Tonight was supposed to be a happy night, but instead as I sat back to watch the C-SPAN coverage of the convention, I couldn’t help but hear my family in the kitchen. They were talking about the election but it was hard to hear over the roar of the television I was listening too. I knew why they were whispering. They didn’t want me to hear.

Much has been said this week about Doris Kearns Goodwin's brilliant book Team of Rivals at a time when all the tradmed wants to talk about drama between Obama and the Clintons. Last night, Hillary did what she had to do to try to put that to rest. She was on message (even if some of that message was self-centered) and she talked about the same middle class folks she championed during the campaign. Thus, it seemed that Obama's biggest rival turned into an ally. But, for obvious reasons, little is being said of Obama's other rival: John Edwards. And while, in my opinion, Edwards has no place at this convention, the message he championed during his campaign most certainly does.

Most if not all of you know that my usual diary shtick is the nightly Countdown diary, so I wasn't planning to diary here until Friday evening. However, this little "gem" that I just found literally has me seeing red.

cross-posted at Bleeding Heartland

I wouldn't say my four-year-old son was following the presidential race closely last year, but he was paying enough attention to understand that his parents were voting for John Edwards. Having been in the car a few times when I delivered yard signs, he also understood that an Edwards sign in front of someone's house meant that person was also voting for Edwards.

In March of this year, my son (by then five years old) asked me whether we were still voting for John Edwards. I explained that not enough people had voted for Edwards, so he couldn't be the president. We would vote for someone else, probably Barack Obama. He found that a little confusing, but over time it clicked with him that we were supporting Obama for president.

Last night we had a baby-sitter over for a couple of hours. While she was here, I was getting the kids a snack, and my older son asked her who she was voting for. She said, "McCain."

He followed up with, "But who are you voting for for president?" She said, "McCain."

Pause. He turns to me: "Mommy, are we voting for Obama?"

"Yes, we're voting for Obama, but [baby-sitter] is voting for McCain."

"Oh." And he went back to eating pretzels.

    I'm wishing for the former, but I thought I should bring up the possibility of the latter, as unlikely as it may be. (Although Tom Eagleton didn't have any real slips on the McGovern campaign trail per se; he'd just had electroshock therapy when younger. Meanwhile, Biden comes up with new zingers like "Barack Americans", which gives me little hope...)
    By the way, this will probably be one's last diary that evokes Biden's past much. (Cf. this comment from my diary yesterday, noting that people were not being very honest in the poll about whether Biden should be VP.) But as we all hope that Joe doesn't use his Joementum in a self-destructive way that could hurt others too, let's ask about the NON-conscious reasons that Barack may have picked Bi to be his partner.

    (below)

(Cross-posted from "Godotbamaism.org")

    CURTAIN RISES. LIGHTS ON Godotbama, center stage, sitting in a chair with a skull in his hand, he looking at the skull intently.

ACT I

    Godotbama: I am the change I've been waiting for--give or take 50 cents. But I am now waiting...waiting...waitingwaiting for the perfect VP. For me. G.
    I think and weigh, but whom shall I choose? The flawless one, without whom I shall lose? (taps skull, looks pensive)
    ...And so too doth the AUDIENCE (nodding towards audience) wait and pine; to see which, which helper shall be mine.

ACT II

    (Shuffling out of the darkness, stage left, a female figure wearing a pantsuit, an "H" embroidered on her jacket:)

    H: Is this a dagger I see before me? Hie hie. The Lady cometh, and not too late; if thou choosest not her, she shalt thee OBLITERATE.

    G: Get thee hence, milady: thou art a ghost of sorrowful sounds, of clinging tones past.

    (H shuffles back where she came from)

[more play-ing below]

Despite having run fiercely as the champion of the people, the people found it hard to accept a champion who had a $400 haircut.  I mean, really, $400?  He never really caught on after throwing everything into Iowa.  Heck, the $400 haircut made it possible for Hillary Clinton to siphon votes from what should have been the core constituency of John Edwards.  It's hard to relate to that, just like it's hard relating to someone who can't remember how many homes he owns.  While John McCain doesn't have enough hair to warrant such a fine cut, his $500 shoes and eight or more homes is tough to understand to the Average Joe(and a lot more than just him).  The fact that he forgot how many homes he has, that he couldn't count them in his head on the spot, is like John Edwards' $400 haircut on crack.

The blogosphere is reporting that the National Enquirer has a timeline planned to rollout "Breaking News" articles on the John Edwards-Reille Hunter affair from now until the election. This week´s Enquirer "Breaking News" details the Baby Pictures, Edwards friends´ funding Hunter´s escape to the Virgin Islands and their extreme stretch in trying to drag Obama into this story because the house in the Virgin Islands belongs to someone who donated to both campaigns. They and Rush Limbaugh are still attempting to blame Mrs. Edwards either for not being sexually active enough or for knowing and not outing her husband previously. Either of these directions are so far fetched it makes both Limbaugh and the Enquirer´s right wing agenda laughable, ridiculous and unscrupulous.

By Jwilkes from Eyes on Obama:

Democrats have a responsibilityto turn their backs on Edwards. As a person, I forgive Edwards. But as a representative and a spokesman for the party and its issues, I expect more. As a man who held his marriage, implicitly or otherwise, as an example of his integrity, credibility, and character, John Edwards failed his cause.

JOHN EDWARDS POLITICAL FUTURE, OBAMA’S VP & WHAT IF?
If Edwards had received the Presidential nominee- He still would have steam rolled McCain, After all McCain did the same thing- except worse. Edwards would have come out on top, just as Clinton did. Voters would have quickly realized that the opportunity to have Edwards as president over McCain, much outweighs a personal mistake. The US always gives 2nd Chances.

I think Obama will now choose Sebelius. (For over a year I have thought that Sebelius (or Blanche Lincoln) will be the first female President). However, I fully think that John Edwards was going to be the VP as late as 1 month ago, until the 06 affair started coming closer to the surface. He perfectly fills in the missing appeal (to Ohio/ Penn/ etc) that Obama Lacks. And he is a Southerner (So long as the top of the ticket is not a "NE liberal" (even though I do not think this should be the case), a southerner does make a difference on the ticket).

(Cross-posted from "Bayh-Bayh-Bayhden.org")

    Some say Obama chose a VP already.
    Well, maybe it's time to un-choose.

    While this diary resembles my previous di on similar topics, there's a lot more to say:


JOE BIDEN

1. Biden is a plagiarist. Even if it was 2 decades ago.

    Actually, more than a plagiarist; just peep the Wik,

(look out below)

Ezra Klein wrote an extremely thoughtful piece today in his blog that exposes a certain double standard between the way John Edwards' affair has been received versus how the torrid affairs of other politicians, including several who ran for president in 2008, have seen their infidelities treated.

Klein argues that the phoniness that the media is now guffawing that they always saw in Edwards is not something extraordinary [that say, you couldn't find in John McCain] or unique to just John Edwards.

So what is it about this current affair that has seemingly has Edwards down for the count when other politicians have survived their infidelities?

Political junkie that I am, one would think that this upcoming election would be filling me with excitement. Quite the opposite, in fact. I am filled with dread. The choices on the right, left and all points in between give new meaning to the phrase "lesser of all evils".

McCain is too old, too tied to special interests and corporate power mongers, too out of touch with the common man, too oblivious to the "new world" around him (hello - Czechoslovakia??),.  and too damn belligerent to be trusted with the top job.

Obama is too green, too tied to special interests and political power mongers, too willing to bend and sway to the political winds, too arrogant and too damn interested in listening to himself pontificate to be given the mantle of President of the United States.

I know this mere title is probably flamable here right now. I have been watching the steady stream of John Edwards diaries the last week or so here, and have put my two-cents worth in several. Most long-time supporters will know that I was an Edwards supporter, and one of those so-called disgraced contributors. That said, I am not here to defend any of his actions.

All disasters are different. Some are sudden catastrophes: a bridge collapse, an earthquake, or the capsizing of a ferryboat. One moment everything is fine, the next, disaster. Other disasters seem to occur in slow motion: the Titanic scaping along the iceberg, the slow leak that fatally undermines a dam, or the gradual destruction of an environment through pollution.

John McCain suffered three slow motion disasters this past week, events that didn't look that bad as they happened, but in retrospect will hurt or even wreck his campaign for the presidency.

Follow me over the jump.

The continuing fall out of John Edwards' 2006 affair may cost Democrats in Texas big time. John Baron was the Finance Committee Chairman for the Edwards' campaign. And he has benn identified as person who paid so-called hush money to the affairess. How does this lose local Texas races for the Democrats? It's all about the effect of not having public financing of election campaigns.

This commentary was written by B. Edwards, an American and professor abroad.

The current frenzy over the extra-marital affair of John Edwards brings to light some interesting facets of the American political scene. Why in all the hubbub of news and events is the most popular point of media interest whether John Edwards has an illegitimate son or not? What stokes the desire to feed upon this man's misdeed?

One obvious answer is the Republican political machine, which like the Democratic one seeks to capitalize on any advantage it can get to win elections.  Elections have become major displays of the power of quantification, with every single element being weighed by a cadre of analysts seeking that one extra percentage point to tip their boss into power.

OK, so I was reading an Ari Melber article on HuffPo where he linked this video.

If you go to 2:10 into the video, you will see clearly that Sean Hannity asks THE QUESTION that should devastate John McCain's campaign (but hasn't yet).

Now, remember, this is Sean Hannity asking the question - so he's not some left-wing radical liberal...  

"I want to know ... you gotta explain this to me ... I'm just a regular guy, and I'm wondering, if you can't keep your promise to your family, can't keep your promise to your wife, you're having an affair, you lie about the affair repeatedly ... why should the American people say you say you're not gonna lie to them?  Why should we trust you?"

For once, I agree with Sean Hannity!