How dare John Edwards create an organization to fight poverty in a time of war. Instead of setting up an organization to combat poverty in America, he should have been using the state of Massachusetts to fund his trips all over the US to build his political network at great taxpayer expense. Heck, he should have also broken with tradition and traveled to the Vatican to see an archbishop become a cardinal because that could have also helped attract right wing catholic voters.
Take notice of how Democratic candidates who either make money or try to help others are widely criticized but the criticism is much more localized and limited when it is a Republican. Both Romney and Edwards were doing what was/is legal under the law so I find it hypocritical to attack Edwards who was targeting a valid cause, which sure, perhaps it did help keep him networked, but is still targeting a good cause that still needs attention. It seems to me that everyone benefited from the cause and that’s OK. Meanwhile, Romney’s good cause was naked ambition on the bill of Massachusetts taxpayers, who he now uses as the butt of his jokes when traveling around the country. Did the taxpayers who funded Romney’s boondoggles around the US truly see any benefit? Help me understand that point because I don’t see it. Save the outrage and attacks for when a real problem shows up, such as pumping billions back to contributors who prosper from the misery of others as we see in Iraq and post-Katrina. Save the criticisms for so-called conservatives that don’t hesitate sticking the bill on taxpayers instead of political campaign donations. This attack on Edwards is a yawner.