What is Digg?280 Comments
- Rosemary02, on 10/12/2007, -47/+187You've got to hand it to Edwards, he's got big brass ones. Like the other multi-millionaire Democrat liberals who criticize some little soccer mom for driving an SUV and wasting a little gasoline, this guy hogs a hundred times more for his share of resources than the average little guy he criticizes. Even worse, his one-note campaign this year is a reprisal of his failed message from last time. Two Americas, well, he ought to know.
- jdh24, on 10/12/2007, -44/+148He's a typical big party hypocrite. Whine about how the poor are destitute; build a massive house.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -19/+108Noone just gave him his money , he went and made his money, whats wrong with that its the America way.
- RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -31/+109Here are some hard numbers about "class warfare." The only way up in this country is by education or business. Income redistribution is an attack on private property which just saps the motivation to work for the recipients and "donors."
The top 1% provides 36.89% of all income taxes
The top 10% provides 68.19%
The top 11-25% provides 16.67%
The bottom 50% provides 3.30%
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html - otheruser, on 10/12/2007, -18/+76I'm a little confused. Some of the comments say, "Democrats are ____" "This is typical of Democrats ____" and so on.
The thing is, Republicans are also extremely wealthy, and aren't afraid to show it.
In all honesty, there's never been a rich person who has lived like a poor man. They may do it for a week, a month maybe, perhaps even a few years, but eventually, they live according to what their wealth permits. Edwards is a man who came from a very poor background, the son of a textile worker and a postal employee. What you see is what he has earned.
As for the charity questions, Edwards has done much more than most politicians. All of the profits generated from the selling the book GO DIRECTLY TO CHARITY. - keyrat, on 10/12/2007, -14/+52So wait, he's not allowed to campaign against poverty because he's rich? I don't see the hypocrisy. If anything, he's taking a hit in the name of poverty. You don't think he knows he'd be richer if he adopted more rich-friendly ideals?
- Barbarino, on 10/12/2007, -19/+52I wonder if Al Gore is going to be ticked off when he sees how many trees John Edwards cut down... I have no problem with the house, but he shouldn't preach about rich and poor when he's filthy rich and I don't want to hear about the environment when he cut a forest down to build that monster.
- wphj, on 10/12/2007, -38/+65So what if he has a big house? He's doing more than any of you to try to fix poverty, one of Americas biggest problems.
- aceg1357, on 10/12/2007, -23/+44I wish Gore was more concerned about the 20,000 gallons of oil he will burn in his private jet going to his next global warming conference.
Nothing wrong with Edwards living the good life. But if he wants to be a champion of the poor, I wanna see how much money he has actually donated to charity the last 10 years. You have to walk the walk before you talk the talk. - javadog, on 10/12/2007, -19/+40John Edwards two Americas agenda...I get to live in my house. You get to work in my house.
- stmiller, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23Orange County, NC. Chapel Hill. Hillsborough. There are no large homes in Orange County. Compared to the nearby counties (Wake) that have Raleigh and Cary, NC- his house is no where near the biggest in the nearby area. This is a bad comparison. Almost like making a headline: "Edward's house is biggest on his street!" Whoa!
"The main house is 10,400 square feet and has two garages."
This is no super-mansion folks. - JimmyDushku, on 10/12/2007, -7/+27Big.....and ugly.
- Euangelion, on 10/12/2007, -29/+44Classic liberalism. Doesn't matter what you do, as long as you sound like you care.
- rhizome, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20Since the rich people get called hypocrites for trying to do something about poverty, someone should tell those lazy poor people to fix their situation themselves. They're the only ones who have credibility on the issue, so hopefully they can get off their asses and lobby Congress in addition to their three jobs.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+25@gb506
"Yeah, by being an ambulance chasing leech. Essentially driving everyone's health care costs through the roof by bankrupting doctors using junk science and retarded juries. Look it up. The guy is a phony baloney pant load."
If you were a true conservative, that wouldn't bother you. The only people who should be complaining about this man's wealth are the socialists (Hey...you're not a commie...are you??). A wealthy man who came from non-affluent background has more credibility when speaking about class separation than any straight middle class citizen, because he's seen both sides of it. He's earned his right to talk. That you attack his occupation rather than his points only shows you have nothing to really contribute to the conversation.
"And it appears as though he's got terrible taste, too. I mean, look at that ugly compound. The design is atrocious."
Like I said, you contribute nothing to the dialogue.
I don't even care about Edwards one way or the other, but I dislike people warping the argument into something out of People magazine. - soogy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13That's what Charlie Murphy thought about Prince. We all know how that one ended.
Game... Blouses. - pseudojd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16ALL that roof and no solar panels. WTF
- winnch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15You people don't know the first thing about John Edwards.
As even he will tell you, he's hard-working, lucky, and has everything he could want. He doesn't fault others who have done the same and doesn't deny he's better off than the vast majority of people in the world.
That speaks nothing to how someone acts or whether or not they care for others. I have a family member who is very wealthy, and I've never met anyone more giving and charitable than he.
"Like the other multi-millionaire Democrat liberals who criticize some little soccer mom for driving an SUV and wasting a little gasoline"
Find me the quote you just imagined. In fact, Edwards said in early January '07 on Hardball with Chris Matthews, "We've bought a hybrid" but hadn't done anything with solar energy or going carbon neutral, saying, "I'm not nearly as good as Al Gore."
"Edwards made most of his money off of falsely accusing OB/GYN doctors of causing cerebral palsy thus causing insurance rates to skyrocket and contribute to the state that our health care system is in."
Of course, you're talking about a doctor who refused to perform a necessary emergency C-Section, though all the people in the waiting room saw it was completely appropriate. This caused a breach birth, where the baby came out 90 degrees in the wrong direction, being strangled by its own ambilical cord. Subsequently the baby will, for the rest of its life, have enormous medical expenses. That's what insurance is for -- to protect the liabilities people have. Doctors sign up for a job. If they endanger someone's life, who will pay it? A doctor doesn't have $20 million for a baby. An insurance company does. Jurors and judges agreed with Edwards, and for that, these children can breathe and live.
Or Valerie Lakey. A little girl who sat on a public swimming pool drain and had her intenstines sucked out of her. The company that manufactured the drain knew about the problem. They ignored it to save 4 cents on every dollar. Other children in different parts of the country had been injured too. They still sold the drains. Valerie lived, but she will need constant medical treatement for the rest of her life.
John Edwards had quit law after his son, 16, died in a car accident. He returned to law one last time to send that drain company into the stone age, and got Valerie the money she needs to stay alive.
Don't talk about John Edwards if you don't know much about him. I've met the guy. You don't have to agree with his politics, but learn something about him as a person. He and his wife are courageous people. - etnu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12The class war is NOT between rich and poor. Poor love rich because rich give jobs and finance massive government waste. Rich love poor because they're cheap labor.
The war that's going on is between the middle class and the rich/poor, and the rich/poor are winning. The myth of the "land of opportunity" is dying. If you're poor, you can work hard, go to college, and then graduate -- to what? $50,000 in debt and a job that doesn't even pay enough to afford a home in 9 out of 10 metropolitan areas?
That being said, Edwards isn't anywhere near as bad as the vast majority of politicians, most of whom were born with silver spoons in their mouths. Sons of "poor farmers" (CEOs of agriculture business megacaps), "public servants" (senators, presidents, and CIA directors), and the like. It's a lie. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+18John Edwards has obscenely enriched himself as a trial lawyer. He is a poster child for tort reform, which the democrat party has staunchly opposed. Isn't it ironic that he runs as a populist? He doesn't have a chance. Pathetic candidate.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I don't support greenpeace and their terroristic tactics, but I'm digging your comment for sticking with what you believe and not blindly supporting someone with a "D" next to their name. Onya!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13You think he got the PS3 that he wanted?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -15/+24I know this may be difficult to understand but let me make it simple for you.
This is about as absurd as a 500lb man on a commercial for "feed the children". I'll let you figure out why. - otheruser, on 10/12/2007, -11/+20Al Gore's presentations and film have done an immeasurable amount in raising awareness for global warming.
As for Edwards and charity, all profits from his book "Home" will go to charity. And seeing as he is a major presidential candidate, his book will sell like hell. - yzerizef, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16"Your numbers don't even add up to 100%.
36.89 + 68.19 + 16.67 + 3.30 = 125.05%"
You, sir, are an idiot. They're not even supposed to add to 100% - ChildeRoland420, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@thatcoolrushguy,
They don't have to add to 100%. Reread it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10He's far behind Al Gore who owns two 14,000 square foot homes and sails around in a private yacht.
- Doofy, on 10/12/2007, -9/+17John Edwards didn't become rich by producing ANYTHING.
He became rich by suing people.
He's nothing but a parasite. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14so? If i was born into a lower income home and then became a millionaire, you'd be certain that the first thing i'd do would be to buy a nice car and a huge house
i guess that since he's a politician he isn't allowed to do the nice things he's earned? - nishna, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Edwards speeches are exactly right about there being two America's. Apparently some posters feel that since he's rich, he should just shut up. Strange argument coming from conservative writers. It's his money, he started with nothing and got rich, it's called the American Dream and he can spend it how he wants; it doesn't take anything away from the truth of his arguments. In the words of Warren Buffett, another rich guy: "“There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
As for the tort reform arguments, here's one of the cases Edward's won. If it was your kid or sister, who's side would you be on?
"A 5-year-old girl was disemboweled, but survived, after being caught and suctioned by wading pool's defective drain. Despite 12 prior suits with similar claims, manufacturer continued to make and sell drain covers lacking warnings." - mattxb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7John Edwards estate is 102 acres, Bush's is 1,583 acres, if this Wikipedia article is right:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prairie_Chapel_Ranch - ChildeRoland420, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@xcoastie,
How is he raising Medicare rates? Does he use more than his fair share of their coverage? He has private insurance, he doesn't use any Medicare or Social Security benefits. He paid your 2.9% on over $300,000 and didn't take any out.
Yet, there are people who have never held a serious job, let alone contributed appreciable taxes into the system, and they are collecting Millions a year in benefits.
Who's raising what now? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7John Edwards has a big house.
Bush's ranch in Crawford Texas ( which he bought just before the 2000 elections, he is as much a Texan as Hilliry Clinton is a New Yorker. He grew up in Ma going to many of the same things as John Kerry ) is 15 MILES long on a side. - foobermensch, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Anybody to talks to dead people on TV is okay in my book.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6He's ***** rich, why wouldn't he own a nice house?
Good lord people are dense and like to sensationalize ***** for their own agendas.
And if you were rich you'd own nice ***** too. STFU please. - bugsy187, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12RadiantBeing, you quote the following:
"The top 1% provides 36.89% of all income taxes
The top 10% provides 68.19%
The top 11-25% provides 16.67%
The bottom 50% provides 3.30%"
It sounds like the rich are getting a great deal when you consider this info:
"In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth, and the top 1% controlled 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_distribution
Wealth had continued to concentrate with the richest people, by the way.
I'm getting really tired of the pro-rich nonsense that is continually circulated. It's a con. The wealthy continually ***** us over and well meaning (or non well meaning) commissars try to do damage control. I think all of us intuitively understand something is wrong with our system. Pretending that "staying the course" will make things better is unwise and has predictable results. Things are getting worse. The miserly social programs we have in the wealthiest country in the world are continually gutted with predictable increase in crime and desperation. There is less hope, because the means for a productive, responsible life are constantly stripped away for an increase in profit. We can see the social decay and environmental decay caused by this system, and it can't continue forever. This is especially true with the environment. As Warren Buffet said "markets have failed in terms of poor people" and they will fail in terms of human survival if we let them. - jbink303, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Read the title again.
- brese1200, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11This ***** was reported by FOX yesterday and you can bet there was a producer somewhere chomping the bit to put up "Country" instead of "county" and just do a retraction on the back page of the post the next day...
This is total *****. The guy earned his living. If he were a republican, then the neo con-commenter's here would be praising him for his affluence. All part of that "what's good for me, is GOOD FOR ME..." mentality that allows them to be dismissive of anything they see fit by simply saying the word "LIBERAL" in a sentence...
Jerk offs... - iloveyouguam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6COUNTY, not COUNTRY...
- actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Makes a good point.....does so in all caps......Man, you got me between a rock and a hard place with the thumb buttons here.
- chucali, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13The 2nd Biggest Douche in the Universe
- fortressgame, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So?
Only the rich can run for office. That's a systemic fault, a result of money running the political system. It's a big problem, but its not his *fault*. He's just another rich guy running for office. By the way, rich guys often have large houses.
Focus on the problem - money in the political system. You are too easily distracted by the media, people! - reed311, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8If doctors mess up and ruin your life through malpractice then you deserve no money?
John Edwards earned his living through hard-work, period. If he was a republican he would be praised as a "rags to riches" story. Unfortunately, every Democratic civil lawyer is an "ambulance chaser" while a Republican one is just a god ole boy who would never take advantage of the system. Throw in a few uses of the word "liberal" and you're done. - VAPerson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@betacmag4u
The truth is that we don't know how Nader really lives. He refuses to file income tax statements like other candidates do and is extremely secretive. His "independent" foundations control millions and no one know who's really in charge of them. You're falling for the marketing facade that he puts forth. - ktchpmn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5so only poor people are allowed to fight against poverty?
i'm not a john edwards fan or anything, but to critcize him for having a big home and trying to help out the lower class is ridiculous. - brandonhoth, on 10/12/2007, -10/+15When I look at the over the top opulence of Edward's home, I instantly hear the hypocrisy in his "Plan for America"'. What can't be overlooked, though, is that America is in love with stories of the "American Dream". We have always loved those tales of someone reaching fortune from humble beginnings, particularly in times when the disparities in class seem to be at their greatest.
- EochaidRiata, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9"In all honesty, there's never been a rich person who has lived like a poor man. They may do it for a week, a month maybe, perhaps even a few years, but eventually, they live according to what their wealth permits."
Sam Walton was the wealthiest man in the world for almost a decade and still drove a 15 year old pickup and wore Wal-Mart clothing. - felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"Due to the extraordinary traffic generated by the link from the Drudge Report website, the main carolinajournal.com website is temporarily unavailable. "
Guess they don't know about the Digg link... - Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You mean how Bush goes on and on about making health care affordable but doesn't subject himself or his family to the same system?
Or how he and his cabinet started a war without any military experience?
Or how he and Cheney still give loads of corporate welfare to energy companies while paying lip service to foreign oil?
I suppose this means Bill Gates' charities are to be scorned and discontinued, yes? - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10"but he shouldn't preach about rich and poor when he's filthy rich"
Why not? Only poor people are allowed to think poverty is a problem? Personally I'm impressed he still remembers the little guy, unlike Republicans who are also rich and consistently pass legislation to help the rich get even richer, at the expense of everybody else. -
Show 51 - 100 of 269 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is