I am really frustrated about this entire Edwards situation

[LibraLiz1973]

I am completely disgusted by the amount of posts bashing anyone who had a problem with the size of the home. I've read post after post claiming that anyone who had a negative reaction to the home was a "plant" or a "troll"... sent here to rile up the masses at DU and create havoc. Yeah- it seems real likely that so many people have been here for months & years waiting to attack the size of the Edwards homestead.

It specifically states in the DU rules that you aren't to call people trolls or freepers. I love DU for the debate, but, when things like this happen there is NO debate... Just a brutal bashing of skulls.

I started on Friday thinking that anyone who was picking on Edwards house was just being persnickety. After two days of thinking I have to tell you... the size of the house IS in fact an issue. TO ME.

Go back and review my posts. I've been an Edwards supporter since 2004. I've been completely enchanted by him. Until now.

Edwards talks about two Americas- but what he's done with that house is illustrate the fact that he lives in the OTHER richer America. The house is in bad taste for someone who plans to run on that platform.

BE HONEST. If you found out that was where McCain or Giuliani lived, DU would be on FIRE. If we found out that belonged to Darth Cheney people would be flipping out!

During a time when we should ALL be worrying about the environment and what kind of a foot print we are leaving, that house screams F*CK IT. I could not care less about the light bulbs or the energy star appliances. They demolished a hell of alot of trees for that compound, and it is WASTEFUL. They are a family of 5- four really if you factor in that Cate is older and off doing her own thing.

I do not begrudge them their dream home, rather, that they chose to be so irresponsible in building it. There must have been many a large house for sale in that area that would not have required more cutting of trees. Why do we continue to pollute our environment?


I have to say- I'm pretty hot about this issue now. Our politicians are like Donald Trump now- they want the biggest and the best.
It's disgusting. So over the top. That house wasn't built for comfort- it was built to show off. Well, he's showed off... and I, for one, am turned off. AS I HAVE A RIGHT TO BE.

You can call everyone who disagrees with you a troll, but I don't see the point. There is a REAL issue here that SHOULD be talked about. I tried to make a joke out of it at first because I have always been in the Edwards camp- but the truth is this IS something that needs discussing. What's YOUR stand on it?
:rant:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

1. This Will Make You Feel Better. :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=59410&mesg_id=59410

[saltpoint]

2. I am listening at this moment to Joni Mitchell's BLUE album.

Earlier today I had on the 2nd Rachmaninoff concerto. When I was 14 I had the chance to play on a piano once owned by Rachmaninoff. I had a wonderful experience but unfortunately none of his talent rubbed off on my playing. Not one note, in fact.

And in just a moment we're going to slide our old VHS of Zefferelli's ROMEO AND JULIET into the gizmo and sit back and let Shakespeare slap us around with almost unbelievable beauty in sight and language.

I'm voting for either Edwards or Kucinich in the primary.

[Olney Blue]

15. Can I come over? I'll bring a homemade chocolate cake.

:hi:

I like the sound of your home.

[saltpoint]

18. Well sure. Come on over, Olney Blue.

The more the merrier.

:dem:

:hi:

[Crabby Appleton]

175. Blue - one of my favorite albums

[Harper_is_Bush]

3. The size of the house is not an issue for me, and they're doing their best to make it efficient

and have plans to go geo-thermal.

I hope Elizabeth Edwards decides to change her lights for CFL's now instead of waiting for the incandescents to burn out.

I do agree with you that the troll/disruptor accusations and flat-out anger by those being defensive of the Edwards has been kind of a shitty thing.

[bdamomma]

4. all this stuff about the size of someone house is getting out of control

never mind about the size of the house, look at Rummy he has about 5 houses. It is all about who has the biggest and the best, and in Rummy's case how many.

[salin]

5. My issue - is that rather than a couple of threads

the entire forum was nearly shut out of other discussions because EVERYONE felt the need to post their own thread. So for most of yesterday I just hid any thread related to 'the house' so that I could read the forum - and in less than two hours I hid more than 50 f*ckin' threads. That isn't discussion that is spam. Not traditional spam (one person doing a gazillion threads) but group spam - and spam nonetheless.

Thus had it been a couple of threads with real discussion - I might have been open to discussion. Now - tired of it all. I even gave up on hiding all the threads because there were just SO many more.

So, ironically, by starting more and more threads - those seeking "conversation/debate/whatever" have turned some folks off completely from the whole issue - out of frustration I don't care to read another word about Edwards and his house.

And it hasn't changed my view. He wasn't my top candidate nor my least favorite candidate - and that hasn't changed and won't over 'the house'. Indeed if there are a slew more of these threads - it might push me to a more favorable view... except that would be pleasing one side of the two groups continuing to perpetuate these threads.

For me, along the way it has become a group dynamic issue. And DU group dynamics should *never* determine political leanings (per favorable/not favorable towards a candidate).

I know this isn't what you were looking for - but I needed to express it somewhere - and I sure didn't want to start yet *another* thread to express it. Sorry for the nonsequitor - but thanks for giving me a place to say it.

[LibraLiz1973]

29. I understand & thank you for posting

[salin]

40. I much appreciate

your graciousness in the face of my rant. Seriously needed to say it somewhere... and am glad that you took it in the spirit of a needed vent - thanks. seriously. :D

[LibraLiz1973]

91. Hey, everyone needs to vent sometimes!!

And since thats what I was doing in the OP, I fully understand!!

[havocmom]

53. salin speaks for me too

There were so many really important things to talk about this weekend, and DU spent most way too much time, energy, bandwidth on the house.

[salin]

61. havocmom,

not the first time we find ourselves together - even if it is standing outside the norms. So great to see you! :hi:

[skipos]

6. Edwards is in my top 3, but what bothers me is that

I think it is harder to sell the idea that you are a champion of the poor and a friend of the environment when you have a house like that. It would be no different than if I found out Kucinich owned a ton of Halliburton stock. Sure, it is within his rights, but it is a bit of a bummer.

[Toucano]

20. Darling, that's it in a nutshell.

Thanks.

[sendero]

131. This is the thing that the "stop bashing" folks..

... are missing.

The Republicans will shove that house right where the sun doesn't shine if he tries to run a "populist" campaign, which it seems is where he is hanging his hat.

It has NOTHING TO DO with the objective rightness or wrongness of owning such a house, it has EVERYTHING to do with politics.

Half the people on DU couldn't get elected dogcatcher, they have such a poor grasp of how things REALLY WORK on the campaign trail. They still think the election is about "issues" and "integrity" and not about "gotcha". They don't get that the MSM is JUST LYING IN WAIT to exploit issues (non-issues?) like this.

Sometimes, it just too painful to watch. All the good intentions in the world is not going to put a Dem in the white house, and THAT and ONLY THAT is my ultimate goal.

[patricia92243]

7. I've wondered if he had already lived in that exact same house for years if anybody would have even

noticed it. His building that large of a house AT THIS TIME is not a good choice on his part. When a person runs for Prez, they need to at least try to be above reproach.

[salin]

9. of course they would have - Kerry's homes came up in his

campaign. That was ironic as it was nothing compared to the excess of the bushes - but it came up nonetheless.

[patricia92243]

12. But did it come up HERE at DU or was it the Republics that mde a big deal of it. n/t

[salin]

21. good question

and i can't remember the answer - could have been external than parrotted on DU - but don't recall.

Keep in mind - on this thread express my fatigue with the DU threads on this topic. I was just recalling havin a similar reaction to numerous threads per Kerry and his house (and frankly it was relatively modest - but in a high cost area).

[John Q. Citizen]

28. Kerry wealth came up here often. I guess it's just part of the curse of being rich.

[karynnj]

94. and other than 1/2 of the Boston one - they weren't his.

Though I am certain Teresa was happy to have him around. I am not an Edwards' fan and I think this is a very hypocritical issue. This house is not significantly more expensive than the house he lived in 2004.

The only reason I think it is an issue at all is that he and especially Elizabeth have gone out of their way to say that they live like everyone else - shopping at Target, going to Wendy's etc. But, there is no way anyone builds a $6 million house and then decorates it with stuff from Target. I quickly scanned Elizabeth's books and I was surprised how concerned she was with how much things cost and she seemed very intimidated by Teresa's wealth.

[Kahuna]

8. DU would be on fire if McCain or Guiliani lived in a mansion???

I really don't think so. The fact is, Edwards is a millionare. Everybody knows that. Millionaires live in mansions. Get over it.

And by the way, what size house do you think Kerry and Teresa live in??? Never heard a word about it on DU. Nobody cares.

[mondo joe]

14. Correction: should be "what size houseS" Kerry and Teresa live in.

Just saying.

[Kahuna]

16. Correction noted. I wonder how many COMPOUNDS they have..

:hi:

[mondo joe]

22. I wonder what the square footage of the combined homes is, not to mention

the expense.

Oh well, I'm sure Teresa has personally screwed in every fluorescent bulb herself, so it's okay.

[salin]

41. *snark warning*

of course there was that tidbit about Guilliani moving the mistress into the mayor's mansion - but that was a *public* mansion so I guess it is kind of different. But always fun to bring up, nonetheless. :evilgrin:

[mzmolly]

60. As to the Kerry house(s) question, I have a bit of info on that here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=66343&mesg_id=67454

We'd have to ask our selves, "which one." ;)

[BlooInBloo]

10. Yah - it is fucking annoying that DUers so happily turn against whomever republicans tell them to...

... But asking DUers to change that behavior is like asking a snake not to bit. Lotsa luck.

DUers hate republicans, but they hate Democrats more. Unfortunately.

[Adelante]

47. DUers deserve more credit than that

Following Republican marching orders? Bullshit.

[BlooInBloo]

120. Insisting on "surge" rather that "escalation", gleefully tearing down, in order...

... Clinton, Obama, and now Edwards...

All because republicans told them to, with their typical MSM lies.

Criticism is deserved.

[Adelante]

132. "All because republicans told them to"

Bullshit. Again.

[BlooInBloo]

136. (shrug) They didn't do it before republicans broached the notion....

... and gleefully proceeded to do it IMMEDIATELY upon republicans broaching the respective notions... Take the Edwards idiocy. Hardly a word on DU about Edwards' wealth before the Solomon hit-piece. Upon the Solomon hit-piece, and ever since, DU is literally FULL of DUers gleefully fulfilling the republicans' desire (as regards Edwards).

Unless you have a plausible candidate for a common-cause theory, the causality of it is apparent. Well, except to those who simply refuse to see it come-hell-or-high-water.

Perhaps it would be helpful for you to realize that "because" does NOT imply "consciously" or "deliberately". It is in fact my belief that DUers are being stupidly sheep-like, and not knowingly malicious. (Which is worse is debatable.) (shrug) Perhaps not.

[bling bling]

79. You know, I can't remember the last time I saw a post from you

that had anything nice to say about the DUer you were responding to or DU'ers collectively. In fact, most of your posts are just downright mean to whichever DU'er sparked your ire.

To hear YOU talking like you're put-off by the hate expressed by others here is pretty funny.

[BlooInBloo]

119. lol! It's largely a function of the topics du jour....

It's nice to see that your memory goes back only a couple days though.

[AlCzervik]

11. maybe he considers it an investment.

[nam78_two]

13. I had decided yesterday morning to stay out of all Edwards threads

after I looked at my own post history and noted that I had posted on about 20 Edwards house-related ones :blush:-apologies.
But I will K&R this one....

I find the constant insinuation that anyone who was on the "wrong" side of that debate (i.e. any response other than "This is America-we get to do whatever the fuck we want to do".) extremely obnoxious.
I was initially drawn in less because I actually care about Edwards or his house. I will even support him if he gets the nod (I prefer Gore or Feingold or Dean but since none of them are running and as much as I love the kooch I don't think he will get the nomination, but Edwards is a hell of an improvement on the moron in the WH). More because I was surprised to see so many "Its my money, I earned it..I am not even interested in what anyone has to say about the environment" replies.


But I think one should be able to speak out against responses one find troubling, without it being insinuated that one is a troll. I find arguments that fall into the classes of , "Its hypocritical to suggest anyone ever try to minimize their eco-footprint, unless they have a zero foot print" very strange. By those standards we shouldn't ever care about any mega corporation that is polluting, using legal policies that are extremely unfriendly to the environment (very easy under the current EPA) etc..

Also, for all the posts about "holier than thou" posters , I see scolding more on the side of the libertarians who are usually much more abusive "Its none of your fucking business", "you are a stupid fuckwit and a busy body", "screw you", than on the part of the "nose-holders"...

[roguevalley]

109. I was called names. I was called a freeper. Makes me furious. I

hate the idea that if you don't support someone no matter what they do, you are evil, wrong, a 'nitwit', a freeper. I thought that crap was what the repugs did. Message discipline is crap. For some of us in more environmentally sensitive areas, we see the global warming NOW. its a matter of life and death for a lot of people. islands are now under water. millions of birds are falling from the skies in Russia and Australia. deserts are growing, our glaciers here are melting and flooding lowlands. It is HERE! We are all responsible and we ALL have to DO SOMETHING TOGETHER. No one gets a pass. It can't all be us and not some of them.

I don't inject myself into fights for the fun of it. I see it happening now. I have rain and melting snow outside my door. In January. In Alaska. If speaking up about this sort of thing pisses some off, then I guess its the small price of telling what I see. And, I have the right to my opinion without being trounced. We are allowed our opinions and the right to speak them freely as long as we uphold the rules of civility that DU expects. Frankly, I am sorry I didn't hit the alert button a couple of times.

When the last polar bear drowns or starves, the sea drowns the cities from the loss of Greenland and the Great Plains blows away into desert, it will be too late to look around and see what to do. If you care for your children, you will care about everything and everyone and work to avoid catastrophe. That to me is more important than the Edward's feelings.

[Toucano]

17. Excellent post.

Thank you.

[ruggerson]

It's not a real issue, that's the point

anymore than John Kerry's five homes was an issue or Al Gore's four homes are an issue.

The only people who would find it an issue would be rightwingers looking for some way to discredit Edwards or socialists who, in their hearts, do not believe in private property rights.

Rich people are not bad because they are rich.

There are bad rich people, sure, just as there are bad poor people. But wealth, honestly gained, in and of itself, is not a bad thing.

THat is, unless one does not believe in the free enterprise economy.

[Toucano]

23. I agree in general, but there's a bit of a difference.

Edwards is CONSTRUCTING this home.

Clearing land, disrupting habitat for YET ANOTHER McMansion. And he chose to do so at the worst possible time.

It's not a big difference, but it's a difference.

[noamnety]

35. right-wingers or socialists

Are they the only ones that care about global warming nowadays?

Or just the only ones that see a connection between how we chose to live and global warming?

We're in trouble if democrats don't care about conservation, and don't demand their leaders do the same.

[illinoisprogressive]

19. the house argument is stupid. If you argue about Edwards, it should be on Iran.

[leeroysphitz]

54. Or The IWR....

Just sayin'...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3057475

[Straight Shooter]

24. Edwards can buy the Taj Majal, for all I care. My problem is his position he's taken against Iran.

First the vote for the IWR, despite overwhelming evidence from the rest of the world that Saddam was no threat. Finally the acknowledgement the vote was wrong.

Now the rhetorical chest-thumping against Iran. Is Edwards sincere, or is he posturing because he thinks this is how the political winds are blowing? I don't know, but it feels like deja vu all over again.

[lostnotforgotten]

25. Clinton's Modest Home

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/06/first.lady/index.html

President off to Washington, Hillary remains in New York as commuter marriage begins

January 6, 2000
Web posted at: 2:05 a.m. EST (0705 GMT)

CHAPPAQUA, New York (CNN) -- The moving vans are being unpacked, and on Thursday, President Bill Clinton heads back to Washington, leaving first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton to settle into their new home and prepare for her campaign for the New York Senate.

It is the start of a modern commuter marriage, with the first lady setting up a new home in a white $1.7 million house in a cul-de-sac in the wealthy hamlet north of New York City, while her husband remains at the White House. On Wednesday, the Clintons had their first meal at the new house, where they both plan to live after Clinton leaves office in January, 2001.

Their furniture and other goods arrived from Washington in two moving vans. "Like any new homeowners, they're excited," White House spokesman Joe Lockhart said after the couple arrived. Joining them was Mrs. Clinton's mother, Dorothy Rodham.

Snip ......



Photo Link Here:

http://cryptome.org/clinton/clinton-eyeball.htm

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

128. And it is modest. I've seen it from the street of the cul-de-sac. It's typical of

many dutch colonials that I've seen in Westchester Co. and the house itself is about 50 feet or so from the curb.

[Crunchy Frog]

143. Very modest in comparison with the Edwards home

and typical of the neighborhood as nearly as I can tell. It also does not appear to be a brand new construction. Seems pretty appropriate to someone of her station. Nice, but not ostentatiously so.

[noamnety]

165. "appropriate to someone of her station"

:puke:

[Hun Joro]

26. Thank you, well said.

I haven't participated in these debates, and I like Edwards - I want to like him, anyway, but I think the environment is the most important issue we face today, and a house of such magnitude...well, it doesn't send the kind of message I want from a candidate.

[karynnj]

98. Edwards had a very mediocre LCV score (in the 60s)

If the environment in your issue - you could do better. (If you are really interested in the votes all of them are included at http://thomas.loc.gov/home/rollcallvotes.html - just pick the years he was in Congress and look at any environmental bills that are important to you. - Skip down to the Senate and select the session of Congress you want - Edwards started in 1999.)

[BlackVelvet04]

27. I swore I wouldn't post anything else about this issue....

but I have to say that I'm very sick and tired of anybody who disagrees gets called a Freeper. I will NOT walk lock step with any group and that includes Democrats. Edwards made an issue of the two Americas and being a regular Wendy's eating guy......I didn't come up with that, he did and this McMansion flies in the face of that.

Nobody NEEDS this size house unless they have a brazillion kids. It's ostentatious and over the top.

It's almost as hypocritical as the faux cowboy's ranch.

[Reterr]

30. You are either with us or against us

:eyes:

Gee where have I heard that before?

Thank you for your post...I agree completely...

[BlackVelvet04]

31. You're welcome. n/t

[Goblinmonger]

32. Should he give away all his money

and live on welfare? Would that make people happy? What is the appropriate square footage for a Democratic presidential candidate? Maybe we should publish that number so all candidates can comply. What about Republican candidates? Do they get more square footage?

This is so damn stupid. He's a millionare. Didn't you know that? Guess how he got it? Unlike Bush his daddy did not give it go him and bail him out. That's gotta count for something, doesn't it? Oh, guess not.

[LibraLiz1973]

34. See, right there. THAT is called over reacting.

Your ATTACKING people for disagreeing with YOU. Apparently YOUR view is the only RIGHT view.
Think about that.

I don't think anyone has yet said that he did not earn the money. Clearly he did.
No one is saying he should open his windows and start dumping money out of them.
Merely suggesting that no matter how much money you have, it does not give you a free pass
to pollute the environment however you see fit. He IS in fact running on the 2 Americas platform.
And this IS in fact going to be a problem for many, many DEMOCRATS.

[Goblinmonger]

38. Interesting

So someone says that they are pissed about people defending the Edwards family. I say that is not a good reaction. Yet it is only I that is over reacting? Whatever.

How exactly is Edwards "pollut{ing} the environment however {he} sees fit"? Because his house has a big footprint? He seems to be moving toward (though not all the way) a very environmentally friendly property. Perhaps you know otherwise.

So it is just the house that is a problem for "many, many DEMOCRATS" in regard to his platform? If he had not purchased the house, you would be fine with everything else? His millions would not stop him from running on 2 Americas? If that is the case, I don't understand how that is ignorant. Nothing has changed about his financial portfolio. Should he live in a little straw cottage just to give the impression that he isn't rich? Maybe he could buy a ranch and pretend to be a man of the earth? Would that keep you happy?

[LibraLiz1973]

42. I'll just say that the size of your wallet should not give you the right to pollute at will

And end it on that. I can't deal with the nastiness.

[Goblinmonger]

48. I wasn't being nasty.

In the words of Shrek, if I was getting nasty, you'd know it.

Please explain: How is he polluting at will?

[BlackVelvet04]

39. Thank you....

reply 32 is exactly the kind of reply that makes a discussion contentious.

[motocicleta]

44. It's not about the money, it's about the environment

It's just a bad message for a presidential candidate in 2007. From either party. Pretty soon, we're going to need a president who helps the US see how to be energy conscious, if we don't need it already. By which I mean: we need such a president now, but soon we're going to be all cutting back hardcore due to rising energy prices if not climate change regulation, and then the president will have to demonstrate that in her/his leadership. I think it is not a stretch to say that said belt-tightening will occur by the end of the next administration.

Just sayin'.

[LibraLiz1973]

46. DING DING DING

Exactly

[motocicleta]

52. I am afraid this point will become all too clear by 2012

For now, though -
Nice thread, LL73 :toast:

[Goblinmonger]

56. What about those measures he is taking

to make his new house environmentally friendly? What about the geo-thermal? Isn't that a good message.

[motocicleta]

123. I believe you had better take some serious measures

to combat the 30000 sq ft message. I could do environmentally friendly and geo thermal. If rich guy wants to offset the huge house, he should do something I can't.

[Virginia Dare]

170. Should the elected President refuse to occupy the White House?

assuming it's a Democrat of course? :shrug:

[motocicleta]

171. Never thought of that.

It could come to that, but those kind of decisions I think the elected President can decide.

[Virginia Dare]

172. Would you demand or expect it?...n/t

[motocicleta]

173. Is that a choice?

Do you mean would I do something such as demand or expect the President to vacate the WH? Or do you mean would I expect the Pres to do so or demand the Pres do so?

Either way, here's what I think is right: if the American public began to widely suffer from high energy prices, brought on by increasing demand (more people, weirder weather) combined with decreasing supply (peak oil, natural gas running low), then the president should do something like publicly cut off the heat to areas that aren't necessary, or go without the A/C.

On the other hand, I suspect most of the WH is actually in some sort of use on a daily basis, so there would not be any areas that would naturally recommend themselves as places to be shut out of climate control systems. In a nutshell, I think being a good leader in an energy short culture means sharing some of the burden, even if only in a symbolic fashion. So a president might put some solar panels on the top of the WH and call it a day and I might be happy with that. It will depend on the individual circumstances of the thing. Also, I don't expect within my lifetime for an American president to do anything like this that will actually make me happy; I am so used to being out of step of the Merkin public as to have no hope that any president will make me proud.

You're not giving me a lot to work with here. It sounds a bit, from your terse little questions, that you are trying to catch me in a logic error. However, being a good leader is not a linear, logical thing. If you are trying to slip me up, I would ask you to ask yourself whether you have any hope of changing your position, because I do not. I firmly believe in energy conservation, and I don't think a president who embodies the image of a 30000 sq ft mansion is doing right by our country, and I don't expect to change that.

Cheers!

[Virginia Dare]

174. Didn't mean to be terse...

and I'm not trying to slip you up, I'm just wondering if in some people's minds, this will be a serious and ongoing issue.

So much of our lives on so many levels are tied to energy consumption, I just wonder how all of this will play out politically.

It puzzles me a little that people have zeroed in on a candidate's personal home, when there are much bigger fish to fry.

[motocicleta]

176. Agreed. Sorry to be suspicious;

bulletin boards don't lend themselves to easy understanding of motives.

I wonder, too, how it will play out politically, and my only criticism of Edwards is that he may find himself in a strange situation if the factors I envision do occur during his presidency - quite a load of 'if's there.

At any rate, I wish our democratic leaders adhered to my sense of environmental asceticism, but I don't think too badly about them when they don't. I just couldn't help but comment on a few of the Edwards threads since they were legion.

The IWR, on the other hand, ...

[leeroysphitz]

57. I'm with you Goblinmonger! I wouldn't care if John Edwards

Started driving everywhere he went, by himself, at 95 MPH in a extra-large, poorly maintained Humvee pulling a 15 foot trailer full of loose asbestos panels behind him, throwing empty beer cans out the window and stopping off every couple of hours or so to do "lawn jobs" in the front yards of invalids and retirees. After all it's his vast pile of money and he can do whatever he wants with it cuz this is murka!

Edwards has my vote no matter what!


BTW :sarcasm:

[Goblinmonger]

63. Please show me

how what he is doing with the two biggest arguments on DU right now (1. buying an expensive house with a big footprint that he is going to make environmentally friendly and 2. not changing to CFLs quickly enough--because he is going to change just not on the "best" timeframe) is anywhere CLOSE to what you put through in your satirical response.

It's not. People have said that the house alone is the problem. What if he had 3 10,000 sq ft houses? I have seen no indication of how Edwards is "polluting at will" (not your words, but you seem to be in the same camp).

[leeroysphitz]

Look, honestly this property represents how he chooses

to spend his share of the worlds limited resources (his wealth) and he is entitled,to do so. I really believe that. However I now see people defending Edwards, vigorously, almost blindly and many of them are the same people who, in the past have not hesitated to loudly condemn, say, owning a Humvee (we've all seen these threads here) as an ostentatious, selfish waste of the worlds limited resources (wealth)and it's rare in these instances to find any DUer willing to stand up and defend Humvee owners with arguments like the ones we have been hearing lately defending Edwards.

I don't know if you fall into that camp or not but that type of hypocrisy for political expedience is galling and seems kind of republican-ish to me.

To me the house and those like it, which I admit Edwards is perfectly entitled to build and occupy, are nothing more than very large stationary Humvees. That is my opinion. And I know that all the other candidates are wealthy and have fabulous homes etc... etc... etc... but the timing and judgment, on the part of Edwards, considering his stance on certain issues and lack of stance on others to me smacks of a kind of Gary Hart "Monkey Business" moment. Reporters "followed" Edwards "around" and instead of Donna Rice they found The tireless defender of the poor building the next San Simeon.

I support Al Gore. I desperately hope he'll decide to run but If I caught him driving to campaign stops in a f@cking humvee my support would evaporate and I wouldn't be here on DU trying to sweep the issue under the rug and shout down people with legitimate concerns about him. (not singling you out on that but we've all seen the contention last few days).

[Goblinmonger]

74. But your support of Gore

did not wane when he flew to his global warming meetings in a G4? That wasn't a problem?

What about Edwards' very public efforts to make his house environmentally friendly? The CFLs? The geo-thermal? It is one thing to say that this is the type of house that is horrible, but another to really show how he is "polluting at will."

[AlGore-08.com]

121. Just F.Y.I. Gore flies commercial and buys carbon offsets for his travel

His family is carbon neutral, with Gore's extensive traveling that involves a lot of carbon offsets. (The Gore family car is a Lexus hybrid; when Gore is driven to events he demands that the car be a hybrid.) Both businesses Gore runs (including the investment firm which only invests in environmentally responsible businesses) are carbon neutral. Both the book and the film version of "An Inconvenient Truth" have been certified carbon neutral. All the profits that Al and Tipper would have gotten from the book and film have been donated to global warming education.

I'm just sayin'...

[noamnety]

163. Are you referring to the geothermal he decided not to put in?

He considered it, realized it was far more efficient, and opted not to install it.

I think I've heard that from the college republicans before. "No, I haven't actually enlisted, but I came super close and even thought about talking to a recruiter at one point."

[roguevalley]

110. straw argument. Who was richer than old man walton? He lived in

a modest house and drove a modest car. He brought his own lunch to work. Its all about choice and personal priorities. Edwards obviously needed a mcmansion for his personal self. Walton of Wal Mart, the old man, he didn't and he could buy and sell us all. Edwards doesn't get a pass. He can have his house. But he can't have his theme for his campaign. You cannot divorce what a person does from what they say. Words are cheap. Its actions that tell what you are. If we didn't learn that from Bush, we didn't learn anything.

[mondo joe]

33. The point of the Two Americas was that everyone should have the opportunity to make good the way he

did. Not that everyone should be poor.

[roguevalley]

111. but, inherent in opportunity is responsibility. if we can upchuck over

trump and his endless pimp palaces, then why not this?

If he had a different theme rather than the one he has, no one would have said a word.

[Adelante]

49. Say it!!

Say it.

[ScreamingMeemie]

124. My brother in law has a HUGE house...and eats at McDonalds. eom.

[dorktv]

36. How do you know they are wastefully cutting the trees?

I know of one house that the trees were cut down and then used to heat the house for quite some time after. Some of the wood went into the house in furniture and the like.

Personally, if that is the house they want, then fine. They have three children. Unless Cate never has kids and the other two only do replacement offspring, then we are looking at at least four grandbabies. If they do a "everyone at the Edwards!" type gathering that could be a massive family gathering. And what if they have elderly relatives to care for? The extra space might help with any medical equipment that needs to be installed.

Based on the media (who shockingly may be biased against the Edwards) maybe they are overreaching but we have no clue as to what is going on with the family internally really so we may be judging without the facts.

[Lisa0825]

37. I have no problem with wealthy people having large homes.

I have totally stayed out of the discussion until now, because it frankly didn't matter to me.

I expect them to do what they can to live in a relatively environmentally friendly way, especially since they can afford upgrades the average person might now be able to afford.

I expect them to prove their principles in deeds towards others, and society in general, but I do not expect them to deny themselves a large home because others can't have the same.

If I held myself to the same standard, I should live in a mud hut because there are people in the third world who live that way, and I care about their lives. I live in a modest home, but compared to many around the world, I am rich. Should we all sacrifice til it hurts if we expect those above us in the economic food chain to sacrifice? I think the answer is either yes, or quitcherbitchin'.

[WestHoustonDem]

43. I couldn't agree more

You also have to look at how someone came into the money they spend and all the better if it's been earned helping people fight corporate criminals.

[LibraLiz1973]

45. They certainly are NOT sacrificing til it hurts

Let's be real here. There is NO sacrifice involved in that house.
I'm not saying he should live in a hut... I'm saying the house is ridiculously large for such
an average size family. On their best day I guarantee there will still be rooms that don't get used.



You clearly don't find it an issue, and that is your prerogative. I respect that you
at least HAVE an opinion, as opposed to many in the world who don't know HOW to form an opinion.

[Lisa0825]

51. Where in the rule book does it say that you have to

sacrifice until "it hurts" in order to be a good Democrat? Do you think that every wealthy Dem with a mansion should be tossed out on their asses? I think that is a ridiculous standard to which to hold people. Do you know how much they have given to charity? Do you know how much money AND effort they give to causes in which progressives believe? Why must the house be a sticking point, when they give in so many ways already?

[salin]

55. agreed about the house - but there are many kinds of sacrifices

lack of privacy (which they have subjected themselves to during the last campaign and are willing to risk again this campaign) - to the public attention to personal tragedy (death of child (or was it twins?) and later her breast cancer). Different kinds of sacrifice and different kinds of hurt. I would agree that living in such a very expensive home is not demonstrated financially sacrificing until it hurts - but at the same time - I think that there has been some big sacrifices and whle this time around they have to understand what that means - but the first time around - who can be prepared for that?

Also if so much money was being made in private practice - there was sacrifice (per 'opportunity cost' that which could have been made if lost opportunities when taking a much lower paying salary per public service as senator) - albeit it is relative. Not saying that a senator's salary is low - heck it is WAY inflated imo, but it is also far less than what seems to have been previous made (all things relative.)

All that said - I don't know yet, what to think. He isn't my top candidate (but none of my tops are yet running).

Additionally - per my above rant - this is the first thread of the gazillion - that I have felt inclined to comment and even begin to sort out my own thoughts about it. thanks for that - for a thread not quite so reflexive in one direction or another that it is okay to be contrary in either (or both for those of us working this out in our minds) directions. thanks again.

[Skwmom]

90. I believe the Edwards chose to

publicly discuss their personal tragedies as part of their 2004 and 2008 campaigns.

[mondo joe]

59. Respectfully, there is no candidate giving until it hurts, nor will there be. NT

[Little Wing]

50. Are you done?

Can you maybe add your comments into one of the other bazillion threads on the matter, maybe the entire forum doesn't have to be SPAMMED with this shit for each person who thinks their rant is so important?

[mzmolly]

58. "BE HONEST. If you found out that was where McCain or Giuliani lived, DU would be on FIRE."

I would think it's noteworthy that anyone, especially a Republican, is building an Energy Star home. In fact, I'd be SHOCKED if McCain or Cheney did so. What surprises ME, is that SOME DU-ers think people have to live in poverty, to care about it.

[noamnety]

64. You must be reading different threads than me

Could you provide links to where DUers have said Edwards should live in poverty?

[mzmolly]

137. No, I'm reading between the lines. When people say he can't live in a large house

because he cares about poverty, that's saying he needs to live in poverty - to address it. Perhaps you can find me the threads which indicate the size of house the Edwards are allowed? That way, we'll all have the "specifics."

[noamnety]

139. "reading between the lines" = twisting words and using hyperbole

You won't find anyone saying he needs to live in poverty, because NOBODY has said that - but it's a convenient strawman, so you don't have to debate the actual arguments we've put forth.

THIS IS THE BETWEEN THE LINES PART >>> We're trying to get people OUT of poverty, not INTO it. So wishing that Edwards, or anyone else, lived in poverty would be contrary to that goal, using simple logic.

[mzmolly]

146. People have mentioned time and time again, that Edwards dares to live in "the other America"

while speaking out against poverty/classism. You call that what you will, and I will characterize the bullshit as what it is - bullshit.

[noamnety]

153. Well, he likes to visit the other America

As for living, he likes to live in gated communities and compounds with no tresspassing signs.

[mzmolly]

156. Can you name many politicians who don't have similar life styles?

If I had a family to protect due to living in the public eye, I too would live in a gated community with no trespassing signs.

[noamnety]

157. Kucinich comes to mind.

[mzmolly]

159. That poor, poor man. I'm not sure I believe that's his current home

however? Also, he and Edwards are quite friendly as you know. J.E. calls him "Kooch." I doubt "Kooch" is troubled by the fact that Edwards has earned his wealth and lives accordingly? DK makes over 150k per year, that is quite wealthy by most standards. Not sure what his wifes income is?

[noamnety]

160. Please can you use some critical thought?

The mansion was a poor environmental choice. Can you admit that much?

[mzmolly]

161. Mansion? It's an Energy Star home. Or, an Energy Star "mansion," if you prefer that description.

Critically thinking, that's a good choice for a millionaire.

[jarab]

62. I simply say pay to build it and pay the taxes ....

How many years did Bill and Hillary Clinton live in subsidized housing without contributing to the community's tax coffers? 10? 15? 20?
Was that house in NY their first ownership? Have we forgotten the exorbitant digs that ex-prez Bill Clinton was seeking for "office space"?
Enough already!

...O...

[Neshanic]

65. Liz, take the pledge at the Edwards site. You will feel better.

"Take the Pledge to Conserve Energy*
Government action and technological innovation alone will not solve our energy crisis or stop global warming. Americans must be willing to take action to change the way we use energy. Sign the pledge below to do all you can to conserve your energy usage — and then ask others to join you in taking responsibility for America's future."

Just say these words, and you will be magically teleported to the world of double standard.

You see, no matter how many times you say it, it is not understood.

It's not that he is a poverty advocate. It's not that we hate wealth. It's not that we want to micromanage what you live in. (Special note to Californians with aggressive HOA's not included), and it's not that we do not like Edwards personally.

He is wealthy, running for President, and built a house. He built an enourmous McMansion. He has a history by running as VP to AL GORE the current leading advocate and voice for the environment in our party. Could he have made better choices in building his mega-home?

Yes. Just plain fucking yes.

[mondo joe]

68. How big is Gore's Nashiville home?

Just wondering.

[Neshanic]

69. No! Look over there! Gore is doing NOTHING! That posuer!

[mondo joe]

70. Hm, I don't know when it became ALL or NOTHING.

That's rather what I've argued against - the purity test.

[Neshanic]

71. It's NOT all or nothing. Some simple choices that could of been made

that would not affect the size, livability, elegance, style, rooms, lighting effects, toilets flushing, garbage disposal, SubZeros in the kitchen, pool heater and the pool temp, nothing would be affected.

Just some smart choices and good advice.

Apparently neither happened.

When monkey prez has a house in Texas that has a state of the art geothermal heating sytem, and water recovery system, and is designed to take solar angles into account, well that's one sad fucking day for the gang that supports the guy that wants them to take a pledge at his site.

[Goblinmonger]

72. Don't twist the facts

It is not your regular "McMansion." The square footage comes in great deal to the fact that he connected the home (which I will not argue is a mansion--it is but nothing horrible for a millionare) to a barn with a covered walkway. The barn and the walkway count in the square footage.

Plus, it is, what, a $6 million dollar home. See what sells for a million on some of those "flip this house" shows and $6 doesn't seem so over the top.

[Neshanic]

73. "It is not your regular "McMansion." Understatement of the year.

[Goblinmonger]

75. It's not

Why not address my points. I freely admit it is a mansion. But to say that it is just another one of the same huge houses that is cranked out in suburbia is just not true. Over a 2/3 of the square footage of the house comes from the covered walkway and the barn. A fucking barn. Rather than tear down the barn, which would have caused a stir, he is remodeling it to suit his needs. What a jizzbag he is.

[Neshanic]

76. Do you know that the barn was there for a fact? Even if it was, the

choices they made, bad ones, far undid the good choices that could of been.

Hence the issue.

[Goblinmonger]

77. No, I don't know

I expect that Edwards, in his plan for his "McMansion" said to the contractor, "Hey, I know you have a great plan here for our recreation space as connected and part of an architectually pleasing single home, but, I was thinking, why not build a big fucking barn that doesn't match anything in the structure of the house and then build this really weaving, kinda out-of-place covering to connect the home to the new barn. All my McMansion buddies will be really damn jealous of that plan." Give me a break.

So, since you are the decider of all that is "good choices," what should he have done? Should he scrap the plans to heat the house solely with geo-thermal energy? That kinda sounded like a good choice to me, but what do I know?

[Neshanic]

80. You are no slouch. I am not the decider of good choices, and even

I forgive Mr. Edwards his cop-out on HIS choice not to support my rights as a gay person, by giving the canned cop out, but I digress.

Scenario:

Mr. Edwards goes to the Architecture department at the University nearby and has the architecture students help in coming up with ideas on how his new home can be a model of energy saving, AND one big MOFO house. Hows' bout that?

All things would be served. Students, faculty, ah ome that has five fucking Bosch dishwashers and SubZeros till kingdom come, but still be a model for energy efficiency.

It's not like he does not have the cash.

[Goblinmonger]

82. But my understanding is

that he is making the moves to make the house environmentally friendly. It is also my understanding that he did not build this house, he just bought it and is making conversions (including the covered walkway to the barn).

The gay thing pissed me off, too. I am straight, but I find our treatment of the gay population in our country absolutely horrible and unconstitutional. As an atheist, I can feel some of your pain for being a shat on member of society. If the U of Minn study is correct, you will be happy to know that people would more likely vote for you than me for political office. That's something to brighten your day, isn't it. :hi:

[Neshanic]

85. The last part, yes that is good news. The other, from past accounts,

is that the home did not exist, and when they bought the land it is not clear if the barn was there.

[Goblinmonger]

86. If he planned out that barn and the connecting walkway

he seriously needs to hire a new person for the next build, because that just ain't pretty.

[Neshanic]

87. Well it does have a "postmodern" thing going, but you are right.

[Goblinmonger]

89. Postmodern?

There is more of a Dali feel to it :rofl:

[Neshanic]

92. Now THATS funny! ROTFLMAO.

[LibraLiz1973]

95. It looks like something my kindergarten class would draw

Not something you would actually pay to build.

[Goblinmonger]

96. Exactly

which is a big reason I am guessing that the barn existed before and that the whole thing wasn't planned. Hey, maybe there is an environmentally friendly reason why the connecting building is built in such a haphazard way :evilgrin:

[LibraLiz1973]

101. I do hope that was there first

because it would kind of explain why the connector is so ewwwwww

[LibraLiz1973]

102. I do hope that was there first

because it would kind of explain why the connector is so ewwwwww

[Benhurst]

103. Okay, Thomas Jefferson he ain't; but he's a good man anyway. NT

[roguevalley]

112. my brother keeps horse in a barn, not swimming pools, two theaters,

squash courts, etc.

[noamnety]

140. It's not a "barn"

It's red and tall, that's about the only barnlike thing about it. It ain't filled with cow manure and hay. It's a recreational facility - and a second wing of the house. Let's use accurate language, instead of stretching to find a way to phrase it that sounds all folksy. Indoor pools, private theatres, personal basketball courts, etc. isn't a "barn" any more than Bush's ranch is a farm.

[marions ghost]

164. wrong

the "barn" is new. Why do you put out fake facts?

[michaelwb]

133. Say what?

"He has a history by running as VP to AL GORE the current leading advocate and voice for the environment in our party."

I must have missed that. Liberman was Gore's VP candidate. Edwards was Kerry's VP candidate.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

66. "Go back and review my posts." LOFL.

[LibraLiz1973]

150. I don't get it... what was LOFL funny there?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

167. Review your posts in these hundreds of idiot house threads?

First I'd have to unhide them!
By the way, I also hid this one long ago but your response
popped up in "My DU". Carry on, Liz, dont worry bout me. LOMFL!

[NoodleyAppendage]

67. Please name ONE 2008 candidate that doesn't make more than their constituents??

Please name ONE 2008 candidate that doesn't make way more than the majority of their constituents? Kucinich? Maybe...but he doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning.

So, the question comes down to: Are you going to contribute to the Repukes winning in 2008 because you are pissed about the size of someone's bankroll? Get over it.

J

[SaveOurDemocracy]

78. I'm not reading this entire thread ...

because I've read more than enough crapola about something so ridiculously overblown.


However, I seriously believe this has been an organized effort at disruption and distraction led by people obsessed with damaging DU. If they did not start it, they certainly fanned the flames.


I'm quite new here, and often thought people sounded a bit paranoid about trolls on a mission to come here and stir shit. Earlier today, someone planted a bogus thread here about DU'ers being jumped at the DC peace march. It has since been removed and the author 'tombstoned'. A responder googled the OP's name and posted some links that led me to a forum full of sick fucks that spend their entire lives, or so it seems, shadowing DU and posting on everything and everyone here. At first it seemed funny to me ... but after looking more closely I realized these people are seriously damaged goods.


Sooooooooooooo, now I've joined the ranks of those who will be very selective about who I might listen and/or respond to. If a thread seems mean-spirited, or seems to be trying to create an issue where there is none, or tries to draw people in and encourage angry discourse ... then I will wonder at the motives of the OP, or certain responders that do the same. If one of those threads seems to get kicked and nominated incomprehensibly, or too suddenly ... I'll smell set-up.



Saw this posted at that other forum ... big shot, huh? I won't be posting a link, but if you would like confirmation, pm me.

01-28-2007 , 04:18 PM

I can promise DUers.. the nightmares we caused during the previous elections will be 10 fold this time. We are more inbedded than ever. Years of existing in your little camp without ban. Thousands of posts, stars (most donated by you, so thanks).. Join Dates probably before you..

You will be slicing each others necks by the time the Wolverines are done with you

..

again

much worse than last time

**** Please add 'inbedded' to the Freeper Dictionary **** :rofl:

edit for formatting error

[Neshanic]

81. You missed my outing as a Republican gay troll. This is one of my accounts.

[bling bling]

84. They flatter themselves.

They posted that knowing that someone over here would read it and believe it.

[LibraLiz1973]

97. That is so ridiculously Talibanish I could

:puke:


But you know what? I'm not going to let small minded idiots like that affect the way I post. Or more importantly, the way I think.

They only have as much power as we give them.

[liberalhistorian]

83. How can you POSSIBLY support Edwards

after his speech in Israel this week, cheerleading for war with Iran and saying it may be necessary in order to protect Israel, in short, vomiting up all of the GOP talking points? He's nothing but a hypocritical warmonger who tries to paint himself up as something that he isn't.

[Skwmom]

88. Maybe when we hear something about a candidate - we should ask how

we would feel if we learned that about a GOP candidate? Maybe if the Bush supporters had done that in 2000, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today.

The Bush supporters bought into the compassionate conservative and other spin because they REFUSED to look past the rhetoric, and at Bush's actual record. I would hope that the Democrats would not do the same in selecting a candidate in 2008.

[Goblinmonger]

93. So what?

Edwards is just a big mean trial lawyer and no good for the country?

[Monk06]

99. In my opinion this whole issue is FReeper troll spam N/T

[LibraLiz1973]

100. The thing is.. He IS running for the highest office in the land

And to that end has put himself out there to be scrutinized. That's just a fact.
Everyone who has said that there are no middle class people running- your 1,000% right.

I just think that in general, the very wealthy are irresponsible with how they make certain choices.
Your children and mine will be paying the price for these enormous (not to mention fugly) McMansions.
Clear cutting is a horrible HORRIBLE thing. Taking up that much energy is also bad.
I see no solar panels there so let's not pretend it is all clean energy. A few lightbulbs are
wonderful, but it does not undue the damage done to the environment when houses this ridiculously huge are erected.

As I said in my OP, I have no problem that he wanted a humongous home.
I'm just saying that in an effort to recycle (For lack of a different term)
they could have easily bought a house that already existed.

[incapsulated]

104. 48,000 TREES CUT DOWN

So The Edwards could build a tacky tribute to their own wealth.

End of story, everything else is spin, the facts speak for themselves.

It has nothing to do with the size of the house, it's their insistence on building their own damn compound, cutting down tens of thousands of trees in the process.

[Neshanic]

107. You know if they lived in a hut in the Amazon, there would be DUers in a wood canoe

paddling up to admonish them on their choice. You see it's only when you cut down trees in OTHER countries that gets thenm going. The person that they want as President cutting a million trees is a non-starter.

[ourbluenation]

144. If they're in a wood canoe, it better be sustainable wood.

:rofl:

[ShaneGR]

105. Still chuckling at the house stuff...

omg, John Edwards has a nice house! Even though he has millions of dollars (all self made) he needs to live in a house thats worth no matter than 200k and is in a normal middle class suburb. Huh? I don't call people like that trolls, I call them communists.

[eridani]

106. I'm much more concerned about the Iran saber-rattling myself n/t

[leftofthedial]

108. I'm on your side

the condemnation of those of us critical of Edwards (or indeed any Democrat except Lieberman) is wearing thin.

As for Edwards house, it makes him "wrong" IMHO on two of the three most important issues in the world today, global climate change and the class war.

His kowtowing to AIPAC and parroting of the Cheney line on Iran makes him wrong on the third, especially since he helped to foist IWR and the PATRIOT Act on us.

[roguevalley]

114. I can't even read about Iran and politicians, it worries me so much.

Edwards better not McCain himself on this issue.

[JVS]

113. I'm sick of penny-ante peons apologizing for the excess consumption of their betters.

[Guaranteed]

115. That's a very good way of putting it.

The neocon culture has really seeped into our party.

[JVS]

116. It reminds me of coworker who wonder if the union is being fair enough to the bosses

No class consciousness.

[hfojvt]

117. I am really sad that you are not reading my journal

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/33

I feel like these are the facts:
1) he did not build it - the barn was certainly already there, and probably the house too
2) it is not as big or as evil as the article and alot of people who are freaked out about it are saying, and
3) none of the other candidates AFAIK are talking as much about poverty as Edwards is. He's promoting my issue, so I am still leaning heavily towards him. I know the Clinton house cost a million too. And also,
4) I never did think Edwards was poor.

I still do not have facts on how long the Edwards' have been in that house either.

[noamnety]

152. "I FEEL LIKE these are the facts"

Gotta love that truthiness.

Elizabeth Edwards said they purchased 102 acres -- valued for tax purposes at $1.1 million -- in 2003 after spotting it while searching the Internet.

The Edwardses began building their home shortly after his Senate term ended in January 2005. They moved in last summer, although construction is continuing on one wing.

The main living section of the house is 10,778 square feet and has a tax value of $3.1 million, according to tax records. It has five bedrooms, 6 1/2 baths and a library. A second wing of the house is connected by a heated enclosed walkway, valued at $192,664, that is lined with family and political photographs.

The second wing, called "The Barn" by the family, has 6,336 square feet and includes a lounge and offices that are 70 percent complete. It has a current tax value of $567,403. It also has a basketball court, which is 60 percent complete and valued at $300,960; a racquetball court, 70 percent complete and valued at $41,000; and a pool, according to tax records.Elizabeth Edwards said they purchased 102 acres -- valued for tax purposes at $1.1 million -- in 2003 after spotting it while searching the Internet.

http://www.newsobserver.com/643/story/537175-p2.html

[hfojvt]

168. ah sh*t

I guess that's what happens when you put logic ahead of research. It's still unbelievable to me that somebody would design something like that. It made far more sense to me that the barn was already there. Why would somebody build such a long, and mismatched walkway by design? And then heat it? That seems like a big waste of $180,000 plus utilities.

I guess I gave him too much credit for sense, but he probably has reasons. Even if he doesn't I still want a candidate that talks about poverty issues.

That article you linked only mentions 18,000 square feet, so I am not sure what happened to the extra 10,000. It seems to be only talking about the completed portion of the barn.

[noamnety]

169. That would have made more sense.

From the photo, it does have the look of buidings added onto at different times.


Here's the breakout in the building plans:

"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."

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3848

And I guess there is a second house (6,000+ if I remember right) going up as a gift to his 22 year old daughter, and a third guest house going up as well so friends have a place to gather.

[marions ghost]

154. some facts

The house and barn were built from scratch by the Edwards' in the last year. Previously some old tobacco fields & cabin were on the 100 acres. It has been valued at 6 million, the most expensive house in a county full of large houses and pricey developments. It is not really a rural location, but very close to town in a transitional area. The Edwards family moved in late last year.

Which doesn't mean that Edwards won't work against poverty. But in an image-conscious country, it is something of A PR problem.

[RiverStone]

118. Yes...I agree LibraLiz. And what REALLY surprised me

is not DU the same bunch of environmentally aware folks that support Al Gore (straw poll after straw poll as their #1 choice) for President? A visionary man who has tons to say about over-building and its effect on the environment and Global Warming. In fact, professionally - it his his primary passion and mission!

Unequivocally - Al Gore is first on my Pres wish-list, so I was left really confused at why so many DUers defend the building of ANY opulent extra HUGE home simply because its BAD for our one planet earth - no matter who lives there or where it is. Is this the same board that is concerned about the environment? I don't get it? :shrug:

Do not DUers hold dear environmental ethics as so eloquently stated by Al Gore here?

http://www.climatecrisis.net/


And thank you for expressing such sensible concern as well Libra Liz. :)



peace~

[ima_sinnic]

122. besides virulently disagreeing w/Edwards on Iran & IWR

I can't relate to his taste in "architecture" and conspicuous consumption. Honestly, that thing looks like a tacky bunch of boxes set in the middle of an obscene clearcut. It seems to say that he is a tacky "new money" big spender who just wants to impress people, but without any taste, uniqueness, or particular class. Frankly, I'd rather vote for someone who is visionary and not impressed by or trying to make an impression with material wealth.

The house thing is just icing on the cake of the fact that he is NOT my candidate and is in fact now at the bottom of the heap. Let those who are impressed by square footage, tackiness, and run-of-the-mill ostentatious consumerism vote their hearts out.

[donheld]

125. Let me play you a song.

:rant:

[michaz]

126. Can we please end this now?

C'mon, this is getting so overboard and so so old.

[Skidmore]

127. Bottom line is that it is no one's business.

Frankly, what is disgusting to me is that we spent the last decade bitching about the Republics snooping into people's personal lives and trying to legislate personal behavior. How is this type of thinking any different. As far as I'm concerned, people can keep their noses out of my bedroom, out of my home, and out of the choices I make as to how I manage my personal finances and consumption patterns so long as what I do is not illegal.

End of subject.

[NorthernSpy]

130. some of us think that receiving medical marijuana for ones suffering is none of the feds' business..

... John Edwards evidently doesn't agree.

Frankly, what is disgusting to me is that we spent the last decade bitching about the Republics snooping into people's personal lives and trying to legislate personal behavior. How is this type of thinking any different. As far as I'm concerned, people can keep their noses out of my bedroom, out of my home, and out of the choices I make as to how I manage my personal finances and consumption patterns so long as what I do is not illegal.

Thing is, Edwards is one of those people who make and maintain intrusive, anti-liberty policies -- including those that violate our rights under statutes drafted and approved directly by us, the citizens. He's spent years telling the rest of us how to live, and evidently he likes it.

Since that is the case, I really couldn't care less about his privacy, or his right to pursue happiness. Why should we respect his privacy and right to pursue happiness more than he respects ours?

[noamnety]

141. Consumption habits are everyone's business.

Sorry, but the impact affects more than just him.

[mondo joe]

145. Moralists always think what others are doing is their business.

From abortion to homosexuality to smoking to eating meat to the house you buy.

[noamnety]

151. global warming actually IS our business.

because it does HARM to other people. When BushCo drops another bomb on Iraq, it's my business, because it harms people. Even if I don't live in Iraq. Even if I'm too poor to owe taxes, so I can't claim it's my money being spent.

Maybe that's why we call it morals, eh? If we didn't have 'em, we'd be voting for Bush.

[mondo joe]

158. Everything impacts others. If it's so harmful it should be illegal.

If it's legal, it's personal business.

[JVS]

155. How much attention is paid to the Bush twins or to Bush's time spent at the "ranch"?

Is that also not the business of us DUers or does the "none of anyone's business" defense only apply to people you like?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

129. I agree with you on this. Thank you for stating it so well. eom

[Dorian Gray]

134. I won't call anybody a troll

but I do think it's ridiculous to be pissed off that the man bought a large house. It's really nobody's business, and, for the life of me, I have no idea why this is even news.

[TZ]

135. what's the point really?

I really think that in terms of behavior and lifestyle no successful politician is going to be an angel. They all live like that. Edwards used to be a successful lawyer (as did Hilary mind you) and that seems to be something that comes with that job--a high degree of desire to impress or show status through material wealth. I don't really care that much. I think most of these guys are hypocites and crooks anyway. The point is to have the best leadership possible for the democrats in order to win back the White House and take away power from Chimpy and his bunch. When we start nit picking like this we actually help the freepers in my mind. Lets just stick to issues and qualifications with our candidates okay? Really if we don't we are not much better than Chimpy and his bunch where appearance is more important than substance.:rant:

[LibraLiz1973]

149. For me the environment IS an issue... a huge one

[peacekitten]

138. Personally, i think it goes against

practice what you preach

[WI_DEM]

142. I just think that we have bigger concerns other than the size of John Edwards home

[Quixote1818]

147. I agree 100%. It took guts to say what you said! Good for you!

A lot of us started out on Edwards side on this then moved over to the other side based on the Environmental issues. I noticed a big change in the DU polling on this issue when focus was changed to the environmental impacts and waste.


Great Post!

[alarimer]

148. So am I

I believe we need to have a discussion on our obscene consumerist society. A person in the US uses more resources per capita that a person anywhere else in the world. THAT is obscene. And of course, rich people use even more. Because our society is ruled by developers and real estate agents we cannot seem to have the discussion about what is enough. Bigger always seems to be better. It is not John Edwards per se but it is symptomatic of what is truly wrong with our disgusting society. All those lifestyle shows (Flip This House, Flip THAT house, What you get for the money- I am watching it now in fact- obscene is truly the right word for that) give us the wrong idea. We have to get development under control. Stop paving over open spaces. Leave something for the trees and animals.

Where I live, they are building on the last remaining undeveloped barrier island left in the US. It disgusts me. I am hoping for a hurricane to blow that crap into kindling. I truly am.

[Generator]

162. Wow, it's a situation?

I had to have a laugh at that. The whole thing has not moved me one way or the other. I get it-we want our politicians to walk the walk completely and be as pure as possible especially if they claim to care-and I do believe Edwards does. But I don't EXPECT that. Hell, I'm told day after day to forgive these cretins (oh sorry for that nasty word) when they vote away things like habeas corpus and approve evil fucks on the supreme court that will take away the NEXT generation's liberties. I just want them to vote like a Democrat and actually represent the people they are representing. That's all I'm looking for.

I'm told I MUST vote and support Hillary if she is the nominee otherwise I'm a Republican enabler when I think that is the fucking irony of the century-Hillary is the Republican enabler. And I don't think there will be much difference if she's president versus whatever Republican beats her. That's a big problem. When you don't think some of your party is your party. NOW-I do believe Edwards is a Democrat. I think he's wised up and seen some evil shit running against Bush in 2004. I believe (until I see otherwise) that he cares about the poor. That he is our best hope to do something for the poor. Where he lives does not change that for me.

I don't give a crap if he lives in a mansion. All the movie stars do, almost EVERY damn rich person has mutiple houses and cars and HOW fucking naive are Du'ers? How do you think rich people live? Oprah gives away millions but she has many houses and spends millinons on her self too. (I will never forget a people magazine saying she sets aside 1 million just for her a year)

It doesn't mean on balance, Oprah isn't doing MORE for the world than not. There is no purity in this world. And if you look for it from our candidates you will find even less. I agree posting this stuff doesn't make one a troll. But me thinking Hillary is Republican lite does not either. And if you want someone that walks the walk-NEVER owned a house his life-never married either-there's Nader. Is that the American dream? It sure as hell isn't.

Oh AND I sure as hell hope Al Gore lives in a geo-thermal solar powered yurt, otherwise-one fat word Du'ers-FAKE.

[LibraLiz1973]

166. I understand what your saying about Hillary