The presidential campaigns of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) and former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) were both derailed yesterday in Florida. But in covering the story, the AP was considerably more morose about Edwards's train wreck than Giuliani's (h/t NB reader Joe Loiacono).
Let's look at the AP coverage. First the Edwards write-up by Nedra Pickler (emphasis mine):
DENVER (AP) - Democrat John Edwards is exiting the presidential race Wednesday, ending a scrappy underdog bid in which he steered his rivals toward progressive ideals while grappling with family hardship that roused voters' sympathies, The Associated Press has learned.
The two-time White House candidate notified a close circle of senior advisers that he planned to make the announcement at a 1 p.m. EST event in New Orleans that had been billed as a speech on poverty, according to two aides. The decision came after Edwards lost the four states to hold nominating contests so far to rivals who stole the spotlight from the beginning—Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.
The former North Carolina senator will not immediately endorse either candidate in what is now a two-person race for the Democratic nomination, said one adviser, who spoke on condition of anonymity in advance of the announcement. Clinton said Wednesday that Edwards called her to inform her about his decision.
Obama told reporters Edwards had exited the race in a "classy" way. "I think he's run a great campaign," said Obama, who aides said also spoke with Edwards Tuesday night and asked for his endorsement.
[...]
Edwards waged a spirited top-tier campaign against the two better- funded rivals, even as he dealt with the stunning blow of his wife's recurring cancer diagnosis. In a dramatic news conference last March, the couple announced that the breast cancer that she thought she had beaten had returned, but they would continue the campaign.
Compare that to the language regarding Giuliani's run in a non-bylined AP story (again, my emphasis):
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) - Rudy Giuliani told supporters Wednesday he's abandoning his bid for president and backing Republican rival and longtime friend John McCain.
"I spoke with Rudy Giuliani this morning and he confirmed that he is dropping out of the race and will endorse Senator John McCain for president," New York Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno said in a statement.
Once the Republican presidential front-runner, Giuliani suffered a debilitating defeat in Tuesday's Florida primary.
[...]
Tuesday's result was a remarkable collapse for Giuliani. Last year, he occupied the top of national polls and seemed destined to turn conventional wisdom on end by running as a moderate Republican who supported abortion rights, gay rights and gun control.
The results seriously decimated Giuliani's unconventional strategy, which relied heavily on Florida to launch him into the coast-to-coast Feb. 5 nominating contests.
But Florida proved to be less than hospitable. His poll numbers dropped and key endorsements went to McCain.
[...]
A bout with prostate cancer and the very public breakup of his marriage with second wife Donna Hanover - she first learned he was filing for divorce when he made the announcement at a televised news conference - forced Giuliani to withdraw from a race for the U.S. Senate against Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2000. The messy divorce was revisited in awkward detail once he re-entered politics.
With no working strategy in his presidential campaign, no primary victories and dwindling resources, the mayor's third-place finish in Florida spelled the end of his run, even if his crestfallen supporters couldn't believe it.
"They'll be sorry!" a woman with a New York accent called out to the mayor as he spoke. "You sound like my mother," Giuliani joked.
Related NewsBusters post: "NYT's Tale of Two Withdrawals: Respecting Edwards, But Giuliani 'Living an Illusion'"
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Edwards and Dims remarks on Economy
January 30, 2008 - 15:32 ET by ThisnThatEdwards said the following in his resignation speech: "Clinton and Obama have committed, to me, to make Economic Equality a central point in their campaigns". Econcomic Equality? And who gets to define "Equality" here?
Harry Reid said he strongly opposed a Baucus proposal to give tax rebates even to the wealthiest filers, unlike the House plan, which set caps on eligibility. “To take out the caps,” Mr. Reid said, “it’s causing me to want to gag, O.K.?” Gag?!? Because tax rebates are going to be given to tax payers?!?
Clinton: "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Common Good? As defined by Clinton?
There is considerable incentive here to keep the socialists out of the White House. They have said so -- in their own words.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Economic Equality
January 30, 2008 - 15:53 ET by ricklailEconomic Equality=Socialism.
If you ain't the lead dog, the scenery never changes.-Lewis Grizzard
Edwards was never expected
January 30, 2008 - 15:41 ET by mvfreemanEdwards was never expected to win the nomination. Giuliani on the other hand was a national front runner in the polls early in the race. That's why the coverage is different, the expectations for Rudy were much higher.
And since Giuliani put all his marbles on Florida and then lost, it's fair to say the state was less than hospitable to him. Pulling out after a single major loss after he was expected to make it to Super Tuesday IS a collapse.
The AP isn't the only guilty party
January 30, 2008 - 15:38 ET by ChrisMillsThe AP is not alone here. Just go to CNN.com (at your own peril) to see the disgusting pandering to Edwards and the venom directed at Rudy. This especially comes through with CNN surrogate Time Magazine. Their hit job on Rudy stands in stark contrast to the fond farewell offerred to John "I want to rob American blind" Edwards.
I'll say what the liberal media won't say: Thanks, Rudy for every wonderful idea and and every hope filled message. You would have made a great president and your campaign managers have a lot of apologizing to do for failing our country. Please stay involved, though. If not, you will be missed.
Good riddance John Edwards
January 30, 2008 - 19:24 ET by nkviking75I spent the morning channel surfing, and from my very casual observation of the news broadcasts, the MSM all but forgot about Rudy as soon as they learned Edwards was dropping out.
In a field of slimy Democrats, Edwards always struck me as one of the slimiest. His wife reportedly has incurable cancer, and yet he was out campaigning for the White House. And she appeared to be pushing him. I'm not aware of anyone having the guts to ask if anyone should run for President knowing of the distractions his wife's illness is bound to cause. Or if maybe their priorities were out of whack.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Questioning how a family
January 31, 2008 - 00:00 ET by cleverpigQuestioning how a family responds to a life-altering tragedy that you will hopefully never have to deal with isn't gutsy, it's callous. They didn't act the way many people expect, and some demand, people with cancer to behave. Good for them! Maybe we would have had a president focused on scientific research and health care, and that would have been good for us.
Oh cleverpig
January 31, 2008 - 00:06 ET by BlondeI am overwhelmed, just totally overwhelmed, by your total empathy for the poor, pathetic, unambitious Edwards family.
Your totally heartfelt and warm, kind, fuzziness is overwhelmingly charming. And of course, has made me change my mind....I shall be voting for Obama.
Keep it up, your San Fran sensibilities are kind of amusing.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
I think "poor, pathetic,
January 31, 2008 - 01:26 ET by cleverpigI think "poor, pathetic, and unambitious" is exactly what they didn't do, and I applaud them for it!
But I'm sad today. Edwards was my first choice... now I'll just have to be happy with my party's choice for president instead of elated. It's so hard being a Democrat these days ;P
Well well well, clever
January 31, 2008 - 01:33 ET by BlondeWelcome to the "Not first choice" boat.
Seriously, an Edwards supporter? That is too funny for words...I've never run into a Silky Pony supporter before.
Just what about his disingenousness floated your boat? A trial lawyer....being a champion of the poor? Or was it his 26,000 square foot home? Or his blind ambition? (Madonna was better at it, quite frankly).
In the immortal words of Johnny Mac...."you cannot be serious"!
But of course, you're a lib, so you are. Too bad for you.
But thanks for the giggles. And the insight into the liberal worldview....it's a scary place for a thinking person. But kind of fascinating, like a train wreck.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Champion of the poor. In my
January 31, 2008 - 01:43 ET by cleverpigChampion of the poor. In my part of the world, a "progressive" is a liberal who cares about poor people. Edwards is a progressive, Clinton and Obama are liberals. Like I said, though, I think the Democratic "Not first choice" boat is pretty well appointed-- spacious cabins, calm seas, not a bad ride :)
Silky Pony cares about the poor? Hogwash.
January 31, 2008 - 02:08 ET by R D HelmIf Edwards cared about "the poor," why did he work to put so many doctors out of business?
Due to him and his ambulance-chasing compatriates, there are now rural areas of this country that have no doctors around.
How does that help "the poor?"
And speaking of "the poor," this country has now spent nigh onto $6 Trillion over the last 40+ years in an effort to help "the poor." Yet, the percentage of the population that makes up "the poor" is roughly the same at it was when the "War on Poverty" began.
Gee, ya think maybe the reason that there are so many "poor" people among us is due to the fact that they continue to do the very things that got them "poor" in the first place?
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
as you say RD
January 31, 2008 - 02:22 ET by botgbeing an enabler does not help the person you enable (they are usually worse off for it) it just fills a selfish need in yourself. (like the libs need votes)(or the libs need to say to themselves i'm a good person i help others of course the help isn't and the money is someone else's but hey it's good being Queen of de Nile)
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Clever, nice to see you admit to being a bigot.
January 31, 2008 - 01:49 ET by R D HelmSpecifically an anti-Christian bigot.
Does the name Amanda Marcotte jog your memory? She was the Cristian-hating blogger that John Edwards was finally shamed into firing.
BTW-have you beheaded any Christians lately?
Remember, the Nazis started out in the '20's and early 30s just being bigotted towards Jews. Look what they graduated into doing a short time later. 6 million Jews and 3 million Christians died as a result, because bigots like you went essentially unchallenged.
Having problems finding a doc? Be sure and thank Silky Pony for that next time you see him, as he and his ambulance-chasing swine drove many out of practice.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Consider it all joy my brethren. . .
January 31, 2008 - 02:13 ET by tracheostomyRD: BTW-have you beheaded any Christians lately?
Christianity is one of the few religions that comes with its own built in ability to withstand persecution. Reactions like this are a symptom of the weakness of the church in general.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
And yes, I read the
January 31, 2008 - 02:14 ET by tracheostomyAnd yes, I read the Marcotte articles here on NB.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach,
January 31, 2008 - 02:18 ET by R D HelmTell that to the 3 million+ Christians who were slaughtered by the Nazis in WW II.
Some of my ancestors were among them.
Perhaps if someone had had the stones to stand up for them when it counted, they would not have been killed.
But, as that fate did not affect YOU, then your indifference to their plight is quite understandable.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Good thing the apostles
January 31, 2008 - 02:23 ET by tracheostomyGood thing the apostles didn't have your attitude, right?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach,
January 31, 2008 - 02:31 ET by R D HelmAs I said, as the plight of my Christian ancestors did not affect you personally, your indifference to their fate is quite understandable.
Next time the call goes out for Christian martyrs to come forward, maybe you should volunteer. I mean, that is what the apostles did, right?
After all, in the end times, Christians are to be beheaded when caught. Only problem is, based on the videos I have seen, the Islamic supremicists have yet to perfect the art of carrying this operation out cleanly.
Perhaps it is due to their dull, rusty swords.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
RD: As I said, as the
January 31, 2008 - 02:39 ET by tracheostomyRD: As I said, as the plight of my Christian ancestors did not affect you personally, your indifference to their fate is quite understandable.
You assume too much. How can I be indifferent to a group of believers whose courage I envy?
RD: Next time the call goes out for Christian martyrs to come forward, maybe you should volunteer. I mean, that is what the apostles did, right?
You say it like it's a bad thing. Is there any one cause you would willingly lay down your life for? Or is Christianity just a slogan on a T-shirt, a song on the "positive life" radio station, and a set of political goals?
RD: After all, in the end times, Christians are to be beheaded when caught. Only problem is, based on the videos I have seen, the Islamic supremicists have yet to perfect the art of carrying this operation out cleanly.
Perhaps it is due to their dull, rusty swords.
Why would someone who claims to be a Christian attempt to discourage another?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
"Indifferent?" They are
January 31, 2008 - 02:26 ET by tracheostomy"Indifferent?"
They are showing the ultimate courage of their faith. The question is why we aren't there among them? Their executioners are storing up wrath.
Now I know why the evangelical church in India prays for our persecution. We've become so soft we have made a point to avoid all persecution for His namesake.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Tell that to the 3 million+
January 31, 2008 - 02:28 ET by tracheostomyTell that to the 3 million+ Christians who were slaughtered by the Nazis in WW II.
Oopsie. My mistake. I misread that as today's martyrs in China.
That's where my head is at anyway (in the present day; not stewing over the past).
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Damn
January 31, 2008 - 02:34 ET by cleverpigOkay, I just wrote a whole sarcastic post about how many Christians I behead and the genocides I hope to spawn providing I continue to go unchallenged, but I deleted it all in the interest of not getting banned.
This isn't as entertaining, but:
You are overreacting and being quite insulting in the process. Cut it out.
Clever,
January 31, 2008 - 02:51 ET by R D HelmYou are overreacting....
No, I am not. The type of bigotry toward Christians today that is displayed by Marcotte, Olbermann, Behar, etc, etc, is very dangerous. At some point, people will begin to act upon this bigotry, just as they did in 1930's Germany, and many other periods throughout history. People are going to suffer because if it.
Some already are. There are already Christians in this country who have lost their livelihoods because of their beliefs. If you lefties were anything other that the hypocrites you are, you would speak out against this. Your silence speaks volumes.
You claim "religious tolerance," but we all know that is a lie, as the only tolerance you have for "religion" is reserved for those that are opposed to this countries traditional values. Like Islam.
and being quite insulting in the process
Good.
Cut it out.
Not a chance.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Methinks he doth protest too much. . .
January 31, 2008 - 02:59 ET by tracheostomyRD: There are already Christians in this country who have lost their livelihoods because of their beliefs.
I assert instead that there are already Christians in this country who have lost their beliefs because of their livelihoods.
Which "Christian" is telling the truth here?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach,
January 31, 2008 - 03:04 ET by R D HelmYou are missing my point.
My Christian ancestors did not have to die. The did so because no one would speak up for them when it counted.
While martyrdom is, indeed, admirable in some circumstances, God commands us to live life, and live it to the fullest.
Some in my family were deprived of that opportunity.
That is all I am saying.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
You are grossly overreacting RD. . .
January 31, 2008 - 03:08 ET by tracheostomyYou have stated that you were a Christian, haven't you? Have you ever read the letter of 1_Peter?
"For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: “Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth”; who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously;"
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach,
January 31, 2008 - 03:13 ET by R D HelmLook, I am not trying to get into a long, drawn out discussion on Christian martyrdom here.
The point I was trying to make to clever was that bigotry has historically lead to something far worse. It does not have to be that way.
That was really all I was saying.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Um. who started this
January 31, 2008 - 03:19 ET by tracheostomyUm. who started this hijack, anyway?
Anyone?
>;)
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
That's ridiculous. You
January 31, 2008 - 13:05 ET by cleverpigThat's ridiculous. You belong to a religious classification which is the overwhelming majority in this country, and as institutionalized as a religion can be in America. Our elected representatives say christian prayers in the halls of government, our children pledge under god in the schools, and every speech ends with "god bless you."
What are the chances in this election that someone who shares your basic beliefs will be elected to the Presidency of the United States? Maybe as low as 75% if you don't count Mormonism. The chances someone who shares my beliefs will become President in this election? Zero. In the next ten elections? Zero.
That is because there is only one feature that makes a candidate completely unelectable to national office. It isn't being black, or a woman, or muslim, or christian. It's being an atheist. And despite knowing that only ten percent of my country shares my beliefs, and only a slightly larger percentage has any respect for them, I manage to live my life without a huge persecution complex or chip on my shoulder! Nasty things are said about atheists all the time in right wing talk media. That doesn't mean I call every conservative I meet a bigot.