Comments on: Edwards Endorses Barack Obama

By: JohnDenningMD

JohnDenningMD — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 23:16:26 +0000

Hey, “Press 7″, how many times have you been the victim of malpractice? Or how about someone in your family? And “junk science”? The only people who use that word are the ones who do “junk thinking.” We call them “Republicans.”

By: CCBeck

CCBeck — Thu, 15 May 2008 15:21:28 +0000

Though neither the Obama campaign nor the Clinton campaign is forthcoming with the costs of its promises, the National Taxpayers Union estimates that the Obama platform will increase federal spending by $307.3 billion. The Clinton platform’s price tag is $226.1 billion. No rollback of the Bush tax cuts would cover that kind of wanton spending increase. The Heritage Foundation puts the figure at less than $60 billion annually. Amazed by the dishonesty of the presidential candidates, The Washington Post’s economics columnist lamented this week that “the candidates dissemble because they believe that Americans don’t want the truth. It would be too upsetting.”

“Campaigning on Ignorance”
By Emmett Tyrrell

By: JimJohnson

JimJohnson — Thu, 15 May 2008 04:03:33 +0000

Edwards said he would endorse when the Democratic Party had determined the winner.

North Carolina determined the winner. In addition, Hillary would not stop attacking Obama.

It was great strategic planning for the Obama campaign to have the endorsement today in front of a large audience in Michigan. Took the steam out of Hillary’s W. Virginia win. Plus Hillary was on national TV at the same time as the endorsement.

By: Press 7 for Celtic

Press 7 for Celtic — Thu, 15 May 2008 01:59:46 +0000

I’ve always called him a “Hollow Armani”.

After all, when you’ve used junk science to squeeze as much money out of as many doctors as he has, not just any suit will do. It’s gotta be a snazzy one.

By: Paul Snatchko

Paul Snatchko — Thu, 15 May 2008 01:43:09 +0000

Agreed. Edwards is an empty suit.