To: Baladas
Why in the heck is a liberal magazine like Time “dissing” John Edwards in this article?
To: Dilbert San Diego
13 posted on
05/30/2007 3:59:22 PM PDT by
jonsie
To: Dilbert San Diego
Why in the heck is a liberal magazine like Time “dissing” John Edwards in this article? Just following orders from high up.
14 posted on
05/30/2007 4:00:20 PM PDT by
M203M4
(What I wanna see is a pro-war ("kill the bastards") Ron Paul. Pacifism is suicide.)
To: Dilbert San Diego
Why in the heck is a liberal magazine like Time “dissing” John Edwards in this article?Because they have all their eggs in the Hillary basket for 2008.
To: Dilbert San Diego
Clinton’s minions told TIME to destroy Edwards.....he’s leading in IOWA.
25 posted on
05/30/2007 4:08:12 PM PDT by
Suzy Quzy
(Hillary '08...Her Phoniness is Genuine!!!)
To: Dilbert San Diego
Sharp elbows, clearing the path for their anointed.
So far as I can tell; not John Edwards.
That’s kind of a creepy story, too.
26 posted on
05/30/2007 4:08:18 PM PDT by
incredulous joe
("Why do psychics have to ask you for your name?" -- Stephen Wright)
To: Dilbert San Diego
"Why in the heck is a liberal magazine like Time “dissing” John Edwards in this article?"
This is truly a gratuitous hit piece, a story that didn't need to be written, a trashy story, so I conclude that Time does not want Edwards to get the nomination. Maybe they're jumping on the Al Gore ("I'm The Smartest Man In The World") bandwagon.
29 posted on
05/30/2007 4:11:15 PM PDT by
Steve_Seattle
("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
To: Dilbert San Diego
HRC—there is a pattern here, Edwards, Obama, Gore—she hasn’t even started on the Repubs yet.
32 posted on
05/30/2007 4:14:53 PM PDT by
richardtavor
(Pray for the peace of Jerusalem in the name of the G-d of Jacob)
To: Dilbert San Diego
Why in the heck is a liberal magazine like Time “dissing” John Edwards in this article? My guess is that this ultimately comes from Hillary Clinton. Despite his recent pratfalls there has been the danger that Edwards might catch on as a darling of the leftist-extremist Dhimmicrat base and "net-roots". Edwards has been the farthest left, both on Iraq and domestic/economic policy, of all the possibles (i.e. excluding the not possibles like Kookcinich).
The last thing Hillary wants is for the Dhimmicrat base to find a champion, a la Howard Dean (pre-scream). The last thing she wants is any air of enthusiasm in the Dhimmicrat primary battles. She hopes to grimly push through to the nomination on "inevitability".
37 posted on
05/30/2007 4:18:41 PM PDT by
Stultis
(I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
To: Dilbert San Diego
Why in the heck is a liberal magazine like Time “dissing” John Edwards in this article? 1. Shrum is a Dem insider so Time wants to stay connected with him.
2. Edwards is running against Hillary and Obama. The commielibs want Dems to have a choice between Marxist A and Marxist A+.
41 posted on
05/30/2007 4:27:40 PM PDT by
Tall_Texan
(NBC News - the preferred network of assassins and terrorists.)
To: Dilbert San Diego
To make way for the pre-ordained candidate for 2008, Hillary.
49 posted on
05/30/2007 4:48:08 PM PDT by
dawn53
To: Dilbert San Diego
Why in the heck is a liberal magazine like Time “dissing” John Edwards in this article?
LOL. Easy. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
65 posted on
05/30/2007 6:02:01 PM PDT by
khnyny
To: Dilbert San Diego
A) Shrum needs a job
B) Shrum needs to revise his record of losing
C) Obama is losing momentum
D) Hillary strike again
E) All of the above
Pick’em.
71 posted on
05/30/2007 7:42:54 PM PDT by
romanesq
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson