Edwards gives the speech of a Lifetime...

Superfreak said:
"The $1.3 million the group raised and spent in 2005 paid for travel, including Mr. Edwards’s “Opportunity Rocks” tour of 10 college campuses, consultants and a Web operation. In addition, some $540,000 went for the “exploration of new ideas,” according to tax filings. "

How do you spend $1.3 million travelling to 10 colleges? $130k per college? Lets fight poverty!
Click to expand...

Wow, what a stupid claim SF. You better take a nap.

The organization, the Center for Promise and Opportunity, raised $1.3 million in 2005

So let's see, the organization raised a total of 1.3 million, and because a whore opinion writer put out a little crumb for you with some clever wording, saying "here SF , here SF" you went along and didn' use your noodle huh?

Because if 1.3 million of the 1.3 million raised was spent on travel, who the fuck paid for the salaries you are bitching about?

DUHH

That's why it's a hit piece. She has not told you how much was spent on travel. She has only desperately attempted to word it so that you believe 1.3 million was all spent on Edwards. Yet, if only 1.3 million was raised, that is clearly impossible.

So, how much WAS spent on travel, and more importantly, as she refused to interview citizens who claim they personally benefitted from this program, how much was spent on POVERTY?????
 
Superfreak said:
"The $1.3 million the group raised and spent in 2005 paid for travel, including Mr. Edwards’s “Opportunity Rocks” tour of 10 college campuses, consultants and a Web operation. In addition, some $540,000 went for the “exploration of new ideas,” according to tax filings. "

How do you spend $1.3 million travelling to 10 colleges? $130k per college? Lets fight poverty!
Click to expand...


Your own quote, shows that not all of the $1.3 million merely went to pay for lectures at ten campuses. It paid for a lot of other stuff too. It wasn't just spent on ten lectures and ten campuses.
 
How did this post turn into a post about who pays him at UNC and away from the substance of his class warfare speech?
 
Cypress said:
Your own quote, shows that not all of the $1.3 million merely went to pay for lectures at ten campuses. It paid for a lot of other stuff too. It wasn't just spent on ten lectures and ten campuses.
Click to expand...

Another quote from your article:

"He founded the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina, which provided him with a platform. In return, he raised $3 million to sustain it."


So Edwards raised three times as much money, as was spent by him and staff on functions.

Edwards was hired by UNC as a professor, contrary to your earlier denials.

Edwards gave about 6 times more to charity, than Bush (who's net worth is similar to edwards.)


Look, if you don't like edwards, just say so. Its really pathetic, that you're claiming this is all grand hypocrisy, and boderline criminal acts.
 
Darla said:
Wow, what a stupid claim SF. You better take a nap.

The organization, the Center for Promise and Opportunity, raised $1.3 million in 2005

So let's see, the organization raised a total of 1.3 million, and because a whore opinion writer put out a little crumb for you with some clever wording, saying "here SF , here SF" you went along and didn' use your noodle huh?

Because if 1.3 million of the 1.3 million raised was spent on travel, who the fuck paid for the salaries you are bitching about?

DUHH

That's why it's a hit piece. She has not told you how much was spent on travel. She has only desperately attempted to word it so that you believe 1.3 million was all spent on Edwards. Yet, if only 1.3 million was raised, that is clearly impossible.

So, how much WAS spent on travel, and more importantly, as she refused to interview citizens who claim they personally benefitted from this program, how much was spent on POVERTY?????
Click to expand...


Ouch. this has to hurt. ;)
 
Darla said:
Wow, what a stupid claim SF. You better take a nap.

The organization, the Center for Promise and Opportunity, raised $1.3 million in 2005

So let's see, the organization raised a total of 1.3 million, and because a whore opinion writer put out a little crumb for you with some clever wording, saying "here SF , here SF" you went along and didn' use your noodle huh?

Because if 1.3 million of the 1.3 million raised was spent on travel, who the fuck paid for the salaries you are bitching about?

DUHH

That's why it's a hit piece. She has not told you how much was spent on travel. She has only desperately attempted to word it so that you believe 1.3 million was all spent on Edwards. Yet, if only 1.3 million was raised, that is clearly impossible.

So, how much WAS spent on travel, and more importantly, as she refused to interview citizens who claim they personally benefitted from this program, how much was spent on POVERTY?????
Click to expand...

Read it again Darla.... this is but one of FOUR little skirt-the-law funds Edwards established. The salary he took from the poverty center. The article did state that over $500k went to "new ideas" and the rest that was raised in 2005 was spent on travel/"consultants"/web operation.

"The $1.3 million the group raised and spent in 2005 paid for travel, including Mr. Edwards’s “Opportunity Rocks” tour of 10 college campuses, consultants and a Web operation. In addition, some $540,000 went for the “exploration of new ideas,” according to tax filings. "
 
"John Edwards ended 2004 with a problem: how to keep alive his public profile without the benefit of a presidential campaign that could finance his travels and pay for his political staff. Mr. Edwards, who reported this year that he had assets of nearly $30 million, came up with a novel solution, creating a nonprofit organization with the stated mission of fighting poverty. . ."

Darla's right.

This is piss-poor journalism. It tabloid. It wanders off into the realm of mind-reading and guessing. The blanket assertion is made that the Edwards "came up with a solution" (using the poverty program to finance his prez campaign). Did Edwards, his wife, or somebody on his staff make this admission on or off the record? I doubt it. The journalist is inserting his own guess, or mind-reading abilities, for actual fact.
 
Jesus Christ, I can't believe I read that whole article, only to find out buried in the last paragraph, that edwards didn't do anything wrong

Great journalism. Set up the piece like there's something shady going on, and then bury in your conclusion that there's no evidence of wrongdoing.

Laughable.

"Nonprofit groups can engage in political activities and not endanger their tax-exempt status so long as those activities are not its primary purpose. But the line between a bona fide charity and a political campaign is often fuzzy, said Marcus S. Owens, a Washington lawyer who headed the Internal Revenue Service division that oversees nonprofit agencies.

“I can’t say that what Mr. Edwards did was wrong,” Mr. Owens said. “But he was working right up to the line. Who knows whether he stepped or stumbled over it. But he was close enough that if a wind was blowing hard, he’d fall over it.”
Click to expand...
 
Cypress said:
"John Edwards ended 2004 with a problem: how to keep alive his public profile without the benefit of a presidential campaign that could finance his travels and pay for his political staff. Mr. Edwards, who reported this year that he had assets of nearly $30 million, came up with a novel solution, creating a nonprofit organization with the stated mission of fighting poverty. . ."

Darla's right.

This is piss-poor journalism. It tabloid. It wanders off into the realm of mind-reading and guessing. The blanket assertion is made that the Edwards "came up with a solution" (using the poverty program to finance his prez campaign). Did Edwards, his wife, or somebody on his staff make this admission on or off the record? I doubt it. The journalist is inserting his own guess, or mind-reading abilities, for actual fact.
Click to expand...
I believe it is called an editorial, and I don't think the NY Times is a tabloid...

:rolleyes:
 
Damocles said:
Nope, it was in the U.S. Politics section, and it is an editorial.
Click to expand...

Damo, I just checked:

Its in the Policial NEWS section of the paper.

A lot of papers divide their news up into Local/National/International/Politics/Science/Whatever.

Ask Darla. This is a news piece. Not an editorial.
 
Damocles said:
I believe it is called an editorial, and I don't think the NY Times is a tabloid...

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, this appeared in the news section, not the op-ed pages. That's what is so alarming. And it's things like this that convince me the corporate owned media does not want Edwards even within sniffing distance of the WH. Which you know, is a good enough endorsement of Edwards for this simple girl.
 
Cypress said:
this wasn't an editorial.

It was a front page NEWS piece, wasn't it?
Click to expand...

Right, and yes it appeared on the front pages. It caused a lot of noise. The Times had to know it was going to, and they took the hit. Hitting Edwards like this, was important enough to them to take the hit on their credibility, which after the Iraqi debacle ain't much anyway.
 
Darla said:
Believe it or not, this appeared in the news section, not the op-ed pages. That's what is so alarming. And it's things like this that convince me the corporate owned media does not want Edwards even within sniffing distance of the WH. Which you know, is a good enough endorsement of Edwards for this simple girl.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't accept that as an endorsement or not. I do not believe that class warfare is such a winning proposition, nor do I see the facts in the article pointing to the organization actually battling poverty, it seems that they indeed have created a unique solution around campaign finance laws.
 
Darla said:
Right, and yes it appeared on the front pages. It caused a lot of noise. The Times had to know it was going to, and they took the hit. Hitting Edwards like this, was important enough to them to take the hit on their credibility, which after the Iraqi debacle ain't much anyway.
Click to expand...
You said it appeared in Politics News. That's on the front page of the NY Times? Wow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top