« Al Gore May Win the Nobel Peace Prize | Main | Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™ »

The Problem With the Edwards Estate

Last week, Carolina Journal took the story of the John Edwards' Chapel Hill mansion national with a story and picture of the 28,000 square foot house on over 100 acres. Now Michael Medved explains why he finds the Edwards' estate worthy of scrutiny, including the following.

Has Edwards spoken to his pal Al Gore about his lavish, energy soaking plantation? Anyone calculated the "carbon footprint" of a 29,000 square foot home? Can you imagine how much natural gas or electricity or nuclear power (only kidding) it takes to heat that puppy? Consider the huge contribution to Global Warming (identified by Edwards and all other Democrats as a dire threat to civilization) by chopping down a hundred acres of forest and installing this monstrously excessive residence.
I posted a picture of the Edwards' estate here last weekend. I didn't get into the detail Medved did in my thinking about the monster house because I could not get past the political considerations. Here is the thing about that house -- it is something everyone can understand. It is not necessary to understand law or public policy or national politics to know that no one needs a house that big. I am all for people enjoying the fruits of their labor, including having a big house and other things beyond their basic needs. But when you are preaching about poverty in America, in fact, basing your entire presidential campaign on that issue, you have to be an idiot to think people won't find such excess socially insensitive at best. Obnoxious and completely out of touch at worst. There is a difference in having a big house, and having a house that might have been contender for largest house in the state, but for the fact that North Carolina is already home to the largest house in the country, the Biltmore Estate.


It will be hard for even diehard Democrats to ignore the obvious question. How could Edwards be serious about addressing poverty in America if he would choose to spend his vast fortune on his private residence, rather than build a somewhat less monstrous mansion and donate some of the money saved to Habitat for Humanity or another worthy cause that could help the economically disadvantaged? I think that house is going to be a huge political problem for him and the fact that he does not see it as such makes me question his political instincts. Doesn't he remember that the last Democrat elected President was homeless, for goodness sake?


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Problem With the Edwards Estate:

» The Thunder Run linked with Web Reconnaissance for 02/02/2007

Comments (61)

Al Gore was homeless? (I k... (Below threshold)
Blake:

Al Gore was homeless? (I kid, I kid.)

I think that house is go... (Below threshold)
Brian:

I think that house is going to be a huge political problem for him and the fact that he does not see it as such makes me question his political instincts.

Coming from the party whose predictions and political instincts have such a dismal accuracy record, I don't think Edwards is worried.

Wham-O! The Relativist-Repu... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Wham-O! The Relativist-Republicans have come out of the closet and are in full tattle mode! WILL the Green-Eyed Monster be the mascot for this exciting new party? WILL the politics of envy extend to Enron, Halliburton, Dead Eye, or Dub'ya? I'm sure Michael Medved will "EXPLAIN" why not in a future article.

Only one thing I see wrong ... (Below threshold)
marc:

Only one thing I see wrong with that house.

It's not mine.

And if Edwards agrees to sign the title over to me I'll heat it with cow dung and plant trees so thick a second Cedar Revolution will start over root space.

It is very telling that man... (Below threshold)
superdestroyer:

It is very telling that many left of center commenters will defend Edwards and "carry water for the Democratic Party" instead of criticizing Edwards for his excess.

I guess that means that the Democratic response to the State of the Union was for show and that Senator Webb did not really mean it. The comments of "progressive" commenters also demonstrates that they do not really believe that talk about global warning but instead want to use the threat of global warning as a method on instituting central planning and invasive governmental controls.

Lorie, a few comments:... (Below threshold)
Wanderlust:

Lorie, a few comments:

1. Edwards' house may be powered from a nuke plant after all. The Shearon Harris One Nuclear Power Plant is located in New Hill, NC (Wake County). This facility is 20 miles from Chapel Hill (point to point measurement on Google Earth). So give credit for the Breck Girl reducing his carbon footprint by using nuclear power. Will Gore do the same?

2. As I pointed out in your previous post, a high resolution version of the Edwards compound photograph can be found at this link to the Carolina Journal website. You can clearly see just how much greenhouse gas reducing forest that the Breck Girl cut down with the fortune he earned fighting all those evil doctors and corporations.

3. I think Brian is right about Edwards not needing to be worried, but for the wrong reason: if Joe Biden can make comments about "clean" African-Americans and Indian convenience store clerks without incident, but George Allen gets practically crucified in the press over the "macaca" comment, I'd say Edwards could have his 29,000 sq. ft. house built in the middle of the Lower Ninth Ward of New Orleans, and Democrats would still vote for him.

Exit question: does Edwards have a gold hairbrush to go with that mansion?

Yes, superdestroyer, our le... (Below threshold)

Yes, superdestroyer, our leftists are hopeless little hypocrites.

It's hard for them to get their tiny little brains wrapped around any sort of concept. Note how Brian gloats at having won ONE election in a row.

No wonder they lap up that Edwards "Two Americas" crap . . .

The radical left takes its ... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

The radical left takes its marching orders from George Soros. Someone willing to throw small countries into economic chaos to make a buck. Its about power. Being a ranking member is a system where the majority of the rest of us are regulated by the government and dependent on the government.

The 'two classes' is just a means to and end meant to appeal to the useful idiots much like dangling candy to children to get them to do what you want.

Perhaps he could takes some... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Perhaps he could takes some lessons from Barbara Bush about poverty:

"What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality. And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them."

Ewwww, more poor people in Teaxs. Maybe she could give the Kennebunkport "summer" mansion to the poor and that would at least keep them out of Texas.

HughYou are confus... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Hugh

You are confused, again. The Republican Party encourages success, wants people to succeed. The Demo (lition) Party wants people to loath the self made success stories that make America great. Edwards is the one who expresses how the rich don't care about the poor, etc. If you cannot see the very obvious hypocritical stance he is taking, there is no hope at all for your party. ww

Is that all you've got? Ge... (Below threshold)
Reality:

Is that all you've got? Get used to being a permanent minority party.

jpm100, I agree: it's abou... (Below threshold)
goddessoftheclassroom:

jpm100, I agree: it's about power. Yes, the Republicans want power, too, but at least some of them keep a bigger picture in mind towards which to work. It seems the Democrats just say what they thin people want to hear; I still don't know what their "big picture" is.

Superdestroyer, they are a... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Superdestroyer, they are all willing "Perpetrators" in the "Criminal Democrat Party of Perpetual Fraud". Their bogus claims of the existence of some "vast right wing conspiracy" wasn't cutting it as a strategy to exuse their corruption being exposed by the Republican Party and the few honest reporters brave enough to expose the party that worships the PIAPS.

I see the whiners are up ea... (Below threshold)
Lee:

I see the whiners are up early today -- another restless night worrying about low-income America, huh Republicans? As if anyone would believe that for a nanosecond.

I"m looking forward to Lorie's list of Republicans who support Habitats for Humanity. Hell, a list of Republicans who know that poor people exist in the United States would be a good start, and it wouldn't take up much room.

Nothing is as funny as conservatives pretending to care about other Americans -- at least those who don't belong to the same religious cult as them... but let's turn our critical eye towards the viable, electable Republicans and see how they stand up to the same scrutiny..... checking.... WAIT A MINUTE! There aren't any viable, electable Republican candidates! My bad....

"Is that all you've got? Ge... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

"Is that all you've got? Get used to being a permanent minority party.
Posted by: Reality at February 2, 2007 07:57 AM"

This is what the Democrat Party is all about. A bunch of incompetant rich arrogant tantrum throwers even when they get what they want. And the Names they give themselves is just more proof of their hypocracy and fraud by using such words as reality , Truth , American ....... and the dictators favorite line of "the People have spoken".

Ooooh! are you threatening me? With that big bad word "Permanent"? You Rats were just in the complete MINORITY and to make yourselves feel good
and forget where you were , you tell yourselves it's OK , they are now going to be in the Permanent Minority. LOL. You fibbing little cry babies are a real embarrassment to Our Great Country and the human race.

Don't you just love freedom? These democrat drones are exercising their right to be just as dumb as humanly possible.

So, is Edwards a believer i... (Below threshold)
jim:

So, is Edwards a believer in noblesse oblige?

Or perhaps in Jane Austen?

"A baronet must be seen to live like a baronet."

--- _Persuasion_

Lorie asks, "Doesn't he rem... (Below threshold)
Herman:

Lorie asks, "Doesn't he remember that the last Democrat elected President was homeless, for goodness sake?"

Lorie, Al Gore was NOT homeless.

While Republicans obsess over what houses politicians live in, far, far, FAR more telling is how these politicians vote. Just this week, the Democratic-controlled House easily passed a noteworthy bill designed to support refugee programs and to fight malaria, AIDS, and tuberculosis. Now, you might ask, who comprised a vast majority of those opposing the passing of this bill? Why, of course, none other than red-state Republicans whom you conservatives place into power, that's who!!

Much better to spend billions upon billions upon billions of dollars on say, war or Dick Cheney's company, Halliburton, than on children stuck in deep poverty or suffering from infectious diseases, right, conservatives??? Jesus Christ himself would heartily approve, right, conservatives??? And if he wouldn't, why do you have the gall to call yourselves Christians, when you're nothing but hypocrites???

Got an answer, dudes?

Ladies and Gentleman , I... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Ladies and Gentleman , Introducing the leader of the bed wetting pack of compuslive liars sporting a "Black Belt" in Hypocracy , it calls itself LEE!

For those who are not aware of Lee and his family , hugh , pukeface and the rest , we are watching history in the making. They are literally evolving backwards right before our very eyes. We are truly blessed to be able to witness this unfortunate phenominom that has been self inflicted resulting in the untreatable "BUSH DERANGEMENT SYNDROME". Let this be a lesson for future generations to come.


It is really funny at times watching these poor pathetic individuals struggle to grasp reality, having not a clue the difference between fantasy and reality. Sad but funny as hell.

"It will be hard for eve... (Below threshold)
cmd:

"It will be hard for even diehard Democrats to ignore the obvious question. . ."

Oh, Lorie, thanks for this morning's chuckle. Ignore? That's Democrat SOP, from terrorism to treason. Look at Wizbang's resident trolls, whom I'd consider fairly representative leftist shills:

Brian - "coming from the party whose predictions. . .have such a dismal accuracy record. . ."

Deflecting the question? Check.

bryanD - "the politics of envy. . ."

Deflecting the question again.

Hugh - "perhaps he could take some lessons from Barbara Bush. . ."

Republicans are meanies, too! Whatever, pal - are you going to address Lorie's question, or do we just call the WAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHmbulance?

Reality - "is that all you've got?"

Can't address the question, can you?

Lee - "I'm looking forward to Lorie's list of Republicans who support Habitat for Humanity. . ."

The question is about the Breck Girl's house, Lee, not about the feel-good scam of the Jew-hating Carter.

So there's your answer, Lorie - Democrats will simply ignore the house and deflect the question to GOP perfidy, just like they ignored slumlord Al Gore, rapist Bill Clinton, "jew bastard" Hillary and so on ad nauseam. Remember the narrative - when a liberal like little Johnny Edwards builds a grand palace, he's inviting the proles to live vicariously through him while he "fights" for them against the evil, rich, Republican robber barons. When a Republican builds a big house, its walls are mortared by the blood of negroes and the lawn watered by the tears of starving orphans. It would be funny if it (and the leftie clowns here) wasn't so predictable.

Hugh, I didn't know Barbara... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

Hugh, I didn't know Barbara Bush was running for President on an anti-poverty platform. I'd love the link for that bit of news because I missed it entirely. I guess if that is your defense for Edwards' excess then you really have no response.

Lee, you must not know any Republicans. I do and know plenty who have worked on Habitat homes and contributed to Habitat. I have contributed myself, but just very small contributions since I don't have the resources Edwards won by channeling infants (or are they fetuses) in the womb for juries here in my home state.

Just a note, Edwards was legally entitled to take the huge 1/3 plus expenses chunk out of the settlements and awards he won on behalf of victims. That is how he made his fortune. He was not, however, required to take it. It was always within his discretion to lower his fee and let the victims keep more of the money juries awarded them. I know that lawyers take risks with contingency cases and when they "hit the jackpot" with a huge jury award or settlement it often makes up for many lost cases. That does not appear to be the case with Edwards, who I have been told turned down many cases that he didn't think would be lucrative enough. There were plenty of times he could have reduced his fee, or he could have donated huge chunks of his income to charity (poverty fighting charities even) and still had enough left to be a multimillionaire.

I don't think all rich people should be required to give all their money away, but there have been quite a few studies showing that Republicans give far more to charity than Democrats, even when those Democrats have the same or greater resources. I just think at the least you could give them credit for it.

Your stereotype, Lee, does not jibe with the facts. Does your anti-religious comment mean that you believe any money given to faith-related charities doesn't count. How loving and compassionate that is? Does that mean you would prefer people go hungry to being fed by a faith-based charity?

Lee's funniest comment, though, was about Republicans not supporting Habitat for Humanity. The list would probably be as long as Dem supporters of the charity. Evidently, Lee doesn't know much about the organization or he would know that it is a Christian ministry (http://www.habitat.org/how/christian.aspx) and would not have made the religious cult comment. Unbelieveable.

"Got an answer, dudes?"<... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

"Got an answer, dudes?"

Ya , don't listen to Herman, he's the DEVIL. He's here to tell lies and tempt those in the Party of Good to attact him which is the only way he can gain strenth.

"the Democratic-controlled House easily passed a noteworthy bill designed to support refugee programs and to fight malaria, AIDS, and tuberculosis."

Of Course , Democrats can only do with taxpayers money what Republicans do with their own money. Democrats never do in their private lives the things they claim to care about once in positions of Power. What is that called again? Umm..... Oh ya it's the same thing they use to call actors in Biblical days , HYPOCRITES!LOL....

Lorie:Could you pl... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Lorie:

Could you please detail for us the charitable donations and charitable works that John Edwards has made and performed?

No you can't? I didn't think so.

P.S. Your post was silly and as usual completely without factual support, ergo my (equally silly) reference to Barbra Bush.

P.S. Your post was silly... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

P.S. Your post was silly and as usual completely without factual support, ergo my (equally silly) reference to Barbra Bush.

Did Edwards not build that huge house while cutting down a number of trees in the process? Is he not running on a Presidential platform of 2 Americas, highlighting poverty? Do you not find this highly hypocritical?

Keeping in mind that we are only talking about Edwards here.

So what about this post is not supported by facts?

J.R.How about this... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

J.R.

How about this?

"......and donate some of the money....." My question was pretty simple, show us what you know about his donations.

LorieJust another ... (Below threshold)
aRepukelican:

Lorie

Just another one of your Demophobic posts pushing the RWB crap about Democratic hypocrisy, courtesy of the left-coast phoney Medved.

If there were such a measure possible, I'd bet my net worth that the total carbon footprint of all Democrats would make the total Republican carbon footprint look like Bigfoot's.

You ought to be pointing out what you can buy in NC for your money; $6 million for 28000 sq ft isn't bad compared to NYC prices or CA prices. I wonder what the average Manhattan 5000 sq ft apartment costs? Probably not much under $6 mil.

There are plenty of rich fat cats who typically pay $6million plus for a home. They are part of the 10% of Americans who own 70% of the accumulated wealth of this country.

Regardless of how Edwards divested himself of his net worth, it wouldn't make the least difference to an increase in the median wealth of this nation.

Yes, the Edward's house is profligate, but it does not invalidate the core idea of 2 Americas. When 10% of the population controls 70% of accumulated wealth, it would take a complete asshole like Medved to attempt to deny the reality that the US has the biggest wealth gap in its population of any other developed western democracy. To find a comparable Gini coefficient to the US wealth gap, you would have to go to countrirs like Brazil or Argentina or most of Central America, where the gap in wealth is obscene.

I can't wait to see what Republican buys the $155 million mansion in Montana, regardless of its squre footage.

there have been quite a ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

there have been quite a few studies showing that Republicans give far more to charity than Democrats, even when those Democrats have the same or greater resources.

Could you point to any such studies? I'd like to have a look.

Duh, Puke. Yeah, prices ar... (Below threshold)

Duh, Puke. Yeah, prices are higher in Cali and NY and lots of other places than here in NC. My main point was regarding the political repercussions. Say whatever you want and defend Edwards mansion all you want, but that will not change the way the house will "play" in poor and middle America and those using this as a weapon to beat Edwards about the head will be Hillary and the other Dems in the primary -- although some of it may be done behind the scenes.

Lorie:I take your ... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Lorie:

I take your silence to my request to give us what you know about Edwards charitable donations as an admission that, as usual, you don't know the facts. Thank you.

H

The donating the money refe... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

The donating the money reference was to the costs of building his mansion. It's pretty clear to me that it was Lorie meant. Build a smaller house and put your money where your mouth is and donate more to the causes you (Edwards) claim to champion.

It is astounding that not one of the left of center posters here can point to and denigrate the hypocrisy of John Edwards and instead will excuse it and/or point somewhere else.

I don't know where people l... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

I don't know where people like JR and Lorie (in her case figuratively) get the balls to criticize anyone....Edwards or anyone else without any knowledge of the facts. The ONLY thing you know is that he built a very large very expensive house. You know NOTHING about to whom or how much he donates money. Yet you feel free to call him a hypocrite because you assume something, In this case assuming makes an ass out of you.

What hypocrisy exactly are you talking about? That he advocates for the poor but builds an expensive home? What should he do? Wear sack cloth and live in a trailer? The absurdity of your argument is mind boggling.

Dick Cheney donated 6.9 Mil... (Below threshold)
jp:

Dick Cheney donated 6.9 Million dollars to charity last year, 3/4's of his income!

"Do as I say, not as I do" liberal puppet master hypocrites aren't so generious but selfish punks like Edwards.

Cmd, that was a beautiful... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Cmd, that was a beautiful first round knockout. They don't even know what hit them. That's why they will be back for more.

Hugh,I am not assumi... (Below threshold)

Hugh,
I am not assuming anything. I am saying the perception that will be created as a result of the mansion will be a political liability. That is only "assuming" I know anything at all about the way politics works. I know a little about it -- certainly enough to know it will not be a political plus. Whether or not Edwards gave every other dime he ever earned in his life to charity, which I am pretty sure he didn't, the house will still stand as a symbol of excess. Are you really arguing otherwise, or are you just mad that I am "picking on" Edwards?

Lorie:Unlike you I... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Lorie:

Unlike you I don't know whether his house will be a symbol of excess.....why it should be to a Republican is beyond me. It appears to me that the right believes that folks on the left who have money are ipso facto hypocrites. Why?

That said, it was you Lorie who wrote "....and donate some of the money saved...." You raised the issue of charity, not me. I've simply challenged you to support what you wrote. Clearly you can't. I'm not mad you're picking on Edwards. I'm irritated that you won't own your own writing.

How exactly is it hypocrisy to build an expensive home and be an advocate for the poor. Again, I'd like some facts not your usual emotional rendering.

FDR did not have to divest ... (Below threshold)
aRepukelican:

FDR did not have to divest himself of his fortune & move to a trailer to promise the "New Deal" campaign.

Get off your pseudo-hypocrisy Lorie.

Hey Hugh , you are the one... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

Hey Hugh , you are the one that doesn't know shit about the facts. For example you don't know , how stupid you are , the fact that you are a complete liar and pull your thoughts straight out of your ass. STFU stupid , stick to the topic and don't open your trap , you might learn something.

If Edwards living in a larg... (Below threshold)

If Edwards living in a large house and advacating for poor Americans equals hypocrisy, would a Republican who lives in a large house and advocates for programs that help poor Americans also be equally hypocritical? Just asking. If the answer is no than we have the classic double standard here don't we?

"How exactly is it hypo... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

"How exactly is it hypocrisy to build an expensive home and be an advocate for the poor"

Your inability to understand something as simple as this is why you are on the left.

"would a Republican who ... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

"would a Republican who lives in a large house and advocates for programs that help poor Americans also be equally hypocritical"

Yes, if the house was as excessive and wasteful as Edwards'. And if that Republican made millions upon millions for himself, while contributing almost nothing to society as Edwards did (the contributing to the problem of so many being in poverty). And if that Republican was personally responsible for the poor not being able to afford health care as Edwards is (and most other democrats are) then it would be just as hypocritical.

Hugh"Lorie You don... (Below threshold)
914:

Hugh

"Lorie You dont know about all the charities that Edwards has contributed too!"

Yes She does hugh! they are He,Himself,His own and the John Edwards I want it all fund..

Now go cry to Mary ellen!

[email protected] asks: If Edwards liv... (Below threshold)
doubled:

[email protected] asks: If Edwards living in a large house and advacating for poor Americans equals hypocrisy, would a Republican who lives in a large house and advocates for programs that help poor Americans also be equally hypocritical? Just asking. If the answer is no than we have the classic double standard here don't we?

The campaign tactic of demonizing the successful (read as rich if you wish), saying they are the cause of poverty, or at least that they became successful at the 'expense' of the poor is NOT a Republican canard.

That is however, exactly Edward's campaign strategy, the 'two America's' b.s., one side keeping the other down.

Herman is impressed by thi... (Below threshold)

Herman is impressed by this: Just this week, the Democratic-controlled House easily passed a noteworthy bill designed to support refugee programs and to fight malaria, AIDS, and tuberculosis.

They all could have contributed to these causes as they wished as private citizens. They wouldn't then be able to crow about it in the press though would they?

Lefty politicians love to fund programs like these I've come to believe to relieve their own pangs of guilt to their success as much as they really want to do something positive for humanity (again they could send funds on their own , and leave me and others who have no interest in funding these particular projects free to fund those projects we feel are more important).

The founding fathers had it right to RESTRICT the powers of government. Otherwise, this is what you get . Arrogent politicos who pat themsleves on the back for spending our money.

Feel free to igno... (Below threshold)
doubled:

Feel free to ignore my diatrbe due to lack of spellchecking skills.

Well I see old "pucker puss... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Well I see old "pucker puss" (lee lee) (resident turd polisher) is out early today. Ditto,ditto and away we go.
And I see old "pukeface" is his usual self-re an idiot.
As to "hughie", beyond discription
"[email protected]" cannot even get his sig. right. (ok let's hear it now)

Doubled,I will be ... (Below threshold)

Doubled,

I will be the last person on earth to criticize another for poor spelling skills. Having suffered from severe dyslexia since kindergarten I know the struggles of communicating in the written word. That's also the reason you will never hear me get isdown on Bush for his verbal slip-ups because I see many of the same symptoms I exhibit in the way the President speaks.

Is your statement "That is however, exactly Edward's campaign strategy, the 'two America's' b.s., one side keeping the other down." a perception or reality?

Obviously I have not read or heard everything Edwards writes or says but when I do tune in to what he's saying I don't here him saying one side (the rich) is keeping the other side (the poor) down.
I do hear him speaking to the wage and wealth disparity in America that grows larger every year. I also don't hear Edwards saying we must knock down the rich to raise up the poor. I do hear him say there are things government can and should be doing to help those in the shadows of society.

If you believe raising taxes on the top 2% of Americans is knocking them down then I will concede that point to you.

I have yet to read about a society in all of humankind's' history where voluntary taxation was successful, have you?

"It was once said that the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped."
Hubert H. Humphrey

I"m looking forward to ... (Below threshold)
marc:

I"m looking forward to Lorie's list of Republicans who support Habitats for Humanity.Posted by: Lee at February 2, 2007 08:09 AM

:In Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism" (Basic Books), Arthur C. Brooks

He writes that households headed by a conservative give roughly 30 percent more to charity each year than households headed by a liberal, despite the fact that the liberal families on average earn slightly more.
Bet a part of the 30 percent goes to Habitat to Humanity Lee.

P.S mantis is that good enough.

I doubt it.

Yeah marc, that's enough. ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Yeah marc, that's enough. I had forgotten about that book; meant to pick it up. I will do so and have a look at it. I'd like to know the methods Brooks used, though don't take that to mean I assume he's wrong (although after reading this review, I have my doubts about his motives, at least). If he is right it is worrisome for non-religious liberals such as myself who believe that charitable giving is worthwhile, though I agree with Nader that "A society that has more justice is a society that needs less charity."

Where are the photos of all... (Below threshold)

Where are the photos of all of Al Gore's several houses, airplanes, and tobacco farms? And how many cars and tractors etc does Al own?

Well I hate to wade into th... (Below threshold)

Well I hate to wade into this mire, but here's one conservative republican who attaches no political significance whatsoever to how big John Edwards' house is. Hypocritical because he doesn't build a smaller house and donate the cost savings to Habitat for Humanity? You can't be serious.

It says something about his focus on himself and his burgeoning consumerism, but I don't attach any ideological significance to it.

I do think there is some legitimacy to the enviro side of the issue -- although it would be easier to target Algor since he's such a zealot.

Sorry, Lorie, but I missed ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Sorry, Lorie, but I missed this comment earlier which you directed at me.

Lee, you must not know any Republicans. I do and know plenty who have worked on Habitat homes and contributed to Habitat. I have contributed myself, but just very small contributions since I don't have the resources Edwards won by channeling infants (or are they fetuses) in the womb for juries here in my home state.

Whoa! "Channeling Fetuses"? Where the heck did THAT come from? I thought this was about Edwards, his house, and his chances for election. Where the heck did fetuses come from?

What is the hidden agenda (or is it just some form of hidden psychologicial damage) that has you bringing fetuses into the discussion?

"Just a note, Edwards was legally entitled to take the huge 1/3 plus expenses chunk out of the settlements and awards he won on behalf of victims. That is how he made his fortune. He was not, however, required to take it. It was always within his discretion to lower his fee and let the victims keep more of the money juries awarded them. I know that lawyers take risks with contingency cases and when they "hit the jackpot" with a huge jury award or settlement it often makes up for many lost cases. That does not appear to be the case with Edwards, who I have been told turned down many cases that he didn't think would be lucrative enough. There were plenty of times he could have reduced his fee, or he could have donated huge chunks of his income to charity (poverty fighting charities even) and still had enough left to be a multimillionaire."

Good, if he's elected president he can get to work chasing down the bad guys in the world. I like the fact that he can make a case and win. I like winners. Winners are winners because the succeed. The only thing GWB is good at is cutting brush, so a successful person in the White House would be a refreshing change.

"I don't think all rich people should be required to give all their money away, but there have been quite a few studies showing that Republicans give far more to charity than Democrats, even when those Democrats have the same or greater resources. I just think at the least you could give them credit for it."

Show me the studies and I will give them credit. I've never seen it. This blog post would have been an excellent place for you to provide that evidence. It would have made your case much stronger -- and to my knowledge, no fetuses would have been harmed in the process, but you correct me if I'm wrong on that.

"Your stereotype, Lee, does not jibe with the facts. Does your anti-religious comment mean that you believe any money given to faith-related charities doesn't count. How loving and compassionate that is? Does that mean you would prefer people go hungry to being fed by a faith-based charity?"

Well, it jibes with the facts as you presented them. This was nothing more than a it piece on Edwards --- apparently having some hidden agenda regarding fetuses.

and finally (emphasis mine):

"Lee's funniest comment, though, was about Republicans not supporting Habitat for Humanity. The list would probably be as long as Dem supporters of the charity. "

Really? I think you're pulling that out of thin air, and I don't believe it for a second. The fact that this is another of your unsubstantiated "facts" (although you were careful to say "probably") means you don't have any factual basis, just your own bias, to base this on. You are transparent, Lorie -- although the foaming at the mouth regarding fetuses did take me by surprise....

"Evidently, Lee doesn't know much about the organization or he would know that it is a Christian ministry (http://www.habitat.org/how/christian.aspx) and would not have made the religious cult comment. Unbelieveable."

No, Lorie, the fact that you imply but never state that the connection that because Habitat for Humanity is a Christian organization somehow means it a conservative, Republican organization? You've presented NO FACTUAL BASIS for that statement.

With regards to your "religious cult" -- your spittle-soaked diatribe over Edwards and "fetuses" tells me I was spot on.

Say a prayer for us all, Lorie. Save us from ourselves -- as you present unfounded bias after bias... lie after lie.

Love to read the responses ... (Below threshold)
OhioVoter:

Love to read the responses to Kim and Lorie's stuff. Nothing brings out the hidden sexism in a leftist apologists (a small subset of all liberals/Democrats - not all liberal/Democrats) like a woman with the temerity to take a conservative political stance instead of doing (and thinking) what they are told.

Since the time was spent attacking her rather than refuting her point, I will just address her point.

John Edwards can build whatever house he cares to and can afford to build.

Can I?

Not according to him - if he wins this election. He thinks he knows better that I what I should be able to do with my money.

That's the hypocrisy.

He isn't sitting back in his own house minding his own business. He is going on the road telling me (and all other Americans) who they should care about and how those people should be cared for - and he plans to use our money, not his, to do it.

His money, of course, is currently well protected from the taxman in a fund currently being investigated for its legality. Now, I have no idea if that fund is legal or not - it very well may be. But, again, he is still a hypocrite for being unwilling to do what he lectures others to do. If you want others to pay more taxes, you certainly should be willing to do so yourself as well. So far he has demonstrated that he is unwilling to do so.

I do believe that most Americans are willing and ready to help their neighbor in times of trouble. Personally, I give a minimum of 10% of my gross income to charity every year. My chief hobby is making afghans for charitable groups. No child from a Girl Scout troop, sports team, or any other group goes away from my door without a donation. I can still do that and take care of the needs of myself and my family.

No one needs to lecture me on the "other" America because I've already met them. I have been that America.

A few years back, a Democratic senator did a PR stunt when he pointed out the tax cuts would enable a rich person to get the equivalent of a Lexus while the poor person would receive only the equivalent of the Lexus' battery. He urged the voters of this country not to be taken in by this "scam". In other words, he engaged in a blatant attempt at class warfare.

What he didn't understand - or perhaps simply didn't care about - was that HE wasn't giving anyone a battery or a Lexus. That money belonged to the taxpayer already and plan in question was only giving the money back to the person who earned it in the first place.

John Edwards doesn't understand that either, apparently or he wouldn't be lecturing adults on a "reality" with which he apparently has no connection.

Hey Lee -- sometimes news i... (Below threshold)

Hey Lee -- sometimes news is so widespread that it isn't even necessary to provide a link to it -- and since you're stuck in your little Plato's Cave ruminating over the shadows on the walls, you probably missed (or did you block) the report that Lori refers to. Try this.

Hey wavemaker -- opinion is... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Hey wavemaker -- opinion isn't news, although you'd be hard pressed to convince the blog writers on Wizbang. They think any thought that pops into their minds is a "fact".

True to form, you've linked to a book review (not a news article) about a book written by an economist who puts forth his theory (not a "report") that conservatives are more giving.

One economist.

One theory.

not "widespread news".

Not a "report".

From your link:

That's a claim that some liberals may have a tough time believing, given Mr. Brooks's withering criticism in the book of liberal icons like Ralph Nader, Mr. Brooks's work for The Wall Street Journal's famously conservative op-ed page, and a promotional tour for the book that reads like a conservative coming-out party. There's a keynote address at a Manhattan Institute for Policy Research dinner, a book signing at the American Enterprise Institute, and an interviews with John Stossel of ABC's 20/20 and radio talk-show host Michael Medved -- two people known for conservative views.

Patrick Rooney, director of research at Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy, says Mr. Brooks's inclusion of strongly worded personal opinions is "a doubled-edged blade."

"He will certainly get more attention," Mr. Rooney says. "But at the same time, it might invite more criticism and skepticism."

Mr. Brooks says he is ready to take the heat. "If I did my job, this will stimulate a whole bunch of new work," he says. "In five years, I'd be delighted to say that in certain ways, I was wrong."

Some conservative hack publishes a biased book and to you and Lorie it's "gospel" -- spare me!

Wavemaker ..I woul... (Below threshold)
OhioVoter:

Wavemaker ..

I wouldn't spend a lot of time on providing a link. Those who claim the opposite - that liberals are more generous with their own money - have provided no other support for their view other than 'everyone knows that ...'. Because they think it, it must be true.

Like everything else in this world - some conservatives are more generous than some liberals and vice versa.

Lorie: "Does your anti-r... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Lorie: "Does your anti-religious comment mean that you believe any money given to faith-related charities doesn't count. How loving and compassionate that is? Does that mean you would prefer people go hungry to being fed by a faith-based charity?"

I don't believe that money given to church building funds, for example, should count. I don't consider that charitable giving -- and it clearly has little if anything to do with feeding the hungry - and it has nothing to do with being loving and compassionate outside of one's own circle of like-minded folks.

It's about feathering thy own's nest -- the conservative Christian's nest -- therefore giving to oneself in this manner shouldn't count, don't you agree Lorie?

I don't believe that mon... (Below threshold)
OhioVoter:

I don't believe that money given to church building funds, for example, should count. I don't consider that charitable giving -- and it clearly has little if anything to do with feeding the hungry - and it has nothing to do with being loving and compassionate outside of one's own circle of like-minded folks.

It's about feathering thy own's nest -- the conservative Christian's nest -- therefore giving to oneself in this manner shouldn't count, don't you agree Lorie?

Or, in other words, you have little first hand knowledge of how any charity feeding the homeless (or running day care and/or senior care programs, youth sports leagues, maternal preparation classes, etc., etc.) operate in this country.

I would think someone who feels confident in judging others on their ability to be loving and show compassion would know something about the subject.

You really are a total frau... (Below threshold)

You really are a total fraud, lee.

wavemaker, you are too kind... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

wavemaker, you are too kind. Lee is just an ass. Although we should pity him, he obviously doesn't know the meaning of love or charity.

Here's a link to an actual ... (Below threshold)
funky chicken:

Here's a link to an actual organization, not a book review that shows "red states" are more generous than "blue states"

http://www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/cfp/db/generosity.php?year=2005

But Lee, I'm sure it's just all the poor liberals in those red states donating so much of their incomes, right? feh

Jealousy is the soul energy... (Below threshold)
TOM HARMON:

Jealousy is the soul energy of most of you crybabies. The guy busted his tail to make a living and you can't seem to get the trash to the can. Shut up if you have nothing good to say. He is one of America's successful dream come true. If he were Polish or African American most of you idiots would be back in the unemployment line like you were yesterday with nothing to say. Get a life.

Jealousy is the soul energy... (Below threshold)
TOM HARMON:

Jealousy is the soul energy of most of you crybabies. The guy busted his tail to make a living and you can't seem to get the trash to the can. Shut up if you have nothing good to say. He is one of America's successful dream come true. If he were Polish or African American most of you idiots would be back in the unemployment line like you were yesterday with nothing to say. Get a life.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy