A new study finds that John Edwards doesn't exist.
Allow me to explain.
After John Edwards placed second in the Iowa caucus on January 3, Elizabeth Edwards took to the airwaves to argue that his finish should occasion the media to stop covering the Dem contest as little more than a showdown between two political superstars, Hillary and Obama. Not surprisingly, nobody listened to her.
Comes now some statistical evidence of this fact. The Project for Excellence in Journalism has released its latest campaign coverage index for January 6-11, a study that does its damndest to try to quantify which political figures are sucking up the most media oxygen and why.
It found that Edwards only got 7% of political coverage during those days -- less than one-fifth of what Hillary earned, and less than one-forth of that accorded to Obama. Edwards even got less attention than Mike Huckabee, even though he, like Edwards, finished third in the New Hampshire primary...
I didn't need a graph or a study to tell me that. The guy is under a virtual media blackout.
I swear to God, if he wins a primary the Big Story will be about how Hillary or Obama came in second and Edwards won't even get mentioned until the sixteenth paragraph.
But that's your Free Press. That's your "liberal" media, laboring under the glorious protections of the First Amendment of our Constitution, and actually undermining our democracy.