You’ve gotta love John Edwards, for in his own mind he must believe that he still lives in the 19th Century when news travels so slow that you can say one thing to one group and something completely antithetical to another without either of them hearing of the other before an election.
Previously he opined about “other” Democratic candidates taking monies from News Corp.
Apparently he figured his own profiting off of News Corp would go unnoticed...IT DIDN’T. In fact, one of News Corps house organs (the New York Post) made sure of it.
Still, you’d think that Uber-Capitalist, john Edwards would realize the futility of his attacking “greedy Capitalists,” like himself. See, when you parody yourself like that, most people prudently presume your tongue is planted firmly in cheek.
A few months ago, Edwards explained his raking in millions from his stint managing a Hedge Fund as “trying to better understand the chasm between wealth and poverty.”
Previously he opined about “other” Democratic candidates taking monies from News Corp.
Apparently he figured his own profiting off of News Corp would go unnoticed...IT DIDN’T. In fact, one of News Corps house organs (the New York Post) made sure of it.
Still, you’d think that Uber-Capitalist, john Edwards would realize the futility of his attacking “greedy Capitalists,” like himself. See, when you parody yourself like that, most people prudently presume your tongue is planted firmly in cheek.
A few months ago, Edwards explained his raking in millions from his stint managing a Hedge Fund as “trying to better understand the chasm between wealth and poverty.”
.
OK, what better way to do that, then raking in millions in Hedge Fund profits?
.
And more importantly, what better way to better understand what side of the wealth/poverty divide one wants to be on?
.
Now it turns out that Edwards has profited off of a hedge fund tied to subprime lenders who foreclosed on victims of Hurricane Katrina. Now there's nothing at all wrong or illegal about that. Hypocritical, yes, illegal...no.
It seems, Edwards, who has denounced such lenders, invested $16 million of his $30 million in assets in Fortress Investment Group. The Wall Street Journal reported that 34 New Orleans homeowners struggling to overcome Katrina's aftermath faced foreclosure suits from sub-prime-lending units of Fortress.
A spokesman for the Edwards campaign said he didn't know how quickly Edwards would be able to divest the controversial funds. Of course, not! There’s some serious profit and loss considerations at stake here!
The spokesman also declined to say whether Edwards would give back the adviser's fee or the campaign contributions. Uhhh, for all those wondering, that "no comment," is a resounding "NO."
Ironically enough, Edwards has made the plight of Katrina victims a recurring theme of his bid for the Democratic nomination. He even chose New Orleans to kick off his campaign in December, when he vowed to help poor residents recover from Katrina. In April, he returned to the city to promote his plan to end the "shameful lending practices" of subprime-mortgage firms.
Asked yesterday if his investments damaged his image as a poverty fighter, Edward's said: "No. Everyone knows I am completely committed to eliminating poverty in this country."
Me TOO!
I’m completely committed to eliminating poverty (my own family's) in this country...I can only presume that’s what John Edwards means too – he’s completely committed to eliminating the Edwards’ family poverty in this country.
Come on John, you’re a Capitalist and a good one, just revel in it and stop embarrassing yourself with all the anti-capitalist talk!
.
And more importantly, what better way to better understand what side of the wealth/poverty divide one wants to be on?
.
Now it turns out that Edwards has profited off of a hedge fund tied to subprime lenders who foreclosed on victims of Hurricane Katrina. Now there's nothing at all wrong or illegal about that. Hypocritical, yes, illegal...no.
It seems, Edwards, who has denounced such lenders, invested $16 million of his $30 million in assets in Fortress Investment Group. The Wall Street Journal reported that 34 New Orleans homeowners struggling to overcome Katrina's aftermath faced foreclosure suits from sub-prime-lending units of Fortress.
A spokesman for the Edwards campaign said he didn't know how quickly Edwards would be able to divest the controversial funds. Of course, not! There’s some serious profit and loss considerations at stake here!
The spokesman also declined to say whether Edwards would give back the adviser's fee or the campaign contributions. Uhhh, for all those wondering, that "no comment," is a resounding "NO."
Ironically enough, Edwards has made the plight of Katrina victims a recurring theme of his bid for the Democratic nomination. He even chose New Orleans to kick off his campaign in December, when he vowed to help poor residents recover from Katrina. In April, he returned to the city to promote his plan to end the "shameful lending practices" of subprime-mortgage firms.
Asked yesterday if his investments damaged his image as a poverty fighter, Edward's said: "No. Everyone knows I am completely committed to eliminating poverty in this country."
Me TOO!
I’m completely committed to eliminating poverty (my own family's) in this country...I can only presume that’s what John Edwards means too – he’s completely committed to eliminating the Edwards’ family poverty in this country.
Come on John, you’re a Capitalist and a good one, just revel in it and stop embarrassing yourself with all the anti-capitalist talk!
6 comments:
And with the revelations about the Katrina foreclosures fresh in the news, how many questions did Edwards field in last night's debate on the issue?
None.
Think if it had been Romney, that would have occured?
Not a chance.
Can we hear from our liberal friends once more about our over-sensitivity towards the media bias?
You have the MSM's number Mal, but no, you'll never hear a Liberal admit to Left-wing media bias, they think Liberal = middle of the road.
I feel for Edwards, as the hypocrisy's got to be heavy.
He's a good Capitalist, he should take pride in that instead of acting as though he's embarassed about it.
The old, "Ooooh my gosh, did I take advantage of you again," act wears thin pretty quickly.
I mean, I like it....I want to see how long it takes the Far Left to catch on.
Even money, they never will.
Other than he's a good-looking sort of guy, what exactly does Mr. Edwards bring to the table?
Even your friendly neighborhood "non-con" has been pondering this.
Gerry, I don't get the Edwards hype any more than I do the Giuliani hype, although I can see where Giuliani has a mythos (deserved or not).
The weird thing about John Edwards is that he purports to "understand the poor by becoming rich-ER, often at their expense," like this Fortress Fund.
With over a year to go before the election, I'm betting most of us will be sick of ALL the current candidates, they're hadrly a heart-warming bunch from either side.
We have become fond, in our nation, of weeding out any real statesmen (statespersons?) in our political process, and nominating a bunch of weenies.
2004: Bush v. Kerry. I didn't sit it out, but, boy, was my vote cast reluctantly. I disagreed with almost all of Bush's positions, and couldn't figure out if Kerry had any.
BTW--I watched the immediate coverage of 9/11 intently, heartbroken. Could somebody enlighten me about what the G did so great? I saw nada that made him look like much.
I guess just showing up and remaining optimistic was enough.
Next to Pataki, he looked like a tower of strength, but the sad thing was that after starting out his tenure with great people around him - Bill Bratton engineered the crime turnaround, and Charlie Rivera in the FDNY (a guy who came up through every rank in the Fire Dept), he left with the likes of Bernie Kerick and Tom von Essen.
There were a ton of problems with 9/11, the primary ones for the FDNY were communication problems, starting with the analog radios that didn't work in the towers once the repeaters were damaged.
I gave Giuliani credit for the great turnaround on crime, and for revitalizing the city after the Dinkins fiasco, but by the end of his tenure, he was a shell of his former self.
Post a Comment