Hedging on the truth
May 8, 2007 Politics and Poker
I said earlier this year that what was going to doom John Edwards — besides everything else — was the obvious contradiction between his running on a class-envy platform and his hair his immense wealth and conspicuously wealthy lifestyle.
Now this:
Edwards said it’s legitimate to ask questions about whether there is a contradiction between campaigning against poverty while working for a hedge fund that is designed to make rich people richer. He said the job was a compliment to his position as the head of a poverty center at the University of North Carolina.
“I didn’t feel like I understand, and to be honest with you still learning right now, sort of the relationship between that world and the way money moves in this country through financial markets,” Edwards said.
Hypocritical… cynical… and a complete BS artist!
May 9th, 2007 at 10:40 am
Yeah, that was interesting, wasn’t it?
Actually, what’s probably going to lead to Edwards’ failure to get the nomination (and if he gets it, his failure to be elected) is that very emphasis on poverty.
The sad fact is that (outside of religious institutions like churches, synagogues and presumably mosques) there is no cultural bias toward helping the poor. And speaking of religion, didn’t Jesus say that “the poor will always be with you?” That doesn’t mean that you don’t help them; but it also doesn’t mean that we can permanently solve the problem, either.
Fact is, deep down, most Americans probably believe that if you’re poor, it’s because you screwed up somehow.
Also: there is no political will to solve poverty. Even if Edwards is elected he’ll have a tough time getting any anti-poverty legislation passed. I hate to be brutal about it, but how many poor people actually, you know, vote?
Don’t get me wrong: it’s a crime that people live in this country and don’t have enough to eat or a decent place to live.
But Edwards is going to find that running on an anti-poverty platform isn’t going to get him a lot of votes.
May 9th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Friends,
Three days a week, I walk up the street about a mile or so and volunteer at the local soup kitchen. I live in a small town, but we still serve 400-500 meals a week.
Now, this soup kitchen also has a food bank and a clothing exchange, and all three are run by a 13-church group. No government funds are used, only donations and sweat equity. It works because it is genuine, it’s from the heart, and no one preaches or asks any questions. The door is open, come on in and have a seat at the table.
It’s true that each meal starts with a prayer, but no one is required to join in, just take their hats off for a minute and sit still. Works for me, and I am a practicing Pagan.
Anyway, what I’m leading to is the sort of folks the Jesus alluded to, being always with us. There are folks there who are not pretty. It’s no fault of their own. They bathe, they take care of themselves, they are good people. It’s just that they aren’t up to corporate America’s idea of what someone should look like, and as a result, they don’t get hired.
For all the talk of equality from the left (and often from the right) folks with large porte-wine stains don’t often get good jobs. Those with a deformed arm, or over-bite, or lazy eye, etc. don’t get good jobs. They get stuck in the back room and whispered about during break times, etc. Companies hire them to satisfy “quotas” for Affirmative Action or the ADA, etc.
It’s been ever thus. We also have some veterans, injured, partial paralyses, etc, who would love to work, but are tired of getting only offers from folks like WalMart to be greeters, etc. Token hires rather than valued employees, because they have a special need of some sort.
Rather than face that each day, they join with us where they know they won’t be judged on appearance. It was ever thus.
Anyway, Edwards hasn’t a clue about poverty. Real or imagined. There is finacial poverty, moral poverty, intellectual poverty, and cluelessness. I file him with the latter. Under terminal.
Respects,
August 10th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
[...] it was the indignant denials from his “camp,” the hypocrisy from someone who made moral judgment of others the linchpin of his platform, and in this case — arguably unlike the others — the gross [...]