Reasons NOT to vote for John Edwards

John Edwards would be a bad President. This judgment is based on my personal assessment of his leadership abilities and his policies. There are many logical reasons not to vote for John Edwards which I will explore on this blog. I hope that you join me in this important discussion by posting comments and sending me your "reasons" at johnrawls@johnedwards.org. In order to maintain the integrity of an intellectual discussion, there are two rules that will govern all content on this blog: 1. personal attacks will not be tolerated and 2. every "reason" must be factual and must cite sources.

Friday, April 20, 2007

Reason #2 YouTube Censorship

This week, John Edwards is featured on the YouChoose section of YouTube.com. The point of this forum is for politicians to have an opportunity to directly speak to the YouTube community and the youth culture, it represents an incredible milestone for the Internet's role in political discourse. In his featured video, John Edwards makes a one minute speech asking the YouTube community to post responses to his video. John Edrwads claims to be is engaging the YouTube community in an honest discussion, when in reality the Edwards campaign screens every video response to make sure they conform to his political strategy. This is not about connecting with the youth, this about manipulating them. See for yourself:
Here is one response to the Edwards video that the Edwards campaign has refused to post:

It is dishonest that the Edwards campaign is pretending to use YouTube to create an open debate and listen to the youth culture. Instead, John Edwards is using YouTube to control debate and hide from hard questions.

9 comments:

jlwolff said...

Hello John,

I'm going have to question this one. You say that "the Edwards campaign has refused to post" that video. Where would they have posted it? I went to the Edwards yout choose 08 site:
http://youtube.com/johnedwards
as well as the video section of his campaign site:
http://www.johnedwards.com/media/video/
and I found not one submitted video.

Now either this means that the Edwards campaign is refusing to post every single video sent to them because they disagree with the message or they aren't posting the videos because they don't post other peoples videos on Edwards websites.

Additionally, you call this YouTube censorship; however, the source of the video he supposedly censored is YouTube...so...what exactly is your reason number 2 for not supporting John Edwards?

STG said...

Can't say that I'm all that surprised by him/his campaign dodging this question. Since when has any politician really gone out of his way to answer potentially damaging questions? That said, you would expect better from a candidate like John Edwards. If he truly embraces this medium of communication, which he clearly tries to convince us of, then he could really generate some trust and interest amongst people like us. Judging by the name of this website, however, it still looks like he's a bit pedestrian when it comes to gauging the importance of and understanding the internets.

John Rawls said...

jlwolff: You are mistaken, you are confusing John Edwards' YouChoose channel with the specific video "What are you going to do to bring about change?" If you click on the link to that video on "Reason #2" of this blog, you will see that Edwards posted over 40 video responses to this video. Please check your facts.

Anonymous said...

Umm....that's idiotic. Edwards has previously stated his stance on Iraq and related this to his previous vote.
I understand wanting to attack him, but do it intelligently.

John Rawls said...

John Edwards voting to send hundreds of thousands of American troops to Iraq before we caught Bin Laden and dealt with Al-Qaeda, that is idiotic.

Miles said...

I think Edwards should have the right to censor people who try and make him look bad on his own page. He has invited people to come discuss important issues, which is a great thing- and a sign of a true visionary. It is in his best interest to only post the videos that cast him in a favorable light, and any smart politician would do the same. This is not an act of censorship, but rather a demonstration of Edwards’ cunningness as a politician. Just the man we need for the job in 08!

Anonymous said...

Edwards is not my first choice, in no small part due to his foolish misjudgement. I wanted Russ Feingold, but he decided not to run most likely because of his marital difficulties.

Barack Obama's judgement was much better as concerns the invasion of Iraq, but beyond Obama are there any candidates in the Democratic primary who weren't foolishly hawkish? Hillary Clinton doesn't even regret supporting the war.

So do you support Obama for 2008 (as I do)? Or did I miss an anti-war candidate?

jlwolff said...

John, I hardly think this is an issue of checking facts. I couldn't find the site you were talking about. Now I have.

That said, I took the time last night to watch all 40 videos that are posted on his you choose and many of them are far more confrontational and anti-Edwards than the one you have on your site. So why would Edwards not accept one that asks him about his policy on Iraq, a question he has answered countless times, and yet accept ones from people who say one of the ways they are going to help the world is by not voting for Edwards?

Also, since last night, 12 more responces have been posted, many of which were online before but have just now been linked to the Edwards post. So this means they are still adding them on.

Finally, this does not strike me as censorship even if he did chose not to post it. This circumstance parallels sending a letter to the editor to your local newspaper and them not printing it. It's a shame, but it's not censorship.

John Rawls said...

jlwolf: I also watched all 53of the Edwards response videos and noticed some anti-Edwards videos sprinkled here and there. But strangely, I could not find a single video that was about John Edwards' record on Iraq. Call it censorship, call it anything you like. The Edwards campaign is blocking videos about his record on Iraq. John Edwards approved a few negative response videos, so what? He blocked every response video about his record on Iraq because he didn't want to remind the YouTube community that he voted to fund this heinous war.

Also, you write that John Edwards screening Iraq videos "parallels sending a letter to the editor to your local newspaper and them not printing it." I think that is a really strange and incorrect statement. Edwards did not just block one "letter" or video response, he seems to be blocking all of them that are about his record on Iraq. The War in Iraq is by far the most important issue for the American people in the upcoming Presidential election. John Edwards supporters should be embarrassed that their candidate is hiding from his Iraq record on YouTube.

anonymous: Much agreed, Obama is the only legitimate Democratic candidate that has a record of good judgment about invading Iraq.