Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
|
First, just a point to see if there is consistency in the logic against my point.
Edwards says the use of "Gobal war on terror" is political and pretty much a marketing gimmick to mislead.
Quote:
|
This is a political frame and political rhetoric. They use it to justify everything they do. They use that language to justify the war in Iraq. They use it to justify Guantanamo. They use it to justify torture. They use it to justify illegal spying on the American people.
|
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/5/2/173657/3999
I say Edwards being the "poverty candidate" is political and pretty much a marketing gimmick to mislead.
What is the difference?
I meant prima facia, on its face the evidence supports Edwards being a hypocrit, short of contradictory evidence.
Edwards is a multi-millionaire and does no more than the average millionaire in his class.
Edwards got rich collecting fees from judgements and settlements directed to poor people. Edwards was a hired gun, and did what most attonies would do. He was never know for pro-bono work above the norm.
Edwards lives an exorbitant life style.
Edwards is running for President and needs a cause that seperates him from the rest of the pack.
Edwards collects exorbitant fees for speaking about poverty to students.
Edwards has no track record as a former senetor where he championed the cause of the poor.
Perhaps, you will ignore those issues, I don't.
I guess I am not the only one who suspects Edwards is a phoney. Bob Shrum a former Edwards campaign manager has written a book. Here is quote from a reviewer of Shrum's book:
Quote:
|
That surely helps to explain why No Excuses repeatedly portrays Edwards as a hyper-ambitious phony.
|
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=QwYl...AfneMYn2%3D%3D
Ouch!
Want to keep ignoring the gorilla?