Kill This Meme Now

5 comments September 19th, 2007at 11:52am Posted by Eli

Ron Fournier makes one good point in his largely hacktacular AP column about whether or not John Edwards is a great big hypocritical phony:

Some who call Edwards a hypocrite assume that a multimillionaire trial lawyer can’t be an authentic advocate for the poor and working people. That’s nonsense. You don’t need to be blind to help those who can’t see or crippled to aid those who can’t walk, and wealthy families like the Roosevelts and Kennedys had no problem connecting with working-class voters.

(He immediately goes on to complain that Edwards’ “excuse” for taking a hedge fund job is “lame”)

The “rich hypocrite” meme is very, very pernicious, because if it takes root it will effectively doom all Democratic advocacy for the poor. The fact is that almost everyone who gets to the senatorial/presidential level in politics is going to have a lot of money, as well as multiple indicators of “elite” status. If this meme takes hold, they will be even more reluctant to aggressively advocate for the poor than they are now, and I don’t think the poor can afford any more timidity from the party that purports to represent their interests.

Entry Filed under: Democrats,Edwards,Media,Politics,Wankers

5 Comments

  • 1. Cavalor Epthith, Esquire  |  September 19th, 2007 at 4:13 pm

    Yep hackery because all people who rise high enough to be in the running for the office of President in the US consider all others less than elite. I think Edwards understands there will be many people who think because he is prettier than most, well heeled and has an outspoken wife that his road will be potholed with such trivial matter as whether he cannot feel the pain of the poor et cetera et cetera.

    OT,
    Wonderful blog. So we are linking to you after a heated debate in the editorial staff room. it was decided based upon your proper use of the word “innards” in regard to rocket engines and had nothing to do with you being a Heat dancer. Our site is adult in nature and scope and deals with some very hot button issues so be careful at work. iIhave to say that or our lawyers will beat me.

    Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!

  • 2. bdr  |  September 19th, 2007 at 4:57 pm

    What always boils my aargh is that it’s somehow more hypocritical to be a rich person who cares about the poor than a moral scold who cheats on his wife.

    The second is considered a natural failing, the first a contrived position. The moral calculus of oinkdom.

  • 3. Ripley  |  September 19th, 2007 at 5:18 pm

    I read that plonk somewhere else this morning and I loved the sly aggregation of ‘the $1,250 haircut’ he slipped in there. It’s one of the most biased ‘news articles’ I’ve read in quite some time.

    The obvious question comes to mind: Who would be a more sincere and effective advocate for the poor, John Edwards or Mitt Romney? Edwards or Giuliani? You think Fred Thompson would do anything on behalf of the poor?

    I think it’s not so much hypocrisy, in some people’s minds, as a sense of betrayal of ‘the upper class.’ Poor dears…

  • 4. Eli  |  September 19th, 2007 at 7:19 pm

    I think Edwards understands there will be many people who think because he is prettier than most, well heeled and has an outspoken wife that his road will be potholed with such trivial matter as whether he cannot feel the pain of the poor et cetera et cetera.

    The thing is, the Republicans are going to use the same kind of playbook no matter *who* the Democratic nominee is. They pulled the same out-of-touch effete elitist shit on Kerry, and when Gore testified on global warming they wrung their hands and cried crocodile tears about his big energy-glutton house.

    Since I am almost certainly going to have to vote for a rich elitist, I would much rather vote for one who cares about the well-being of people who are *not* fellow rich elitists. This is why I find Edwards marginally preferable to Clinton and Obama (I have serious doubts about his campaigning skills), and any Democrat vastly preferable to any Republican.

    Thanks for the link, BTW – I see you guys Technorati’ed on practically every WaPo story I read, but I’m usually at work, so…

    What always boils my aargh is that itís somehow more hypocritical to be a rich person who cares about the poor than a moral scold who cheats on his wife.

    How about a war supporter who won’t serve, nor urge any family members to serve?

  • 5. ellroon  |  September 19th, 2007 at 11:38 pm

    Bring up FDR. Roosevelt was filthy rich yet did more for the poor than anyone. (No wonder the rich hated him.)


Contact Eli





Feeds

Linkedelia!

Most Recent Posts

Archives

Categories

Calendar

September 2007
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930


Thinking Blogger

Pittsburgh Webloggers

Site Meter


View My Stats *