Edwards is scheduled to travel to New Orleans to make the announcement. He will appear in the Katrina ravaged ninth ward where recovery efforts continue more than a year later.
This is flat out bull. What is the purpose of this?
Use a tragedy for political gain?
Dems do this as a common practice, so I can see why they would not mind...
Is he going there to show how ineffective and incompetent the DEMOCRAT mayor and DEMOCRAT governor are?
That would be some honestly for once.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
John Edwards Kicks Off His Campaign Tour?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
Game, your efforts to hoot and howl against anything a Democrat does become more laughable all the time. A Democrat doing something with political motives? OH-MY-GOD! Who would do such a thing? Republics never do that. Bush never does that.
There is nothing any Republic politician does that does not have a political motive. Same for Democrats.
You are either naive or deluded (or both).
Breathe. They all have political motives, is right.
The GOP had their national convention in the bluest of blue cities for the sole reason of using national tragedy for political gain.
In one speech they mentioned 9/11 two hundred times! They went to a city they hate and demonize and a city from which they cut funding for port security and infrastructure improvements. To have a crater as a backdrop.
And on the hypocrisy thing, Edwards is the only Democrat clean on NOLA. He has busted his ass to clean up New Orleans with his Center on Poverty, Work & Opportunity.
One time he brought 700 college kids to NOLA over spring break to work in the 9th Ward cleaning out flooded houses.
If anyone could say honestly that he's been fighting to help the people in New Orleans who are stuck in what is essentially a third world country, it's Edwards.
What Thomas said!
I don't know about what Thomas said, but I DO know that all Edwards need do is speak, and that's all I need to know.
Don't forget guys, there are two Americas according to Comrade Edwards-- the Proletariat, and the Bourgeoisie. Let's bring America together by taking down our most imaginative, industrious, enterprising, and most able people.
Democrats think they are fighting the Paris Hiltons of the world, but there are around 2.5 million millionaires in the United States. Almost all of them live lives of quiet obscurity with nothing to prove.
As a fellow freeper neanderthal put it,
"This country is a product of the Enlightenment, built entirely of people who immigrated from other places - from cultures that believed in blood-and-soil tradition - to a new country where Jefferson promised that a person could by hard work improve his lot. This is what makes us different from classbound countries where the goodies flow to people who made a good choice of parents."
Except most millionaires dont earn their millions, jason. More than 90% inherit that money. Congrats to the few who make it, outside of the ones who cheated or took advantage or had important friends or won it. I really admire that person.
Rhyno,
You betray your Liberal Democrat-ness once again.
Now, where did you get your statistic about 90% of millionaires inheriting their money? It is either a know-nothing site like Jim's or Kos, or from your derriere.
Stuff your blind class warfare, rhyno.
"Except most millionaires dont earn their millions, jason. More than 90% inherit that money. Congrats to the few who make it, outside of the ones who cheated or took advantage or had important friends or won it. I really admire that person."
Don't you realize how sad and pathetic that sounds? Aside from the point that "the Millionaire Next Door" claims most millionaires are self-made, just the overall tone of defeat in that comment. Even if your stats are right on the money, the idea that somehoe success is already sewn up by those born into wealth makes me want to blow my brains out. It's that sorrowful.
But of course I won't blow my brains out because I don't buy it for a second. You shouldn't, either.
The amount of dough in your pocket isnt a sign of success. Its just that you've done enough not to lose it when you inherit it. Its a glaring sign of your superficiality and lack of depth that you look up to people just because they have money.
"Its just that you've done enough not to lose it when you inherit it."
That's not as easy as it sounds. Give your average American even a free $1000 and I guarantee they'll blow it by the end of the week.
Class warfare in general is against human nature. The teachers in here will appreciate the following example.
Suppose you give a test and the median score was 80, but a few students did really bad. To remedy this situation, you promise to take the points from the top scorers and give those points to those who did the worst. The aim is to ensure everyone passes the test.
Now, what kind of results will this policy engender? It doesn't take a genius to guess that the average score will drop. The worst scores will drop even more, and many of the mediocre and top scores will drop too, even though there will still be a few who try hard in any case. Socialism in practice always creates a "race to the bottom," to follow a phrase from Comrade Dobbs.
Nice try, rhyno. But it was you that set the bar with your whining about those who are financially well off, accusing them of aquiring their wealth by less than honorable means. What could be more superficial than that kind of covetousness? You'll need some more professional help in dealing with the fact that financial wealth is a measure of success. Consequently, the lack of money is a measure of a lack of success. So my comments were strictly about the measure that you yourself presented.
Marshall, Your words to the effect that finacial wealth is a measure of success is one more thing to tell me that on many things you and I are not even in the same dimension. I find you the most thoughtful and reasoned among the posters here. That said, I still don't have to agree!"-) Money and wealth is made in all kinds of ways and the way most fortunes are made are not without some very nasty stuff happening getting there. I have no problem with the American way and people working to wealth. I do have a problem with outright greed. How many years in a row does one need to make tens of millions of dollars until they decide to reward the workers and other people that help keep the business humming. Sacrifice your own tens of millions down to one or two and give employees health care or a raise? I have a problem with the rich because of the ones that are greedy, not because they are rich. And no, in my mind that has nothing to do with socialism.
find you the most thoughtful and reasoned among the posters here.
That would be among the righties of course.:-)
It was not an opinion, but a fact: in financial terms, lots of money is a measure of success. Perhaps I should stress "A" measure of success, not "THE" measure of success. And you suffer from the same malady as Rhyno if you truly believe that most of it was aquired as a result of "some very nasty stuff happening". It's all just envy. If's easier to suspect it's too hard to get for dark reasons to allay the guilt or shame of not having gotten there. If it's only done with unethical activities, one needn't explain why one wasn't willing to put in the hours. Now one needn't risk failure and humiliation but can safely stand back and criticize those who do and succeed. It's a natural defense mechanism against a painful reality, that success is what we're not willing to bust ass for. Who freakin' cares how some rich dude gets paid and who the fuck are WE to decide whether this guy we don't know deserves the extra millions he's getting from the board of directors who are thrilled with how much good he did the company? HIS good fortune has zero impact on the chances of any of US getting more out of life.
Personally, I have better things to do than to care what the rich do with their money. That's because it's THEIR money. They got it. God bless them. At what point will YOU decide you will keep no more and all additional amounts of income will be donated? How close are you to that? As to those who inherit? God bless them and their parents that they have the ability to leave their families so well off. I hope I can do something like that for MY family. I intend to get as close as I can. It's all good.
Once again marshall, you and I live in different dimensions. Yes, being rich is THE measure of FINANCIAL sucess. Weather that means anything about one as a person is highly doubtful to me.Mike Tyson made millions. It says nothing about his life being a success. I guess Ryno and I have the same malady because I DO believe that in most cases to get wildly rich..as in the top 5 percent..the vast majority have had to deny principals or morals to do it. Yes, we all have our crosses to bear but I'm just sayin. As I stated before it has nothing to do with envy or wanting to deny a fruitful living to those that worked for it. That certainly is an element too. Your spiritual mentor, Jesus, had little good to say about the rich however. Wonder why that was? He did say MUCH about helping the poor and the least among us. Just because I don't claim to be Christian doesn't mean my principals aren't grounded in a spiritual basis. If you think hard work is the guaranteed element in financial security then you haven't been looking in on my life or many others. Many people work just as hard as others who have far more money. Yes, I know life isn't fair. I don't expect it to be. I do think that to whom much is given much is expected. I hear you..damnit, it wasn't given to them..yes, life gave them a break, even if they did work hard. My problem with the guy getting extra millions from the company is that there are many who are deserving within the company but get passed over so the guy at the top can claim all the glory and the bulk of the dollars.
At what point is it enough for people that make 10s of millions for years in a row? That was my question for you. Does greed exist in your world or is that just a "socialist" idea in your world? If I had 20 or 30 million I don't think I would need another cent for the rest of my life. I could live off that, invest and leave a fine amount to my heirs. If you are only working for the money your world is again in a different dimension than mine.
My view is not a political one on this issue but a moral one. Of course for Fundies it is of little consequence. That is why I don't follow their religion. They seem opposite to what I see as moral about 70 percent of the time and they think my views on what is important to living a respectable life is unimportant in theirs..just like you stated in your last paragraph Marshall.
I think the term "millionaire" needs to be better defined. If you are a mature American with a good amount of equity in your home and a decent 401(k), you may very well be a "millionaire" as far as your net worth is concerned (especially if you live in California where the price of homes is higher). So maybe we should be talking about, what $10MM, $100MM, $1B?
So I would dispute the 90% inherited number and call it hyperbole. I don't think it is anywhere near that, and it may be the other way around.
That said, accumulating millions upon millions of dollars of personal wealth for the sake of having that wealth and providing one's heirs with a certain standard of living borders on immoral.
I think that Buffet and Gates provide excellent examples of those who have accumulated great wealth and are now using that money to benefit society.
Ron and Jim,
First off, Jesus didn't have much to say about the rich OR the poor in the manner you imply. Christ only warned of the spiritual hazards of being wealthy, not that wealth was in any way evil, in and of itself. He did not raise up the poor as being MORE special than anyone else. But He was telling YOU how to deal with the poor, not telling you how to make others deal with the poor. The parable of the talents should show He prefers wisdom with one's assets over stupidity.
And that's a lesson the financially successful have learned. They've worked SMARTER rather than harder and did things that sharply increased their RETURNS on their investment of time and money. I haven't read a ton of these books, but autobiographies of rich dudes are good reads. You find the same qualities of character and discipline and some even state that they don't understand crime when you can make money so easily without it. Yet, I rarely hear of any real life Ebenezers that justify the contention that most who've made it had to do it unethically. We hear of some that failed at unethical stuff and it is assumed to be typical rather than rare. And Gates and Buffet aren't anything new to the world of wealth. Most charitable and philanthropic organizations are started by or partnered with rich people who have the time to do such things. Spending one iota of time worrying about what the rich do with their dough is envy and covetousnous and interferes with more productive thought. I like rich people. We need more of 'em. Even those who ARE like you imagine kick in charity dough just to prove they ain't the greedy bastards Ron and Jim just KNOW they are.
Wealth is not the be all and end all of who a person is by any means. What they do with it isn't necessarily either. The point is there's no way you know the intent of a contribution or the lack of one, so concentrate on your own giving and never mind the other guy. When you think you can dictate what some other guy does with his dough, when without knowing or having evidence you think you can judge another to be dishonest because of his income level, when you think you can set the limit to another's ability to earn, that's when you need to step back and check yourself out.
You wanna talk about greed? Think of all the people you know personally and then leave off the filthy rich ones. Of those who are left, and these are all those you've known in your lifetimes, do you know any who've fudged their tax returns to get a couple hundred bucks? Any who've padded an expense report or time card? Any who do the least amount of work they can get away with? Any who breech a rule in order to gain a little extra? Most of the greedy people I've ever met weren't rich. Actually none, since I know no one who's filthy rich, how about you? Those are the ones we SHOULD be watching, since we have experience with them. We KNOW their shit is unethical. You only think you know about the wealthy.
So yeah, we're in different dimensions alright. I do not begrudge a man the consequences of his actions. If a man can accumulate wealth, good for him. Another rich man is good for the economy.
Post a Comment