YOUR COMMENTS

This is not an ad hominem argument...Edwards seems to be imploding, evidenced by an article by SC's largest newspaper. By the way, Edward's is originally from SC. See:

http://www.thestate.com/editorial-columns/story/139273.html

Not to denigrate the guy because he's not the only one with this approach/attitude. It's like he has no core, no belief of what he really stands for and what he's really passionate about. In his defense, I'm not sure I could put up with the fatigue of being on the campaign trail this early. Most folks do not like the slick, lawyer type that can turn it on and off. He doesn't have "it," nevermind that he has no platform. Anyone can throw stones; however, Mr. Edwards is in a very large glass house and windows are starting to break.
- Dennis Preston, Woodstock, GA

Decay of professionalism in journalism - do you mean things like Jayson Blair (NYT), Stephen Glass (The New Republic), Janet Cooke (Washington Post), Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith(Boston Globe) were dismissed due to fabricating stories, quotes, and plagerizing from left leaning papers?
- Susan, Concord

What angered me a while back was Edwards' well-documented use of the tax code to avoid paying Medicare taxes. He took money that to most would be considered ordinary income and called it a "distribution" rather than income. So politicians like Edwards want me to pay the Medicare tax on all of my income, but he can make millions and avoid paying the tax.

Reference:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-ap-edwards-finances,0,2606485.story?coll=chi-ed_opinion_bloggers-utl
- Richard Anderson, Roseville CA

Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich have all appeared on Fox News and it is time for Edwards to do the same. He is going to have to start answering the hard questions if he wants to move up in the polls.
- Jeff Samano, Torrance, CA

Mr Fodor - I made no ad hominem argument - I responded directly to your assertion that Edwards, being honest, open and above-board, donated his Murdoch-money to charities of his choice by simply pointing out that at least one of his charities of choice was in fact a 501(c) that he himself established for the specific purpose of benefiting his campaign. Some charity. Some ad hominem.
Mr Sullivan, I re-read my response to you and at no point did I say that you were a liberal so I don't know where your accusation came from. I responded to what you said however, that Fox News is not only biased but is actively pushing an ideology on their viewers. You said that Fox systematically devalues the liberal viewpoint. You also state that the Wall St Journal has a conservative bias. That is certainly true of the editorial page and certainly not true of the rest of the newspaper, which has a decidedly liberal lean. I disagree with your opinion of Fox News to this extent - they are obviously conservative, but far less so than most of the rest of what we call the MSM - entities that I referred to in my original post - are liberal. In addition, they give fair voice to commentators of the left such Juan Williams, Mara Liasson and others. Most MSM outlets that I am aware of are far less tolerant of opposing viewpoints. I watch news across the spectrum, and strongly disagree with your opinion that Murdoch leads the parade in the decay of professionalism in journalism. There are many that I would put ahead of him - Ted Turner and Pinch Sulzburger come immediately to mind.
- Wright Truesdell, Minneapolis, MN

This is the same trial lawyer shyster who berated the Bush administration for not having the courage to speak to Iran. Interesting when one realizes that former senator Edwards, placating his left-wing base, refuses to appear on the moderate to moderately conservative Fox News. Actions speak louder than words.
- Brent Anderson, Moultonborough

As a former resident of what arguably is THE most liberal state, Massachusetts, where I also grew up, I still see on the left the "we're smarter than you" attitude. More pointedly, their thought process is to get people to trust them as being smarter and to avoid what the facts are. In other words, throw away your minds and let us take care of you. Which is EXACTLY why John Kerry is not President. Witness his comments - "I can't believe we're losing to these idiots." Well, apparently because of the left's blindness to it's own ineptitude, the right was smarter. For John Edwards logic to continue to be true, he needs to sell his $6 million property in NC and live among what he calls the down and out. If in his eyes there are 2 America's, well he's living on the rich side of the fence. That is out and out hypocrisy. As well, while there are environmental concerns, how about the Hollywood elite cutting back on their enviro-consumer lifestyles? Again, this is not a principle but being "in" by being green. And how about them giving some real money, like until it hurts, like rest of us do? The only one I've seen do this is Sandra Bullock who has 2X given $1 million to help. How about the others? How about Oprah donating a $100 million to African relief? Sadly, this is about some supposedly thinking they are better than others, and above others, and wanting to dictate to the rest how to live. However, who wants to live like a hypocrite? Not very inspiring.
- Dennis Preston, Woodstock, GA

To Mr. Truesdell--Your ad hominem arguments avoid the real issue here--accuracy in media--which the editorial writer similarly eschews.
- George M. Fodor, Derry, NH

To the gentleman from Minnesota, Who said anything about left-wing bias? Who said that I was a liberal? Please be more careful when you make these statements. The point I was trying to make is that there is responsible journalism (Wall St Journal & UL on the right and NY Times & Concord Monitor on the left) and there is irresponsible journalism (NewsCorp). It's not the right-wing or left-wing bias that bothers me, it the decay of professionalism in our news that bothers me. Rupert Murdoch, without doubt, it leading this unfortunate march.
- Breyer Sullivan, Manchester, NH

Pushing an ideology? The same argument could be made for the New York Times, ABC News, The Washington Post, the LA Times, National Public Radio, the Concord Monitor .....

If you don't like Fox News or any other Murdoch publication or news station - the solution is simple --- don't read or watch.
- Susan, Concord

re your commentators: Is Mr Sullivan willing to give up the left-wing bias of the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CBS, NBC, ABC, MS-NBC and all the others in exchange for more neutrality from FOX? As for Mr Fodor, do you suppose one of Edwards' 'charities' was the non-profit Center for Promise and Opportunity which he founded, and from which, according to tax filings, he himself was the main beneficiary? And Mr Ahern bemoans the bias of Bill O'Reilly, as if that were something new under the sun. Maybe he should, during his channel-changing excursions listen in on Chris Mathews, Lou Dobbs or Bill Moyers, among many others. They all want their opinions to, in Mr Ahern's words "dominate our everyday life."
The one thing that annoys me more than anything else about the American left is its blinding hypocrisy.
- Wright Truesdell, Minneapolis MN

All of our news is biased in some way. Every writer has some sort of assumptions and/or leanings that might affect the partiality of their articles. What makes FOX News so troublesome is not that they are biased, it is because they are actively pushing an ideology on its viewers. They are only interested in “winning” the debate instead of learning from the debate. The Democrats are boycotting FOX not because they’re conservative, but because FOX systematically devalues the liberal viewpoint. Say what you will about the leanings of the Union Leader, but they aren’t trying to dupe their audience like FOX does. They have a whole lot more integrity that that. This is why the Dems had no problem with the UL co-hosting the NH debates awhile back at St. A’s.

One needs to look no further than Rupert Murdoch’s controversial acquisition of the Wall Street Journal to see the problem here. It wasn’t because of the NewsCorp’s conservative bias that was the issue; The Wall Street Journal already has a conservative bias. The controversy lies in the potential loss of journalistic integrity that the Wall Street Journal has established. People are afraid that NewsCorp will turn a respected newspaper into a tabloid-ish gossip rag like it has done with so many other newspapers. Unfortunately, the hypocritical actions by Mr. Edwards are not nearly enough to make NewsCorp and FOX News look like the “victims” in this situation. It is going to take a whole lot more than a visit to an apple orchard to make people feel bad for Rupert Murdoch.
- Breyer Sullivan, Manchester, NH

When your editorial writer refers to business transactions, he or she should have the decency and the professionalism to give all of the facts and not distort some of the details to fit pre-existing biases. John Edwards had a business relationship with the publisher in question--and all of the money went directly to charities of his choice. Thus, none of the money was, in fact, a campaign contribution, and for you to suggest otherwise is deceitful at best, if not an out-and-out lie. Edwards' position is clear and consistent--the moneyed interests, the lobbyists, the Washington insiders, the special interests--all of those who support and benefit from right-wing cronyism, have to be challenged at every point or we, the people , will never get our country back. That's why Edwards does not accept PAC money or contributions from insiders. Edwards is honest, open, and above-board, a refreshing, needed change from the current power elite.
- George M. Fodor, Derry

Mr. Bob Ahern of Londonderry NH remarks of so full of "Spin" The article was written was about John Edwards, sir, not about Bill O'Rielly Again these far left individuals, such as Mr. Ahern, take every opportunity to bash O'Rielly because what he says are facts and truths; they can't handle the truth. If he watched the program he would never make remarks that O'Reilly
engages in name calling or insults.

Mr. Ahern, I would suggest that you cut back on the Kool-aid.....
- Norm Landers, Sanford, fl (former NH resident)

Edwards much like many in his party is a hypocrite. How about CNN and it's obvious left leaning agenda and broadcasters?
Was it not known as the Clinton News Network during the Clinton years?
Of course they are OK and I do not see any republicans boycotting it? Or how about MSNBC and lest we forget CBS and it's left leaning take on things. You helped me in one decision because I will not be buying any apples at Macks I assure you. Not because of his political liablity(Edwards) but because he thinks those who go there want to read his political agenda.
Edwards campaign is done anyway and if we are lucky he will take the other hypocite with him....Hilary Clinton.
- Bill Brewster, Pelham NH

Fox news, an entity of Newscorp has gone way over the edge as of late. In particular, the O’reilly Factor. Bill O’reilly has become the rudest anchor of any news/commentary program. As an original viewer of Fox, I have since switched the channel. O’reilly frequently engages in name-calling, insults, and screaming matches with guests who particularly do not agree with his far right opinion. O’reilly frequently states that there’s “no spin” when in fact all of his rhetoric has a prominent “right wing spin”. Several months ago, Mr. O’reilly had a gust appear who in fact was an opponent of the war in Iraq. A young and soft-spoken Woman who, unfortunately could not get a word in edgewise. O’reilly persisted in interrupting her and insulting her position on the issues. Even the most casual viewer could not help but notice his “bully” tactics. We are all entitled to our opinion and only the rudest of rude would behave as O’reilly did. In addition, O’reilly has persisted in bullying numerous States in adopting Laws the “He” feels are appropriate.. In particular, he has been a strong advocate for Jessica’s Law. A sound law recently written and enacted to protect our children. New Hampshire did not adopt Jessica’s Law but instead wrote a law that serves the same purpose, and in many ways exceeds the attributes of Jessica’s law. However, this is not good enough for Newscorp. O’reilly wants his opinions to dominate our everyday life and if by chance we do not march to his drum, we are somehow criticized and scrutinized on his program. O’reilly has gone excessively far in his bullying tactics and by all standards, his is in fact a “Tin Horn” as described by the editor of the Union Leader several months ago while appearing on the factor.. The democrats should boycott Fox. They certainly deserve it.
- Bob Ahern, Londonderry

People see through Edward's hypocrisy. That's why he can't get any traction in the polls. The fact that he's a tort lawyer can't be helping him either. Besides that, why would the Demo's want to become accustomed to Edward's hypocrisy when they are already familiar with the hypocrisy of the Clinton's.
- GR Chase, Exeter, NH