g023420009:25AMJan 22nd 2008

The choice in this election is simple. If we want a president who will lead America to the big, bold changes we need and change the conversation in America, Democrats should choose the candidate who has led the field in ideas and shaped the conversation in this race so far.

On the Democratic side, John Edwards, although never the front-runner, has been driving his party's policy agenda. He's done it again on economic stimulus: last month, before the economic consensus turned as negative as it now has, he proposed a stimulus package including aid to unemployed workers, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, public investment in alternative energy, and other measures

The fact remains that the Edwards campaign has set the domestic policy agenda for the entire field. He was the first with a bold universal health care plan, the first with an ambitious climate change proposal that called for cap-and-trade, and the leader on reforming predatory lending practices and raising the minimum wage to a level where it regains its lost purchasing power

John Edwards has led the other candidates in standing up for progressive change. In this campaign, the other candidates have followed John's lead in talking about the special interests -- but the special interests understand the difference between rhetoric and reality. That's why corporate lobbyists are united against John Edwards.

Here's the bottom line in this election. We need a president who has the vision to put forth bold, progressive solutions to the challenges facing America in the 21st century. John Edwards has shown he has that vision -- and he has led on it throughout this campaign.

John Edwards has stated that, as president, he will require the use of safe, renewable energy sources like wind, solar power and biomass to generate 25% of the nation's electricity by 2025. In the first 100 days of his presidency, John will send legislation to Congress to halt global warming and achieve energy independence.

John has promised to invest $1 billion a year to develop the ability to permanently store carbon emissions and ban the construction of new coal plants that cannot capture their own carbon.

And, as president, John Edwards would invest an additional $1 billion to help U.S. automakers advance the latest technology -- including biofuels, hybrid and electric cars, ultra-light materials and drivetrain improvements -- to ensure the world's most fuel-efficient cars are made in America by union workers.

And because John Edwards has not accepted a dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs, he has a bold, transformational plan to take on the big oil companies, polluters and power companies to address the great environmental challenges of our lifetime.

John Edwards is the only one that will fight poverty and bring health care and education to the poor & middle class of America. John Edwards would be the best President for all of America, anything less will be as bad as keeping Bush in office forever.

America deserves honest men of integrity that will fight for all Americans, and Edwards is a true patriot that can make America great. He has the substinance, determination, and will to fight greed, corruption and end the outsourcing of our jobs.

His economic, education, health and welfare policies are now being copied by all the canidates. Edwards spoke out months and even years before the others.

America needs to think about why the "Washington Greed, Corruption, Large Corporations and Media" are trying to make this a two candidate Democratic race?

Edwards is the only Democrat able to win the Presidency, as polls have showed that any Republican nominated will beat Clinton and/or Obama.

An Edwards presidency will create American jobs for Americans by ending the outsourcing of our jobs lost through NAFTA and CAFTA. It will end the greed and corruption of large corporations and Washington politicians.

End the $700 million per day wasted in Iraq and invest in America, America can prosper in a global economy without outsourcing our jobs

Vote for jobs for the workers of America, healthcare and education for the middle class by endorsing a true patriot of integrity and honesty for America, John Edwards

David S.11:20AMJan 22nd 2008

No doubt Roe v. Wade has been the most controversial decision handed down by the Supreme Court, surpassing even Brown vs. Board of Education.
There will always be fundamental differences among folks as to when life begins - some believe it begins at conception, others later.
I am personally pro-choice. A "fetus" is not a fetus at conception; it is merely a clump of cells. There is no "baby" for some time. All Roe v. Wade states is first trimester abortions only; after that states can - and do - set their own rules.
The majority of Americans still support abortion rights, with restrictions. Those restricitons being parental consent for minors and no late term abortions, which are reasonable. Reasonable people do not want to drive women back to the days of back alley butchers, coat hangers, etc. That would be disastrous.
What galls me about Republicans running for public office is they take the high road on abortion. They merely claim they are "pro-life" yet do not have to define it. If you truly in your heart believe abortion is murder, say so. Call for the imprisonment of women who get abortions. We all know they won't do that because it is unpopular and women are a powerful voting force in this country. If we ever in this country got to the point where abortion is completely illegal, all the media would have to show is women being hauled out in front of judges with orange jump suits on and in shackles, and the GOP would be finished for a generation. And the Republican party is well aware of that.
I will continue to support Democrats because they believe in protecting a woman's right to choose.
Don't like abortion? Don't have one. As to the one out of every three abortions "targeting" African Americans, no one holds a gun to your head and forces you into an abortion clinic.

robmeja12:45PMJan 22nd 2008

remember it's about freedom of choice.

FAYE12:14AMJan 23rd 2008

REGARDLESS OF OUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF ABORTION, ABORTIONS HAVE ALWAYS OCCURRED AND WILL CONTINUE TO OCCUR. WE CAN EITHER ACCEPT COATHANGER MUTILATIONS AND DEATH OF BOTH FETUS AND MOTHER, OR WE CAN ALLOW FOR SAFETY. NOBODY KNOWS THE FEELINGS OF THE PREGNANT WOMAN BETTER THAN SHE DOES. IT SHOULD BE A MATTER OF CHOICE FOR THE WOMAN CONCERNED.
IF GOD DISAPPROVES OR APPROVES OF HER DECISION, THEN THE DECISION SHOULD BE LEFT TO THE PERSON THEMSELVES.

Tracy8:03AMJan 23rd 2008

No, it's not about freedom of choice, it is about the freedom of the mother to murder a baby if s/he is inconvenient. _Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow_