John Edwards, former United States Senator from South Carolina and candidate for the vice presidency in the last presidential election is running a very close third to Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton in the race to secure the Democratic Party's nomination for president. The media makes it seem like a two horse race even so early in the campaign, unfairly writing off Mr. Edwards with more than 6 months to go before the Democratic Convention and almost 10 months before the general election in November. Well, guess again. John Edwards understands it's a long process that has barely begun. And on balance, Edwards seems to have the best policies of any Democratic candidate and a real working knowledge of our nation and the world around us.
He has his drawbacks, to be sure, and I'm not referring to his background as a wealthy litigator. If anything, I think his experience fighting large corporations in court gives him a more realistic feel for their ruthlessness and rapacity. The next president will face a corporate world far more empowered by the corporate presidency he or she will be replacing. The various lobby groups for big business on Capitol Hill are stocked with powerful and knowledgeable former Senators and Congressman reaping millions to subvert the government they once pretended to serve. I think Edwards' adversarial experience will better enable him to battle the multinationals as they attempt to completely take over the United States government instead of merely dominating it as they do now.
His drawback is his perfect hair and game show host/TV weatherman good looks. While America likes to elect good looking men with a full head of hair, John Edwards just might be too good looking, his hair just a little too perfect. Not only that, he seems like a decent guy, reasonable and mature. Not what a lot of Americans look for in a president. Don't know why that is, but we seem to elect some fairly odd people to lead us. Anybody remember Nixon? Wow! A very strange man indeed. How about Reagan? He was totally nuts, a delusional old fart who deluded a large segment of the population who wanted to believe his nonsense. Guess the joke was on us. Bill Clinton? A slick charmer but at least pretty bright, so you wonder why he did such dumb things like export so many American jobs with that whole NAFTA fiasco and fail to tell Congress that his penis was none of their damned business. He wound up outsmarting himself and surrendering the Congress to another real sleazy ball of wax, Newt Gingrich.
Then you have our current president Bush the Younger, a complete moron representing the single most bizarre choice of a President in American history. It's like that Peter Sellers' movie "Being There" in which a simpleton rises to power. Only the reality of it isn't comedy but a national tragedy, even if it is pretty damned funny sometimes. America didn't want to admit the joke was on us again and so reelected the boob and his team of puppet masters to four more years of zany ineptitude, Treasury looting and declaring war on the wrong country, the one hat never attacked us. Just goes to show you how very much we miss The Three Stooges.
So maybe this Edwards guy is too normal of a human being to be our president. Even the media can't find much dirt on the guy and they live for that crap. The biggest scandal they found was that he paid four hundred bucks for a haircut, something a lot of rich people do. Hell, a lot of those media people are put together by a sizable team of makeup artists, hairdressers and clothing experts before they're allowed to go on the air and still don't look as good as John Edwards. Maybe they're jealous. Or maybe political writers and TV pundits don't like more than two viable candidates, not being as smart as the rest of us who can pretty much follow any number of candidates. This is not a game or a TV show to voters, this is a presidential election at a critical time in American history. Can we hear all the voices out there, all the ideas?
Who the hell appointed or elected the TV clowns to decide who is or is not a viable candidate? What interests them doesn't necessarily interest regular people. And what's all that bullshit about race and gender? What about the damned issues? Don't waste limited and valuable TV time asking childish questions and don't try to dictate to the candidates what are the important issues. By definition presidential candidates decide what are the issues that are important to them and that's why they run for president; to address certain issues or to advance particular ideas. Nobody runs for president to remedy the things that worry Wolf Blitzer and Bill O'Reilly. Let them run for president if they're so hot and bothered about the stupid shit they think about. See how many votes they</> get.
So let's not allow TV talking heads to declare the Democratic race a two candidate show. John Edwards is right there with Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton and has a chance to win the nomination whether or not that sits well with the the media or ruins the script they would prefer to follow. Nobody really gives a rat's ass what newscasters think anyway. They're merely wealthy corporate spokesman for the most part and completely out of touch with reality. Most of them are shallow and phony blowhards with an axe of some sort to grind and who are completely dependent on ratings, just like any other TV show. Are these the people anybody but themselves wants to define the parameters of political discussion or affect the electoral process in this country? I don't think so. So let Mr. Edwards and his perfect hair have their say and shut the hell up about things you know nothing about. Go bother Mitt Romney and his hair. Or better yet, go read a newspaper and see how real reporting is done.
