The leader of the MSM, Keith Olbermann, had no comment.
Maybe they were just biased. Maybe? What gave ya the first clue Sherlock? Reporters not wanting to report unflattering things about big time democrat players is nothing new. Nothing new at all.
Each reporter assigned to a ‘leading’ candidate in either party simply doesn’t want to lose the gig - they love doing those meaningless stand-ups at campaign stops where nothing is said and nothing happens but the reporters still dutifully repeat campaign-issued talking points.
Campaign coverage in the age of the Internet is a relic of the 1930s when the only way to obtain ‘news’ was to ride the train along with the candidate.
With Democratic candidates, of course, there is an added dimension in which statism is given more disguises than Lon Chaney ever dreamed up. Each Dem candidate is Robin Hood, Santa Claus and Superman rolled into one.
Advertiser beware! There will come a day when no one will buy your products because you advertise with this scum and filth!
Not true. He was never a contender, serious or otherwise.
“Or maybe they were just biased.”
Umhhh - what exactly was the nature of that bias? Because we all know (since we’re continually told so) that there’s no left-wing bias in the MSM, right?
If it was a republican presidential candidate the story would have led every report every night and the story would have camped out on the front page of every MSM source in the country. That it didn't for Edwards is just further proof of bias...no "maybe" about it.
Andrew Young was a tool and stupid to boot. Now he writes a book seeking to shine up his image for his next political “trick”?.
You and I both know the word for this guy.
He barely lost to Zero in Iowa. Too bad that he didn’t beat Obama. After all, we haven’t had a child crawling around the Oval Office since Monica Lewinsky.