John Edwards' Childhood Home - "Middle Class"

[jsamuel]

I have seen a lot of criticisms of John Edwards' "son of a mill worker" story. I have seen people say things like "no, he is the son of a mill MANAGER!" Well, I hope this picture puts it in context. Sure they were able to afford a house and that says something, but he was at best middle class.

[leveymg]

1. Ya,but this is what it looks like INSIDE>

:evilgrin: And, none of the women are his wife, either. :evilgrin:

[MadBadger]

3. Now that was funny.

[JuniperLea]

50. Shades of Dr. Who!!! n/t

[LittleClarkie]

103. That's just what I was gonna say!

Dimensionally transcendental indeed!

[ComerPerro]

91. LMFAO

[BoneDaddy]

108. Clever

made me laugh

[mzmolly]

132. Heh.

;)

[davidwparker]

2. contrast this house with the new one to show how people can, with

hard work and policies that support all, do well in America. Edwards talks about two Americas, but also embodies what can be done in America when it has a strong middle class and support for the working poor.

[GeorgeGist]

112. We can't all be ...

obscenely rich.

[dogday]

4. Those little houses were typical for Mill Houses

that were built near the Mills... I grew up in a mill town, and have seen so many of these small houses and they are far from even middle class if you ask me...

[paparush]

110. Mill Villages in fact...

Row after row of identical houses built by 'the company'.

Then, across town, are the nice victorian houses for the owners and upper level managers.

[Cameron27]

5. His family moved out

before his first birthday, I believe. (an old neighbor told the press this) Then moved into a middle class home.

[gollygee]

6. They wouldn't have moved from there to a mansion though

I lived in a house like that till I was 8, and then my family moved into a modest middle class home. I've got to think they were still in a pretty modest home.

[Cameron27]

10. His father was a manager

(time-clock, effiency something or other) and I think his mom was a postal worker, so it while may have been modest, it was not "the little pink house." There are no pics of it to be found btw.:shrug:

[Clark2008]

7. Yes - when his father was promoted to a manager.

[dogday]

119. Not all the managers make money at a mill..

The executives made the most, board of Directors....

I know a guy who was employed by a Mill after he finished his graduation from The Citadel... Started out as a buyer... But he was only making 22,000 and this was in 1980. Not all managers made big bucks, only the executives were making the big bucks...

Managers made enough to move out of a box house like that photo into a regular 3 bedroom house...

Where are you getting your information, may I ask?

[IndyOp]

8. Here is a picture of him around age 3 or 4 in a similar home...

[Cameron27]

11. I think that's the same house Indy,

I seem to remember his grandmother living there. Could be wrong about that though.

[in_cog_ni_to]

140. Awwww! That's such a cute picture! He was an adorable little boy. n/t

[mzmolly]

133. Damn them!

Elitist bastards! /sarcasm

[IndyOp]

9. The ONLY reason his wealth is an issue is that he is concerned about POVERTY

If he just act like an upper-class guy and not worry about the little, dirty people he would not be a target of criticism.

I care much, much, much more about the fact that he is concerned about poverty than where he grew up or where he lives now.

[depakid]

12. It's NOT wealth- it's ostentation

And OF COURSE the corporate media is going to be all over that like flies on shit.

That's why it's important not to gratuitously hand them ammunition. Hopefully, Edwards has finally learned his lesson- but unfortunately, most of the damage has already been done.

[JuniperLea]

15. If it were ostentaion...

We'd see it about everyone who is running, on both sides of the isle.

[depakid]

25. Trouble is that it conflicts with the message

If it didn't, the corporate media wouldn't be able to get much traction from the "story."

[JuniperLea]

41. How does it conflict?

Someone born to poor mill worker makes good, finds the American dream, and remembers from whence he came.

Seems like a straight line to me! So basic, in fact, it's the stuff many literary greats chose to write about!

[dogday]

126. Me Too

And I have not even picked a candidate, but I like to hear the truth of the matter...

[Clark2008]

136. Because he wasn't "poor."

If he'd been touting that he was upper middle class to riches, fine.

But, he was not "poor."

[dogday]

139. Upper middle class on a Mill Manager's salary???

Did his Dad get an executive position? I grew up in a Mill town, I know what is what... Their first house was a box and I don't think their second was a mansion....

Managers at Mills do not make a fortune at all... Especially if they are hired from Janitor to Manager, it would of taken years to accomplish at a mill... John specifically spoke about sitting around the table, talking about which bills to pay and how to pay for college...

I would like to see a link to your statement, please...

[sojourner]

66. corporate media feeds crap to the people who are stupid enough to slurp it up.

thinking people will realize the hypocrisy. how in the hell is a person supposed to come up in the ranks high enough to RUN for president without coming up in the ranks economically as well as politically? in order to be concerned about the poor you have to BE poor? bullshit. or, you have to lie about your upbringing? or, i don't know what people want from their candidates.

I want leadership, intelligence, and an ability to connect with the people of the US...to understand that we don't all live like most politicians.

[IndyOp]

26. Who gets to decide what is ostentation?

Sending Cate to high-priced private schools?

Paying for a private tutor for Emma Claire & Jack to travel with them on the campaign trail?

Having a STAFF MEMBER ask a hair-dresser to come to his hotel room to give him a haircut before a TV interview? -- Not knowing that that would more than double the cost of a regular haircut with the same hair dresser?

Who gets to decide what is ostentation? :shrug:

[stevedeshazer]

33. If I could have afforded all that for my kids, I would have.

That's not ostentation, that's caring about your kids.

And please, not the haircut thing.

Let me ask you, I just paid fifty bucks for my last haircut. Was it too much?

[IndyOp]

52. I brought up the haircut because the facts still are not out there -

The staffer did not know the haircut was $400 and it was only that because a good hair dresser traveled to Edwards' location to do the cut --

To me it is like going to get a manicure at a nice looking little shop and not asking in advance how much it will be and winding up paying 2 or 3 times as much as you thought it would be. It happens.

I don't know if you noticed, but I am on Edwards' side here.

We DESPERATELY need to focus on the important issues, but so long as people keep bringing this up we will wind up giving it some minimal attention to clear up misunderstandings.

On Edit: I can't judge whether your $50 haircut was too much unless you post pictures of yourself before and after. :D

[depakid]

39. You can rationalize a lot of things

but by ANY definition, the Edwards' mansion is ostentatious. And the media will find it to be fair game- which, in a way, it is.

[goclark]

46. JFK was beyond wealthy and that was not a problem

Edwards may have a Million plus house but he worked to earn it.

I'm delighted for them and their kids.

The beauty is that he cares and wants to do things to help all people.

GW is rich and powerful and his little ranch is just a cover for the billions that his family has stolen for years!

Give me Edwards!

[JuniperLea]

49. Hear, hear!!! n/t

[kskiska]

99. LBJ initiated the War on Poverty

and lived on the lavish LBJ ranch in Texas. No one castigated him for it.

[goclark]

118. Didn't hear a peep ~ Reagan had a ranch and fancy house and millions

from being a "movie star" and selling refrigerators.

[Texas_Kat]

143. LBJ's ranch wasn't particularly 'lavish'

It certainly didn't hold a candle to the Edwards compound -- not even today.

[raccoon]

111. Don't forget RFK and FDR. nt

[goclark]

117. Right! So Rich and so Caring

Far more money and far more POWER than Edwards.

I love Edwards!

One of my cherished memories was standing in a long line of people after he spoke in Culver City during the election.

I was the only African American in his view when he made his exit from the hall.

He came right over to speak to me and shake my hand.
That is how caring he is, IMO.

He didn't have to shake my hand but he valued my being there. It was just something about his bearing that let me know he would care about ALL people.

[JuniperLea]

48. you mean the Edwards' office/house...

Please... I've worked for several billionaires in my time, and the Edwards' house is no where near ostentatious. Go to Bel Air, Beverly Hills or Pacific Palisades and then tell me again. No one I know in these areas would be caught dead having actual office space in their homes. One particular family I have in mind won't allow anyone in their home to wear blue jeans. Not even the gardener. Now THAT is ostentatious!

No. Not by any definition. Not by a very, very long shot.

[goclark]

67. You got that right!

In Los Angeles,there are many million + homes right in the urban areas.

[JuniperLea]

130. Shoot... I live in relative "hoodville"...

And you can drive less than a mile to find a $1,000,000 property. Drive three miles and you are in the three to six million dollar range.

My stupid 1700 sq foot split level three bedroom one and one-half bath condo townhouse is worth over $400,000... even with the graffiti on the sidewalk out front! And the gangstas that live in the complex!

[goclark]

135. Exactly, so people need to get off of the back of Edwards

and spend their energy on getting Bush out of office.

[JuniperLea]

142. Hear, hear!!! n/t

[depakid]

106. "Go to Bel Air, Beverly Hills or Pacific Palisades."

You're forgetting Brentwood- and the portions of Santa Monica along San Vicente.

Sorry, but comparatively speaking... you might want to think again.

[JuniperLea]

129. I didn't forget them... left them out intentionally...

Not near as heinously smug as the aforementioned.

[kskiska]

98. I have friends who own a small Chinese restaurant in South Carolina

and their son is going to M.I.T. this fall.

[JuniperLea]

14. Bingo

I agree! If not checked, poverty will be the death of our nation.

[WiseButAngrySara]

16. I agree! I have come to the conclusion that he is SINCERE in

his concern about Poverty and his remarks last night about Katrina were quite moving. He has my full support unless Gore enters.

[eridani]

13. When Edwards was young, working class could be middle class

Never forget that.

[OzarkDem]

17. Not the same today

In fact, a mill worker today probably couldn't even afford to live in Edwards first home.

[gollygee]

18. If they could even find a mill

The ones around here have all closed.

[Cameron27]

19. I'm his age, and was raised in a working class

family, so I know what it was like...and my dad wasn't a manager, and my mom didn't work until I reached HS. It was tough, but nothing out of the ordinary.

[Matsubara]

20. Wow. That's kind of a dump.

Dennis Kucinich's house is a palace in comparison.

I live in Japan, and I think I still have more square footage than that.

Good for Edwards that he made it.

[chimpymustgo]

21. Oh, but to Clark supporters it's the freaking Taj Majal.

:Shakes head and chuckles at the futility:

:shrug:

[Cameron27]

22. Clark supporters

would simply like to see the home he lived in past the age of 1. Nothing Taj Majal about that.

[chimpymustgo]

23. See thread 8.

God bless them.

[Cameron27]

24. Maybe, but I'm pretty sure it's the same house.

I could be wrong, though. Did you read the book?

[IndyOp]

30. That house could be loved right back to life --

I live in an area where people are taking old houses like that are turning them into nice properties. I just got a new neighbor a week ago who is getting started on his and I get to watch the transition. :D

[stevedeshazer]

36. It's important to point out that Kucinich lived with his family IN A CAR.

http://kucinich.us/node/4376

[Matsubara]

45. That, and even his present home is very modest.

He probably has one of the most modest homes of any congressperson. You would never guess that a politician lives there.

That's the only reason I mentioned it. Couldn't find the photo, though.

[Pastiche423]

60. Unless he has moved since 2004...

This is Dennis' home:

[nam78_two]

88. Yup.nt

[Blackhatjack]

27. The fact Edwards' father had to borrow money to bring him home from the hospital...

... pretty much tells you how well off his "mill manager" father was.

But that means nothing to people who perpetuate false impressions like pretending Edwards gets $400 haircuts all the time, and like accusing him of building a 28,000 sq ft home to live in, when they know the truth.

It really tells us more about the poster than about Edwards.

[sandnsea]

29. Everybody had/has to do that

Some of these posts actually go to show how out of touch most DUers are with working-class America. John Edwards was like a good 50% of the country, which means NOT poor.

[Cameron27]

34. That's what I was unsuccessfully

trying to point out. I grew up in a small town in the NE, and all of my friends lived in small cape cod homes, with fathers who worked very "working class" jobs. It wasn't growing up poor.

[jsamuel]

37. I don't think anyone is arguing that he was crazy poor.

Rather that he was much like everyone else, maybe about the same or less at times. The point is not that was poor, but that he was "normal" and understands how hard it can be to be "normal".

[Cameron27]

40. The point is,

he didn't grow up in that home, but used it in his 2004 campaign anyway. His family lived there until he turned 1, yet the actual home he was raised in was never seen.

Who the hell puts out the pic of a house they only lived in as a baby? Abe Lincoln?

[jsamuel]

43. To show you where he started out?

[Cameron27]

44. Political theatre.

[jsamuel]

51. Political Theater?

Reality is true. Politics should reflect reality. If reality is that John Edwards started his life in this home, then I don't think he should keep it from people just to not be accused of "political theater." So if I run and mention that I have never been devorced or never been to jail, is that "political theater?" No. Politicians should reveal information about their lives to allow voters to have a better idea who they are voting for. To not do so would deny good information from the voters. Does Obama hide the fact that his father was from Kenya? No and he shouldn't. If people want to get all racist or xenophobic on him, so what, it's the truth and can be seen as a good thing to many people.

[Cameron27]

54. Yes, political theatre.

Edwards portrayed THAT as his childhood home, over and over and over in tv commercials. A nice political gimmick, but a distortion of the actual reality he lived. He never made any mention of the fact that he lived somewhere else for most of his childhood, or that his father was a manager of the mill, and probably not even in the union with a time/check job. He painted himself as poor, or nearly poor, not middle class.

I started out really liking him, but it was this kind of unnecessary BS that caused me to support someone else.

[mondo joe]

55. Like Bill Clinton being from Hope, or his JFK photo. All political campaigns

use theater. Well, the successful ones do, anyway.

[Cameron27]

57. I never got the feeling that Clinton

was trying to paint himself as growing up poor in the sense that Edwards does. Clinton was raised by his mom, who was an RN so he wasn't living more than a working class life.

And there weren't pics like this all over the place:

[mondo joe]

64. Perhaps you were too young to remember, or simply didn't pay attention, but I

assure you there was PLENTY from Clinton about growing up working class - there was the whole flipping intro at the convention about the Man From Hope.

[Cameron27]

68. I wish I was too young to remember!

Bill Clinton was a big ham. I actually didn't think much of him before his first year in office, but I never got the sense that he was trying to portray himself as anything other than a working class country boy. The Kennedy thing was over the top, but like I said, a big ham.

I'll have to google a little to find out more, since I may be forgetting the whole charade.

But first, I've got to watch Hugh Laurie :P

[chimpymustgo]

70. Bill Clinton grew up in Hot Springs, Arkansas.

John Edwards grew up lower - middle class. Why is this a PROBLEM for you?

Deal the f*ck with it.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Clark2008]

137. Because he grew up UPPER middle class.

That's why it's a problem.

I was lower middle class. Believe me, I know the fucking difference.

Deal with that!

[gollygee]

144. A manager at a mill and a postal worker makes an UPPER middle class family?

I have a different opinion about what upper middle class is than you, I guess.

[kskiska]

101. Clinton birthplace in Hope

Keep in mind how they spruce these places up before turning them into national historic sites. Elvis was born in a shack, but you'd never know it once the garden ladies paint and furnish the place.

[Cameron27]

102. It's lovely, but that's not the point.

Growing up lower middle class was commonplace in the 50's and 60's, and Edwards was no different than the majority of Americans who grew up with factory worker fathers and mothers, or millworker fathers. His family probably had more income than most, since his dad was a manager, and his mother a postal worker.

The problem is that he tries to paint himself as poorer than most. That "little pink house" couldn't really be considered "poor" but the point is he wasn't raised in it.

It's got nothing to do with being rich now, it's about the hypocrisy of the portrait of the life he's been spinning for years.

[Bridget Burke]

128. Lincoln was born in a log cabin, but became a prosperous lawyer....

Before he went into politics.

I think he was a pretty good President--for a Republican.

[sandnsea]

56. Some people don't know the difference

Especially Washington people. When they talk about middle class, they're talking about doctors and lawyers, who aren't multi-millionaire rich after all. So in that world, a mill worker's son is poor, even though that is better off than half the country. I wish Edwards made differentiated better. He still approaches the subject as if the one percent is normal and working class is the abnormal poor. It's great he at least acknowledges we exist out here, but it would be nice if he didn't pretend WE were the minority. The truth is, THEY ARE.

[sandnsea]

28. Probably new 50 years ago

It probably was spic and span back then. And beat the hell out of sharecropper poor.

[jsamuel]

32. nowhere did I claim he was "sharecropper poor"

[BlooInBloo]

31. Fuck I hate the poorer-than-thou bullshit.

[jsamuel]

35. ok, good for you

The point is a defence against those who accuse the oposite is true. "Jesus, I am tired of your holy-er-than-thou attitude!"

[nam78_two]

87. Yay for you.nt

:eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

38. If you think Edwards was poor?

We were so poor, When my mother said it was time to move....she kicked an empty box, took a step and said....."we done"! :rofl:

Actually poverty is serious business and a tragedy...and is caused by unequal education, unaffordable decent housing, lack of healthcare, and the lack of a paid living wage as a minimum. Those are issues that all Democrats address, one way or another. Rolling them together results in the term poverty.....but each are separate issues, all which need to be addressed. I think that John Edwards has some decent ideas, but he's not the only one.

[jsamuel]

42. I think his ideas are better than "decent" and I think he is the first politician running

for President in a long time to run on Poverty. Others might have "decent" stances on poverty, but Edwards is an advocating for major changes, unlike others. If he wasn't that different, he wouldn't be getting attacked so harshly compared to the other candidates.

[Blackhatjack]

47. "Those are issues that all Democrats address, one way or another." Really?

How many of the Democratic candidates have made 'poverty' a prime issue in their campaign?

Democrats are more likely than Republicans to address issues related to poverty, but it is not a first priority with any of the present slate of Democratic Candidates for President EXCEPT Edwards. And they have the same opportunity to make it a first priority same as Edwards, and have not chosen to do so.

IF you think Edwards has 'some decent ideas' about poverty, that means someone else must have better ideas. Care to share the names of those individuals and their better ideas?

[FrenchieCat]

59. Making "Poverty" your campaign "strategy" doesn't mean one

is actually proposing anything that much different from what has been proposed before......a living wage, universal (not single payer) healthcare, college tuition programs and technological advances for the rural areas.....just the fact that the word poverty is used a lot.

John Edwards has always been about "election" strategy.....

Circa 2002- didn't work
Edwards gets in tune with rural voters.
(Knight Ridder Newspapers)
Date: September 11, 2002 | Author: Hurt, Charles
Edwards had hired the band to perform at a Washington fund-raiser for Ben Jones, who is running for Congress in Virginia. That's the same Ben Jones who played Cooter, the country mechanic in the 1980s good ol' boy TV hit "The Dukes of Hazzard."

The event was sponsored by Edwards' political action committee, New American Optimists, and is part of a key strategy Edwards is rolling out in his 2004 campaign for president

Aiming to buck a 20-year trend, Edwards _ a Democrat _ is courting the conservative rural voters who are some of the Republican Party's most reliable. The effort could make some traditional Democrats a bit squeamish, however, because it embraces gun ownership rights and trumpets cultural passions such as NASCAR that might be viewed by some as unsophisticated.

Regardless of whether it succeeds, the strategy is already being closely watched by top Democrats nationwide.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-91380449.html


Circa 2007-
Standing up to corporate America in an era of booming profits, however, may be a well-timed strategy for Edwards in the Democratic primary. Much as he did as a trial lawyer making tens of millions representing the injured against corporate abuse, the shrewd Edwards has figured out how to do well by siding with the little guy. While labor's membership has declined, its determination to wield its political clout has mushroomed over the past decade. In the two most recent elections, union money ranked at the top of independent expenditures, and union leaders tell Fortune they plan to exceed their record-breaking 2004 spending in the current election.

With that as the spark plug, Edwards hopes his other assets - the appeal of his anti-war stance, a formidable campaign organization, and his experience as a presidential candidate - will enable him to surprise all those pundits betting on a two-way race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/...

Edwards' Poverty Center strategy come under question:

MAY 28, 2007
Up Front
Edited by Deborah Stead
John Edwards' Convenient Nonprofit

During periods when they're out of office, many politicians arrange jobs for loyal former aides. After his unsuccessful 2004 Vice-Presidential bid, John Edwards came up with a creative approach: He started a nonprofit dedicated to fighting poverty. Rather than recruiting outside poverty experts, the Center for Promise & Opportunity became a perch for several once and future Edwards staff members.

The line between an ordinary nonprofit and a group formed to test the political waters can be blurry. But legally there's a big difference. Ordinary nonprofits aren't subject to rules on disclosing donors and limiting contributions; exploratory political groups are. No one has challenged the status of the Edwards center, and experts in the field say it may technically pass muster as an ordinary nonprofit. But at a minimum, it appears to have helped Edwards prepare for the 2008 Presidential race.

Edwards, a former Democratic senator from North Carolina, launched the center in 2005 at the Washington (D.C.) address of his PAC. The nonprofit raised $1.3 million in 2005, the only year for which data are available, and spent some of it on a national speaking tour for Edwards. It also spent $259,000 on consultants. The campaign declines to disclose the donors or consultants. The center is now defunct, and some of its key leaders are now aiding the Edwards campaign.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_22/c4036012.htm?chan=search

[Blackhatjack]

61. You still pushing the erroneous story that Rawstory had to print a retraction for?

I guess some people are unwilling to do research instead of 'cut and paste' with no followup.

You really need to get current if you are going to criticize Edwards.

The anti-poverty center at UNC-Chapel Hill is not 'defunct.'

THe nonprofit he created is not required to disclose donors since donors 'do not get a tax deduction' for their contributions.

The so-called consultants referred to happen to be experts in the field of combatting poverty. Bringing them together to come up with ideas they can promote is the purpose of the center. They are not making widgets over there!

And there is no better way to raise the issue of combatting poverty than to put people out there to speak about it in all kinds of venues.

If you hate Edwards, that is perfectly fine. If you hate Edwards and use faulty arguments and evidence to criticize him -- prepared to be confronted by the truth.

[FrenchieCat]

62. I have never nor did I here cite RawStory......Which from what I could find only corrected

the type of non profit organization Edwards was running. I didn't say that he somehow was doing something shady in terms of Tax issues and contributions! In addition, the Center for Promise and Opportunity IS defunct.

An article published Friday about a nonprofit organization started by former Sen. John Edwards incorrectly compared standards applied to charities to Edwards' group, which was organized under a separate section of US tax code.

Edwards' group, The Center for Promise and Opportunity, was organized under section 501(c)(4) of the IRS code, which does not allow donors to receive tax deductions for contributions to such groups. A link to the Better Business Bureau's standards for financially health charities referred to 501(c)(3) organizations, which solicit public contributions that are tax deductible. Similar standards from Charity Navigator also apply only to 501(c)(3) organizations.

The article also misstated speaking fees Edwards collected from colleges and universities last year. He made $267,000 during the speaking tour.
http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/6/2/74114/40494


In terms of you getting "personal" with me, and telling me what I hate, etc.....you don't know me, and I'd rather that you didn't persist with this practice. Edwards is a politician, a public figure....and is therefore available for criticism. I am simply a member of this board, and according to DU rules, I am able to express my views and opinions without being personally attacked. I appreciate your rebut, but I don't appreciate your attempt at charaterizing what I think or feel, cause you have no clue. Just because I don't believe Edwards to be as pious as you do, doesn't make me a "hater" or anything else for that matter, just someone with an opinion different than your own about one politician. Get over it.

[1932]

73. "You don't know me"

You're one of the most prolific posters on DU! I think I know more about your private life than some people I work with and see every day!

[FrenchieCat]

75. And regardless, you still don't know me........

But thanks for chiming in.

[bling bling]

94. WTF?

You don't know anything. Discuss politics....or don't. That's why we're here.

[Blackhatjack]

77. Hint: Presenting facts that contradict your allegations is not 'getting personal' ....

I did not attack you personally.

I did not tell you what you hate.

I did not attempt 'at charaterizing(sic) what (you) think or feel'

I posted "If you hate Edwards, that is perfectly fine. If you hate Edwards and use faulty arguments and evidence to criticize him -- prepared to be confronted by the truth."

The word "IF" is the operative word. (I guess you just glanced over it by mistake).

[FrenchieCat]

90. Well, I don't really need for you to tell "If "you" this, then That"......

And in reference to the poverty center, the article I initially posted did not discuss it....it was talking about his other endeavor.

Further, when you stated that I was "continuing" to post something about Raw Story....I didn't know what you were refering to, because I didn't know about a Raw story anything...nor have I ever posted such article, ever.

And so it goes, my only point was that Edwards' poverty stance is admirable, but hardly novel.....and it is my belief that Edwards is a politician who has staked out a "cause" in a very calculated manner (just like he has wooed the Internet in a coordinated fashion, partially for fundraising potential a la Dean, I'm sure).

I'm not saying Edwards doesn't believe in his cause....just saying that he "tried" a few things in 2003 (as I illustrated with the pre-poverty angle article I posted, in where Edwards was going for the Rural moderates in order to get elected), but it didn't pan out......before "settling" on the Populist approach. Now he says he will also lead anti-War....

You obviously find him sincere to the greatest of degrees, while I am obviously skeptical as to his motives based on the fact that I also believe that he "stratigically voted for the IWR" more for political reasons than for belief that there was an iminent threat from Iraq.

Differences of opinions are simply a way of life. This forum doesn't separate threads and allow only certain posters to post in Edwards threads....they allow "free for all" in terms of discourse during primaries. I am glad of that. And you are absolutely correct, when I post whatever I should be prepared for responses. Great lesson for Edwards supporters who thinks those who have something other than a praise for Edwards most likely "hate" him.

[Blackhatjack]

97. You just assume things about Edwards' supporters that is not true...

Like this statement you posted:

"Great lesson for Edwards supporters who thinks those who have something other than a praise for Edwards most likely "hate" him."

I have found Edwards' supporters to be very open in debating positive and negative issues about their candidate. They do not assume people who 'have something other than a praise for Edwards most likely hate him.'

However, there are certain posters here that consistently and continuously post negative comments about Edwards, and in many cases the information is recycled over and over, is not accurate, and they know it is not accurate when they post it.

If there are any 'thin skinned' posters here, it is the serial anti-Edwards posters.

[Cameron27]

100. Please link to any inaccurate comments,

statements, or posts about Edwards that you're referring to.

[1932]

76. I know which politicians you like and which ones you don't.

I know what your arguments for and against them are.

You are a prolific poster.

[Cameron27]

78. WTF is with you and other Edwards' supporters

and the personal BS comments? Who the hell cares that you THINK you know about FrenchieCat's posting habits, or personal life... or that of any other member of DU? It's none of your damned business.

Stick to the candidates and the issues.

[Blackhatjack]

80. I do believe she accused me of 'getting personal' which I did not...n/t

[Cameron27]

81. I wasn't replying to you, I was referring

to someone who asserted he knew more of Frenchie's personal life than people he worked with.

I think you should give the hate thing a rest though. Seriously. It's not true, at least for me, and it becomes personal when it's thrown around like that. It's an emotion that you're guessing someone feels. Saying that someone hates JE's policies, or voting record might be better, but I generally don't use that word unless I'm talking about republicans.

By others, I meant what I've seen in other threads btw.

[Blackhatjack]

82. What exactly is it about posters who cannot read? I did not say she 'hated' anyone...

However, I did say if she did, that is ok. Not everyone is going to like everyone else's preferred candidate.

The truth is she was disingenuous in her response that I was attacking her 'personally.'

The link she provided was not only a 'hit piece' on Edwards, but it was wrong in several important factual respects. The same information did cause Raw Story to 'retract' claims they made in the original article they posted.

If she was just providing complete information with the excerpt she posted with the link, she would have excerpted this paragraph appearing in the same article:

"The Edwards campaign says the Center is not connected to a separate Edwards anti-poverty effort at the University of North Carolina.

Edwards' team defends the center. "Obviously, some of the people who had worked for Senator Edwards in government and on his campaign continued to work with him in this effort," says spokesman Eric Schultz. "John Edwards and everyone involved is proud of the organization's work." That work included running a foundation that awarded $300,000 in college aid to 86 North Carolina students in 2006. The Edwards campaign put BusinessWeek in touch with recipient Tony Tyson, 18, who finished his freshman year at North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University. Tyson calls the scholarship "a golden opportunity." When he returns to campus this fall, he adds, he'll volunteer for Edwards' campaign."

I guess some people get 'touchy' when they are contradicted by the facts.

[Cameron27]

83. It's this, and I don't think it's too fine a point.:

"If you hate Edwards, that is perfectly fine. If you hate Edwards and use faulty arguments and evidence to criticize him -- prepared to be confronted by the truth."

I've never posted anything like that about Wes Clark, and neither has Frenchie. I never assume that anyone hates him, although I'm sure that someone, somewhere probably does. I've seen it quite a bit of this kind of thing lately, and it's usually in Edwards' threads.

Whatever, it's just my way of looking at things.

[Blackhatjack]

84. That is interesting... you have read threads here and you don't think some hate Edwards?

I could give you a list if you like.

If someone hates Edwards for what they think is a good reason, so be it.

But they don't get to make allegations which are inaccurate, and then claim they are being attacked 'personally' when they are presented with the truth.

[Cameron27]

89. No I don't think anyone

hates John Edwards. They may hate his politics, his voting record, they may think he's a phony or an opportunist, a slick politician who's loose with the truth, they may think that he worries too much about his hair, or lives in an extravagantly big house, they may think he eats puppies sauteed with garlic and onions, but NO I don't think anyone hates John Edwards as a person.

I'm tired of this. Think what you want.

[CarolNYC]

107. Right wing tactic

It's such a right wing tactic, crying hatred when someone criticizes your guy. I'm surprised to see more and more Edwards supporters adopting it more and more often around here....Perhaps I should expect it, I guess.

[Blackhatjack]

114. And what reality have you created? (BTW that is a RW tactic also--creating your own)

Broadbased smears of Edwards supporters reflect more negatively on the poster than on Edwards and his supporters.

[CarolNYC]

115. No created reality or broadbased smear here

just a somewhat distressing observation.

Hey, if the shoe fits, though, wear it.

[Blackhatjack]

116. Of course you fail to recognized that shoe fits you so well...

Smears against Edwards posters as a group are more than 'a somewhat distressing observation.'

And saying such a statement is not a smear does not make it so.

[FrenchieCat]

92. John Edwards is not "hated"....as there is no reason to "Hate" him....hell, I don't even hate

George Bush....I just don't think that Bush should be President.....and in terms of Edwards, I have reservations that he is who he presents himself to be based on some of his past actions and past words. I do believe John Edwards to be a relatively skilled politician (as he was a skilled attorney) who wants nothing more than becoming President. But I actually believe that he would have a harder time in the GE than either Obama or Hillary in beating the opposition. He can be painted as weak much easier, based on some of his past statements and actions, and he won't be able to deflect attacks as easyly as "been around the block a few times" Hillary and "I thought it was a dumb war from the Get AND I also care for the poor" Obama. I believe that I want a Democrat to be in the White House come 2009, and I have my doubts that Edwards is the person that can make that happen, regardless of the fact that he fits the "conventional" Attractive White Southern Male bill nicely enough. Usually those we "think" are gonna be most "electable" end up not winning.

[Blackhatjack]

95. Edwards' strength would be in the General Election ...

He has higher 'favorable' numbers than Hillary or Obama, and reaches the independents/undecided and unaffiliated voters.

I for one do not believe the electorate is looking at whether the candidate fits 'the conventional attractive white southern male bill.'

Our problems are too serious to make a decision solely on stereotypical characteristics of race and sex.

Edwards has a leg up on Hillary and Obama in that Repub opposition research was extensive on him in his 2004 bid, and if there had been anything significant it would have surfaced then. That is why Repubs are reverting to 'personal' attacks on Edwards. We have yet to see the depth and breadth of opposition research Repubs have in reserve to be used on Hillary and Obama.

[Blackhatjack]

79. This is True ...... n/t

[bling bling]

93. I didn't see any faulty arguments. Except for yours.

"I guess some people are unwilling to do research instead of 'cut and paste' with no follow-up."

What is wrong with you? Her whole entire post was based on research. And more credible looking than your whiny "you hate Edwards" retort. At least she provided a link I could click on to check it out for myself. You offered jack squat other than essentially calling her lazy for citing a legitimate source.

Alright. So I'm "prepared to be confronted by the truth". The question is, are you prepared? Do you have anything more to offer me for "the truth" than you running your mouth in an intimidating sounding way?

[rug]

53. I'm reserving judgment until I see a photo of his childhood haircut.

[jsamuel]

58. thanks for some levity

[Pastiche423]

63. johnnyboy did not grow up as a po' folk

And he certainly was not poor in HS.

As someone above pointed out - it's all political theatre.

[chimpymustgo]

71. Well tell us WTF you know, Pastiche. Were you there? How are you the expert?

This is some crazy sick sh*t.

[Pastiche423]

85. Was I where?

If you were referring to Moore County, N.C., then yes.

I am not an expert.

What is "crazy sick sh*t" about telling the truth?

[GreenArrow]

109. the truth is always "crazy sick shi*t"

if one isn't inclined to hearing it.

[mzmolly]

134. If you were telling the truth, you'd have a point.

?

[1932]

74. I read his bio. In it, he makes the point that he didn't grow up poor.

He doesn't claim to have been poor.

But he does tell stories that reveal an appreciation of what it means to have to work to earn your way.

[nealmhughes]

65. I have seen variations of the same house throughout the Midwest and South.

Actually, most I have seen are larger. There is an entire neighborhood of similar houses that are now mostly rented by college students in my hometown. Absolutely nothing remotely remarkable about the structure in any sense. That is how the working class were housed fifty years ago. Now a similar family would be in a house trailer.

[JI7]

69. i would love to have a house like that

[july302001]

86. comments on Edward's homes

That little mill house is far from fancy. Even when brand new, it doesn't look like it has more than two small bedrooms, a kitchenette, a small bathroom, and a very small living room. Comparisons with sharecropper shacks are lame, if you ask me.

That being said, Edwards' new 10,000 sf spread in Orange County, NC (the largest in that county, which includes Chapel Hill and some very nice wealthy neighborhoods) is *too much.* Too ostentatious.

He would have done much better purchasing a nice 3,000 sf home that is a solid dwelling, but far from the largest in the county.

[Texas_Kat]

96. I've never understood how anyone could think JE grew up 'poor'

That's a photo of a typical 2 bedroom home in the 50's in the South -- particularly in a company town. No air conditioning, 1 bathroom, a kitchen and probably 3-4 small closets. Clapboard siding was also standard. Only the wealthy could afford a brick home.

It was considered an average middle class home for a young family. Two bedrooms were plenty for 2 parents and one or two small children.

Nothing special.

I think that a lot of those who bought the SOMW story are too young to know what growing up in the 50's/60's was like for middle class families. My personal circumstances were much worse than JE's, but I'd never have claimed to be anything other than solidly in the middle class. We went to school everyday. We had a car and indoor plumbing (don't laugh -- it was a differentiator).

I've always thought that Edwards may have resented his family's circumstances a little. He should have been grateful that his dad was in management. I'm sure his dad worked very hard for everything they had.

[jsamuel]

113. see this is exactly the problem. No one is arguing he was poor, you just assume they are.

I have stated like 5 times in this thread already that no one is saying he was poor, but that he was "normal" for the time period and maybe had a little less than "normal".

[Texas_Kat]

120. "Growing up 'poor'"

was Edwards schtick in 04. He promoted the idea constantly and never disputed that characterization of his childhood. It's why you never find a photo of the home he ACTUALLY grew up in.

Part of the problem with creating a meme is that the meme sticks with you, even when it becomes clear to everyone else that it was more obfuscation than truth to begin with.

A lesson to be learned for candidates. Stick with the truth -- then you don't have to remember what you said to whom.

[jsamuel]

121. His "schtick" was not "growing up poor", it was "son of a mil worker"

[Texas_Kat]

124. It was all in the 'impression' left to the general public

The Edwards campaign in 04 fed the impression as much as possible. Otherwise, why no photos of the obviously middle class (even by today's standards) family home that he grew up in. Why only the 'millworker log cabin' that his family moved out of when he was still an infant?

[Hekate]

104. Lower-middle-class at best. That's a tiny house.

Back in the 1950's and 1960's the middle class was a lot broader segment of the population than it is now. It included blue-collar workers in unions, some of whom were doing very well, like the auto workers. And there was a rung on the ladder called "lower middle class" whose members might at any time be tight for money but not living in fear. Some white-collar salaried workers made much less than their blue-collar unionized counterparts.

The middle class is as much an idea as it is anything else--the idea that you can create some security for yourself and your family, and that you can move up the ladder or at least possess most of the elements of comfort. It's the idea, as well, that your children will also have opportunities.

I grew up in two neighborhoods, both of which were filled with 2-3 bedroom, one-bathroom houses, with one-car garages or carports. The houses were tiny by today's standards, but I think most of the people in them thought they were middle-class.

That's not a spacious house by any means. The Edwards family were obviously strivers, but that house says they had not yet come close to their goals. All the more so if they were renters.

:shrug:

Hekate

[Hekate]

105. Why does Edwards'self-made wealth provoke criticism when Kerry's inherited wealth does not?

Personally I wonder at the motives of people who keep picking at the scab of John Edwards's bio. Unlike so many other politicians and other rich men, he got where he is by personal hard work, not by family connections and trust funds. Bill and Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama are not backed by generations of family money--they made their own. John Kerry was born wealthy, but he's on our side too--and I have not heard any sniping about his wealth here on DU.

I really would like to know what combination of envy and bile causes so many DUers to continually harp on John Edwards' money and new house. It's not very becoming, is it? And I wish the envious would find something more productive to do with their time.

Hekate

[Marie26]

122. Jealousy

IMHO. Classism in a different way.

[FrenchieCat]

123. It is the OP that posted a pic of the house.........and I would have to think, there was a reason to

do this. What would it have been, in your opinion?

In mine, it was to remind folks of Edwards' experience with poverty, not remind us of his middle class upbringing.

Are we supposed to be naive about the motives and the reason that this thread was even started? Who do you take us for? So folks respond, and now it is those responders that you disagree with that are somehow culpable for "picking at the scab of John Edwards's bio" and "continually harp on John Edwards' money and new house" - How convenient for John Edwards!

Kind of like Ms. Edwards emoting Jesse Helms in the same sentence as her husband. Why would she do that? http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/592359.html

There's a reason behind everything in an election campaign. To say otherwise is to discredit the candidate.

But keep in mind that no one here is stupid.

[jsamuel]

125. just ignore the words middle class all over my op

The point of the op was not to convince people he was poor. It was to show that people who were saying he was advantaged or wealthy or "upper class" or "upper-middle class" that it is not true. He was at best middle class.

[Hekate]

141. Sorry--my ire was not directed at your OP in particular, just the snarks who won't quit

It's a looooong thread now, isn't it?

Hekate

[jsamuel]

145. oh, I was replying to FrenchieCat, not you.

Don't worry about it.

[rec_report]

127. K&R. I am tired of the Edwards bashing in the mainstream media.

n/t

[Nikia]

131. I must have grown up in well to do areas

Because to me that is a shack. Here, in rural Central Wisconsin, that house would sell for less than $50,000, maybe even less than $30,000.

[gollygee]

138. I don't understand why people see any hypocricy at all

All he says is that he is the son of a millworker. That is not to contrast him to you and me - it is to contrast him to, say, George W. Bush, who "was born on third base and thinks he struck a triple." For someone running for president, he comes from a pretty modest background.