If you are interested in how Elizabeth and John are doing, and how they are coping with this unfortunate turn of events in their lives, click here to read the article, and to view the full video of the news conference that John and Elizabeth held today in Chapell Hill. Even if you don’t read the article, the video is well worth watching. These are two wonderful people who exemplify what love, courage, and hope can bring to a life altering situation that is not within one’s locus of control.

I thank John and Elizabeth for sharing their personal struggles with us in such an open and honest way as they did in their press conference. Their love and devotion to each other, and more remarkably, to their Country, is deeply moving. Their example of courage and hope is inspiring.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to the entire Edwards family.

The term “awakened electorate” stuck with me immediately upon hearing the announcement speech, so I went back and read the term in context to try to more fully understand what Barack meant by this term. He seems to be saying that our liberty, and our human rights can only be ensured by our ACTIVE participation in our government. He is saying that we control our own destiny, but only if we participate actively in shaping it.

I think the post by Paul Waldman, Cut the Smear Machine, on TomPaine.com, Feb 13, 2007, is an outstanding example of how bloggers (credible, thoughtful, non-biased, fact-based bloggers) are in the process of taking control of the media machine that is reporting rumors instead of facts in the interest of ratings, and holding them accountable for their reporting errors. Insisting on the public retraction of mis-information, and the publication of the correct information.

These are selected excerpts. Click on the link above to read the entire article.

Today a lie can get all the way around the world in the time it takes a liar to click a post. The good news is that the truth will be hot on its tail.

Consider the first of what will no doubt be many false stories spread about the Democratic candidates: the lie that Barack Obama attended a fundamentalist madrassa when he lived in Indonesia as a boy. When insightmag.com, a website owned by the right-wing Washington Times, put out a breathless report trumpeting the fantasy, Fox News immediately jumped on board, as did Limbaugh, Hannity…Why didn’t anybody ever mention, asked Fox & Friends co-host Steve Doocy, a man who makes Larry King look like Oscar Wilde, that that man right there was raised spent the first decade of his life, raised by his Muslim father as a Muslim and was educated in a madrassa? This sentence contained no fewer than five falsehoods: Obama wasn’t raised by his father, his father left the family when Obama was two years old, his father wasn’t a practicing Muslim, Obama wasn’t raised as a Muslim and he didn’t go to a madrassa ….

But then, perhaps spurred by their more or less constant feud with Fox, CNN sent a reporter out to get this checked to see if the story was true. ABC and the AP followed suit, and all reported to their audiences that what Obama had attended was nothing more than an ordinary public school. In other words, they did what journalists are supposed to do when confronted with a potentially scandalous story about a candidate: investigate before reporting it, then tell the public the facts. That those news organizations doing the right thing seems so remarkable is a testament to how debased American journalism has become.

After the madrassa story, it was rumored that Obama was now refusing to give interviews to Fox News in response to their appallingly irresponsible behavior. This kind of hardball is long overdue, not because Fox itself can be shamed into exercising some journalistic responsibility (shamelessness is one of the primary employment requirements at Fox) but because it sends a message to other journalists: We will hold you accountable for your actions. If you spread lies, we’ll treat you like a liar, and we don’t talk to liars.

(There are several paragraphs describing the Edwards’ blogger situation that preceed this paragraph)

…Despite there being some factual elements buried deep within the story, the two bloggers, Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan, were, in fact, working for John Edwards, and they had previously written strong, even intemperate words criticizing the Catholic Church, this controversy was at its heart no different from the madrassa fiction. Both were attempts by right-wing operatives to create a scandal out of nothing in an attempt to damage a Democratic presidential candidate; in both cases these right-wing operatives sought to enlist the help of the media to do their dirty work.

And in both cases, the liberal blogs fought back (albeit for slightly different reasons; it wasn’t Edwards they were defending, but two of their own). They spread the facts, they put pressure on the media to report them accurately and they generally made the kind of ruckus the right wing has been much more effective at creating. In the end, Edwards did the right thing and refused to fire Marcotte and McEwan. Still, Donohue got the scalp he wanted: Marcotte quit the Edwards campaign this week. (You can read her explanation.)

The 2008 election will be a test of whether blogs have the power to enforce some standard of truth and shame on those news organizations that buy into made-up tales like the Obama madrassa story. During the 2004 campaign blogs were still a novelty, an emerging information source and organizing tool with mostly unrealized potential. Four years later they have become a major player, and journalists, terribly threatened though they may be by the idea that ordinary, uncredentialed people might be checking their work and calling them on their mistakes, have finally realized that blogs can’t be ignored. And if there’s one thing bloggers don’t hesitate to do, it is calling journalists to account when they have sinned.

There is also a blog post on Edwards’ site where you can post questions or ideas that might be used in the discussion tonight. I have tried posting a few questions on these ‘diaries’ in past weeks for the recent town hall meetings that JRE did over the holidays, but I have not yet heard or seen any responses to these questions….yet.

The excerpt below is from an e-mail I received earlier today from JRE. It provides a preview of some of the topics that will be discussed this evening.

We’ll talk about our ideas for changing America and take questions from you about the big challenges we face — from ending the war in Iraq to rebuilding America’s Gulf Coast. How are we going to end the scourge of poverty in 30 years? What role do we all have to play in stopping global warming? How do we ensure that every American gets the top quality health care we deserve? And a topic the president did not even mention last night — what can we do to ensure that there will be good jobs and job security for Americans in the decades to come?

This campaign is about more than the presidency, and it’s certainly about more than me. It’s about a whole generation of Americans who are ready to take personal responsibility for ensuring our nation’s greatness.

Update on this event: There was a live video feed of Edwards (accessible via a link off the Edwards Site home page) talking sort of informally about his reaction to the State of the Union Address, and then taking questions that were submitted via various interfaces on the Edwards site. The questions were read by a person sitting in the same room as JRE at a desk with a nice looking Apple laptop. It went smoothly from a logistical point of view, but I did not think it was all that effective as far as selling me on Edwards’ plan/s. I’m still trying to figure out what actions he is calling us all to take….I guess I need it spelled out in more clear terms.

There was one issue, however, that I thought he could have addressed more effectively. This issue was immigration. I wasn’t able to hear the entire question from the audience member, but I think its essence was what was his solution to the immigration problem. His response was sort of rambling as he touched on many of the myriad factors that contribute to and exacerbate the problem of mass illegal immigration of citizens from countries south of the Mexican border into America. Granted, the issue is extremely complex, and the contributing factors are multiple, but the debate/suggested solutions seem to center around tactical responses to the problem; such as fence building, border security, deportation, and amnesty.

Tactical approaches can only have limited effect. A more comprehensie, strategic approach is required. An approach that deals with the more fundamental causes of the problem: Why are all of these people from south of the border leaving their homes and families by the millions to work at seasonal, low-paying (by US standards – and this is a significant fact) jobs in the US? The answer is, of course, simple, these people are living in extreme poverty because of governmental corruption and critically depressed economies, and they are willing to risk their lives to find jobs so that they can feed their families.

So, what is the solution? What can the US do to contribute to a constructive, comprehensive, and sustainable action plan for alleviating the poverty and suffering that is resulting in this mass migration? I believe the answer lies in changing US and international trade policies. We have seen the results of Free Trade policies (mass migration). Isn’t it time to seriously look at Fair Trade as an alternative? The statistics regarding the success of free trade are summarized in several research reports and briefs that can be found on the MakeTradeFair.org site. These statistics indicate that free trade agreements are eroding the economies of poor coutries and fueling governmental corruption, rather than improving these contributing factors.

There is a wealth of excellent information and research on this site that anyone who is concerned about poverty or immigration should take some time to analyze. I have selectively extracted some content from the Executive Summary of the comprehensive trade report: Rigged Rules and Double Standards: trade, globilisation, and the fight against poverty, Oxfam 2002, to share with you in the hopes that it will inspire you to look into this very important issue more deeply.

Trade is one of the most powerful forces linking our lives, and a source of unprecedented wealth. Yet millions of the world’s poorest people are being left behind. Increased prosperity has gone hand in hand with mass poverty. Already obscene inequalities between rich and poor are widening.

World trade could be a powerful motor to reduce poverty, and support economic growth, but that potential is being lost. The problem is not that international trade is inherently opposed to the needs and interests of the poor, but that the rules that govern it are rigged in favour of the rich.

If Africa, East Asia, South Asia, and Latin America were each to increase their share of world exports by one per cent, the resulting gains in income could lift 128 million people out of poverty. In Africa alone, this would generate $70bn – approximately five times what the continent receives in aid.

In their rhetoric, governments of rich countries constantly stress their commitment to poverty reduction. Yet in practice rigged rules and double standards lock poor people out of the benefits of trade, closing the door to an escape route from poverty. For example:

Rich countries spend $1bn every day on agricultural subsidies. The resulting surpluses are dumped on world markets, undermining the livelihoods of millions of smallholder farmers in poor countries.

When developing countries export to rich-country markets, they face tariff barriers that are four times higher than those encountered by rich countries. Those barriers cost them $100bn a year – twice as much as they receive in aid.

Reform of world trade is only one of the requirements for ending the deep social injustices that pervade globalisation. Action is also needed to reduce inequalities in health, education, and the distribution of income and opportunity, including those inequalities that exist between women and men. However, world trade rules are a key part of the poverty problem; fundamental reforms are needed to make them part of the solution.

The existing trade system is indefensible and unsustainable. No civilised community should be willing to tolerate the extremes of prosperity and poverty that are generated by current trade practices.

Large parts of the developing world are becoming enclaves of despair, increasingly marginalised and cut off from the rising wealth generated through trade. Shared prosperity cannot be built on such foundations. Like the economic forces that drive globalisation, the anger and social tensions that accompany vast inequalities in wealth and opportunity will not respect national borders. The instability that they will generate threatens us all. In today’s globalised world, our lives are more inextricably linked than ever before, and so is our prosperity. As a global community, we sink or swim together.

It seems so clear and logical to me how poverty, immigration, and trade policies are directly interrlated, and how, if not addressed in a more strategic, forward-looking manner, we here in Texas and the greater US will be looking at millions more immigrants pouring over our borders.

There is an excelllent post on DailyKos.com by philgoblue that details what Senator Edwards has been doing since 2004. This post also compiles the most complete set of information about the current initiatives and activities that JRE is engaged in that I have seen to date. Since I couldn’t possibly create a more complete and accurate post about this topic, I will not attempt to do so, but rather spend my time reviewing that post myself. If you are interested in a real change for the better in America, I would encourage you to take some time to scrutinize the content of some of the newsletters and speeches that John has given over the past few months. They can be found on the OAC site by clicking here.

I have seen ads on NBC yesterday and this morning saying that John will be on the Today show tomorrow, and the post referred to above includes the following information:

From what I can gather from C-SPAN and a few other websites, The Announcement will be in New Orleans on Thursday, December 28, sometime in the morning in the Lower Ninth Ward.

So, maybe tomorrow will be the day for the big announcement, however, the death of President Ford may take some of the attention away from the occasion….