Edwards charges $55,000 to speak to UC Davis students about poverty

[Birdzeye]

Likewise, when I have to use snide remarks to focus your and others' attention 'on the point', I wonder if you guys have ANY real interest in anything but stirring the proverbial pot.

See how that works?

The trouble is, you haven't made a valid point yet. This whole brouhaha is nothing but a thinly disguised excuse to bash another liberal for no damned good reason.

[loosecannon]

If anyone, including Giuliani, charged that much to discuss reducing poverty, I'd criticize him, too. The 'poverty' topic is what makes our "judgments" re: Edwards' hypocrisy far from selective, and actually right on target. The question is, why do you refuse to understand it?

How about addressing my point that he took money that could have been used for scholarships for the poor?

Maybe i can explain my POV like this.

If somebody is gonna be a celebrity, and make a million dollars a year,

would you rather that they choose to do that as:

a ball player?

a pornographer like Hefner?

a bimbo like Spears?

or a poverty educator?

Why is it more moral to make grandiose fortunes as an advocate for a good cause rather than simply a self serving cause?

Why should Edwards be held to the standard that he must donate his fee to a scholarship fund if Guilianni does the same thing, void ANY socially benefitial element, and can pocket the cash?

Don't you see the hypocrisy of holding the better man to a different standard than the ordinary hack who does the same thing?

[darin]

The trouble is, you haven't made a valid point yet. This whole brouhaha is nothing but a thinly disguised excuse to bash another liberal for no damned good reason.

What the hell are you talking about?

I'm NOT here making POINTS - I'm here to FOCUS wandering minds on the POINT OF THE ARTICLE, which was the IRONY of somebody getting 55000 to speak about POVERTY - which is 'the lack of money'....See??? GET IT? Holy Crap somebody HELP me here...

[Birdzeye]

What the hell are you talking about?

I'm NOT here making POINTS - I'm here to FOCUS wandering minds on the POINT OF THE ARTICLE, which was the IRONY of somebody getting 55000 to speak about POVERTY - which is 'the lack of money'....See??? GET IT? Holy Crap somebody HELP me here...

Then if you're not "making POINTS," then why did you say this earlier?

Likewise, when I have to use snide remarks to focus your and others' attention 'on the point', I wonder if you guys have ANY real interest in anything but stirring the proverbial pot.

See how that works?

Now, temper, temper. Getting nasty makes it look like you just don't have an argument, y'know?

[darin]

Then if you're not "making POINTS," then why did you say this earlier?



Now, temper, temper. Getting nasty makes it look like you just don't have an argument, y'know?

see? Now you're simply acting Insane. You make outlandish claims, such as "I invented the question mark" or "It's very much on-topic to start blabbering about Rudi Guilianni" and when CALLED on it - when I attempt, out of my good graces, to steer you back to the point of the article, you refuse. You stomp your feet. You remove ANY context from ANYTHING I write here. You play passive-aggressive. And through it all, you are not fooling ANYONE who possesses a modicum of Reason or Rational Thought. Getting Nasty? Nasty? Nasty is your never-ending desire - no - compulsion to thumb your nose in the face of VERY VERY VERY VERY Simple concepts of intellectual honesty.

How nice for you.

[edit]
Misc Large Text Words:

professional bugger celiac lactonizing

[Birdzeye]

see? Now you're simply acting Insane. You make outlandish claims, such as "I invented the question mark" or "It's very much on-topic to start blabbering about Rudi Guilianni" and when CALLED on it - when I attempt, out of my good graces, to steer you back to the point of the article, you refuse. You stomp your feet. You remove ANY context from ANYTHING I write here. You play passive-aggressive. And through it all, you are not fooling ANYONE who possesses a modicum of Reason or Rational Thought. Getting Nasty? Nasty? Nasty is your never-ending desire - no - compulsion to thumb your nose in the face of VERY VERY VERY VERY Simple concepts of intellectual honesty.

How nice for you.

Too bad your fairy tale is not reality based. I haven't stomped my feet, but it sure looks like you have. If you see the point of the thread differently than I do, then that's your privilege, but you have no business trying to bully me into seeing things your way, and I won't passively tolerate any bullying from you.

[darin]

Too bad your fairy tale is not reality based. I haven't stomped my feet, but it sure looks like you have. If you see the point of the thread differently than I do, then that's your privilege, but you have no business trying to bully me into seeing things your way, and I won't passively tolerate any bullying from you.

Bullying? How the hell is YOU repeating, ad nauseam, that Rudi Guilianni has even a REMOTE chance of 'being the point of the OP', ME bullying YOU?

Your passive-aggressive bs stinks.

What's wrong with you? Really? You MUST be just yanking my chain.

[glockmail]

Edwards is a hypocrite as well as a faggot.

[Birdzeye]

Bullying? How the hell is YOU repeating, ad nauseam, that Rudi Guilianni has even a REMOTE chance of 'being the point of the OP', ME bullying YOU?

Your passive-aggressive bs stinks.

What's wrong with you? Really? You MUST be just yanking my chain.

Personal insults simply don't help whatever argument you may have.

[darin]

Edwards is a hypocrite as well as a faggot.

Dude - Please, Help me understand - I REALLY want to - Help me understand WTF Rudi Giuliani' has to do with "The Irony of Edwards Taking $55000 to talk about POVERTY". Please? Somebody?? I honestly think it ONLY relates in the Minds of LIBS who lack the "I know what is funny" and "I know what is Ironic" gene. There ARE a few libs around here who possess such a gene; however the sad part is, those who seem to be MISSING said gene possess the "Well, I can't defend my position, so I'll just keep re-stating it, and attacking anyone (dmp) who attempts to force-teach me how to stay on-topic" gene.

[darin]

Personal insults simply don't help whatever argument you may have.

When I start insulting you personally, you may have a case. Right now, your 'argument' that Rudi Giulianni has ANYTHING to do with "The Irony of Edwards taking $55K to speak about POVERTY" is severely lacking. You simply 'saying it does, and that's your opinion' means you are closed-minded and not worth my trouble of trying to teach you. Instead of "Ya know? dmp? You're right. While Rudi doesn't really have two shits to do with the "The Irony of Edwards taking $55K to speak about POVERTY", he does seem to charge a LOT of money - in fact, MOST politicians or notables charge a HUGE amount of money for organizations to hear them blabber..." you get defiant and play the victim. You create BS stories and accounts of being 'bullied' in an attempt to garner sympathy.

You know where you find SYMPATHY in the dictionary? Between Shit and Syphilis

[loosecannon]

Help me understand WTF Rudi Giuliani' has to do with "The Irony of Edwards Taking $55000 to talk about POVERTY". Please? Somebody??

I dunno DMP, I have posted numerous posts that address that and basicly it all comes down to context.

Whatever irony exists in this particular speaking engagement IS mitigated by the relative discount price paid to Edwards for the presentation.

And the most ironic part of this thread appears to be the outlandish double standard being applied to Edwards by the political opposition.

Bill Gates for example is the richest man ever to live, greedy beyond any standard.

Yet he will die the greatest philanthropist in the history of the world.

Context is everything.

[darin]

I dunno DMP, I have posted numerous posts that address that and basically it all comes down to context.

Stop reading into it and just laugh, I suppose. Is it funny that, regardless of any discount, FIFTY-FIVE Thousand dollars is a LOT of money - FUNNY because the focus of his talk was about 'poverty'. That's it. It's hilarious that a guy who probably knows very little of poverty (from a personal standpoint) got paid more for a couple hours work, than a high-ranking soldier gets in ONE YEAR. To be fair, out of that $55k, He'd likely have to pay all his 'handlers' and what not; so his in-pocket amount could be substantially less.

[loosecannon]

Stop reading into it and just laugh, I suppose. Is it funny that, regardless of any discount, FIFTY-FIVE Thousand dollars is a LOT of money - FUNNY because

It isn't funny to me.

A leading presidential candidate MUST raise $600,000/day every day for a whole year to pay for a presidential run.

A typical senator MUST raise $5500 every single day for a year in order to afford a run at the senate.

This is all obscene and outrageous.

The fact that this fundraising activity might actually have some redeeming value is a minute perk in contrast to the appalling nature of the dominant role money plays in buying political office.

It just isn't very funny to me, sorry.

[darin]

It isn't funny to me.

A leading presidential candidate MUST raise $600,000/day every day for a whole year to pay for a presidential run.

A typical senator MUST raise $5500 every single day for a year in order to afford a run at the senate.

This is all obscene and outrageous.

The fact that this fundraising activity might actually have some redeeming value is a minute perk in contrast to the appalling nature of the dominant role money plays in buying political office.

It just isn't very funny to me, sorry.

As you said - context, chap. It's FUNNY because of the CONTEXT surrounding how he 'earned' $55k...talking about 'poverty'. A good joke/Ironic joke? can only be SOO funny after having to essplayn it so many times.

(sigh)