also says that the three arms of the government are equal. So what is Edwards talking about?

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Prior to the IOWA caucaus, I made my decision to support and vote for Senator Barack Obama in the upcoming New Hampshire primary (on Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2008).This morning, Saturday, Jan. 5, I attended Senator Obama'sappearance at the Nashua North High School (in Nashua, New Hampshire). There was such an overabundant , enthusiastic crowd, that BOTH of the school's gymnasiums were overfull with democrats and independents.I paid attention to those who were there with me, and although race plays no factor in American politics, it must be noted that among those in attendance at Senator Barack Obama's rally at the Nashua High School today, 99.5% were Caucasian, .25% were Asian, .25% were African-American, and 0% were Hispanic.

Excellent article, and right on the money! I admire Sasha Issenberg and the Globe for writing about this! I live in NC, and have followed Senator Edwards for many years. He was the first candidate to focus on many of the key issues of this campaign. Edwards was the first to come out with universal healthcare, the first to talk about change and taking on big corporate interests, the first to support the issues of labor and the middle class, and certainly the first to truly care about our obligation to help the poor among us. Many voters have not been watching these campaigns for very long, and may genuinely not realize that the others are copying John Edwards. Some say it does not matter. I think it matters because the person who came up with these ideas, is most likely the person who will work hardest to make them a reality. I admire the leadership and vision of John Edwards!

Excellent article, and right on the money! I admire Sasha Issenberg and the Globe for writing about this! I live in NC, and have followed Senator Edwards for many years. He was the first candidate to focus on many of the key issues of this campaign. Edwards was the first to come out with universal healthcare, the first to talk about change and taking on big corporate interests, the first to support the issues of labor and the middle class, and certainly the first to truly care about our obligation to help the poor among us. Many voters have not been watching these campaigns for very long, and may genuinely not realize that the others are copying John Edwards. Some say it does not matter. I think it matters because the person who came up with these ideas, is most likely the person who will work hardest to make them a reality. I admire the leadership and vision of John Edwards!

John Edwards was the FIRST CANDIDATE to use the change word as a central theme in the campaign. He used it in the Philadelphia debate, when he said, "The democratic party won in 2006, for one reason...because we represented CHANGE. If we don't represent change in 2008, we'll lose."

After that, every other Democratic campaign wrapped their messages around "change."

Here's the thing. Obama gets all of the coverage, so once he steals Edwards' words just like he did with change, he can portray it as his own, and people will think he said it first, because they didn't see Edwards say it first, just like these people here think that Obama was using "change" before Edwards did.

Edwards came out of the GATE in December 2006 talking about change (Tomorrow begins Today). Obama wasn't even a candidate yet.

Mr. Custer, stop posting. We got it. You're also embarrassing yourself by repeatedly posting "race plays no factor in American politics." The signs may have been too subtle for you to notice so far in this campaign, but if Obama wins the Democratic nomination, I guarantee they'll smack even you over the head.

Mr. Custer, stop posting. We got it. Also, you're embarrassing yourself by repeatedly posting "race plays no factor in American politics." The signs may have been too subtle for you to notice so far in this campaign, but if Obama wins the Democratic nomination, I guarantee they'll smack even you over the head.

It's funny to read all the comments and see that supporters of each Democratic candidate fighting over the word "change" and who used it first. Change to Democratic candidates usually means nothing. It's an empty word to get the young and gullible to vote for them. I support a candidate that can lead this country not dream about what it could be. Try to see through the words "change" and "hope". Deval Patrick is a prime example of voters falling for empty words and promises with no true proposals of his own. When people start voting with their hearts instead of their heads we all suffer as a nation.

It's funny to read all the comments and see that supporters of each Democratic candidate fighting over the word "change" and who used it first. Change to Democratic candidates usually means nothing. It's an empty word to get the young and gullible to vote for them. I support a candidate that can lead this country not dream about what it could be. Try to see through the words "change" and "hope". Deval Patrick is a prime example of voters falling for empty words and promises with no true proposals of his own. When people start voting with their hearts instead of their heads we all suffer as a nation.

It's funny to read all of your comments about who mentioned the word "change" first. You liberals are so gullible, these candidates are playing you. To vote for a candidate based on a word or dream is ridiculous. Wake up from your fantasy world and start voting with your heads not your tender little hearts.

It's funny to read all of your comments about who mentioned the word "change" first. You liberals are so gullible, these candidates are playing you. To vote for a candidate based on a word or dream is ridiculous. Wake up from your fantasy world and start voting with your heads not your tender little hearts.

David P, you say the word "liberal" like it's supposed to be a bad thing or something.

Liberals are the ones who fought for this country. Conservatives wanted to remain under the British crown.

Remember Thomas Paine, "Give me liberty or give me death"?

Remember how Thomas Jefferson changed it from the conservative written, "life, liberty, and estate" to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"? What a very liberal thing to say.

Or how George Washington said, "As Mankind becomes more LIBERAL, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality"?

Why don't you go somewhere and learn who the real patriots are? Conservatives have fought against every freedom and protection that you enjoy in your daily life, "Dave rePublican."

Sure they all plagiarize. Sure, Obama supporters.

Biden was destroyed in 1988 over plagiarizing a paper in college, but your candidate gets a free pass.

Disgusting.

Re: Edmonsky

So I take it you have a problem with Edwards winning a multi-million dollar settlement for a little kid that had her intestines sucked out through her anus by a pool drain, for lack of a .50 piece? That settlement will allow her to live some semblance of a normal life.

Perhaps we should just have let her die. It would be cheaper to society.

I have immense respect for John Edwards. Edwards's background has been a motivating force throughout his life, and has directed his life's course.

His passion to help others less fortunate has been evident throughout his life. For Edwards, hope is not audacious, it’s natural. But, he wants all Americans to have hope, and an Edwards presidency will give hope to millions who've not had it before.

When you've lived hardship, you understand it. His authenticity shines through when he's talking with someone in need, because he's able to have empathy.

Edwards does not need to copy Barack Obama, since helping people move up and forward has been a genuine mission for him for a very long time.

Barack Obama has been Edwards light the entire campaign. It has been clear that his campaign--and perhaps some of his success---has been a strategy of "wait and see". Edwards was the first candidate to offer proposals on every issue and Barack tended to copy them--if not water some of them down. Obama did not pick up the change mantle until after Edwards made clear that he was running as the change candidate. Luckily for Obama, that tends to be how to win--let someone else pioneer and then steal their ideas and run with them.

Obama has been copying Edwards for quite some time and anyone who has been following this campaign knows it. It's nice that the newspaper that endorsed Obama is finally telling the truth about what he's been doing.

I think Edwards did a fantastic job in the debate tonight and I think he helped himself a great deal. He is clearly the one candidate who recognizes that in order to have any chance at meaningful change you must fight the special interests. I think he showed NH voters that he is the best candidate in this race.

Obama may give inspirational speeches but that's where it ends. When questions are asked, like they were in the debate, and he has to think on his feet he falls flat. If the media wasn't helping Obama by ignoring Edwards I think he could actually win NH.

Obama has been copying Edwards for quite some time and anyone who has been following this campaign knows it. It's nice that the newspaper that endorsed Obama is finally telling the truth about what he's been doing.

I think Edwards did a fantastic job in the debate tonight and I think he helped himself a great deal. He is clearly the one candidate who recognizes that in order to have any chance at meaningful change you must fight the special interests. I think he showed NH voters that he is the best candidate in this race.

Obama may give inspirational speeches but that's where it ends. When questions are asked, like they were in the debate, and he has to think on his feet he falls flat. If the media wasn't helping Obama by ignoring Edwards I think Edwards could actually win NH.

Obama has been copying Edwards for quite some time and anyone who has been following this campaign knows it. It's nice that the newspaper that endorsed Obama is finally telling the truth about what he's been doing.

I think Edwards did a fantastic job in the debate tonight and I think he helped himself a great deal. He is clearly the one candidate who recognizes that in order to have any chance at meaningful change you must fight the special interests. I think he showed NH voters that he is the best candidate in this race.

Obama may give inspirational speeches but that's where it ends. When questions are asked, like they were in the debate, and he has to think on his feet he falls flat. If the media wasn't helping Obama by ignoring Edwards I think Edwards could actually win NH.

Obama has been copying Edwards for quite some time and anyone who has been following this campaign knows it. It's nice that the newspaper that endorsed Obama is finally telling the truth about what he's been doing.

I think Edwards did a fantastic job in the debate tonight and I think he helped himself a great deal. He is clearly the one candidate who recognizes that in order to have any chance at meaningful change you must fight the special interests. I think he showed NH voters that he is the best candidate in this race.

Obama may give inspirational speeches but that's where it ends. When questions are asked, like they were in the debate, and he has to think on his feet he falls flat. If the media wasn't helping Obama by ignoring Edwards I think Edwards could actually win NH.

Edmonsky shows his ignorance by stating that Edwards said that he would, but cannot, unilaterally change Congress's health benefits. Of course he can't. He didn't say that he would. He stated that he would introduce legislation, which a president does by calling on allies in Congress to introduce legislation, that would call for Congress's very generous package to be cut if Congress continues to ignore the plight of millions of Americans who are not covered.

Sounds like a sensible use of the bully pulpit to me.

Wake up, Edmonsky, that's what the Republicans have been successfully been doing for years to advance their agenda. You must frame the debate.

Hey guys, I really didn't try to post my comments numerous times. Evidently they are having some problems with their website. It looks like it is not accepting your post so you try again but obviously it is taking them which is why some of us have multiple posts of the same comments.

Edmonsky
What are you talking about? Since you asked why Edwards did not choose to practice as a public defendant I will tell you. If he was a public defender he would be a criminal law attorney. Edwards is a civil law attorney. A lot of attorneys actually have specialties and sometimes one of the chief differences is criminal law and civil law practices. Most cases in civil law are actually settled out of court. That's a fact. Civil law cases are a lot more complicated than you would think even though there is a lower level of evidence. Negligence is not always so easy to prove but a company or a doctor wouldn’t settle in court or out of court if the evidence of proof wasn’t there. Edwards did not grow up rich but he studied, got a law degree and got wealthy because he was good at it. I think you would want someone to be successful in their previous endeavors before you elect them president. People earning minimum wage usually don’t get elected president, at least not to my knowledge. Fighting against big corporations with a lot of wealth is a big fight. Especially when you have people like George Bush and his administration to do everything they can to help big corporations. It’s a David and Goliath task and yet Edwards has earned a substantial amount of money in those battles. Would it be a fight if they didn’t fight back? Trust me if oil companies were shut down for 3 months they would be hurting. The government would simply go in and take over in the name of national security anyway and there’s not a thing those oil companies can do about it. By the time it was settled in court every one of those big oil tycoons would be bankrupt. Yes the three arms of the government are equal yet Bush has successfully made the presidency stronger than the constitutional framers intentions. Even Cheney claims to be part of the executive branch in order not to answer investigative questions then turns around and claims to be part of the legislative branch because he oversees the Senate when it is convenient. Just because you don’t see the big picture doesn’t mean Edwards is a phony. So….what are you talking about?

I hope to see Edwards as the next president. The sad thing is that Edwards would almost have to do a Britney Spears stunt to get noticed by the press. Obama could burp and it would be a full story. How do you win when the press is pushing the celebrity candidates for their own monetary gains? If Obama wins he will have to thank the news media.

FYI: there is more of edwards that obama copied than just those mentioned here
and Obama should be called on it by the DNC
Obama is all about SPIN!!!!! and he is all about change.....change his mind, change his stump,change change change......its just too bad its not really his change he's standing on... Its JOHN EDWARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edmonsky
What are you talking about? Since you asked why Edwards did not choose to practice as a public defendant I will tell you. If he was a public defender he would be a criminal law attorney. Edwards is a civil law attorney. A lot of attorneys actually have specialties and sometimes one of the chief differences is criminal law and civil law practices. Most cases in civil law are actually settled out of court. That's a fact. Civil law cases are a lot more complicated than you would think even though there is a lower level of evidence. Negligence is not always so easy to prove but a company or a doctor wouldn’t settle in court or out of court if the evidence of proof wasn’t there. Edwards did not grow up rich but he studied, got a law degree and got wealthy because he was good at it. I think you would want someone to be successful in their previous endeavors before you elect them president. People earning minimum wage usually don’t get elected president, at least not to my knowledge. Fighting against big corporations with a lot of wealth is a big fight. Especially when you have people like George Bush and his administration to do everything they can to help big corporations. It’s a David and Goliath task and yet Edwards has earned a substantial amount of money in those battles. Would it be a fight if they didn’t fight back? Trust me if oil companies were shut down for 3 months they would be hurting. The government would simply go in and take over in the name of national security anyway and there’s not a thing those oil companies can do about it. By the time it was settled in court every one of those big oil tycoons would be bankrupt. Yes the three arms of the government are equal yet Bush has successfully made the presidency stronger than the constitutional framers intentions. Even Cheney claims to be part of the executive branch in order not to answer investigative questions then turns around and claims to be part of the legislative branch because he oversees the Senate when it is convenient. Just because you don’t see the big picture doesn’t mean Edwards is a phony. So….what are you talking about?

I hope to see Edwards as the next president. The sad thing is that Edwards would almost have to do a Britney Spears stunt to get noticed by the press. Obama could burp and it would be a full story. How do you win when the press is pushing the celebrity candidates for their own monetary gains? If Obama wins he will have to thank the news media. In this debate Edwards did real well. When he was talking about this fight being very personal to him I could imagine him in a court room and winning. He's convincing enough to win my vote.

Luckily Sasha Issenberg has been paying attention.

As a plaintiffs' tort or malpractice lawyer, Edwards would have made most (if not all ) of his earnings on a contingency basis, in other words, he borrowed money to front the costs of the cases (depositions, travel, experts, etc.) and only received fees if he prevailed for the plaintiff or got a settlement that was satisfactory to the plaintiff.

Given how difficult it is to be an attorney for working and middle class plaintiffs and fight the big guys, it has been and remains amazing to me that not one former client has come out of the woodwork to say that Edwards let the plaintiff down. Everyone hates lawyers (hence all the lawyers' jokes about only caring about $$$), and even after lawyers work incredibly hard to win or get a good settlement for a client, the client often feels because of the cost of litigation that the lawyer got a better deal than the client did. In other words, even the client who wins can turn out unhappy. It's human nature. People love their doctors but hate their lawyers.

That not one former Edwards' client has complained is pretty incredible to ,me, particularly since as a Vice Presidential candidate, he 's already been under greater public scrutiny than Obama. Of course, as the Presidential candidate last time, it was Kerry who was the obvious target of the "Swift-boating". And, if Edwards becomes the front-runer, there will certainly be greater coevrage of his work as a trial lawyer and an attempt to find a disgruntled client. Nonetheless, that no one has come forward so far says to me that he is the real thing -- both empathetic as a counselor to his clients-- and a commited and effective fighter for them and a formidable opponent.
Of course, eventually, he will be forced to compromise as President. But, he's starting as a committed fighter who will get the ebst deal for us that he can.

I'm from North Carolina and I'm attending graduate school at Harvard. As a life long resident of North Carolina I can assure you that Edwards was one of the best trial lawyers in the South. He really did grow up poor and worked in the textile mills with his father. I think he does understand what it means to fight for every thing and understands the average working person.

He has a very good insight of the real world. Every city is not as weathly as Boston. When I drive down those Carolina roads back home the picture tells a different story.

I would post a long comment here but I'm scared it will be copied over and over and over again. So...I'll just say, John Edwards is the real deal,...sincere, smart and nationally tested for scandals. Mr Obama though eloquent and well-spoken is not tested. He's gotten a press free pass. He has charmed young people with his rock star status. I don't want a famous rock star. I want a President.

Go Edwards.

Borrow is a euphemistic way to word it, especially with feeling of frustration that Edwards is not getting same media coverage as the big money candidates.

John Edwards has definitely changed his tone since 2004. He also, since that time built a 29,000 square foot home (southern White House?). I've know many trial attorneys .... personal injury lawyers are a breed all their own. They make huge amounts of money which is fine - that's their choice of profession. However, Edwards' political interest started when his now deceased son Wade stated that his dad would make a good senator. That was Edwards' motivation to get into politics? He has no experience. His wife is critically ill and they have two small children. The stress of campaigning is extremely hard on one's immune system but I guess they're the only ones who can really "fight" "fight" "fight" for change. Audience reactions last night showed people recoiling from his tirades. We need good energy here. Obama is reasoned, brilliant, has street smarts, is genuine in his goals and ideals and is the most inspiring candidate since Bobby Kennedy whose campaign was my first involvemenet in Presidential politics. 40 years later we still need someone who can make me feel patriotic and proud again. Obama makes us soar. That is powerful and can translate into a good feeling about our country. The voters deserve this refreshing, mature and visionary. It's the new millienium. We need change of heart, soul and actions. Edwards alienates way too many people. Not since Gary Hart have I found a candidate who is as smart, smooth(er), and forward thinking - Obama is out of the gate. He's going to do it and the world will be a much better place for it.

It does not matter who said "change" first. It does, however, matter that Barack Obama has stolen--almost verbatim--most of John Edwards' policies and speeches. His speech in Nashua yesterday contained incredibly blatant lifting of Edwards' words--talking about respecting work, not wealth (Edwards has been saying for years we must reward work, not wealth), and a whole host of other Edwards-isms. In fact, Obama had better hope Edwards stays in the race or he'll run out of material! There is example after example of Obama directly copying Edwards; many of his foreign policy declarations mimic Edwards' essay in "Foreign Affairs" magazine, Sept/Oct issu.

And, does it matter to anyone that Obama has accepted nearly as much money from the health-insurance industry as Hillary has? Why, if he wants to get money and special interests out of politics, did he not opt for public financing? You can't change the system if the system is paying your way.

Also, Obama has inflated his resume and his record. He was not, as he has claimed, a law professor. He was a senior lecturer; this is a real difference, not a matter of semantics.

Edwards is the real deal. Obama may be eloquent, but he has not led on the issues, he has followed.

When a candidate copies themes and concepts after watching them work for another candidate, how can we know that they truly believe the words they have stolen? Words are very powerful, but they do not matter much if they are not sincere. I like this article because it raises a good point that people should think about. What does it mean that Obama is copying Edwards on so many key points?
I had the privilege of watching John Edwards meet with a small group of his key donors in North Carolina. Behind closed doors, and needing their continued backing, John Edwards stayed true to every theme of his campaign....even though most in that room were not in agreement with him. He spoke persuasively about the need for strong unions, the need to fix trade agreements to benefit the middle class, the need to bring out troops home at once, the need to have universal healthcare, and the duty to provide help and real opportunity to the poor among us. Edwards did not budge one inch on his ideas. He "fought" with reason and intellect, and eventually won over most in the room. I learned two things from observing this. 1) Edwards sticks to his guns no matter who he is talking to, and 2) Edwards is able to win people over to his ideas.... when he has the time to really communicate with them.
Edwards is genuine. I know it. And I wish I had some of his eloquence to tell people this in a way that will get through to them. Maybe I should do like Obama and find some good lines to steal.

When a candidate copies themes and concepts after watching them work for another candidate, how can we know that they truly believe the words they have stolen? Words are very powerful, but they do not matter much if they are not sincere. I like this article because it raises a good point that people should think about. What does it mean that Obama is copying Edwards on so many key points?
I had the privilege of watching John Edwards meet with a small group of his key donors in North Carolina. Behind closed doors, and needing their continued backing, John Edwards stayed true to every theme of his campaign....even though most in that room were not in agreement with him. He spoke persuasively about the need for strong unions, the need to fix trade agreements to benefit the middle class, the need to bring out troops home at once, the need to have universal healthcare, and the duty to provide help and real opportunity to the poor among us. Edwards did not budge one inch on his ideas. He "fought" with reason and intellect, and eventually won over most in the room. I learned two things from observing this. 1) Edwards sticks to his guns no matter who he is talking to, and 2) Edwards is able to win people over to his ideas.... when he has the time to really communicate with them.
Edwards is genuine. I know it. And I wish I had some of his eloquence to tell people this in a way that will get through to them. Maybe I should do like Obama and find some good lines to steal.

Let's hear what Mr. G.A. Custer has to say on this.

Let's hear what Mr. G.A. Custer has to say on this.

Have also noticed the similar lines that David Axelrod took from John Edwards and gave to Obama. Edwards is genuine and has the long done the deeds for the people. I first of heard of the Edwards real,good deeds as they created a super afterschool program for students in memory of their son. Having resided in both NH and NC,I would ask the NH voters to give very serious consideration of John Edwards as our next president. The old establishment stopped his rise to presidency by giving us John Kerry.

I'm thinking --- could it be possible that we could frame this whole thing in some way other than winner take all. I liked Obama's recent call for a coalition for change, and I'd suggest that Obama and Edwards join forces to really blow the doors off the general election in the fall. Their styles are complimentary and the policies are really similar and still hopefully a work in progress.

Obama and Edwards in '08. That sounds like an amazing ticket to me. Two of the strongest leaders we could ever hope for joining forces to undo the Bush damage of the past eight years and facilitating the change we all are starved for.

I'm thinking --- could it be possible that we could frame this whole thing in some way other than winner take all. I liked Obama's recent call for a coalition for change, and I'd suggest that Obama and Edwards join forces to really blow the doors off the general election in the fall. Their styles are complimentary and the policies are really similar and still hopefully a work in progress.

Obama and Edwards in '08. That sounds like an amazing ticket to me. Two of the strongest leaders we could ever hope for joining forces to undo the Bush damage of the past eight years and facilitating the change we all are starved for.

I'll never vote for Obama. Just like Hillary Clinton he's taken as much from the health insurance lobby, more than 2 million dollars, he's bought and paid for, and will, like Clinton continue Bush's policies of allowing corporate interests to to dictate our laws. He and his wife make millions off Wall Street and corporate interests. He's not about change, he's about manipulating power for profit, and it won't be the working poor or struggling middle class American citizens who will profit.

I'm voting for Edwards, and that is the only candidate I will vote for.

I'll never vote for Obama. Just like Hillary Clinton he's taken as much from the health insurance lobby, more than 2 million dollars, he's bought and paid for, and will, like Clinton continue Bush's policies of allowing corporate interests to to dictate our laws. He and his wife make millions off Wall Street and corporate interests. He's not about change, he's about manipulating power for profit, and it won't be the working poor or struggling middle class American citizens who will profit.

I'm voting for Edwards, and that is the only candidate I will vote for.

Is it be possible that we could frame this presidential campaign in some way other than a unrepresentative, combative, winner-take-all primary mess we seem saddled with?

I appreciate the, consistent and strongly articulated positions which John Edwards has taken. I've also liked Obama's recent call for a national Coalition for Change. I'd suggest that Obama and Edwards join forces to present the strongest imaginable national leadership team . Their styles are complimentary and the policies are quite similar and, hopefully, still work in progress.

Obama and Edwards in '08 - that sounds like an amazing ticket to me. Two of the strongest leaders we could ever hope for joining forces to undo the Bush damage of the past eight years and facilitating the many changes we have been hoping for.

And, by the way, what is going on with the Federal Elections Commission and our need for adequate fund-matching for current campaigns and our concerns about election fraud, faulty voting machines, paper trails, voter lists, etc? We should all be deeply troubled by the lack of attention and progress on these matters in the White House and Congress. ???

Duncan McCutchan
I'm thinking --- could it be possible that we could frame this whole thing in some way other than winner take all. I liked Obama's recent call for a coalition for change, and I'd suggest that Obama and Edwards join forces to really blow the doors off the general election in the fall. Their styles are complimentary and the policies are really similar and still hopefully a work in progress.

Obama and Edwards in '08. That sounds like an amazing ticket to me. Two of the strongest leaders we could ever hope for joining forces to undo the Bush damage of the past eight years and facilitating the change we all are starved for.

Do you really want Obama in our presidential office??
He is a born Muslin and America does not need a Muslim to rule
us. The Muslims hate Americans. Where would that leave us?
It is very scary to know that he may be leading our great country.

The media made Hillary the front runner before anybody voted in the primary. Now the media is making this nomination process “Change versus Experience”. We buy into this media game without asking ourselves what really do these candidates stand for, what have they accomplished, and where do they want to see us go.

In my rational way of looking at things and perhaps in my reality world, this contest is about change and the agents of change.

On the one hand, we have change, idealistic and theoretical, driven by empty words (false hope) and strong emotions but only temporary because it cannot stand the test of time. A change that will require four years on the job training to clean the mess of the current administration. A change that will take a second term in office before the agents can even begin implementing their ideas which has been lost in this discussion perhaps because they really don’t have one.

On the other hand, we have change that can be put into effect right away. A change based on logical and rational thoughts and grounded on experience. A change that does not require on the job training. A change that can stand the test of time. A change you can feel, hear, see, smell, taste, and touch.

President Bush was an outsider, an agent of change. He was elected 8 years ago with the help of the Supreme Court and re-elected 4 years ago. Exit polls showed that he was well liked, most people consider him to be their next door neighbor, he was the type they could hang out with, etc. With only the concept of change and no experience on foreign affairs amongst others, he surrounded himself with the best experienced advisers money can buy. What do we have today in return? A broken system: FBI/CIA abuses, Iraq war, Effects of Hurricane Katrina, Economic woes, Recession, etc.

Obama and Edwards will argue that they are not President Bush. I am sure they will also tell us that they have different set of ideas and values. But I think it will be wrong to put the future of our country in the hands of someone without the first hand experience involved in the concept of change especially in today’s global dynamics of powers.

Edwards is the most morally consistent candidate out there--He truly walks the talk.

He doesn't just talk about taking on special interests, he has done so his whole life.

He doesn't just talk about universal health care, he pays his staffers health care.

He doesn't just talk about ending the war...he gets on the phone and contacts Ted Kennedy to unite the Dems to stop Bush.

He doesn't just talk about ending global warming, he has a carbon-neutral camapaign, drives a hybrid, uses solar power, and distributes lit on reducing carbon footprints...

He doesn't just talk about public financing and ending the corruption in WA...he is the ONLY candidate who has never taken a dime from WA lobbyists or PACS.

Obama talks a good game, but Edwards walks the talk.

Go, Edwards!

Elaine,

You people (yeah, I said it) need to pay attention.

For the 400th time, Obama IS NOT a Muslim. His father used to be a Muslim, but was actually an atheist by the time Obama was born. Obama is a Christian who has attended the Church of Christ in Chicago for many years.

Not that it should matter... and you're obviously going to vote Republican anyway.

Edwards is the real thing as far I'm concerned.

Thank God Hillary is dropping like a rock. I would hate to see her get the nomination... she would divide this country more than it already is. Not to mention she would raise Soooo much $$ for the Republicans. Seeing Hillary win the nomination is their dream.

For those who carry the delusion that Obama can win the general election, you are "drinking the Cool-Aid". Let's see, what hole do I want to drive a truck through? Statements about sending U.S. forces in Pakistan? Lifting phrases (and platform) from his rivals? Lack of national experience? What about signs of patriotism?

Do not get me wrong, I think Obama is likeable and a good egg in general, but to believe the GOP machine would not going to make mincemeat out of him is unrealistic. Hillary is truly (and inexplicably to me) hated in the rest of the country; she has very little chance of grabbing the centrist vote the feelings are that strong.

Edwards -- a stern negotiator (what litigators do most of the time), no nonsense
approach who answers the questions he is asked, and he has good ideas on how to change D.C.; I believe he's onto something and his inside the beltway ideas will become catalysts for real change in how Washington operates.

One more thing: the $400 haircut -- the person shut down their shop and went with Edwards for the day to prep him before multiple TV appearances. It wasn't one session in the chair at a salon. And it you don't think they all do it, have another sip of the Cherry-flavor.

Mr. Edwards reminds me of Harry Truman and the plaque on his desk. "The Buck Stops Here" Harry Truman was not recognized as doing so well until afterwards.

You can count on John doing the right things!

I believe John Edwards should be President..

Mr. Edwards reminds me of Harry Truman and the plaque on his desk. "The Buck Stops Here" Harry Truman was not recognized as doing so well until afterwards.

You can count on John doing the right things!

I believe John Edwards should be President..

Mr. Edwards reminds me of Harry Truman and the plaque on his desk. "The Buck Stops Here" Harry Truman was not recognized as doing so well until afterwards.

You can count on John doing the right things!

I believe John Edwards should be President..

Hmm. Is TJay's story about the haircuts true? if so, then the $400 payment is just rather than exorbitant. Perhaps the stylist would step forward and tell the story from his or her side of the scissors.

I'm increasingly irritated at how ignorant people are about what lawyers actually do. Comments 39 and 40 should be read and reread if Edwards' success as a litigator is to be properly understood and his ability to win battles for the little guy against the wealth and power of the big guys is to be appreciated.

Did Obama really did call himself a Professor instead of what he actually is, a
Senior Lecturer, at the University of Chicago Law School? Or did someone else bestow that title on him? Obama needs to clarify this.

I read in one post that someone said'she changed her mind at the last moment and voted for Obamma just because she couldnt pass up the opportunity to vote for a person of color".This in itself is a testimony of the ignorance of the vast majority of the American electorate.And we wonder how GWB was elected to the office of the Presidency twice??If Obamma wins the nomination,they will have handed the Presidency to the Republicans again.Some people never learn.You people had better wake up and stop listening to the news media and start thinking for yourselves.A vote for Obamma is a vote for more of the same.He cannot possibly win the general election.John Edwards is the only Democrat who can.

“Between now and November, you, the American people, you can reject the tired, old, hateful, negative politics of the past. And instead you can embrace the politics of hope, the politics of what's possible because this is America, where everything is possible.”
Sen. John Edwards, Democratic National Convention, July 28, 2004

I have been interested in Edwards as a candidate since 2004, I had no idea who
he was until he became the candidate for VP. I was sorry the Democratic party lost. Kerry was not my choice, but the Democratic party was. I wanted GW Bush out of the Whitehouse, well it didn't happen. A lot of people from the Democratic party crossed over and voted for GW Bush, no paid attention to the message of hope from the Democratic party. Instead they elected a phony, who was lying from the beginning about unity, and bipartisan politics. I believe Obama says the same thing, well I'll be lieve it when I see it, and I certainly hope I don't see it.
with Obama as President. He is an empty suit, Harvard grad or not. He probably became a social services attorney because, black people still have trouble getting
into the bigger law firms and even when they get in, they rarely become a partner.
Yes, Mr. Obama racism still exists, and just because you ignore the civil rights
of black people in 2008, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Ignoring people of color to appease your white voters, so you will get their votes. Talk about Martin Luther King among the mostly black audiences to fool them and pretend you really believed the civil rights movement. Yes, he benefited from MLK, Jessie Jackson
and Andrew Young, and Al Sharpton just name a few, but he doesn't repect them.
Takes their endorsements to fool the people, but is extremely deceptive and insincere.

Obama, don't you think it's odd, that so many whites are supporting your candidancy, with fundraising that has gone though the roof. They know nothing about you, yet they chose to fund your campaign, there's a something fishy here, and I think it is beginning to stink.

Yes, Obama does mimick John Edwarfds by using his words, because he doesn't
have any words of his own except " i am going change" yes, change what, he never says. Imitating is the most sincere form of flatterly , but Mr. Obama needs to give credit where credit is due. John Edwards entire campaign has been about change, without using the word. Healthcare for all, higher wages, opportunity for
the disadvantage, better education, better jobs, and a way out of poverty. He has
written an extensive pamplet on how we can get people out of poverty. Go to his website. What has Obama done, I 'll tell you, nothing. But if that's what you want to lead the country, many people will continue to suffer under a Presidency of
an African by the name of Barack Obama. We might as well have Adi Amin.