Les Jones

Is this idea of "controlling the news" a new discovery for you? "unofficial censors editing the news to favor the political party of their choosing" -- gosh, who ever heard of such a thing? Is there any danger of this happening closer to home or in relation to more substantial stories?

Nah, it's just really blatant in this case, what with news editors for major U.S. dailies forbidding their bloggers from covering it.

This is hardly a blatant example. For one, it's essentially a celebrity story since Edwards is no longer a candidate for anything. Two, it's potentially libelous, and any professional editor is going to want to proceed carefully.

A more blatant example is the recent blackout of news that Karl Rove was formally declared in contempt of Congress. The Sentinel did not mention it, and neither did Fox News nor dozens of U.S. dailies. The Sentinel did mention the next day that a federal judge ordered Miers and Bolton to testify.

There was also that time a few months ago when the Huntsville CBS station (I think) blacked out the 60 Minutes report on former Alabama Governor Seligman's jail sentence. Same story, really.

"For one, it's essentially a celebrity story since Edwards is no longer a candidate for anything."

When the Enquirer broke the story on the affair John Edwards was a candidate to be President of the United States America. He didn't drop out until January 30, 2008.

He was considered a candidate for the Vice-President as recently as June:

On June 15, 2008, Edwards stepped back from his initial outright denial of interest in the position of the Vice President, saying, ”I’d take anything he asks me to think about seriously, but obviously this is something that I’ve done and it’s not a job I’m seeking." [58]. On June 20, 2008, The Associated Press reported that according to a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, the names of Edwards and Sam Nunn are on Obama's vice presidential shortlist.[59]

If Edwards had started winning primaries, I'll bet the story would have bubbled up sooner. Either way, the story still dwarfs in comparison to the Bush administration's continued efforts to undermine our Constitutional checks and balances.

You are going to spend the next 4 or 8 years hypocritically bitching about a Democratic President using the unfettered powers Bush has laid down for the office, and it will be because you were so happy to have your news controlled when your team was doing the cheating.

You're assuming that I'm in the tank for one side as much as you're in the tank for the other. I spoke out about the Bush administration's denigration of habeus, and I wasn't happy when Bush commuted Libby's sentence.

No matter which party takes office in 2008 I expect them to try to roll back Constitutional rights. That's been a long-term trend no matter who is in office.