How has the Edwards "house" flap changed your mind?

[Pale Blue Dot]

Poll question: How has the Edwards "house" flap changed your mind?

[Debi]

1. Where is 'who cares'? n/t

[Pale Blue Dot]

3. I'm not doing a poll about the validity of the argument

I'm trying to determine what effect the debate has had.

[Debi]

7. Sorry for the sarcasm..it's Saturday morning and I can't believe

the conversation is still going on :eyes:

[Faygo Kid]

2. The Washington Post tried to make something out of his Georgetown house sale. What a joke.

Put a long article on the front page about the people he sold his Georgetown house to being under some kind of investigation. No link or allegations whatsoever to any wrongdoing, but they tried to make something out of nothing (front page, too!). The Post is such a tool.

[PATRICK]

4. I would like to know first

whether he blundered into this Israeli defense conference as a way to enhance his candidacy or whether he had other motives and effects to actually change the situation in the ME(at risk of his candidacy) that you can't possibility judge in Israeli newspapers. Everyone addressing Israel on any side gets caught in a meat-grinder and they are a volatile Bushco tool wrapped in war hysteria and propaganda at the moment.

At the moment Edwards is not as important as backing down the Israelis from the agreed upon brink it holds in collusion with Bushco and the Saudis. Membership in NATO may be a big and necessary consolation in ending this ugly gambit that logically one cannot fully blame upon Israel, seeking to survive with no absolutely dependable friends(including the US). Kerry comes out and, keeping Israel's un-public backing of the iranian war, likewise blasts Bushco. Confronting Israel on this edge is probably no answer at all, though there is moral justification for giving their administrations full share of blame. They must be eased away from the tinderbox and Bushco carefully caged with no vengeful vacuum for Muslim extremists to ignite things anyway. And is Hillary aloof and playing the same "support Israel" sift the ruins strategy one fears from "muscular" Democrats? It is time for everyone to get involved and oppose the coming crime.

Plenty of time to dwell on presidential choices, but no time to prevent the war on Iran. If Edwards' net effect was to nudge Israel on to their pre-determined strategy against Syria and Iran, then he is out in everyone's books here on DU and on down the line to to a zero sum candidacy.

The rush to judgment is fully justified though, to help us remember what is really important. We shall see how the facts and effects play out and that judgment could change.

[Adelante]

6. Honestly, this is a lot more important

than what house the man lives in.

[bluerum]

5. House? Flap? I thought that tents had flaps. eom

[Auggie]

8. Yeah, who cares. A lot of people live in big houses.

[Buzz Clik]

9. ENOUGH OF THIS STUPIDITY!

No more house threads! No more dumbass fucking polls!

Have you people imploded?

[PATRICK]

10. One should no more post

distracting, smear stories from MSM sources than from any biased or rabid RW source. Following the lead of pitiful distractions based on old patterns of GOP impunity smears is deadly at this time or any time actually. Yet this dominance of the airways and the print media leads us all by the nose, even in having to critique the filth.

Meanwhile, other biased sources like war drum Israeli newspapers HAVE brought up some crucial issues Edwards HAS stepped into which our MSM will never give help in understanding- thereby leaving us gasping like fish on the beach. The candidacy of Edwards this point is not an issue. Even the MSM understands this by putting the "house" above the controversy that would focus Americans on the march to Iran. but if they are silent and misinforming we are diverted and misinformed. Not relying except minimally on the treacherous American press means a lot more work before automatically accepting their goads to over-reaction.

[Buzz Clik]

16. Excellent post.

I couldn't agree more.

As with the things you mentioned, the administration is setting us up for a disastrous conflict with Iran while we're getting excited about the square footage in the house owned by the guy who is a long shot for the Dem nomination.

And we scoff at the gullibility of the Freepers.

[Neshanic]

18. Is that house Photoshopped?

[mmonk]

11. Silly if you ask me.

[Rowdyboy]

12. If the biggest "issue" Edwards has is the size of his house, then congratulations

President Edwards!

[krabigirl]

21. I totally agree! I think people are really reaching with this one..

[mondo joe]

13. I'm unchanged on Edwards, but more disillusioned with DU.

[Seabiscuit]

14. Before this "flap" I had a lot more respect for DUers.

Anyone whining about Edwards' house deserves any bitch-slapping they've received.

They're playing right into Karl Rove's hands (or they've been in his hands for some time now).

Appalling.

[sutz12]

15. Much ado about nothing...

But I suppose its better arguing about the size of Edwards's house than the size of his penis. ;)

[Neshanic]

17. Parts of the puzzle that come to light that confirms he is not a good candidate.

[devilgrrl]

19. Let me illustrate where I stand on all this....

[JNelson6563]

20. Where's the Who Gives A Shit option?

What a stupid, stupid reason to not support a candidate. Stupid.

Seems we've got an influx of stupid goin' on here at DU these days.

Julie

[mnhtnbb]

22. I think some DU'ers have a case of house envy.

[elaineb]

23. Was a supporter, now reconsidering

I don't post a lot, so I hope my opinion might be taken a little less reflexively by Edwards supporters than some of the other posts which are criticizing his decision to buy such a big house. (But I'm probably hoping in vain.)

I have always been a Kucinich supporter, but I became deeply impressed by John Edwards after an article I read in "The Nation" a year or so ago about his "conversion" to the fight against poverty in this country. He was bumped up in my estimation to a very close second to Kucinich based on this alone.

Yes, I know all of us who aren't living below the poverty level could always do more to spend less money and conserve the planet's resources. I certainly don't think any of us are blameless, but surely it's not too much to expect our Democratic candidates, especially those who are putting the "Two Americas" at the center of their campaign to live in a house no LARGER than the median size of a house in the US. He can live in any size house he wants, obviously. Nobody here is telling him he can't, but many of us are saying it alters our perception of him quite significantly. If he lived in a 3000 s.f. house, I probably wouldn't feel differently about him, because (amazingly!) that's probably become the new standard of living in this country. But we're not talking about a 3000 s.f. house by any means.

And please don't lump this in with the other drive-by attacks on candidates I've seen so much of on DU lately. I haven't posted during the last few months in support of or in opposition to ANY candidate, even though I've got firm opinions on most of them, one way or the other. I was a supporter of both Kucinich and Edwards based on the issues they espouse. I'm still a Kucinich supporter, but I'm now undecided on Edwards. If opposition to the war was his main issue, the size of his house probably wouldn't be as much of a concern to me, but economic inequality is his MAIN issue. (At least that's the perception I've gotten; someone please correct me if he's more focused on some other issue). I truly feel like I've entered bizarro world, when expressing this kind of opinion elicits howls of indignation from some Democrats.

I don't post a lot, and I wouldn't have even joined this "debate", except that it seemed like most of the first ten threads I read were about 80 to 20 percent in favor of "who the hell cares how big his house is?". (Granted, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the earlier threads were more evenly balanced or even tilted the other way.) I just thought I ought to speak for those who actually truly liked Edwards as a candidate, so that some of you who think this isn't an issue might understand how it might be perceived by those who were supporting him based on his stance on economic inequality.

[elaineb]

25. quick addendum

By saying I'm reconsidering supporting Edwards, I only mean that I will reconsider donating to his campaign (or voting for him in the primary should Kucinich drop out early). He still will have my firm support should he become the Democratic nominee for 2008. And, in a sense, he's still second to my Kucinich in my mind right now, because he DOES speak out on poverty, even if he ain't entirely "walking the walk". It's just that he's no longer the close second to me that he was before this.

[Liberal Veteran]

24. It's made me realize that petty faux outrage isn't just a republican trait.

[JVS]

26. I was not fond of him in the first place, and I am less bothered by the house itself...

than by the hypocrisy of a place where buying yourself a huge compound is ok, but shopping at Wal-Mart because you need to stretch you dollars is a mortal sin. We love our rich masters in the US and DU is no exception it appears.

As far as my support of him goes. I never liked his stance on the war and would prefer Clark, who I fucking hated last time around.