Unlike the gang over at NRO, when I hear a man is building a 28,000 square foot house for himself, I don’t say “Good for him.” Call me a Puritan, but there are limits to what a man actually needs on Earth.
But I do share their repugnance at John Edwards’ monumental hypocrisy. Someone who goes around bloviating about two Americas should at least pay some attention to the appearance of his personal lifestyle, especially when running for President. The energy costs of a 28,000 foot MacMansion alone should give him pause, let alone the aesthetics. And let’s not get started about Katrina.
So I have a recommendation for him. He should do what the Hollywood stars do when people start to criticize their private jets and multi-million dollar residences in Malibu, Vail, etc. He should buy a Prius!
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
27 Comments
1. promoguy:Edwards lied, poor people died.
Jan 29, 2007 - 10:41 am 2. Hoodlumman:If it was any bigger, it’d be a Wal-Mart. And we all know how much Edwards loves to bash Wal-Mart.
Jan 29, 2007 - 11:23 am 3. Godzilla:Hey, Edwards, don’t forget to check that your maintenance men have green cards. BTW, destroyed quite a bit of environment building that thing, dincha? How does it feel to have your guts hanging out, dribbling all over your chin? You pig.
Jan 29, 2007 - 11:39 am 4. jedrury:28,000 square feet to match his ego.
Jan 29, 2007 - 11:44 am 5. JK Ribera:This is an indication that Edwards doesn’t really want to be President. Anyone running a populist campaign like he is – and was serious about winning – wouldn’t do something like this and this time.
Jan 29, 2007 - 11:45 am 6. Bob_R:I’ve been in Wal-Marts smaller than 28,000 sq.ft.
Jan 29, 2007 - 11:58 am 7. stu:Once he becomes President he intends to shelter all the homeless there. At least I assume that’s why he built such a mansion.
Jan 29, 2007 - 12:07 pm 8. Connecticut Yankee:He just wants to offer suitable accommodations when Tehrayza and the Boy-Toy come to visit, dontcha know.
Jan 29, 2007 - 12:56 pm 9. Terrye:The local courthouse is not 28,000 sq feet. In fact I doubt if there is a 28,000 sq feet home in the county I live in.
But then again I live in rural Indiana, you know that other America. The one where poor folks live.
Conspicious consumption carried to a comical extreme.
Jan 29, 2007 - 1:01 pm 10. Rhod:I’ve heard that the diving board on the money bin cost over fifty grand.
Jan 29, 2007 - 1:19 pm 11. Rhod:Oh yes, I’ve wondered if he just needs space to entertain American Number One.
Jan 29, 2007 - 1:21 pm 12. Lem:John Edwards is very proud of the American system of jurist prudence witch has afforded him a modest log cabin in the woods.
You people should be ashamed of yourselves
Jan 29, 2007 - 2:14 pm 13. ricpic:Given Edwards considerable experience gulling juries, it may be that he has a better fix on what impresses the average American shlub than do those on this thread expressing their outrage at his hypocrisy. He may have calculated that treating himself to a MacMonstroMansh will garner him extra credit with the mediocre masses, for the sheer gall of it, if for nothing else. And you know what? He may well be right.
Jan 29, 2007 - 4:50 pm 14. Ray Zacek:In the words of the “simple barefoot mouthpiece” from the musical, Chicago:
It’s all a circus, kid. A three ring circus. This trial – the whole world – all show business. But kid, you’re working with a star, the biggest!
Give ‘em the old razzle dazzle
Jan 29, 2007 - 4:54 pm 15. valjean:Razzle dazzle ‘em
Give ‘em act with lots of flash in it
And the reaction will be passionate
Give ‘em the old hocus pocus
Bread and feather ‘em
How can they see with sequins in their eyes?
Great posts all, and no argument — but an unpleasant reminder: it’s late January 2007. What odds would you give than *anyone* — and I mean any individual reporter — following Mr. Edwards nascent campaign a year from now is going to pin him on this spread he just bought?
Given the otherworldy hypocrisy evidenced by our politicians today (”how much jet fuel are you using to save the planet, Mr. Gore?”) maybe reporters avoid this kind of easy swipe out of simple fatigue or not wanting to be stigmitized. But mark my words: John “Two Americas” Edwards will get away with this; the electorate that matters to him will forget anyway.
And I wouldn’t vote for the blow-dried creep if he lived in a tin shack.
Jan 29, 2007 - 8:04 pm 16. mikem:Edward’s image aside (although I agree with you there also), I think that it is nice to have enough space for some privacy. But huge homes are not good for child rearing. I think a family works better, and children benefit more, when they routinely need to interact. Also, I think “security”, or however a child senses that feeling, is second only to health (maybe first, actually) in importance and you need some coziness to reap that benefit.
Jan 29, 2007 - 8:23 pm 17. PC14:He needs the closet space to hand all those empty suits.
Jan 29, 2007 - 8:26 pm 18. Rhod:ricpic:
“…the average American shlub”? You people used to have the courtesy to call him The Common Man. What’s changed?
Jan 30, 2007 - 3:30 am 19. ricpic:Rhod:
Didn’t you know? The Common Man is code for Dumb Shmuck. Shlub represented self-restraint on my part.
Jan 30, 2007 - 7:09 am 20. TheManTheMyth:The average American is at best ignorant and uninvolved, at worst stupid (see Rhod). There is no other explanation for any liberal ever getting elected to anything in this day and age. Then again, the average Amercian is no worse in that regard than the “average” citizen of any and every country throughout human history. This is why democracy is easily the worst system of government except for evey other one that’s ever been tried….
Jan 30, 2007 - 7:23 am 21. Rhod:The Man:
Am I stupid, or have I misread your post? I’m just cautious about the view that the intelligence or interests of the “average American” is the problem with American government. It’s the intelligence and interests of our elected fools that’s the problem, and they’re not elected through the dimwittery of Americans at large. They’re elected by people who know exactly what they’re doing.
We have other problems beside politics. There’s almost nothing that qualifies as high culture anymore, which is a multi-layered problem involving morals, taste, education and a list of other qualities we no longer take seriously. Politics is way down the line of destructive influences. America is dying from the inside out.
That’s my deepest concern, not that the proles are too stupid and vulgar to apprehend the difficulties of governing. They’re too stupid and vulgar to learn and appreciate anything. I’m happy they don’t vote. It’s progressives who want them to, and when I hear some egalitarian rant about participatory democracy alongside the realities of American life, I want to close my head in the door.
Jan 30, 2007 - 9:10 am 22. JDFlanagan:At 28,000 square ft., it’s not a McMansion, it’s just a mansion.
Jan 30, 2007 - 11:22 am 23. Buddy Larsen:Well, at least, come the revolution, thousands of unemployed small-town MDs and their doctorless erstwhile patients, put out of the health system by the insurance industry’s reaction to the lord of the mansion’s tactic of deft and cynical jury demagoguing, will know where to find him, in their midnight pitchfork-and-torch, tar-and-feathers rage.
Jan 30, 2007 - 2:56 pm 24. scott:28,000 sq. feet….Nancy Pelosi’s closet space?
Jan 31, 2007 - 1:23 am 25. Steven Mitchell:Yeah, I think a house that big is stupid for anyone, but it’s his choice. However, I’m not sure if the hypocrisy is more annoying or the MSM’s refusal to call him on it. People with no class will only attempt to hide their deficiency if someone calls them on it.
As an aside, I’ve always been interested in home design for 30 years. I like a bit of room. I could never afford it, but I can think of a few things that I’d squeeze into, say, a 5,000 square foot house that would get left out of a 2000-2500 square foot house. I’ve seen plans for even 8,000 square feet that had “the basics” plus a bit more–merely poorly designed. But after that, what do you actually put into such a house? Maybe I can’t stand the poor designs, but I can’t think of anything useful. Even a home theatre system, a bowling alley, an indoor pool, and a small gym would fit easily under 8,000.
Feb 1, 2007 - 9:09 am 26. rippleflats:John Edwards comment re: “The war on terror is a bumper sticker slogan”. Does this not then qualify him as a mere “SPEED BUMP” in the road to the Presidency???
Aug 9, 2007 - 2:07 pm 27. Stephen Martin:No matter what you say about John Edwards being able to buy a mansion in NC for what he sold his Georgetown home for after leaving the Senate to avoid capital gains tax – still a questionable decision, there are still two Americas and the gap between the rich and the poor has increased every year since the Reagan presidency. Have the rich worked somehow worked harder than anyone else or have the Republican and Democratic administrations worked it so the rich get richer (even the Clinton roaring ’90’s increased middle-class incomes only marginally).
From the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office figures (from 2005): In 1979 the share of national after-tax income going to the top 1 percent of households was around 7.5%. By 2005, the figure had more than doubled to 15.6 percent. Indeed, the number went from 14.0 to 15.6 from 2004 to 2005 alone (they must have really worked harder that year!). So much for “trickle-down” economics. Worker productivity has gone up but not shares of national wealth for the middle and lower income classes.
At this rate, how can anyone running for president not point this out?
Feb 3, 2008 - 9:14 am