![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Let the Games Begin
Posted by Stephen Green · 31 July 2003
Found this story on Drudge: Sen. John Edwards, North Carolina Democrat and 2004 presidential hopeful, is four months delinquent in paying the property taxes on his Georgetown mansion and owes the cash-strapped District more than $11,000, city records show. As I said before, for political junkies, all the fun the next year or so will be on the Democratic side. This kind of story is exactly what we live for. Really, how does Edwards recover from something like this? His primary-race poll numbers are nothing great, and he's already seen as something of a "Clinton Lite." This ain't no Whitewater, but that's what makes the story even more deadly. Whitewater was just too damn complicated for most people to understand. Hell, I could never wrap my brain around it, and I love that sort of thing. Here, however, is a story every single homeowner can understand. If you or I don't pay our property taxes, we eventually lose our homes. In the unlikely event that we don't pay, we usually have a pretty damn good reason -- unemployment, death, or something else catastrophic. Edwards is a guy worth at least 12 million bucks, and he can't remember to write a check for ten grand? Not only is that easy to grasp, it's even easier to form an opinion. And the opinion most people will form is: Why that cheap bastard! And he's a lawyer, too. I'll say it now -- Edwards is toast. Comments
He'll just blow it off as an accounting error at the City Clerks office. Bureaucratic ineptitude is an excuse anyone can believe. Posted by: Gary Utter at July 31, 2003 12:34 AMI'm not as concerned about him slipping up on his taxes as that he's a personal injury lawyer in the senate! Posted by: aaron at July 31, 2003 06:39 AMToast, indeed. I never understood why Edwards was considered anywhere near the deadly charisma or straight-faced rhetorical abilities of Clinton, in any case. Posted by: Michael Ubaldi at July 31, 2003 07:22 AMActually, Edwards is interesting for other reasons. Edwards is the only Democratic candidate who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee. He's also one of the few (if not the only one) not making wild "Bush lied" accusations. Or have I missed something? Posted by: David Perron at July 31, 2003 09:01 AMEdwards reinforces the stereotype that he is out of touch with average Americans. It appears that he doesn't care if he is late and that there are penalties. Hey, what's another couple of thousand in penalties? He doesn't even know how to be rich. Rich people don't leave money on the table. It's also quite possible that he himself doesn't actually handle his own finances and the bill slipped between the cracks in the new marble bathroom or the new granite kitchen countertop. Maybe it's lost in one of the eight bedrooms. Posted by: sligobob at July 31, 2003 09:04 AMHey he may be toast, but being toast is better than being nothing at all. Edwards is basically an anomymous suit that's pulling a whopping 3% among *Democrats* in likely-voter polls. He should be able to run a campaign ad showing him lighting puppies on fire and do better than 3%. There's no such thing as bad publicity...especially when you're a faceless trial lawyer that nobody knows about. Posted by: Mike M at July 31, 2003 09:27 AMMike is right. He'll send a big check over to the City by the end of the day, and some personal secretary of his will apologize for misplacing the tax bill. If he steps up quickly, pays the damned thing and acts suitably contrite, I don't see why that shouldn't be the end of it. Aaron's right. His bigger image problem is that he's represented injured plaintiffs. Posted by: denise at July 31, 2003 10:18 AM1. I believe that Bob Graham, who's technically one of the Democratic candidates for president, is also on the Intelligence Committee. 2. Virtually Edwards' entire appeal, such as it is, is premised on being good-looking. If he looked like Jerry Nadler, he'd never get off the ground. Posted by: Crank at July 31, 2003 12:21 PMDarn right! Posted by: Jerry Nadler at July 31, 2003 12:37 PMWhat a Democrat that doesn't want to pay his taxes? I am sure he would have voted to raise them though. Posted by: Fred at July 31, 2003 12:46 PMI agree that he'll probably get away with the "clerical error" argument. Indeed, given his riches, I'd readily believe that he doesn't actually control his own checkbook or look at his own bills. I was always perplexed by the early furor over him in the media; he was even considered a strong VP candidate for 2000. Given his almost total lack of resume, that was always astounding. Posted by: James Joyner at July 31, 2003 12:52 PMWhile I despise Edwards, who is going to get warm about a property tax bill? The voters who actually own property mostly pay these indirectly through mortgage escrow accounts. Posted by: Robin Roberts at July 31, 2003 02:52 PMGraham used to be a member (in fact, Chairman). They rotate off; he's not a member now. Posted by: old maltese at July 31, 2003 04:09 PMCorrect, old maltese. He's not on it. Neither is Kerry, or Lieberman. Neither Gephardt nor Kucinich are on the corresponding House committee. So, Edwards gets a few cool points for knowing what's so, and choosing not to throw darts anyway even though no one's going to cry bullshit on him. Posted by: David Perron at August 1, 2003 12:19 PM |
MDS - Give Until It Hurts Terror War Scorecard Watching America 50 Things American Cancer Ablation Center Buy VodkaPundit Stuff
"3 out of 4 large mammals choose VodkaPundit."
Ann Althouse
Across the Atlantic
American Realpolitik
Albion's Seedlings
Justene Adamec
The Argument Clinic
Todd A
Moe Freedman
Allah Is In the House
Body in Mind
Ben Domenech
Duck Season
Banana Counting Monkey
Ted Barlow
Eric Alterman
American Times
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |