The Edwards home uses solar energy.

[madfloridian]

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/1/28/172744/545

"Yes, John and Elizabeth have made a lot of money, and good for them. The fact that they can afford to build a very nice home -- and they paid attention to energy conservation in the process -- demonstrates the opportunity to succeed that exists in America. When people take advantage of what America offers, they have an obligation to ensure that the country that gave them that chance remains strong and just and takes care of all of its people.

I don't know why anyone would hold it against someone, from a working class background, who has done very well financially but obviously remembers where he came from and is drawing attention to the plight of those who are far less fortunate.

There are plenty of examples in the Republican Party of people who are filthy rich (and often were born with a silver spoon) who don't give a rat's ass about poor people. I certainly am not going to criticize someone who is actually out there working to help the poor and the disadvantaged, just because he happens to have succeeded financially."

And this post by Elizabeth Edwards tells more about it.

http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/1/26/15303/2358

"Since we were building a home in Orange County, we decided to take advantage of some of the technology that President Carter had encouraged.

All the water (all of which comes from wells) in our home and some of the flooring is heated with solar energy.

We built a highly energy efficient house. In fact, our home is Energy-Star rated. Energy Star is an EPA regulated designation for homes that are at least 30 percent more efficient than the national Model Energy Code. In building we made sure we had effective insulation in floors, walls, and attics. We chose efficient heating and cooling equipment and high-performance windows. Our builder paid close attention to making sure the construction was tight to seal out drafts and moisture. The day the independent inspector came to evaluate the house, we were on pins and needles while he tested our home's energy performance. As he packed his equipment, he gave us the good news: we are an Energy-Star home! "

" Tomorrow is the first One Corps Day of Energy Action. Our family is headed to Scranton, Pennsylvania, to help winterize a home. One Corps groups throughout the country will be undertaking service projects in their communities. I urge you all to join the One Corps nearest you, to start a One Corps near you if you don't have one, or to take it on yourself to be active on energy tomorrow. Maybe it is helping to winterize a house, or maybe it just means changing a few bulbs. But, as President Carter understood, progress happens when all of us act individually and together to reach our common goals.
See you tomorrow!"

[Hekate]

1. I like John and Elizabeth Edwards. Kick this post

:hi:
:kick:

Hekate

[sandnsea]

2. That's sweet

$3860, $2700 after federal solar credit

Nice, hot water uses lots of power, but not much of an effort.

Solar Field - for those who are serious about renewable energy

[Porcupine]

3. This is such a feeble greenwash.....

Let me repost from another thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=51019&mesg_id=63152

the "little note" by Elizabeth Edwards doesn't pass the smell test.

When you are building a new house of this size your architect and designer get together and "design" the lighting. The fixtures are sized and placed for certain effects in each room. Rarely in custom houses over 3000 sq. ft. is the lighting design compatible with 15 watt fluorescents. Usually there are a great many can lights, 15 watt candle bulbs and sometimes DC micro-lights.

In a place that size it would take 2-3 HOURS just to confirm that all the switches worked and turned on the lights they were supposed to. The Edwards never touch a light bulb; their staff takes care of it. Therefore it's cheaper to have lighting techs come in and switch out all possible bulbs at once due to the hassles with ladders etc.

The biggest savings the Edwards will realize in switching to fluorescents is staff time because they will replace bulbs every few years instead of every six months. The cost of the electricity pales in comparison.

In another thread somebody mentioned that Elizabeth Edwards said that they were geo-exchange ready. This place probably has a massive zone-controlled HVAC system. A competent heating engineer can always hook an existing system to a geo-exchange system but it costs around 15k for a normal house. The ground loop part of the geo-exchange has to be buried in the ground or sunk in multiple wells. I doubt they are planning to install landscaping and then destroy it later for that purpose.

I believe this little missive was written by a well meaning staffer. The well meaning staffer should cover his/her bosses ass better than that.

The Edwards might consider getting a competent energy consultant in to help them green up their house a little more because as of this September this will be a major issue.

(quoting myself)

I would add that the Edwards could certainly have afforded wall to wall PV panels on the roof of the rec building and walkway. It would have added a tiny fraction to the overall cost of the buildig and would have paid far more in political divideds than savings.

Ultimately the point will be the next president will have to demand the US make enourmous changes to mitigate Climate Change. These will be forced as whacky weather starts to kill more of us off. It would help if said president had made a sincere effort to green up rather than a lame greenwashing campaign.

A relevent search on any grean building forum would have yielded enough information to make a green remodel easy and bitchproof. We don'd expect the rich to live in earthships but a modest effort in relation to resources consumed would be nice. Just they flying they do removes any hope of them ever becoming carbon neutral.

Ignoring these issues or worse, greenwashing, shows that the Edwards just don't "get it." A relevent search on any grean building forum would have yielded enough information to make a green remodel easy and bitchproof.

[Tin Man]

8. Greenwash - LOL. That term is going into the lexicon.

...lots of big corporate polluters love to foist some single, environmentally conscious project as part of a PR campaign to soften their image.

Greenwash - perfect. I'll remember that word.

[soswolf]

10. What's wrong with that?

Q: What's wrong with Edwards?

A: He used his money (money he won by defending 'regular' people who got screwed by big business), to build a home that is more energy-efficient than most homes in America.


:wow: The horror! :wow:

How dare they try to set an example. How dare they try to take a step in the right direction.

If that's the worst criticism he gets, we're in good shape.

[5X]

4. It is laughable to say you are worried about Energy Star

compliance and build such a home.

[rman]

5. Would be nice if they payed attention to energy conservation

in the rest of the US as well.
Or is national energy policy now a matter of personal responsibility?

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. I don't think the energy miser snobs will listen.

So many people are writing about John Edward's electrical choices, but their porchlight is still out.

However, I think we'll salvage something from all this. Like, maybe Congress can provide good information for homeowners out there to reduce the guessing game on what they should install and where do they go to get it?

[ShortnFiery]

7. Good.

But is it true that Edwards and his wife have to put GPS units on their two younger kids - so they won't get hopelessly lost? :rofl: :yoiks:

I know I know = *cold.* You think I'm harsh, but quite honestly, his rivals and the right wing are, and will continue to be, ALL OVER THIS. :( You have to also admit, the jokes seemingly write themselves, i.e., it was an un-wise move by an very intelligent man. :shrug:

[leftofthedial]

9. I hardly ever use the AC in my Hummer. I'm doing my part to fight

global climate change.

[Hun Joro]

15. That was brilliant.

[madfloridian]

11. Edwards ain't got a chance in hell at DU.

It's laughable. It pathetic. And I don't have a candidate yet. I really truly don't.

But the attacks on him are from every corner. Watch who is posting against him. Watch which groups are not going to give him an inch.

Watch, it is interesting.

[madfloridian]

12. In fact, may I venture to say that Edwards is DU's new Dean.

Yes, I think I will say that. The Kerry supporters don't like him at all, the Clark supporters hate that he was chosen VP instead of Clark.

That is two large groups here. He ain't got a chance.

Why do we do this to ourselves and our party? Why do we let the media divide us so much. MyDD had a good post saying, I think Matt...that he allowed the media to define Edwards and took their talking points from Drudge.

This is crazy stuff. There should be room for everyone here.

[Firespirit]

18. Take it easy on Kerry supporters

This Kerry supporter is fully on board for Edwards for 2008.

Seriously, a lot of us are wide open, most of us in fact. There are a few who don't like Edwards, but for the most part, we're either tuning out the primaries for the rest of the year, or we've got our ears open to pretty much everyone. A few of us have aligned with Obama or Edwards, and one or two with Dodd (I guess because he reminds them the most of our true guy). The candidate that Kerry supporters do not like is Hillary, for what she and her henchmen did.

I agree about the Edwards' house. Who cares? There are far more important things to be concerned with than the size of John and Elizabeth Edwards' house. Three thousand dead in Iraq, two thousand on the Gulf Coast, thousands more in unsung tragedies that were caused by the Bush administration's negligence and malevolence, and people create outrage over what size John Edwards house is? Every candidate out there is wealthy; they're going to have big houses. At least it's the honest thing to do. What I care about is whether they understand that their wealth is a privilege and that most people are not so fortunate... and whether they intend to do anything about it. The Edwardses are good people and do intend to do something about it.

[madfloridian]

19. Thanks.

Appreciate your post. I don't have a choice yet. :hi:

[mtnsnake]

24. "The candidate that Kerry supporters do not like is Hillary"

Are you the self appointed head of the "Kerry supporters turned against Hillary" campaign or something? lol

[Firespirit]

25. I figured you'd troll our forum

Considering how obsessed and almost stalker-ish you have become.

One might say I'm one of the "appointed heads" of the DU group. I have very extensive contacts in Kerry's offices.

I can assure you, Kerry supporters are quite aware of what Hillary did, and continues to do. Kerry wasn't the only person her henchmen attacked. They also went after Dean. If you refuse to see that this is an attack by the status-quo "old guard" against the members of the party who want to move the party forward, then I can't help you.

[mtnsnake]

26. You're no one to talk

about stalking, since you're the one who first tried it with me when you went straight from one thread to some other completely unrelated threads in a feeble effort to get back at me for defending Hillary or whatever. Before you jumped in and started following me around, I had no clue who the hell you were, other than you later bragging how much you know Kerry personally. Good gawd, talk about being tacky.

Nice try. NOT

[Firespirit]

27. I got an email alert about your McCain smear.

No, not from blm, so don't even try to blame her.

It's hard not to notice that you are all over any thread trying to inject your attacks on Kerry, who is NOT your senator nor even running for the presidential nomination, nor doing anything to warrant your abuse. You leaped in this thread about Edwards, into a perfectly civil discussion I was having with madfloridian to clear up her misconception that Kerry supporters didn't like Edwards, in order to attack Kerry supporters.

If you doubt me, why don't you go into the Kerry forum and ASK them if they like Hillary?

[AtomicKitten]

29. we've seen you plotting

I would have expected you and the rest of Team Kerry and the OP to have exhibited a teensy bit more finesse before turning on a dime to annihilate HRC and boost all her opponents, but sometimes I overestimate the caliber of the game people bring here. For entertainment purposes, I'm going to have to ask you to try harder.

[Firespirit]

31. Can I have fries with that?

When we report to the next top secret meeting of the Kerry Conspiracy, I'll pass on your sage advice.

Oh, and it's generally considered courteous to address one personally if there is a concern. So maybe you should direct your additional concerns to madflo herself, rather than to me.

[mtnsnake]

30. Good for you.

I just got an interesting PM about you, so I guess we're even.

Good luck at your meeting of the "Kerry supporters turned against Hillary" tonight.

And stop boring me to death with making like I'm the only one who jumps into threads and changes the subject. You have a warranted history of doing exactly that yourself, but when you do it, it's fine and dandy. You're not the angel you like to portray yourself to be.

[Firespirit]

32. I'll pass on your well wishes.

I'm sure they'll be appreciated by the Conspiracy.

Tonight's meeting will be attended, incidentally, by a group of Freepers associated with stophillary.com, as well as your favorite person, Senator John McCain (R-AZ). We'll all discuss strategy with Kerry about how to annihilate Hillary.

[Clark2008]

22. WRONG!!!!!

Clark DID NOT want to be VP, therefore, we don't HATE Edwards because of that.

Many Clark supporters believe in progressive policies, including in the areas of diplomacy and foreign policies and Clark fits the bill, while Edwards continues to make misteps regarding foreign policy, including a recent push for war in Iran.

THAT'S why we don't like him. Edwards says what he needs to say to be politically expedient to his cause - him.

I also don't like how he didn't do squat for the poor during his six years as senator. If he did, I can't find it - but I sure found where he wrote legislation helping Big Banking and the push for the Iraqi War.

I think it's interesting that you continue to spout this bullshit when you've been told a million times how WRONG you are.

[sandnsea]

35. Not true at all

Edwards is fine with me. He's not perfect, however. He really needs to drop his po-folk I shop at Target schtick because there is no way in hell these people furnished that house from friggin' Target. Get real. They better do it now because I can hear the guffaws all the way from the panhandle if they try this as a Presidential candidate.

AND, every single one of our primary candidates better get their homes 100% on renewable energy. They all have the money and they need to take the lead. ANY Democrat who has the money needs to do it now. We cannot run on global warming and renewable energy if the "liberal elites" aren't practicing what they preach.

[CarolNYC]

37. Well, as a Clark supporter who did NOT want him to be VP

and who has not even read the damn 300 million "house" threads but who does care about this coming surge and what it means for our country, Iraq and our troops, I ask, did you see this thread?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3084964

Have you donated to get this ad on the air?

Or do you care a heck of a lot more about the Edwards' house than Iraq and the looming confrontation with Iran?

Just curious...Please don't say I'm attacking you or mad at you or hate you or trying to villainize you. I'm just asking a question, OK? ;)

[madfloridian]

41. I don't think Edwards should be judged by his house. Do you?

I posted it because I think the whole thing is so unbelievably stupid.

I posted it because I like John Edwards very much, and I thought it was interesting.

I posted it because I am as much a part of DU as anyone else.

Oh, maybe you failed to see my posts about the DLC setting the policy on the surge....or the one about the Third Way setting policy on the Surge.

Maybe you have somehow missed my passion about the war.

Maybe.

Did you just judge me?

[CarolNYC]

47. Oh, judging you...

That's one thing I left out in my disclaimer...Of course, I'm not trying to judge you. I just asked a couple of questions about the Vote Vets ad and thread, questions which, for whatever reason, you chose to ignore. Notice, nothing judgmental there...just stating a fact. You ignored my questions about the votevets ad.

I really don't care why you started this thread. You're welcome to start as many threads as you want for whatever reasons you want. it's not for me to judge.

But why are you always trying to pick a fight with me? I really hate to disappoint you but it's not going to happen. As much as you want me to fight with you, you can't make me because I don't want to. Sorry.

[CarolNYC]

49. Oh and if you did donate and just don't want to say,,,

thank you very much.

It's an important ad and an important issue.

[venable]

43. I agee, MadFloridian

I am an outspoken Edwards supporter, so my view on this probably won't matter much, as it's got to be subjective, but I do believe if I were not an Edwards guy, and I visited here, I'd wonder how many of these people he must have mugged with a baseball bat. the vitriol is pervasive. Fortunately there are a growing few that either support him, or at least view him with some objectivity, whether they end up liking him or not.

[madfloridian]

50. It is almost exactly like 2003.

It is living it all over again with a different victim. I remember they used to make fun of Dean's smile, just start posts with stuff like that. Silly things.

A lot of people are gone from DU now, and they can't come back because they stood up for their candidate.

It is the same old song all over again. I like Edwards a lot, and I respect the courage they have shown through her illness. Their home is their own business, and this is just out of control.

[maxsolomon]

13. an energystar house 10x as big as mine still uses

way more than 5x the energy. a new fridge & a couple solar panels doesn't make it ok.

if his house was off the grid & carbon neutral, even then he'd have to justify the massive resouce use - housing materials don't grow on trees (well, wood does).

NO ONE needs 20,000 SF. not hollywood stars, not rupert murdoch, not even crazy mormon polygamists.

[madfloridian]

14. Yep, that house will destroy him.

.:sarcasm:

[Firespirit]

21. I say this as a hardcore environmentalist.

The righteous outrage against anyone perceived as not "carbon neutral" is A BAD THING for the climate change movement. People don't like being nagged and harangued for not being "pure enough," no matter how just the cause may be.

My family lives in a 7,000 square foot house that they bought by choice. It's horribly energy inefficient because it is old. It uses natural gas, because it's historic and installing solar panels would take it off the historic register.

I guess it should be razed to the ground.

I drive a small, non-hybrid car, predating ethanol-85, that gets ONLY 32 miles to the gallon. Burn it (and me?) at the stake!

The Edwardses are doing the right thing and at least making an EFFORT. That's far more than can be said for the millions of suburbanites who replace their gas guzzlers every two years with the new model, who crank up their thermostats at the slightest breeze, and who drive the monster vehicle two blocks down the street to haul their kids to practice (further perpetuating the childhood obesity problem).

[maxsolomon]

34. in no way am i saying i am perfect

that's not the point. my house is old, poorly insulated, and i drive a 16 year old saab that gets 22 mpg if i'm lucky. no one is ghandhi, but a presidential candidate has a special responsibility to lead, & edwards missed the boat.

don't be so defensive.

and the historic register where you live is retarded.

[sandnsea]

36. I think you're wrong

Your 7,000 sq ft house, as a historic home, is not the issue. I would think it stupendous if the Edwards had saved an historic home, and made it energy efficient at the same time.

What people don't like is being told to make sacrifices, (and expensive lightbulbs is a sacrifice for many people), only to find the people telling them to make the sacrifice didn't sacrifice at all. There's a HUGE difference between expending money that might not ever save you a dime - and having the money to make modest adjustments more because they'll save you money than because you care about the environment. The problems with the way the Edwards approached that house have been outlined previously. One being the lighting. The poster on that topic was absolutely correct. If green building were on their mind, they'd have hired a consultant and there would be no lightbulbs to change. That says it all. They could have actually sacrificed real money and built an almost completely energy independent home - they chose not to.

And if you also think that burning through fuel and justifying it by buying a carbon credit is going to fly, you're way wrong about that too. It'll just be perceived as a bunch of rich people writing checks while real people can't even afford the water and power and gas that their overconsumption prices out of the market. This is the kind of shit that costs Democrats votes. If Republicans proposed writing checks to cover their ass for their excessive consumption, we would be all over them.

We have to get this right and we aren't there yet.

[Firespirit]

38. Frankly,

I don't see what difference it makes whether the house is historic or not. If the issue is energy efficiency and carbon emissions, the age of the house really shouldn't be a mitigating factor. The mileage/emissions standards that many states have considered enacting for new cars do not retroactively apply, but the point is to phase out those older cars and eventually have them replaced by ALL new cars. From a strictly scientific point of view, the "correct" thing to do about the old house would be to strip it down and make it modern and energy efficient, and forget the history, because ultimately a historic home is about sentiment rather than practicality.

I have no idea where you came from with the paragraph about a carbon credit, since I said nothing whatsoever about that, positive or negative.

To be perfectly realistic -- and yes, I've watched the movie, I've read the books, I've followed the issue -- I don't think we're going to stop the effects of global warming. I'm not even sure it CAN be stopped, Gore's optimism notwithstanding. It's in an exponential explosion right now, with the man-made effects being compounded by the release of greenhouse gases from the thawing tundra. The Netherlands have already started designing floating houses to prepare for when they are inundated. It was a matter of time before New Orleans was inundated, as well -- if the levees HAD been built up in preparation for a low-end Cat 4 like Katrina (and that's what it was, government reports notwithstanding), the city would've been taken out by a stronger hurricane, and it will again someday. Eventually the New Madrid fault will destroy the greater part of the Ohio River Valley, and this too will probably occur within my lifetime. There comes a point at which we have to look hard at the "period of consequences" and how we're going to cope with them, rather than wasting time trying to hold off the inevitable. I hate it, but there you have it. I think we should be invested right now in how we are going to respond when we start seeing these catastrophic impacts, rather than pretending we can hold back the flood (literally and figuratively) by installing fluorescent bulbs and solar panels.

[sandnsea]

40. Let me recap

From my perspective. This all started at some point on Friday. At the time, it was rather humorous to me. I mostly thought it was ironic coming from "Miss Shops At Target" - a 10,000 sq ft home plus 20,000 sq ft 'bonus room', oh yeah, real down home. While this goop was going on, Sapphire Blue was attemting to get attention to Diane Sawyer's excellent program on poverty. Notice what's being discussed today. People care about poverty?? Psssht.

Then, another development. First it was the offhand, his money he can do what he wants with it. That has expanded to the most bizarre kind of free market libertarianism, it's an attitude most DUers wouldn't have or admit to have under any other circumstance. That's when I started getting agitated. Then people dismissed the way the development was done, or that it was done at all. DU is suddenly FOR massive consumption of goods with no regard to labor exploitation, pollution, limited resources, and how all of this contributes to imbalances that lead to war.

So that's when I started getting mad and saying, hey wait just a minute - there is so much more than Energy Star that can be done in green building. There is evidence that they didn't do all they could, what many responsible homebuilders do. My local sole proprietor flooring company makes sure to know exactly where their floors come from, whether the wood is easily renewable, etc. Is it really too much to ask similar questions of our Democratic leaders??

Your house isn't being built today. Unless you're a millionaire and choosing to ignore upgrades you can easily afford, I'd say you are being responsible in preserving history and not contributing to modern pollution with a new round of excessive consumerism.

It's all connected. I always thought that was the core belief that held Kerry supporters together.

[Firespirit]

51. I'm still not sure I see where you're headed

I'm not saying that you or anyone else doesn't have a right to anger or righteous outrage; freedom of opinion is the bedrock of this country. I just find it very hard, as someone who has lived most of my life in red areas, to care that much about the "issue." In many, possibly most parts of the country (definitely most in terms of land area), green building and meticulous purism when selecting materials not only wouldn't compute, it wouldn't even be something they knew about. This is a fact that many people on this website and liberal blogs like Daily Kos don't seem to understand, that well over half the country has only known a paradigm in which it's neither practical nor possible to make "progressive" choices all the time, and it wouldn't even occur to them to do it if it were possible. We just weren't brought up that way. This has little or nothing to do with John and Elizabeth Edwards, of course, but I think it explains some of the reaction. Lots of us have not had the good fortune of living for a long time in California, or Seattle, or the Northeastern corridor, and we just can't work up outrage over something that we aren't accustomed to doing or caring about. Especially when there are far more pressing issues at hand. For someone like me, with a personal interest in the recovery of the people of the Gulf Coast, I can't find it in me to care if John Edwards' mansion isn't as green/fair trade/(insert issue here) as it might be.

Sure, no doubt they could have done better. They're human.

[sandnsea]

52. It's the entire issue to me

I live in a purplish corner of my state, and we're very conscientious of green building materials - we have companies who grow certified timber and are leaders in the field. It isn't hard and it certainly isn't a purism. It's the way most people know we have to move in order for loggers to continue to be in business, unless people are satisfied with everything being built from press board. I think people really underestimate what their rural neighbors care about and understand. Who would have thought a farmer on the highline in Montana would be organic? But he is.

There's a whole lot of DU that needs to be told to just shut up if global pollution, foreign labor and products, alternative energy, and global poverty don't really matter.

I'm seeing the true colors of an awful lot of people this week-end.

On edit:

Oh, and you're nowhere near a hard core environmentalist if you think writing checks for carbon credits is an acceptable alternative to truly greening your home, or that certified wood or renewable flooring is environmental purism.

[Firespirit]

53. For years I WAS rural.

I'll get even more specific. In the rural and semirural South, it is definitely not a concern of your average homeowner whether a product is certified organic, certified fair-trade, carbon neutral, or Energy Star compliant. In many places in that region, these aren't even available options, and they are regarded by Republicans and Democrats alike as something unique to the blue coast states. In those areas, people tend to buy based on one of two criteria: price, or perceived quality. They'll either go with what's cheapest (for any product -- home materials, clothes, food), or if they consider themselves more affluent, they'll go with what is perceived to be the "best." I am not offering any opinion on the merits of this; I'm just stating it the way it is. This is the background that a substantial number of people come from. I myself am aware of the BuyBlue ratings of many businesses, and I'll use them if I have no overriding preference for another brand for some item that I want. But I had to train myself into it, and even now I'll ignore the Blue ratings guilt-free if there is some other item that I prefer the appearance or taste of.

(I still don't know where this carbon credit thing is coming from. I've said nothing at all about it.)

[sandnsea]

54. My family is still in the south

They are more green than I am and they vote straight Republican ticket. Sometimes when I look at all the innovative businesses out there, I think the environmental revolution is taking place right under our noses and Democratic activists don't even see it. We're going to have green co-op communities all around and the 'grassroots' are going to lift their heads and say 'well how'd that happen'.

I am not attacking Edwards for the pure thrill of it, which it appears is what you think. I care about a different kind of planet, long term. To stop all wars and end all poverty, we have to change the way we think about our lifestyles and the limited resources that everyone needs to survive.

[Firespirit]

55. That's good

I have not witnessed any such sea change. What I see, and I am there about once a month for several days, is "same old same old." SUVs rampant on roads, the old kind that barely made 15 mpg, often with right-wing stickers on them. I asked for Gore's movie as a Christmas gift, and they had a very hard time finding it because it wasn't stocked in most stores. Thermostats in people's houses cranked up to 80 degrees in "winter" (or what passes for it there) and 65 in summer. My family's house is kept at a chilly 62 in winter and a boiling 85 in the summer, and the utility bill is still outrageous as in $400-$500 a month for gas and electric combined. Since they are, if not deliberately energy-conscious, certainly wallet-conscious, I shudder to think how non-green everyone else is.

Perhaps your people are from a different area in the South. Clearly so, because if I were to suggest to the entirety of my Southern acquaintance that it could be possible to stop all wars and end all poverty, every last one of them would laugh in my face and suggest that I spend more time "in the real world." (Their words, or George Allen's if you prefer.) I don't care one way or the other about Edwards... I was attempting to offer one possible explanation for why some people couldn't find it in them to care about his house. Even if we're liberal, it's hard to shake that kind of background.

[venable]

44. nicely said n/t

[Ninja Jordan]

16. If this is the best DU has got against Edwards, then he is in good shape.

Arrrrgh. Let's attack his house!!!!

[Clark2008]

23. It's not.

I don't like how he's pushing for war in Iran.

I don't like how he pushed for war in Iraq and then, once the war was less popular than genital warts, changed his mind and called it an "oopsie."

I don't like that he did absolutely NOTHING for the poor when he was a senator.

I don't like how he continues to insert his foot into his mouth on foreign policy issues.

I don't like how he ignored his constituents when he was senator.

I don't like how he never corrects the misunderstanding that he grew up dirt poor when he actually grew up upper, middle class.

I don't like how he changes his positions to fit recent polls.

His house? I don't care about that.

[venable]

46. hang on, there - your points, one by one

he is not pushing for war with Iran. His Verzliya speech was arguably ill-phrased, but listen to everything he has said, and will say, and judge the actual positions in that light. It's a long road.

He did not call it an oopsie, he said straight out, I Was Wrong. More than some who dilly dally around have said.

His Verzliya speech was not a good one, but his foreign policy statements have been inspiring.

His constituents were the poor of this country.

See above - look at his votes. The most progressive socially of any candidate.

He absolutely did not grow up Upper Middle Class. That is flat wrong. He grew up among the working poor, as one himself.

He doesn't change his opinions to fit recent polls. That is easy to say, but hard to justify.

I don't care about his house, either.

[Hippo_Tron]

48. Don't take this the wrong way but your post made me laugh

I'm just thinking of a poll question

"Genital Warts: approve or disapprove?"

[madfloridian]

17. Drudge did a good job on this. He's the big winner.

And what is going on here is sad.

And I don't even have a candidate.

[ncliberal]

45. Not just Drudge

The article linked at Drudge was from the Carolina Journal. The Carolina Journal is a copyright of the John Locke Foundation, a conservative think tank in NC. I'm sure they are loving this. Also, a story about the uproar over the house hit the front page of the News and Observer yesterday. http://www.newsobserver.com/689/story/537175-p2.html

Sorry, if someone has mentioned this before. I have been here a few years but don't get to post often and don't have time to read everything.

[eddiemunster]

58. What are you waiting for?

You know the field. Suck it up, soldier. Make a decision.

[mtnsnake]

20. Edwards will ultimately be judged 95% on his record & 5% on his excessive life style

I don't think the house will be anything close to being a determining factor, but it might be a small factor in making some peoples minds up about him.

IMO, his winning personality is going to have to make up for any of his perceived shortcomings in order for him to have a chance.

[SayWhatYo]

39. hah, have you read the posts here?

I think you transposed those numbers...

I personally like the guy.

[Tom Rinaldo]

28. So do Trees. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

33. How is this relevant to Edwards' qualifications for President

Poor people can't afford "green" homes. They have to make do with whatever shitty housing they can afford.

The only time that Edwards' home, or any candidate's home, would become an issue it would be if he used eminent domain to expel low income residents from housing which was subsequently demolished to make way for his fancy home.

[madfloridian]

42. It isn't. That's my point.

People seem to think I am being critical of Edwards...I don't think his house is our business.

[eddiemunster]

56. Man of the people...

Ahhh...it's simply heart-warming to see the energy friendly construction techniques used in the Edward's new 29,000 square foot cottage.


P.S.-clear cutting obviously wasn't a concern...

[madfloridian]

57. Make that 3 groups...

just like 03. Same tactics, different target.

[Cameron27]

59. I don't know why the hell you

think that lumping people into groups because they happen to support someone is acceptable.

I've never talked in private to any other Clarkie about any another candidate, or any another candidate's supporters. If I have an opinion about someone or something, it's my OWN opinion based on my OWN judgment and I resent your implications that as a Clarkie, I'm acting as a part of a group against John Edwards, or anyone else.

I don't have a target to attack, I don't use any tactics while posting and I don't have any damned goal, except to state my own opinion in my own way, about anything that I friggin' please. The insinuations that you make are divisive and unfair. It gets so thick in here, that I've actually thought about removing my avatar so I could express my own feelings without this labeling from you and others.

I'm damned well tired of it.

[madfloridian]

60. Me too.

But a read of the board bears me out pretty well.

[Cameron27]

61. Then perhaps you need

stronger glasses. It's all a matter of who you support, because you certainly don't express these defensive feelings about Hillary Clinton. I don't see any comments about the number of groups attacking or targeting her.

As a matter of fact I don't see you defending anyone except the 2 former candidates and 1 active candidate who you apparently favor.

The house threads going on right now, are composed of a variety of posters with a variety of opinions. I haven't participated because I'd rather focus on Edwards' foreign policy statements. But it wasn't a group attack; I was surprised by the range of different posters involved, and each has a right to their opinion whether you agree or not.

I've seen group attacks, and I've defended posters subjected to group attacks. It's not an attack, or bashing, trashing, or undermining a candidate if you stick to the facts, and tell the truth.

What's been said about Edwards is based on facts. There are no lies going on here. It's out there, and people are discussing their own feelings; some sincere, some silly, some with important things to say, and some shallow.

Someone told me to stick to the facts, and you won't go wrong. Think about it.