She may have been a better candidate than John.

The more the focus is on the issues and the less on the horse race from here on out the better. The "horce race" was useful in boosting TV ratings and voter turnout. Now let's hope all these people care about fixing the country.

So, where's the outcry (paging Joan Walsh, paging Joan Walsh) that a WOMAN who had some political capital DID NOT endorse the WOMAN candidate?

HOW DARE SHE NOT SUPPORT ANOTHER WOMAN!!! This is rampant sexism.

SEXISM ALERT...SOUND THE ALARMS!!!!! SEXISM ALERT...SOUND THE ALARMS!!!!!

Just pointing out that Salon and Joan have missed a chance to identify some minute speck of opportunity to scream SEXISM!!!!!

(For the record, I love Elizabeth Edwards, and think she's a true class act...)

who think that their blovations amount to fact or what we should believe is the truth. They ought to stick to prognosticating about Paris Hilton, Miley Cirus and other such "important" news

And yes, she'd be an excellent president. It's really too bad about her health being so precarious.

After John Edwards endorsed, Walsh said on TV that it was significant that Elizabeth didn't join him in Michigan. Wrong again. What a joke Salon has for an editor.

Too bad. I really like her. Always have. I guess that makes me sexist too.

The cancer joke? Not so much.

In the interviews that I have heard her give on the subject, she did not in any way reject Obama's plan. She said they were very both very similiar in many respects but she preferred Clinton's because it mandated universal coverage. As a doctor, she of course has concerns and interests that are not going to be the same as a patient, so while I respect her oppinion, it is not like she is the final word on what is best for the average American. Personally, I don't like the idea of mandates in Clinton's plan, because it forces someone to purchase coverage as condition of being alive in the US. I know Illinois has tried this with unhappy results, and frankly I don't understand how it is even Constitutional. As someone who pays a hefty amount to carry my own insurance, and would not be able to afford it if my small business takes a downturn, the thought of being required to buy insurance troubles me as I don't trust the government to have the same idea of what I can afford as I do.

I like and respect her reasons. As she said, the pundits are paid to make much ado about nothing, and whatever influence she has would be better spent speaking on an issue that she is personally invested in.

Have you ever had a loved one die of cancer?

The more the focus is on the issues and the less on the horse race from here on out the better.

Amen.

P.S. You don't play college baseball, do you?

And yes, I've had a loved one die of cancer. I have another one on his deathbed as we speak. I choose not to go through life with a raincloud hanging over my head. Nonetheless I apologize for ruffling feathers. Apparently my mimicry of a Hillaryis44 subscriber was over the top.

Maybe recognize this is a comment section and not a soap box for your self righteousness. Just a thought. Or maybe I don't know ENOUGH victims of cancer to make a stupid joke.

Or maybe I don't know ENOUGH victims of cancer to make a stupid joke.

I was only asking, not judging.

Elizabeth Edwards said not a word about endorsements at any time, yet the fact that she didn't appear with John at the Obama rally is thrown about as "significant." Based on what? Then, she writes in to Politico and that nest of political gossips and right-wing Drudge types. No, she never said she would "endorse." She's made statements that are supportive of Hillary's health plan -- really, the Edwards plan -- as she should. Nobody has given me a convincing reason why Obama wimps out on this issue. However, she, and I, will gladly support the nominee, and I bet she will be still urging at least for the Edwards plan, and maybe better -- single payer. This is the way adults commit politics, see?

Meanwhile, the Huffington Post highlights the (non-factual) refusal to endorse HILLARY. Well, she's not endorsing Obama, either, see? She's satisfied with the choice of the people, and meanwhile will lobby for health care reform that really deserves the name.

As long as we're trying to make a big deal about non-endorsements, has anybody noticed that Christina Augilera has NOT endorsed Obama? What's that about? Could that mean she secretly favors Hillary?

As Richard Dreyfuss says in "Close Encounters" while making a pile of mashed potatoes with his fork, This means something.

Salon Readers

Is'nt it wonderful to hear the true feeling of a Public Figure. Mrs. Edwards we salute you for your candor. Thank you for telling the Media Pundits to stop spinning the truth.

Why are the wives getting so involved and heated during this campaign? Oh, and one husband, of course. We don't care what you think, Elizabeth. None of the other spouses have helped by jumping on the band wagon. Take a hint, y'all.