Edwards: One Of The Americas Can Engage In Conspicuous Consumption
John Edwards got a big round of applause from union workers in Florida when he shared his policy direction on the environment. He told the crowd that Americans should be prepared to sacrifice, and the first sacrifice should be the sports-utility vehicles that American drivers prefer:
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards told a labor group that he would ask Americans to make a big sacrifice: their sport utility vehicles."I think Americans are actually willing to sacrifice," Edwards said Tuesday during a forum held by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "One of the things they should be asked to do is drive more fuel efficient vehicles."
The former North Carolina senator was asked specifically if he would tell them to give up their SUVs, he said, "Yes."
Well, SUVs have been the target of environmentalists for years, even as most of them have become more efficient. They make great targets, after all, with less-than optimal gas mileage and their size on the road making them easy to spot. They're also popular with Americans, including the Sierra Club, which fetched Arianna Huffington in one model for a 2005 appearance -- three years after she started a jeremiad against the "metal monstrosities".
But that's not the entire story about Edwards' call for sacrifice. One union member asked the candidate why other Americans have to sacrifice while Edwards' family sucks up energy and space in a 28,000-square-foot mansion. Edwards drew himself up in righteous indignation:
He said he came from nothing, worked hard all his life, has always supported workers and fought big corporations as a lawyer."I have no apologies whatsoever for what I've done with my life," he said to loud cheers. "My entire life has been about the same cause, which is making sure wherever you come from, whatever your family is, whatever the color of your skin, you get a real chance to do something great in this country."
Oh, okay. If one accepts the notion that Edwards came from "nothing" -- his father had a pretty decent job while Edwards grew up -- then it's acceptable and even laudable to engage in conspicuous consumption. Edwards must think that he purchased the sacrifice offsets as a kid, and now can use them to take a pass on the same sacrifices on which he will insist if elected President. He can criticize the decisions of ordinary Americans in purchasing their vehicles with concern to safety, but don't dare criticize his decision to live in a house the size of Luxembourg.
Most Americans work hard for their money. Most of them would make the kind of sacrifices that Edwards asks if the country really needed them. It's impossible to take that kind of demand seriously from a rich personal-injury lawyer standing in front of his enormous mansion. (h/t: CQ reader Roger B)
Posted by Ed Morrissey on August 29, 2007 7:03 AM | Comments (33) | TrackBacks (2)
Comments (33)
Posted by NoDonkey | August 29, 2007 7:31 AM
Whom exactly would Edwards like to see purchase the vehicles? Martians?
Because if anyone else buys them, they're still going to be on this planet. Or is he too stupid to realize that? Or is he stupid enough to think that those who have purchased these SUVs, can afford to park them and eat the cost?
Why doesn't Mr. Deep Pockets here and rich as kings buddies, start a foundation to buy these vehicles and get them off the roads, then?
Oh yes, that would take actual effort and work. Not something an unqualified, unaccomplished lightweight, shyster fop is apt to do.
Posted by steve sturm | August 29, 2007 7:34 AM
Being someone who didn't have things handed to me on a platter, I (tongue in cheek) totally buy into Edwards' line that working hard gives me a free pass to consume away (as I happily do).
And by extension, the Ted Kennedy's who did have everything handed to him ought to forfeit their large houses, SUVs, private plane rides and so on.
Posted by bulbasaur | August 29, 2007 7:44 AM
Soccer moms everywhere, John Edwards has just thrown the gauntlet down against you.
Still, I sympathize with Edwards, because he's taking all the heat by issuing specific proposals. Has Hillary said anything definitive about what she believes about any issue yet? No, and the fact is, her strategy is to say nothing and get swept in office by default, and it seems like it's going to work.
Poor John.
Posted by Bennett | August 29, 2007 7:47 AM
I don't know if he really did come from nothing or not but if he did, he hasn't made all that much progress because he's still nothing.
Except a schmuck, a complete schmuck. He can get rich and spend his money on whatever he wants but the rest of us can't?
If I thought this guy had any chance at all of becoming President, I might actually start to get a little worried.
Posted by Larry J | August 29, 2007 7:49 AM
"Do as I say, not as I do" is the classic definition of a hypocrit. It fits Edwards and many of his ilk to a "t".
Posted by ZeteBoy | August 29, 2007 8:02 AM
I hope that Bennett knows what a schmuck really is. If he knew he might use a different word to describe Edwards.
Posted by Bennett | August 29, 2007 8:43 AM
"The word schmuck refers to the foreskin of the head of the a penis and has become common in American English meaning a detestable person, or a jerk. The word also means a stupid or idiotic person." (Wikipedia)
I was taught my Yiddish by very reliable people.
Posted by John | August 29, 2007 8:47 AM
The trailer I grew up in didn't even have axles, much less wheels. Edwards grew up in a house with a foundation; he would have been a rich kid in the community I grew up in.
Posted by John | August 29, 2007 8:52 AM
The trailer I grew up in didn't even have axles, much less wheels. Edwards grew up in a house with a foundation; he would have been a rich kid in the community I grew up in.
Posted by Paul | August 29, 2007 8:53 AM
Ms. Edwards,
Why don't you go to Follywood (home of the big donors) and your fellow poleechticians and preach to those multi-millionaires and billionaires about giving up their SUVs, yachts, private planes, helicopters, limos, mansions, and other sundry fuel-guzzling toys.
Please, Ms. Edwards, it would be wonderful if you and your ilk could set a positive example for those of us who were born on the wrong side of the tracks of your two Americas.
Posted by Paul | August 29, 2007 8:58 AM
Ms. Edwards,
Why don't you go to Follywood (home of the big donors) and your fellow poleechticians and preach to those multi-millionaires and billionaires about giving up their SUVs, yachts, private planes, helicopters, limos, mansions, and other sundry fuel-guzzling toys.
Please, Ms. Edwards, it would be wonderful if you and your ilk could set a positive example for those of us who were born on the wrong side of the tracks of your two Americas.
Posted by JeanneB | August 29, 2007 9:02 AM
He said he came from nothing, worked hard all his life, has always supported workers and fought big corporations as a lawyer.
How much you want to bet that one of the way Edwards appealed to juries was by describing how those "greedy corporate officers" lived in big houses and rode around in chauffered SUV's?! Not only that, it irks me to no end the way lawyers depict their "work" as sooooo noble, hoping no one will notice they got filthy rich while "looking out for the little guy". We're supposed to believe he wasn't doing it for the money...ha!
Further, what does he have to say to those of us who rely on our SUV for our work? I haul construction materials every day...I suspect a large part of his target audience does the same.
Lastly, imagine what would happen if he did succeed in getting SUV's removed. We'd all be driving featherweight vehicles, traffic fatalities would go up, then---because he's so concerned---he would demand lower speed limits.
Sheesh. I wish these guys would stop looking out for me.
Posted by Paul | August 29, 2007 9:03 AM
Ms. Edwards,
Why don't you go to Follywood (home of the big donors) and your fellow poleechticians and preach to those multi-millionaires and billionaires about giving up their SUVs, yachts, private planes, helicopters, limos, mansions, and other sundry fuel-guzzling toys.
Please, Ms. Edwards, it would be wonderful if you and your ilk could set a positive example for those of us who were born on the wrong side of the tracks of your two Americas.
Posted by pianoman | August 29, 2007 9:18 AM
Not sure where I read it first, but it still applies:
I'll believe global warming is a crisis when the people who say it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis.
Posted by 186 | August 29, 2007 9:34 AM
"Sacrifice Offsets" I love it!
Too bad most of today's members of the left have NO IDEA what sacrifice is but they keep living the mantra, as long as you "feel" less than or unappreciated you have a right to grab an extra cookie from the guy sitting next to you.
Posted by A Parent | August 29, 2007 9:37 AM
Riddle me this, Mr. Edwards.
We have two small children (ages 1 and 3), and are thinking about having another. We already own two of the enormous car seats that the nanny state (and, to a degree, trial lawyers) requires. As it is, they barely fit into a "normal car". If we have a third, an SUV or some other huge vehicle is the only thing that can accomodate. So what are we to do?
Or are you going to tell us that we aren't allowed to have a third child?
Posted by burt | August 29, 2007 9:42 AM
Ed, Luxemburg is probably a little larger; maybe Monte Carlo.
JeanneB, he will not be demanding lower speed limits; he will be suing big pockets: state governments for speed limits and automobile manufacturers for dangerous vehicles.
Posted by holdfast | August 29, 2007 9:44 AM
Growing up, my family were (lower) middle class, but my folks did not care about cars - they drove small, unstylish old cars, and spent their money on good food, education and travel. Thanks to their sacrifice I have been quite succesful in my career. Since I spent my youth collecting "cool car offsets" I know fee justified in trading in my Trailblazer for a Yukon XLT or an Nissan Armada - thanks John!
Posted by holdfast | August 29, 2007 9:46 AM
Growing up, my family were (lower) middle class, but my folks did not care about cars - they drove small, unstylish old cars, and spent their money on good food, education and travel. Thanks to their sacrifice I have been quite succesful in my career. Since I spent my youth collecting "cool car offsets" I know fee justified in trading in my Trailblazer for a Yukon XLT or an Nissan Armada - thanks John!
Posted by DCM | August 29, 2007 9:59 AM
Edwards shows why most gutless politicians do not give any details of how they intend to effectuate their hot air policies. It's the old cliche about "Better to keep quiet and let everyone think you're an idiot than to open your mouth and prove it".
Posted by David M | August 29, 2007 10:17 AM
Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 08/29/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.
Posted by essucht | August 29, 2007 11:58 AM
It amazes me how these leftists can get away with this constant hypocrisy (it certainly isn't just Edwards). As a point of comparison, imagine if the leaders of the pro-life movement were constantly being caught procuring abortions for their mistresses, and rather then slinking off into the shadows, loudly proclaimed that their political work excused their private activities?!?
Hypocrisy is an easy charge, and no one is perfect, but the level that the western left revels in it is astounding...
As pianoman said so very well;
I'll believe global warming is a crisis when the people who say it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis.
Posted by essucht | August 29, 2007 12:03 PM
It amazes me how these leftists can get away with this constant hypocrisy (it certainly isn't just Edwards). As a point of comparison, imagine if the leaders of the pro-life movement were constantly being caught procuring abortions for their mistresses, and rather then slinking off into the shadows, loudly proclaimed that their political work excused their private activities?!?
Hypocrisy is an easy charge, and no one is perfect, but the level that the western left revels in it is astounding...
As pianoman said so very well;
I'll believe global warming is a crisis when the people who say it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis.
Posted by essucht | August 29, 2007 12:05 PM
It amazes me how these leftists can get away with this constant hypocrisy (it certainly isn't just Edwards). As a point of comparison, imagine if the leaders of the pro-life movement were constantly being caught procuring abortions for their mistresses, and rather then slinking off into the shadows, loudly proclaimed that their political work excused their private activities?!?
Hypocrisy is an easy charge, and no one is perfect, but the level that the western left revels in it is astounding...
As pianoman said so very well;
I'll believe global warming is a crisis when the people who say it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis.
Posted by Patrick | August 29, 2007 12:15 PM
Y'know, I don't think I've ever seen anyone run any campaign, be it so small county Dogcatcher, as incompetently as Edwards. Leave competely aside any policy proposals he may have - can he talk anywhere without sounding like a complete narcissist?
Posted by essucht | August 29, 2007 12:19 PM
It amazes me how these leftists can get away with this constant hypocrisy (it certainly isn't just Edwards). As a point of comparison, imagine if the leaders of the pro-life movement were constantly being caught procuring abortions for their mistresses, and rather then slinking off into the shadows, loudly proclaimed that their political work excused their private activities?!?
Hypocrisy is an easy charge, and no one is perfect, but the level that the western left revels in it is astounding...
As pianoman said so very well;
I'll believe global warming is a crisis when the people who say it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis.
Posted by Paul Milenkovic | August 29, 2007 12:21 PM
What I don't understand is railing against SUV's before a union audience? Don't their union brothers and sisters make SUV's, like the Yukon in the GM plant in Janesville, Wisconsin and many others?
Posted by Nony Mouse | August 29, 2007 4:33 PM
I believe, pianoman, that I first read that over on instapundit. And I agree with both that and Ed's sentiments above: you can't take these guys seriously when their actions shout that they don't believe the words they mouth.
Posted by obladioblada | August 29, 2007 4:46 PM
I'm not sure the United Auto Workers would give his suggestion as warm a welcome. Wonder what his opinion will be in Detroit.
Posted by Only One Cannoli | August 29, 2007 6:36 PM
I've heard enough from Edwards to form the opinion that he's a complete shmoo. Why that's not obvious to everyone I don't know. This is a telling little moment.
Edwards preparing to speak to his admirers in 2003:
Nice, eh?
Posted by the fly-man | August 30, 2007 6:44 AM
Well, could one of you define Rich for me? I'd love to have a definitive answer on just where you draw the line between doing well and Rich? Any takers, Ed?
Posted by the fly-man | August 30, 2007 6:57 AM
Quote: "It's impossible to take that kind of demand seriously from a rich personal-injury lawyer standing in front of his enormous mansion." END. So if the average wealthy guy like Rudy, or Fred, or Mitt asked the same of us, in some photo op ideal scene,would somehow be more genuine? Cap'n Ed did Myrna Blyth write that for you? Go back and read your quote again and again, its' failure to hold any water of logic is astounding.
Posted by fouse, gary c | August 30, 2007 6:34 PM
John Edwards for president? NO!
With the campaign getting underway, I've been thinking about doing blogs of the major candidates of both parties. Since, I need to do some more homework on several of the candidates, I thought I would start off one by one.
In the interest of full disclosure, I belong to no party. I am an independent (small case "i"). Being of the conservative persuasion, I have always voted Republican, and I will almost certainly do so in 2008 since the Democrats have gone so far to the left that I consider them dangerous for America. So don't be surprised when I slam the Democratic candidates. Anyway, speaking of slamming, I will start off with John Edwards.
Edwards, as he is fond of telling everyone, grew up as the son of a simple millworker. He was fortunate enough to be able to go to college and get his law degree, in spite of his humble beginnings (a testament to the greatness of America, one of the few places in the world where poor people can rise to the top through traditional and legal means).
Edwards went on to become one of North Carolina's most successful trial lawyers, specializing in personal injury cases, suing doctors and hospitals for malfeasance and collecting huge settlements. Thus, he became fabulously wealthy. Some have criticized his trial tactics of using questionable science to convince juries of his cases.
From law, Edwards went on to politics, becoming a US Senator in 1998 before suddenly emerging as John Kerry's VP running mate in 2004. This after an unsucessful primary campaign for the presidential nomination. During the campaign, Edwards' theme was "two Americas" (one being the America of fat cat George Bush and his cronies, the other America consisting of "po folks" like him, I guess). The irony of one of the richest men in North Carolina complaining about Republican "fat cats" was not lost on most Americans.
Losing the election and out of his Senate job, Edwards returned to North Carolina to lick his wounds and prepare for the next go-around. Now he is back, repositioned to the far left of the Democratic presidential candidates and again showing his hypocritical nature. To be sure, he is hardly considered the favorite, running behind Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. In addition, he has suffered some embarassing bumps in the road.
First there was the issue of 2 far-left bloggers he had hired to work his websites. Turns out, both of these ladies had a paper trail of harsh and profane comments about Christians. When a public furor followed, Edwards made more moves than OJ Simpson in his pre-murderer days, first disowning the statements, then dancing back and forth between firing the gals or giving them another chance. Seems the Move-On.org crowd protested against any firings. Anyway, after weeks passed, the ladies resigned, then went out writing a flurry of articles slamming the right-wing conspiracy and the Bushies for the loss of their jobs. Edwards, meanwhile, showed the public that he had questionable leadership and decision-making skills.
Then his wife Elizabeth announced that she had unfortunately suffered a relapse of cancer. Edwards' decision to continue the campaign rather than drop out met with stern disapproval from certain quarters, who saw blind ambition, while others defended the decision as courageous.
Then came the $400 haircut (billed to the Edwards campaign no less). Once again, conservative pundits had a field day pointing out the hypocrisy of the man they had already been referring to as "the Breck Girl". Of course, "Po Folks" Johnny hastened to make it right by "correcting the billing error".
Finally, just a few days ago, he told interviewers that, if elected, he would deal with Islamic terrorism by doing the following:
Reorganize the military ( ala Carter and Clinton?)
Meet with his leading generals !?!? (That would be revolutionary.)
Create a "Marshall Corps" of 10,000 volunteers, who would go to the Middle East and work to eliminate poverty and provide clean drinking water.
Maybe Edwards will go on to win the Democratic nomination- with the Dems, nothing would surprise me. But in a general election, I think he will have a hard time convincing Americans that he is anything more than an ambitious, hypocritical lightweight, who doesn't have what it takes to face America's enemies.
gary fouse
fousesquawk (june post)