The Continuing Education Of John Edwards
John Edwards has been vexed by questions about his cash-in stint with a hedge fund, but he had a ready answer for the AP:
WASHINGTON — Democrat John Edwards said Tuesday he worked for a hedge fund between presidential campaigns to learn about financial markets and their relationship to poverty — and to make money, too.
In an interview with The Associated Press, the former North Carolina senator said his yearlong, part-time position with Fortress Investment Group helped his understanding of the connection, but he has more to learn.
Edwards has made eradicating poverty a focus of his second White House bid.
Edwards, a multimillionaire after years as a trial lawyer, would not disclose how much he got paid for a year of consulting beginning in October 2005. He said the amount will be revealed when he releases his financial disclosure forms due May 15.
Asked if he had to join a hedge fund to learn about financial markets, Edwards replied, "How else would I have done it?"
He said he considered going to an investment firm such as Goldman Sachs, but Fortress was the most natural fit. Presented with the suggestion that he could have taken a university class instead, he said, "That's true."
"It was primarily to learn, but making money was a good thing, too," the 2004 vice presidential nominee said in an hourlong interview with AP reporters and editors.
Left unreported by the AP - John Edwards built his 28,000 square foot home to learn about homelessness in America, and he got a $400 haircut to learn about the emerging baby-boomer crisis of male pattern baldness.
Must we endure 18 more months of this (and possibly four, or even eight years)? One of Bill Clinton's many infuriating aspects was his unshakable belief that that he could sell any BS, however outrageous, to the rubes. If Mr. Edwards is positioning himself as the say-anything heir to Mr. I Didn't Inhale, I can't bear to watch.
That said, although Edwards' answer is rubbish, his concept is sound - there really are socially responsible investment funds out there and I suspect an earnest pol could learn something about the interplay between financial markets and good intentions by working at one.
However, Edwards chose to go to work for Fortress Investment Group (10-K), a perfectly respectable and credible group that makes no claim at all to emphasizing social responsibility in its investing.
Whatever. Edwards wanted to add to his pile, and there is nothing wrong with that - I am quite sure $15-50 million (est.) ain't what is used to be. But please don't tell us this was just an exercise in continuing education.

"Asked if he had to join a hedge fund to learn about financial markets, Edwards replied, 'How else would I have done it?'"
Hillary Clinton would tell him all he had to do was read the Wall Street Journal. Worked for her.
Nevertheless, this transparent fraud continues to poll quite well in head-to-heads against Rudy, McCain et al. Can anyone imagine this twit as President of the United States?
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Huh! Shows how stupid I am: I've always wanted to learn about financial markets but it never occurred to me to join a hedge fund. And although I read the editorial page of the WSJ religiously, I don't seem to get much smarter about financial markets. Maybe Hillary and I are on different pages?
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 11:02 AM
TM, H & R noted yesterday that THIS hedge fund is hq'd in the tax-free haven of the Caymen Islands, something not disclosed in the original report. \
Maybe like the Kennedy's (tax free trust funds in Tahitit) and Heinz (tax free munis) etc., he is studying how much money can be tax sheltered before the poor notice.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 11:13 AM
clarice, I just put on my special read-between-the-lines spectacles and reread that. Are you suggesting that Heinz and Edwards and the Kennedy's are somehow cynical? That the class warfare rhetoric is--what? Rhetoric? I can't bear the disillusion--I'll have to stomp my specs!
Y'know, no matter how many times you get your face rubbed in it, it really is breathtaking.
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Maybe it is just age but the older I get the more I believe that a decent society cannot exist without a strong and vibrant middle class who maintain the very habits of mind and traits that the very rich despise. Representation w/out taxation means those of the very rich who seek political office have a large class of people to enlist in their war against the middle class. (The old grasshopper versus the ant.)
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Last Sunday--Chris Wallace asked Edwards about the Cayman Island connection directly. Edwards responded that he did not know--while he was with the fund--about this and admitted it was not a good move on his part.
Posted by: glasater | May 09, 2007 at 12:01 PM
I really think what I find the most amazing trait on the left is what they can say with a straight face. You really have to give them some points for that. Edwards, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Hillary - they all have advanced degrees in lying convincingly.
It's a heck of a major.
Posted by: Jane | May 09, 2007 at 12:03 PM
From the WaPo article with the Cayman info...and of course....this is priceless...
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 12:04 PM
Leave aside the nonsense about poverty, and working for a hedge fund would indeed be one king hell way of learning about financial markets. What the hedge fund gets out of paying a "consultant" who doesn't know the business is less clear. (Were Edwards part of the Republican climate of corruption, to ask the question would be to answer it. As it stands, it's a deep mystery.)
Posted by: Paul Zrimsek | May 09, 2007 at 12:06 PM
"Representation w/out taxation"
Second time in as many days that I've seen that phrase--and I like it a lot! You realize, of course, that's revolutionary talk.
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Next up. Edwards plans to become a slumlord to learn about inner city poverty and to join a lacrosse team to learn about rape victims.
Posted by: Lew Clark | May 09, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Last Sunday--Chris Wallace asked Edwards about the Cayman Island connection directly. Edwards responded that he did not know--while he was with the fund--about this and admitted it was not a good move on his part.
No surprise. Edwards is sitting at the defense table on this one, and his ideas about due diligence have changed accordingly.
Posted by: Paul Zrimsek | May 09, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Lew:
Next up. Edwards plans to become a slumlord to learn about inner city poverty
Well, Edwards could perhaps tap Tony Rezko since Obama is trying to distance himself from him...might need to act quick, though, in case Rezko is convicted...
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 12:38 PM
What is Edwards trying to learn here...rap music or yoga?
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 12:43 PM
H & R Since you haven't apparently, I submitted a blog on this, calling Edwards a Hedgehog.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Someone has a way-back machine. Check out the date.
Posted by: Sue | May 09, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Yes, I didn't do anything for Edwards.
I tried to push something out on Obama yesterday, got home tried to get on the computer and was intercepted by an unruly mob of 3 people desperate for my attention.
(Don't tell Obama, but he's a little lower on the priority scale)
Actually, I did submit something yesterday but it was half-baked and stunk which, come to think of it would be a pretty good representation of Obama himself...we'll see what time permits today
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Heh, Sue...well, what did happen on May 9, 2004?
Googling we find a few things...
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 12:58 PM
h&r:
Are you sure your googling is work safe?
Posted by: Appalled Moderate | May 09, 2007 at 01:26 PM
No. But I have dirt on everyone above me in the food chain, so....
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 01:34 PM
Clinton did it, too!
Posted by: manys | May 09, 2007 at 02:58 PM
Wow. Sarkozy in his first speech to France as president-elect.
Read the post at Volokh where this is quoted from. Sarkozy deviated from his written prepared text on several occasions, including this entire paragraph....wow.
David Kopel ends the post at Volokh with:
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 03:22 PM
Hmmmmm, back to the topic of the post...
[Edwards] said the amount will be revealed when he releases his financial disclosure forms due May 15.
WHOA! Just caught that.
This whole millions of dollars earned at a hedge fund company and hundreds of thousands of dollars raised for his campaign there and offshore tax shelters and whatnot...IS ALL JUST A RUSE.
Read between the lines and you will clearly see that the May 15 filing will have more extravagent hair, nail and skin care expenses in it and he is just trying to throw everyone off with a red herring.
Keep focused people. Eyes on the ball.
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 03:34 PM
I posted the following the other day and still feel it's a valid view of Edwards....
Today's insane quote from Edwards...
Presidential candidate John Edwards said Monday it's silly to suggest that his wealth and expensive tastes have hurt his credibility as an advocate for the poor.
"Would it have been better if I had done well and didn't care?" Edwards asked.
Mr. Edwards...Ya think?
Bill Gates have more money in his change bowl than you and he doesn't get 400 dollar haircuts..
I have been blessed with money also..The vanity of a 400.00 cut totally destroyed your street cred pal..
and because you can't even see that amazes everyone I know..
Spend 20.00 to style your hair and you can donate that amount to feed a thousand African children and then..maybe then, we'll buy your lame party line of 2 america's..no wait..It's too late. No one will swallow that now. Your 15 minutes are up..
****************************
My distaste of edwards runs deep..but some of you have called him a liar here.
Although i detest the man it's not fair to call him a liar just like it's not fair saying bush lied about Iraq.
If Edwards believes his nonsensical stump speeches then so be it but i don't think labeling pols we dislike as 'liars' is right.
Perhaps a better expression would be just 'flat wrong'.
Posted by: hoosierhoops | May 09, 2007 at 04:18 PM
Hoosierhoops, I for one have not called him a liar. I'm not aware of anyone having done so on this site, but I may well be wrong because I haven't by any means read everything posted here.
While I don't call him a liar I do, very lustily, call him a fraud, a hypocrite, a foppish dilettante and an idle poseur. Will that do?
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 04:23 PM
Yeah hypocrite works for me. But it sure seems like most Democrat pols fit that moniker. But only a few do it with quite as much chutzpah as the silky one.
Posted by: gmax | May 09, 2007 at 04:30 PM
I'll call him a liar ---for saying that he consulted for that hedge fund to learn anything about poverty. There!
H & R that Sarkozy quote is fantastic.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 04:45 PM
While I don't call him a liar I do, very lustily, call him a fraud, a hypocrite, a foppish dilettante and an idle poseur. Will that do?
Posted by: Other Tom |
Yes OT..I suppose that will do fine in edwards case. ;)
The thing is..I really think he believes in what he is saying...
perhaps delutional is closier to the facts before us.
And Clarice..I must admit you make a strong case for intentional deception on edwards part...As usual you bring clarity to the table..I just hate the idea of people throwing around the word liar in politics.
It gets old when all i hear is bush lied..blah,blah...
H&R: when's the book coming out? you rock dude...
Posted by: hoosierhoops | May 09, 2007 at 05:01 PM
The thing is..I really think he believes in what he is saying
All the more reason he should never be considered a viable candidate for president. However, I don't believe he believes it. He says what he thinks the jury wants to hear. And from the looks of his house, he was good at it.
Posted by: Sue | May 09, 2007 at 05:08 PM
As H & R's biggest fan (excspt for his certainly adoring family) here are his words in neon (well on NRO's the Corner)
"Re: Oooops [Jonah Goldberg]
From a reader:
Oh, sure, Obama was wrong about the KS story — but piece together his thinking, and perhaps that many dead isn't entirely impossible...
What if the threat of the "Tyranny of Oil" which Obama has likened to the tyranny of fascism and communism were to unite in an alliance with "Cynicism" which Obama has identified as our biggest enemy? And heaven help us if that unholy union were to engage in the "Verbal Violence" which Obama pointed us to in the wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy.
A conflation of all his abstract analogies would create an unimaginable toll, one that would create casualities in numbers like the stars in the sky or the grains of sand on a beach or like the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin or the number of roads a man must walk down before they call him a man or something.
05/09 10:05 AM"
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 05:48 PM
The Democrats have cleaned up in Washington.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 05:48 PM
From TBOTW:
Nowhere in the dispatch does Edwards explain what his hedge-fund work taught him about poverty. Reader Robert Paci notes:
I work in the hedge-fund industry and have yet to learn anything about poverty from the experience. In fact, I went into the into the field to avoid poverty. I think almost everyone in the industry sees it my way. Maybe Edwards knows something we don't.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 05:55 PM
Clarice,
"Nowhere in the dispatch does Edwards explain what his hedge-fund work taught him about poverty."
Poverty,something that money can't buy.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 06:15 PM
Someone, probably instapundit was saying that there are hedge funds out there that commit to certain causes, like education or alleviating poverty and stuff like that. The Hedge fund Edwards went to school on is not tied to any cause except making as much money as possible.
I think you can feel pretty comfortable calling him a liar at this point.
Posted by: Jane | May 09, 2007 at 06:39 PM
Thank you, Jane.(Remember he was heading up the Poverty Center at the time he was "consulting" for this Cayman Island tax-sheltered hedge fund. A liar, a posuer and a hyporcrite. Hedgehog.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 06:52 PM
Media airbrushing Obama.
Airbrushing
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 07:13 PM
My favorite thing about Fortress's relationship with it's intern, John Edwards, was when the WaPo published the donations Fortress employees had made to the Edwards campaign.
People were maxing out, sometimes writing two checks for several thousand dollars on the same day. Secretaries were giving $2300.
And one guy donated $10.
You don't think there was any pressure from the management to donate, do you?
Posted by: Maybeex | May 09, 2007 at 07:17 PM
The Kennedy family should give one of its Profiles in Courage awards to the dude who gave the $10.
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 07:22 PM
While I don't call him a liar I do, very lustily, call him a fraud, a hypocrite, a foppish dilettante and an idle poseur. Will that do?
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 04:23 PM
A conflation of all his abstract analogies would create an unimaginable toll, one that would create casualities in numbers like the stars in the sky or the grains of sand on a beach or like the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin or the number of roads a man must walk down before they call him a man or something.
hit and run
I think you can feel pretty comfortable calling him a liar at this point.
Posted by: Jane | May 09, 2007 at 06:39 PM
A liar, a posuer and a hyporcrite. Hedgehog.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 06:52 PM
Maybe we should just leave the question of the proper moniker to Ann Coulter? My take: never trust someone with hair like that. The guy probably spends more time in front of a mirror than the world class narcissist Clinton.
Why didn't I say that:
Poverty,something that money can't buy.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 06:15 PM
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 07:43 PM
From the BBC, no less:
"The world's biggest economy topped the rankings of 55 nations compiled in the Swiss-based IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2007.
"Singapore was the second most competitive nation, moving up a place from last year, followed by Hong Kong, Luxembourg and Denmark.
"Britain came in 20th place in the rankings, unchanged from 2006.
"The least competitive nation was Venezuela, whose government has recently embarked on a forced nationalisation drive."
Go ahead, H&R--blame it on Bush.
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 07:50 PM
Well, since the Edwards campaign has very little to do with the current election (fat chance in hell)... Let's say that Clarice will win the nomination for the Republicans... Oh well, just wistful thinking...
Sorry Clarice...
Posted by: Deagle | May 09, 2007 at 08:11 PM
Don't be so hard on Pink Sapphire Hedgehog.
His quote was, "to learn about financial markets and their relationship to poverty "
He certainly could have learned of the inverse relationship between access to and participation in financial markets via employment in a hedge fund and poverty.
Sure, we can scoff that that seems ridiculously obvious, but he's probably a kinsethetic learner.
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 08:40 PM
Other Tom:
Go ahead, H&R--blame it on Bush.
Oh definitely. I Blame Bush. BDS has been a large contributing factor in driving Chavez literally stark raving mad.
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 08:47 PM
PUK:
Poverty,something that money can't buy.
Heh.
Try this thought experiment...
Working as an ambulance chasing trial lawyer, a pandering class-warfare promoting politician and a grubby hedge fund manager has left Edwards with a poverty of [fill in the blank].
[VIMH: But he grew up the son of a mill worker!]
Well he's a son of a something all right.
Posted by: hit and run | May 09, 2007 at 08:53 PM
"Working as an ambulance chasing trial lawyer, a pandering class-warfare promoting politician and a grubby hedge fund manager has left Edwards with a poverty of [fill in the blank]."
Obvious the man has acquired poverty offsets.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 09:06 PM
"One of Bill Clinton's many infuriating aspects was his unshakable belief that that he could sell any BS, however outrageous, to the rubes."
I cut the slob some slack, because it ain't bragging if you can do it. And boy, did he! The "sophisticates" were gulled even more than the rubes.
Cordially...
Posted by: Rick | May 09, 2007 at 09:14 PM
Thanks but I'm passing, Deagle. I'd rather right the Obama book with H & R.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 09:48 PM
Hehe... Oh well, a good book by H % R would a poor substitute. Sorry to hear that you are not running...(heh). Keep the chin up...I do love your input...
Posted by: Deagle | May 09, 2007 at 10:05 PM
He was for the hedge fund before he was against the hedge fund. Now cut the nonsense and let's go windsurfing.
Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report
Posted by: Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report | May 09, 2007 at 10:19 PM
OK, folks. I mean, I hate to say I told you so or anything like that, but here we go already with the stuff about how the Fort Dix Six would never have been a problem if it weren't for--you guessed it, us.
This is from the NYTimes:
"He [one of the Six] wanted the informer to lead the attack, according to a federal complaint. 'I am at your services,' the young man is quoted as telling the informer, who had presented himself as an Egyptian with a military background.
"That moment, recorded on tape and submitted in federal court this week in Camden, N.J., as the authorities charged six Muslim men in the plot, captures something of the complexity of using informers in terror investigations. The informer, sent to penetrate a loose group of men who liked to talk about jihad and fire guns in the woods, had come to be seen by the suspects as the person who might actually show them how an act of terror could be carried off.
"Indeed, over the months that followed, as the targets of the investigation spoke with a sometimes unfocused zeal about waging holy war, the informer, one of two used in the investigation, would tell them that he could get them the sophisticated weapons they wanted. He would accompany them on surveillance missions to military installations, debating the risks, and when the men looked ready to purchase the weapons, it was the informer who seemed to be pushing the idea of buying the deadliest items, startling at least one of the suspects."
Get it? These guys just like to shoot off guns in the woods. Did they ever pose any kind of danger? Of course not--at least not until that nasty informant pushed them over the edge. Anyway, it's all very "complex."
Trust me, this is just the beginning...
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 10:52 PM