The problem with Edwards gigantic mansion

Edwards seems unauthentic when he preaches about poverty and then lives in a huge house/compound. It causes problems for his image which seems hypocritical living the life of the ultra-wealthy and then acting as if he really cares about "the little people".

It adds to the perception Edwards is a smooth talker who is insincere.

Have you seen a picture of his house?

misplaced

he wasn't actually faced with a vote on it.

I think Edwards made a grievous error in cosponsoring and rallying for the IWR. He shares that epic mistake of a vote with Hillary, Biden, and Dodd.

But it is Hillary that "distinguished" herself by voting YES on Kyl-Lieberman, and I appreciate those that stood against it whether they voted or not.

It is the YES votes on matters of war that resonate.

as the one time he was actually faced with making a decision on a like issue, he showed unutterably poor judgment and/or expediency. He has an history of positions changed when he no longer finds them tenable and I don't sense that he changes them out of principle, but rather, from pure self-interest and opportunism. My opinion.

Hillary's K-L vote was execrable, but I think Edwards showed his true colors regards Iran at his Herzilia (sp?) speech. Criticizing Hillary for her vote may be the right thing to do, but given his own vote on IWR, humility should dictate that he be one of the last to do so. His self righteousness is nauseating and downright Liebermanesque in scope and tone.

I'm still fuming over the IWR, but Kyl-Lieberman provided fresh outrage and was a 'you fooled me once' kind of vote that she again blew. It really put her at the end of the line for me. In my opinion, none of these people deserve to be rewarded for their bad judgment.

When he was in the Senate, however, his votes on major issues seem to side with the Republicans - as did many of our candidates, sadly, which is why I'm stuck on who to support.

I completely sympathize with your predicament. Once I accepted the fact that Gore wasn't going to run, it was either Obama or Kucinich for me, and I don't believe the latter has a snowball's chance in hell. People have different criteria to consider, mine is simply that I won't support any of the numbnuts that voted YES on the IWR and especially YES on Kyl-Lieberman if I can avoid it, and I can. Obama is a flawed candidate, but what matters to me most is that he showed good judgment when it mattered on issues that matter to me. Best of luck in your deliberative process.

Does he have to be poor to discuss poverty?

:shrug:

but I do find his house issue offputting. He's rightfully talking about the need for people to make sacrifices such as stopping driving SUVs and he's living in a house that's 24,000 sq ft. Like Gandi said: Live the change you want to see.

when you're rich.

to give a huge cancer prevention speech, and when you're done, kick back and enjoy a drag on your cigarette.

What is YOUR point, to run this all over again??

:rofl:

??

Oh... and I sincerely hope that the White House is not Edwards' next pad.

And what an embarrassment! I refuse to vote for this guy. :eyes:

Not this again. This is a false equivalency of the most mind-roasting degree. History is replete with examples of men and women of wealth who still stood foursquare for those of far lesser means.

Please, this and the haircut is played, tired, tedious and shopworn. You can retire this talking point. No one with two braincells to rub together is buying.

misplaced

Edwards house is set in a wooded area and has more of a compound like look to it.

I want a leader in the White House - not a REID that blows in the wind.

it's not the biggest deal in the world, but it's not nothing either. It's not like he's living in a house of 10,000 sq. ft- which is a damn big house; he's living in a house that's well over twice that size. Do you have any idea how big that is? And please don't give me the crap about envy: I grew up in a house of almost 10,000 sq. feet and it was huge.

Here's the problem: Edwards is stressing the importance of the environment and climate change and asking that people make sacrifices. He's not making any himself. And the whole carbon trading scheme doesn't cut it.

And because of the size of the house you grew up in, it looks like you would feel right at home here.

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3848
"Knight approved the building plans that showed the Edwards home totaling 28,200 square feet of connected space. The main house is 10,400 square feet and has two garages. The recreation building, a red, barn-like building containing 15,600 square feet, is connected to the house by a closed-in and roofed structure of varying widths and elevations that totals 2,200 square feet.

The main house is all on one level except for a 600-square-foot bedroom and bath area above the guest garage.

The recreation building contains a basketball court, a squash court, two stages, a bedroom, kitchen, bathrooms, swimming pool, a four-story tower, and a room designated “John’s Lounge.”"

It looks to me that he wanted to provide safety and care for his kids. Like my mom always said, "I'd rather have them here where I can keep and eye on them, then some place else." He seems to be building a cocoon around his kids, and I can understand after Wade's death. He earned the money, he can spend it anyway he wants.

He is carbon trading now, but had to wait for the solar panels.

zalinda

and carbon trading is like buying indulgences.

narrow albeit covered walkway, considered part of a house. Certainly not in my neck of the woods, or any other sane person's description. So you are telling me that if a barn was connected the same way that it too should be considered part of a house? This walkway only tells me that they don't want to walk out into the weather to go to the basketball court.

zalinda

it weren't connected, it would still be space that requires electricity, heat, etc. Sorry. You are just flat wrong.

it's still way too big for a guy who talks about the "two Americas". I love John Edwards, but I cringe every time I see a photo of that thing.

Did you buy the smear when the media was trashing him?

Edwards house is truly in another league.

Too bad - Edwards is carrying the message this time around, and it's resonating with many, many people in this country. Everyone will benefit from his proposals, including you.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17718511/

to vote for him if he's nominee. You're projecting like crazy. I will note however, that he's not resonating with enough people. He's in the low teens or less in every poll outside of Iowa. And furthermore, if he does get the nom, I won't be happy watching him get the snot beat out of him. He's accepted public funding. His repuke counterpart will not do so, and will be free to run non-stop ads against him for several months.

score on that one, do you? He'll have the benefit of the 527's (SEIU was the top contributor in the 2006 election cycle) and the DNC behind him and after Iowa, there will be plenty to stay focused. And for projecting? There was a pretty hefty argument below - backed up with facts and links which you chose to ignore. As for not resonating, Edwards has the backing of more Union endorsements than Clinton or Obama. That speaks volumes.

is the only part of the dem machine that's low on money. 527's are not allowed to run the same kind of ads as candidates. It's clear you're the one talking out of your....

Those were 527's. The public financing, like the house, has been debunked. Thanks for your time - for I have wasted mine with this.

though the odds on that are, quite literally, very slim. Oh, and if he does; the house will be a big issue.

And how that carpetbagger Hillary didn't have many New York connections before she decided she wanted to be a Senator from New York?

Have you seen the huge gobs of money the lobbyists and corporations are pouring into Hillary's campaign? What do you suppose they're going to want in return for all that loot?

Do you know which side of the issues Hillary is on today? It's difficult to determine, because she changes her stance depending on the audience she's in front of. I think they call it pandering.

Folks in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

at least Edwards is an ultra liberal since last year.

more from where THAT came from!!!

They consider her a New Yorker , as do I . New Yorkers are not like the little states. It's NY ,get over it. If you consider yourself a New Yorker and live there, you are; no residency. You do Edwards no favors

You never really know what she stands for. Congratulations.

My opinions are mine, and they have nothing to do with Edwards.

And I don't consider her a New Yorker. Just because she's somewhat better than Rick Lazio doesn't make her a New Yorker by any means. And FWIW, she "lives" in Chappaqua, a very wealthy town in Westchester. I don't know how big her house is becuase it's completely meaningless, but I'm sure it's no studio apartment.

I think those who judge him on his house err. Being rich does not disqualify someone from having a social conscience.

I don't consider their behavior to be that of glitzy wealth. They are extremely well known in the area, have a large group of family and friends that they could have over and need a couple of large rooms for guests. I think this looks very proper, and although "LARGE", does not come across to me as wasteful, and if he has to explain why and what he would need this place for, then he'll do it. I would think that most politicians and do-gooders with children have larger homes. I don't have any kids, nor am I a politician who brings groups over to visit or hold meetings - but I can accept it from Mr & Mrs Edwards, and concerning the fact that her final years on Earth be as relaxed and enjoyable, and they have the means from their hard fought wins, and the stresses of doing those battles - they can do this with at least THIS voter's approval. We all answer, imo, to God for our choices on Earth, I have a pretty good feeling they aren't feeling they're living as snooty stuck ups with gold toilets fer cryin' out loud. But you bring up a good point, it should be discussed and I appreciate the opportunity to voice my opinion.

(I'm not sure who or what the photo is trying to show by the vehicles visiting him in the parking lot area and off to the left)

that is it, and I do believe this is a legit issue.

and that IS the house because I took the time to look it up on google by searching john edwards home. You do know how to do this, correct?

It's your prerogative to ignore why he would have a large home, also, but still the discussion can be had. Should we bring out all the candidates finances and land deals and property including jewelry, foreign investments and bank issues? Basing an argument just on a home is ridiculous and I believe he would answer any questions about his large estate rather easily.

I believe this issue should be front and center in this election year, when rivers of blood are flowing in Iraq, we're on the verge of economic ruin and collapse, our fellow citizens are dying from lack of healthcare.. well, I could go on but I won't. In my mind, Edward's HOUSE is THE #1 issue facing this country today. I am so glad you brought this to my attention. A man who won't landscape his own yard properly...can you imagine what he'd do to the Rose Garden? I'm shocked to the core, shocked I tell you !

Mansions abound!! The home of MANY rich and famous live here!!

But I will have to say that NOT all of them are Repukes either!!!

I'm in FL also, and there's mansions aplenty. I believe in living as simple a life as possible. But, I also don't have several children and a wife who has non-curable cancer, either. This sort of argument, if not discussed with class and research and discussion about ALL the candidates comes across as rather negatively placed, and just done to try and deflect, and I don't think that's positive. I'm all for showing the pic of his home, that's why I uploaded it.

the Intra-coastal Waterway! I live very simply too in a nice quiet spot with older homes, trees and some GREAT neighbors.

Right ACROSS, the Intra-coastal that's not very wide, there's Casey Key and THERE you will see the mansions! What always strikes me about those living right on the Gulf is that the homes are crammed so close together, but they have HUGE fences or hedges to keep their neighbors from getting a "look-see." The access road is one turn after another, winding and winding and not very wide. Hard to get those big trucks in there to build another palace from time to time. But they sho' 'nuff are purdy!

I have more actual "land" than most of them because we have very big lots. But those other houses cost 4 or 5 times more than mine, oh probably much more! But I'm not complaining, but I WOULD love some rain sometime! Because of the Intra-coastal and the Gulf intersecting like they do, it could be raining up the road and never rain at my house! It's very very dry in my little spot on earth.

Good thing we kept our well working when we hooked up to city water!!!! Keeps the sprinkler system going and very little water waste, just goes back into the ground!

Sorry for the rant, I got carried AWAAAAAY!!

Lots of room for the grandkids. It's big, but doesn't look huge in the least.

it'd be nice to have camera crews go there for holidays and shoot our nation's leader with his children and future grandchildren... much better than having to see Shrub cut shrubs out behind his ranch in Texas... All John has to say, is he's worked hard, they use it and they have a large family & guests, and they do all they can to help other Americans trying to have the dream of having a nice home get one who are poor & w/o care. Of course, I believe a lot of it is John trying to make Elizabeth's time as beautiful as possible (as some of you know, the Edwards' marriage was voted as having the best appearance of happiness, and I couldn't agree more).

I worked in a 15K sq. foot home, and it was a mansion in Palm Beach...

There is the quote from the newspaper and link, his home is 10,400 square feet.

zalinda

I just posted it, from the Edwards own mouth's the other day....I'll see if I can find it again.

Here it is;

Elizabeth Edwards said she and her husband did not grow up with much; she on military bases, her husband in mill towns where his father worked. That is why they decided to build their dream home on 102 wooded acres near Chapel Hill, N.C. It is a decision she says she does not regret.

“I’m not going to apologize for the house,” she said. “We don’t go on fancy trips, we don’t buy fancy cars – this is how we want to spend the money that John earned.”

She said they have worked to make the 28,000-square-foot estate energy-efficient. The estate is valued at between $1 million and $5 million. There is the main home with five bedrooms and 6½ baths connected by a covered walkway to recreational building that includes living quarters, a handball court, an indoor pool and an indoor basketball court with a stage at one end.

“If I were trying to be solely political, I would have said, let’s not build that part yet,” she said of the recreational building.

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070409/NEWS02/204090338

But, I sincerely doubt Elizabeth Edwards said 28,000 square foot estate, I'm betting she said that they have worked to make their home energy efficient. The paper added in the 28,000 square foot estate.

zalinda

It's 28,200 SQ FT. It's a fact. See my last post.

They should sue the architect then because that is the ugliest house I've ever seen. I mean you could actually cut it in half and it would make very little difference. You know, just to satisfy you they should take out the covered walkway, then maybe you'd stop spewing the RW talking points. Because it certainly looks like two different buildings to me. But then what do I know, you are the expert. Yeah, that's the ticket.

zalinda

because you don't care about the facts;

the main house may be less than 28,000, but the rec part and the house are all under air, so it's one unit. For it to be 2 units, legally, it would have to be detached, or not under air. I just asked my best friend, who's a realtor, and it's a fact. I highly doubt there's no air, or heat in that inclosed walkway, since they would need heat in the winter time. It doesn't matter how far away from the house it is, if it's connected. 28,000 is considered the total sq.ft of the house.


IT'S LEGALLY ONE HOUSE.

Listen.....

I am an Architect. You only count the living area as the area of the house (the area you live in). You do not count garagees, barns, breezeways, walkways, porches, carports, sheds or unfinished basements.

Go John Edwards.

You worked hard to get to this campaign!
I read you wanted to be President since you were a little boy.
I saw the home you were raised in.

I know you want others to have all the opportunities possible in America!!!!!

Edwards 08

sizes. It's beyond large. It's gargantuan. The average American house is approx 2,000 sq ft. A 5,000 sq ft house is a big house. A 10,000 sq foot house is a very big house. 28,000 sq ft? Ridiculous.

the main house may be less than 28,000, but the rec part and the house are all under air, so it's one unit. For it to be 2 units, legally, it would have to be detached, or not under air. I just asked my best friend, who's a realtor, and it's a fact. I highly doubt there's no air, or heat in that inclosed walkway, since they would need heat in the winter time. It doesn't matter how far away from the house it is, if it's connected. 28,000 is considered the total sq.ft of the house.

Maybe if it was in Maine or Upper Michigan, but not in the Carolina's. It doesn't get hot or cold enough for a long enough period of time to make it worth it. Hey, if I connect my garage to my house by a covered walkway, would that increase the value of my house?

zalinda

Arguing that his house is "too big" for him to discuss poverty is like saying Obama's not black enough to discuss race issues. it's silly.

However... that place is just hideous-looking. The main house is nice, but hte rest looks like crap. ugh.

:thumbsdown:

It's quite a spread.

he would tell people to give up SUV's-
“One of the things they should be asked to do is drive more fuel efficient vehicles.”
The former North Carolina senator was asked specifically if he would tell them to give up their SUVS, he said, “Yes.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20487065/

-and it turned out he owned a couple of SUV's himself.


Nobody is claiming that if you have a large home that you can't help the poor. Calling bullshit on someone who says "we" need to sacrifice for the good of the planet and then clear cut old growth trees to make room for new construction of a mansion like this is justified.

Jefferson spent a fortune on it but that's because he kept tearing it down and rebuilding it as his ideas changed.

He wanted it to be of modest size from the outside--at least what you could see of it because he saw himself as a yeoman farmer in a Republic--not as a nobleman better than everyone else.

While you can knock the guy for being a hypocritical slave holder he was one hell of an architect. In order to reduce the visible size of the house he put the service wings (kitchen, offices, etc) out of sight by putting them underground. He also absolutely hated wasted space and apparently resented staircases. He loved windows and light and perfect proportions. The house is absolutely a reflection of its owner.

These days the bigger the better seems the watchword. Edward's place strikes me as being pretty graceless. I mean what is that big red barn looking thing attached to the house supposed to be.

Thomas Jefferson, the master of proportion and understatement would have had a fit!

Edwards grew up in a working class family, was the first in that family to attend college, and made his money through hard work. He is entitled to enjoy the wealth he earned. But he hasn't forgotten his working class roots, and he will work to help those who are still working hard to achieve what he has.

Just because he isn't currently poor doesn't mean he doesn't have compassion and want to help those who are. Why do you get the idea he is? Is he preaching that everyone should be poor, or everyone is entitled to success?

I respect that people have different views on this.

How dare you work hard in America and do well for yourself, then turn around and try to help the less fortunate. What a bad, bad man. You people crack me up.

what's wrong with the man?? You need to talk to him about this next time you see him, Rocky.. ::nods::

And I also agree with your previous post about the landscaping. This IS the #1 problem - next to this, wars, death, destruction, loss of civil liberties, PALE by comparison. It's all about the house and the landscaping!

Do we have pictures of all the candidates houses? I think we should, and then we should choose our candidate by the size of their house - without knowing the candidates name, even...just their house, because I think that's always the best way to choose a candidate....

I've seen Dennis Kucinich's house - I think it's way too small - but I have to admit, I haven't seen any of the other candidates houses. I'm going to go on a search one of these days to find the right candidate by finding a house that's PERFECT - not too big, not too small - with porridge cooking away on the stove!!

class more than anyone.

it has nothing to do with the quality of leadership or ability to empathize with others.

I wonder why this is such an issue here, its normally a GOP talking point.

Edwards is one of my top candidates, but I do think the house could be an issue.

The question is "Will it be an effective issue for them?" Most Americans don't begrudge the rich their mansions and other perks and they know that some of the rich are trustworthy and others are not.

It may come down to whether the Repubs can sell the idea that JE is a hypocrite for not living his personal life in a manner consistent with his public political beliefs. (Many of us do the same to justify outing gay Repub politicians and wayward "family values" conservatives - It's not the sexual orientation or the philandering that is the problem, it is the hypocrisy of their personal vs. political lives.)

I like JE. All the candidates have flaws and his house is not at the top of the list of those flaws. I don't think we should believe that Repubs won't make it an issue, however.

but an issue will be made of it if he's the candidate. Oh, if only that were the worst issue the Repugs could find. haha

Because if you did, you're being a hypocrite.

BTW, I noticed two posts about this on DU in a row. Did this just make it up to Hillary Hub?

if this makes it to Hillary hub! I gotta be honest.

I think Hillary knows better than to throw stones....the glass house analogy you know.

Edwards house will be an issue if he's the nominee because he's asking people to make sacrifices such as stopping driving SUVs butr he's living in a house that's at least twice as large as any of the other candidates. And no, carbon offsets don't cut it.

compound or because its not as ornate as the houses of noted hypocrites who never did anything for the poor like FDR and Thomas Jefferson?

And your comparison to the Kennedy compound is spurious. That houses several large families, not one. Again, Edwards is stressing climate change and the environment and living in a house that 25,000 sq feet. He's asking others to sacrifice, but it appears that he's not willing to. He'll be slammed for it in the media, just as JK was slammed for his homes on in Idaho, Nantucket and Boston.

Ever hear Gandhi's admonishment; Live the change you want to see?

And the Edwards' use their house as office space, which is also more efficient.

And the OP was addressing the whole "how can he help the poor when he lives in a big house." I'm sure you are smart enough to know that they aren't mutually exclusive.

there is no such thing as an energy efficient house of 25,000 sq ft. And I have no problems with Edwards addressing poverty. That's commendable and has nothing to do with his wealth.

Lots of big houses around that are equipped with energy-saving devices, some actually off the grid and selling energy back to the energy companies.

you obviously don't grasp how big this house is. And it's not off the grid.

Look, I actually grew up in a house about 10,000 sq ft- and it was frickin' huge. We had an archery range in the attic and a roller skating "rink" in the basement. you could yell from the kitchen and no one could hear you on the third floor. I honestly don't think people get how big 28,000 sq feet is. And heating an indoor basketball court take a lot of energy. I know damned well the Edwards house isn't selling back energy. AFAIK it doesn't have solar panels or any sort of innovative technology.

I never said their house was off the grid. But you can't be serious when you say there is no innovative technology in the house. No one builds a house these days without it.

You know, I'm done with you on this topic. It isn't even what the OP was talking about. GO ahead, I give you the last word.

neither of those house is green. I live in a green house. Neither Gore's or Edwards is green. Sadly, bushco's house in Texas is a hundred times greener than either Gore's or especially Edward's.

Gandhi's words, is that a requirement of all candidates?

Don't get mixed up.

spreading RW talking points?

zalinda

Vote for a candidate who says people shouldn't make sacrifices or help the poor? This is a position the Republicans want to push us into. People successfull enough to run for President, tend to have been successfull enough to have a nice house. Nearly all of them have multi-million dollar homes.

Being rich and having a big home that's a reward of being successfull doesn't make someone stop being able to care about the poor, and playing into that hand is letting the Republicans win. Because then nobody can talk about poverty anymore.

Not Edwards with his single $4.3 million dollar home, or Clinton with her two homes valued at over $4.6 million.

make some him/herself. I'm not talking about taking vows of poverty, but sorry, no one, and I do mean no one, needs to live in a house of 25,000 sq. ft. It's horribly wasteful. I'm not even talking about the poverty issue. I have no problem with Edward's being wealthy and also being concerned about the issue of poverty. I think he's absolutely sincere. I'm approaching this from an environmental pov.

Which candidate meets your standards?

though I plan on voting for Kucinich to support his platform.

and agree with what you are saying :hi:

Do we count just his primary residence, or all of them?

They did this to Kerry you know. Pointed out the mansion in Pittsburgh, the expensive properties and homes in Boston and Washington DC, the vacation homes...

Edwards home is valued at $4.3 million.

Clinton's home in Chappaqua they got for 1.7 million, and they bought their Washington home at $2.9. Both are probably valued higher now than when they bought them 8 and 6 years ago respectively. Should I think she's unauthentic when she talks about any issues that affect the poor? Her homes are a combined value of $4.6 million. Three hundred thousand dollars more than Edwards, and actually probably more.

So by your logic does Hillary not actually care about the little people either? Or does she care about them even less than Edwards.

These kinds of arguments make Hillary supporters and Hillary Clinton herself look bad.

but it's not about the cost of the house, it's about it's honking huge carbon footprint and how that's at odds with his asking Americans to make sacrifices in the name of climate change and the environment.

And just for the heck of it, let me say that his house is valued at 6+ million, and that in Westchester County a house of that size would cost over 12 million, and probably more like 15 mil.

energy efficient and used solar power would your opinion be changed?

Then it is just one ostentatious house or another ostentatious house.

if it was in the antarctic it would cost 100 bucks. if it was on Central Park West it would cost 300 million. odd of you to think this is relevant.

to become the president and help those less fortunate.

Yep, the cost of his hair cuts, the size of his house, and nice possessions show me the kind of man he is for sure.



NOT!

Kennedy from being a sincere champion of the impoverished? Are you saying Edward Kennedy has no crediablity because he is rich?

How about Robert Kennedy, Jr? He must really be a shill in your eyes.....rich bastard that he is...

The curtain has been pulled back, and we see your post for what it is........

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/26/sunday/main560595.shtml

So I'd say that the Kennedy's including Ted and Robert Jr. are being hypocrites.

much would be destroyed in the name of "conservation" ..

Many times it looks like there is an "easy" answer or "easy" solution....and it is way more complicated.

and spent his weekends clearing brush in front of photographers. He should have catered to people like you that prefer rich politicians who pretend to be working class.

Edwards is wealthy (and rightly so, he earned it, didn't inherit it), should he pretend not to be? What size house seems right to you? 10000 sq ft? 15000? 3000? At what point would he please you? Or would a small house just make him a pandering phony, as George is with his ranch?

than buying a mansion that flaunts his wealth.

I'll bet dirt and mud gets tracked in all the time, and even if I didn't have to vacuum it myself, the noise of other people constantly vacuuming would drive me batty.

Seriously, what difference should it make that Edwards has a big house? It's what he plans to do for the rest of us that counts.

That's how he was able to help the poor!

typical hillaryite in the glass house throwing stones....

So don't even try to compare them.

You are really beating a dead horse here. You have received a lot of great responses, yet you still push this bullshit.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9902E0DD163AF932A3575AC0A96F958260&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/C/Clinton,%20Hillary%20Rodham

:eyes:

Edwards is living large in a literal way.

Who decides what's reasonable?

The guy is rich and has a big house. So what? Who among all the candidates lives in a double wide? I'm not an Edwards supporter, but I think if he really didn't care about the "little people" he could just hang around the mansion and count his money instead. He seems to have chosen public service and I think he's genuine.

John Edwards was out there among them. Sure, he wants the votes, but still HE WAS THE ONE who walked with them!! AND those people were GLAD to have him!

it is wrong for someone
to work their way up, and
reward themselves for it?
No. If he earned the money,
he can buy anything he wants.
He is not insincere, he promotes
this 'American Dream' that any
one can rise up from meager
beginnings to accomplish better
lives for themselves.

This is the best you got? He lives in a big house?

Seriously, get a fucking life.

bad taste to me!! JMHO!

All the candidates running have MONEY, it's what they have in their HEART that matters! Edwards is NO Scrooge!!

Go, Johnny, Go!

I guess he should just STFU about the poor and the injustices working men and women face in this country.

What right does this rich white man have to talk about issues that he has cannot understand?

If he wants to talk about fair workers rights, building up the middle class and expanding opportunities to the poor, he needs to move into a shack post haste!

:sarcasm::crazy::sarcasm:

Thanks Nutmegger.

Just thought I'd top it off for us.

Now let's go to work.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
it's a record.

And the house is way to big almost on the verge of being illegal for a single family residence, at least in my thinking. Just today I started a thread on a housing idea about a Earthships designed house for what I'm looking for. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2349631

Go Team Hillary :grouphug:

:sarcasm:

what the hell is wrong with someone having a large house? a lucrative business? IF he/she is willing to donate time, effort, and money to helping those who are less fortunate.

This is absolutely ridiculous... Edwards "large" house should not even be a damn issue. ATLEAST he is attempting to improve the impoverished and diminishing middle class in America.

The people whom I have a real problem with are the super wealthy WHO DO NOT help and interest in helping those in need.
There is nothing wrong with having money.... It depends on how you chose to live your life and what you choose to do with your success.

It's true.

It was on one of the blogs.

Hi sweetie OC, you just know how to ruin a girl's fantasizing about Lou. /snark

:hi:

The "featureless" Lou Dobbs.

Hope all's well with you. Only 39 days left until the Carolinian wins the Iowa caucus!

:rofl:

:spank:

Got it from an inside source.

for the money :evilgrin:

Bush was successful at nothing, don't forget. :hi:

Both crises-tested presidents, both thoughtful and long-sighted leaders.

Two different eras, two different parties, two very great men.

How about that.

in order to "better understand poverty". Perhaps building this house will help him to better understand homelessness. And his $400 haircuts will help him better understand baldness.

I can't say I'm too impressed with Edwards. He brought precisely 2 things to Kerry's campaign- boyish good looks, and a pretty good "Two Americas" speech. But that was it. If Kerry had chosen Gephardt instead he would have carried Ohio for sure and would have been president today.

Kerry was going down no matter who the running mate was.

He worked hard, made money, and got himself a nice house. So what?

(yawn)

whatever....

One in DC and one in Westchester. His and Hers.

But their house in Westchester is a fairly modest house, though in a pricey location.

The post above this on the crawl is "Obama v. Obama" - WTF, oh, wait. It's primary season when The Money Party goes to work.

Edwards has one problem, he won't let loose, just won't do it. Full tilt populism right now would galvanize the country. I was in Lake Lanier, Georgia for 10 days at the end of August, having fun etc. Got to meet a bunch of locals, party with them etc. They are totally fed up with Republican and corporate bullshit. They know the scam and if local Zel Miller showed up spouting his Republican crap, they'd give him an ear full.

This campaign is about speaking to the people, the vast middle/working class, the poor, everybody but those who manipulate huge concentrations of money gained through political tricks and bought politicians. The candidate who addresses that will win, without regard to his living arrangements.

Franklin Deleno Roosevelt was from a long line of wealthy folks, he lived in a wonderful estate, people knew it and they loved him. Forget the mansion talk.

If not, you may be my 1st 'ignore' in 3 years.

Edwards advocates policies that help working people -- increased access to college education, higher wages, union rights. He's not trying to keep them from enjoying what he enjoys. THAT would be hypocritical.

Politically smart? probably not. Hypocritical? no.

polls,Why else would anyone post this crap?

n/t

I honestly have never remotely understood this argument. Why can't wealthy people be concerned about the poor?

Edwards is a poor kid made good who hasn't forgotten where he came from. And he's doing the American thing. Giving back for what he received by pursuing public service.

Some poor kids who grew up and became rich people never forget where they came from. Others run away from it and pretend their past never existed. I often cite Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan as examples of the two extremes.

Edwards and Kucinich are both poor kids with good memories. Edwards did better than Kucinich, but both want to give back.

And if at the end of the day Edwards returns to a large compound instead of a trailer park, I'm not going to fault him for that. The fact is that instead of spending his days counting his money, making deals, and making more money (a characteristic revered among Republicans, who get a free pass on such things), John Edwards is criss-crossing the country (on public financing) delivering a message of hope to help make America a better place.

your post too thoughtful and intellectually stimulating to be on this thread... shame on you! lol

I hope for John to be raising his right hand come January 09 and taking the oath of office, and unlike shrubya, he'll actually follow it.

Because when he played by the rules, and had a government that worked for him, he lived the American dream. His message is he wants every American to have the opportunity to do the same thing, and he wants to give them all the tools to do so. There is nothing insincere about that. He isn't saying he's poor or middle class, he's saying he knows whats it like and wants to make the lives of the poor and middle class better. He shouldn't have to live in a two room shack to be seen as sincere.

Friends to the Bunnies.


Bunnies vote Edwards.

I CAN AFFORD IT.

He's a very., very bad man for having such a big house. Even worst, he had the never to accomplish the American dream. AND to top it off that very, very bad man want to help put his country The S.O.B. even care about those damn poor poeple....

Stop trying to bring people down because what they have done RIGHT!

Elizabeth Edwards is ill. They have two small children. They have an older daughter who might have to pinch-hit for her mother in due time, and live in that house -- possibly with her own husband and family. That compound might be intended for more than just the current Edwards family circle. It could be used to house people to help with the children and the household tasks. It could be used to hold meetings at home, instead of having to travel.

Those are possibilities. But do you think we should go back in time and criticize FDR for living in a big house? John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy lived in big houses. The Clintons didn't live in a small bungalow prior to taking the White House, as far as I know.

John and Elizabeth Edwards jointly worked to pay for that big house. This is America. And a lot of people are simply envious of what others have that they don't -- even if the others worked very hard for what they have, and the envious ones did not. And even if the efforts were equal, no one ever promised us a rose garden in this life.

John and Elizabeth Edwards give every indication of caring about the little people, as far as I can intuit from their public presentations. Perceptions can be dead wrong, especially when they are grounded in jealousy.

My two cents. John Edwards probably has a million cents. I'm interested in what the man plans to do for the country, from the comfort of a haven he well deserves.

This is just envy. Look into yourself and ask why you don't want someone who started out working-class (which John Edwards did) to make a great success of himself and have whatever material goods he wants -- especially if he devotes his life to trying to make your life better.

Where is the hypocrisy, exactly? As I said, you and your cohorts here need to look into your own selves.

Hekate

not sure that disqualifies him from talking about the poor though

I'm not sure if that was what you meant. Because according to polls, Hillary is seen as the most insincere candidate we have?

Why don't you do a search for all the candidates homes & figure out what they are worth and then get back to us? :eyes:


p.s. This is a totally Bullshit meme-the freepers love it-why don't you take it over to freeperville where it belongs?! :puke:

I remember reading that during the campaign. But, I agree with your premise. :)

I have no personal problem with his choice of house. With the Secret Service running the show they need an isolated 'compound'. It's actually a courtesy to his old neighbors who would have had hell going to and from their homes with the SS security measures involved.

But it just looks bad on a Presidential candidate and especially one with the politics that John is promoting. He could still have gotten a large home that wasn't quite THAT large and that further doesn't look as large as it really is. Like a large home that looks only medium-large, instead of an extra-large home that looks even larger than that.

Plus, while the house itself looks nice, with that ramshackly strip of misshapen sheds between the main house and the barn, it looks kind of junky. Don't think people won't notice and fail to be impressed.

My advice:

- get rid of those shitty sheds, paint the barn quiet, add alot more trees
- make is so green that the sun gets energy back from John Edwards
- make sure people know that the Secret Service people need the space and accomodations
- point out the courtesy of an out of the way compound over a populated neighborhood in terms of security hardship to neighbors

At worst none of these suggestions hurt. At best they could be damage control.

"Plus, while the house itself looks nice, with that ramshackly strip of misshapen sheds between the main house and the barn, it looks kind of junky. Don't think people won't notice and fail to be impressed."



I agree. The first thing I thought was uucckkk....what the? Looks like crap. I guess it looks fine from the ground though....just kind of not well thought out.....

The only damage is a manufactured controversy straight out of the Rove handbook.

that this isn't going to help John. In fact if the political retards on DU notice it, and we're predisposed towards Edwards, then it is more than likely that others will too. How many votes? Who knows. How much willingness to really listen to Edward's message and maybe throw in with him is compromised? Unmeasureable. Maybe not much, but why should there be any?

The point is that there's little political upside to this.

But hey, if he ever gets gotcha-questioned on it by one of our illustrious media assholes looking for corpo-cred by digging on a Dem, he can just take your advice and sneer something about Karl Rove. Isn't that a great plan.

:eyes:

Whatever. Continue bringing up RW themes to distract from the issues.

Are Hillary supporters so scared now they're falling back on garbage like this?

Franklin Roosevelt.

Look Bunnies!

And what's with all the carrots? What do they need such good eyesight for anyway?!

:hide:

On the one hand, we know that often major social changes and revolutions started from the wealthy, for the simple reason that they can afford to sit and think about issues and don't have to worry about feeding and clothing their families.

On the other hand, these wealthy individuals often came from old money or at least from one generation old money - think the Kennedys or the Roosevelts.

Thus, their family homes were older and perhaps not as extravagant as Edwards.

One really has to wonder what he was thinking - building this mansion while at the same time planning his run on "Two Americas," again.

issue

C'mon, don't you guys have anything else?

It shows that successful, smart, wealthy people can lead a lifestyle they have earned and can afford and STILL be compassionate, and intelligent and socially conscious and DEMOCRATIC!

I get so annoyed with the hairshirt wing of the party.

If people are going to take these sanctimonious viewpoints - I demand specificity -

EXACTLY how large is a house before you are offended?

EXACTLY how much may Hillary or Nancy Pelosi pay for a pantsuit?

EXACTLY what is the upper limit for haircuts?

You can be Democratic and be succcessful! You can have a nice (even enormous) house!

You can be a Democrat and:

be homeless, or
live in your car
live in a mobile home
live in a foster home
live in a retirement home
live in a tree
live in a boat
live in a tent
live in a hut
live in a small house
live in a medium house
live in a large house
live in a huge house

How or what we live in is NOT what defines us and the sooner we stop having pointless discussions like this, the better.

The Republicans LAUGH at you and play you like trout for trying to define what is "acceptable" to your modesty.

(Note to Question Everything - I meant to respond to the OP and not to your post- so when I say "you" I really don't mean you - I hate it when I do that!)

The barn like structures from the main house to the rec room or whatever. Not appealing to me.

Plus, you know it's 31 times bigger than my 900 square foot house. :shrug:

Gawd! They even had the nerve to put their name on the front of it.

Wow...now that is just awful.

;)