Remember when it was a big deal that John Edwards had a big house? Or that John Kerry’s big house was owned by his wife? Such things are apparently not big deals if you are John McCain, whose wife is the owner of a luxurious second home variously described by the media as “cabin” or “rustic cabin” or “weekend cabin.” This “rustic cabin” has a guest house and a pool. (h/t Reverent & Free.)
None of this would be an issue at all, but for the double standard. What’s the message I’m supposed to take away from this? “Republicans promote the rich and screw the poor. Of course they have nice stuff. Why would we dwell on it or even accurately describe the nice stuff? It’s too insignificant for our liberally biased liberalism”
I think you saw more of this in the blogosphere than in the mainstream media – as a blogdweller, maybe it is a more glaring contrast to your eye.
Is there a way to tell how the McCains’ fortunes compare with those of the Edwards? (I am assuming that neither of them are close to the Kerrys, although that would be an interesting figure to have, as well).
Another way to frame this would be that Republicans think its OK to be rich – I don’t think McCain has too much of the “two Americas” rhetoric going on, as Edwards did.
I don’t think there was anything in Edwards’ argument that implied people shouldn’t be rich. One of his central themes was this idea that as tbe gap between rich and poor widens, democracy suffers. I happen to agree with this.
As for the link, I think the point there addresses the blatant inaccuracy in the reporting on McCain’s home. Unless you consider the presence of a pool and a $1000+ barbecue as “rustic”
If a dog goes “meow”, it’s news. If a dog goes “woof”, it’s just doing what’s expected. The press isn’t making a big deal over McCain’s housing situation because it’s only what one would expect of a leader of his party, no?
Dude. McCain’s wife is a babe AND rich?
I don’t know if it makes up for 5 and a half years of the Hanoi Hilton, but it’s something.
The Edwards and Kerry thing are part of the “limosine liberal” critique of Democrats. Even Obama, who had a household income of $500k since elected to the Senate, can be painted with the limosine liberal brush.
C’mon Doug, you really don’t see the difference? Does it have anything to do with the “H” word?
For the record, Cindy McCain earned her money the same way Chappaquiddick Ted did, from dear old dad (though Cindy McCain’s dad likely didn’t steal his fortune, unlike the senior Kennedy).
You can’t run on a platform of hating the rich, then live in a 85,000 sq. ft. house and fly around in private jets.
At the time I interpreted the jabs at Kerry’s wife’s wealth as ‘wealth by marriage’ which is an honorable way for a woman to gain wealth but not for a man. This was Heinz wealth and Kerry stole it.Also, it made Kerry into a kind of gigolo figure. But maybe I was reading too much into it.
Hmm, so, objecting to “letting the rich do whatever the fuck they want” is “hating the rich”.
Thanks for the deep insight into John Edwards’s platform, Jacob.
Jacob’s deep insight is matched only by your penetrating, dead-on observations, Branden.
Seriously – not your best work, and not much of an addition to any kind of useful discourse.
(Waiting for irrelevant ad hominem…3..2..1..)
Parker,
You’ll be rid of me soon enough. In preparation for a move to North Carolina, I’m investing most of my energies elsewhere.
Not that you’ll find that any more worthwhile, let alone relevant. ;-)
Who wants to get rid of a person that knows “y’all” is plural?
And if you’re looking for wind power, have you considered recruiting down at the statehouse?
Honestly – take as many of them with you as you want – as far as I’m concerned there’s no bag limit…