John Edwards' Two Americas Lady-Friends

The irritating, honey-throated trial lawyer, son-of-a-mill-worker, and reigning Father of the Year has admitted what only the National Enquirer, Mickey Kaus, and about 75,000 blogs were heretofore brave enough to discuss − he has been cheating on his cancer-stricken wife with a gal named Rielle Hunter. But just like Michael Jackson, Edwards swears the kid is not his son daughter. Finally, a political sex scandal involving sex!

Just desserts? Tabloid irrelevance? Tawdry-but-thrilling entertainment? Consider this your open thread.

Bonus Edwards quote, about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky: "I think this President has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen."

UPDATE: Nick Gillespie beat me to the punch, with bonus links and media angles, just below.

Comments

Nigel Watt | August 8, 2008, 4:33pm | #

On the plus side, we should never have to hear from him, ever again.

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 4:33pm | #

Nice Billie Jean reference.

Gway | August 8, 2008, 4:35pm | #

What else is one to expect from an ambulance chasing lawyer?

good luck

John Hawthorn | August 8, 2008, 4:36pm | #

I can't believe I find myself thinking this, I mean, what did I expect. Nevertheless...what a douche.

Jon | August 8, 2008, 4:36pm | #

Can we get some pics of this woman for a "To Hit It or Not To Hit It" analysis?

Citizen Nothing | August 8, 2008, 4:37pm | #

Does this mean the Father of the Year runner-up now assumes the crown?

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 4:37pm | #

"I think this President has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen."

Personally I think the moral dimensions of political leadership begin and end with knowing that torture is wrong, the Constitution is the Owner's Manual to which one swears an oath to follow, and that force is the last refuge of desperation.

But, it seems, many are still stuck on it mattering where you stick your dick.

Smappy | August 8, 2008, 4:38pm | #

Talk about throwing the (loaded) dice. Having an affair on your cancer-stricken wife before the presidential primaries.

Jaybird | August 8, 2008, 4:41pm | #

Reagan divorced Jane Wyman and everyone thought that he was Jesus!

Barack HUSSEIN Obama | August 8, 2008, 4:41pm | #

On the plus side, we should never have to hear from him, ever again.

Except as AmericaWeCanBeProudOf's Attorney General suing Big Free Enterprise, the greedy, environmentally racist, unsafe workplacing,.78 for every dollar a man makes Gaia raping, corporate fascists who didn't pony up BIG for my campaign.

Josh | August 8, 2008, 4:41pm | #

Citizen Nothing, only if he was using a performance-enhancing drug.

BoscoH | August 8, 2008, 4:44pm | #

That skank looks like a bleach blonde version of Elizabeth, who still perplexes me. Pretty boys with ugly wives mean one thing, and it starts with "closet". I suspect that's the underlying thing here, so this "scandal" becoming public isn't a huge deal to Edwards or his cancer stricken wife.

Jeff P, Reactionary Edition | August 8, 2008, 4:44pm | #

The root cause of this is, of course, female videographers. They are amoral and devoid of character. And they all wanna be Leni Riefenstahl anyway.

Episiarch | August 8, 2008, 4:49pm | #

Can we get some pics of this woman for a "To Hit It or Not To Hit It" analysis?

She's not impressive. She probably dresses up as a boy for him or something. Just google her name.

duster | August 8, 2008, 4:51pm | #

But, it seems, many are still stuck on it mattering where you stick your dick.

As one recent H+R poster recently pointed out( I think it was Weigel), media outlets have a problem with using the 'P' word(Policy). Things alluding to another 'P' word(Penis) are, of course, pure gold to them.

Pro Libertate | August 8, 2008, 4:53pm | #

Elemenope,

Well, I thought the man had character flaws up the wazoo to begin with. And, frankly, I think a guy who lacks personal ethics and morals doesn't deserve my vote. Caesar's wife should be above suspicion.

Jon | August 8, 2008, 4:53pm | #

"Episiarch | August 8, 2008, 4:49pm
She's not impressive. She probably dresses up as a boy for him or something. Just google her name."

AAAAAHhhhh Someone get me some eye-bleach.

rana | August 8, 2008, 4:55pm | #

Fuck. Are ALL men alike?!!! Someone, please, give me some hope.

Nigel Watt | August 8, 2008, 4:57pm | #

Rana, John Edwards was your source of hope in men?

Cliff | August 8, 2008, 4:57pm | #

Geeze, and I thought Monica Lewinski was not worth it.

She's even less attractive.

shrike | August 8, 2008, 4:57pm | #

On the plus side, he is not a GOP gayfag like Mark Foley, Larry Craig, countless "reverends" and George W. Bush (see Victor Ashe).

I doubt Edwards had to dribble into a test tube to "create" twins like the Bushpig did, but Edwards probably does not recoil at the sight of vagina like our Dear Leader does.

Jon | August 8, 2008, 4:58pm | #

Listen rana if she's working for Edwards, she lost her brain a long time ago.

I like smart women, they're a huge turn on.

Given that this woman apparently has no brains ... all I can do is go on looks.

Episiarch | August 8, 2008, 4:58pm | #

Fuck. Are ALL men alike?!!! Someone, please, give me some hope.

HAHAHAHAHA

What else are we supposed to say? That's he's an amoral douchebag? We already knew that. Now we need to discuss the details, and that includes the quality of his poon-on-the-side.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 4:59pm | #

Kudos to the Inquirer!

It's funny reading all these liberals up in arms over a "private matter" when Republican sex scandals seem to bring great ecstasy to many of them.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 5:04pm | #

The real scandal isn't the sex but that people gave Edwards lots of money to change America only to have it funneled to his mistress.

And I bet a lot of those people weren't rich.

Seitz | August 8, 2008, 5:06pm | #

It's funny reading all these liberals up in arms over a "private matter" when Republican sex scandals seem to bring great ecstasy to many of them.

That's because there's usually an element of illegality to them. Like going after teenaged boys, or looking for gay sex in airport bathrooms.

I don't recall a lot of liberals calling Spitzer's indiscretion a "private matter". Most thought he was a dumbass and should have resigned. Bitchin straw man, though.

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 5:07pm | #

Well, I thought the man had character flaws up the wazoo to begin with. And, frankly, I think a guy who lacks personal ethics and morals doesn't deserve my vote. Caesar's wife should be above suspicion.

I was certainly no fan of Edwards, but I am personally leery of imputing character flaws to people I have not met and interacted with a decent amount of time except to the extent of their public actions already on record.

And most of our best presidents were fucking bastards, with few redeeming qualities. Among those redeeming qualities happened to be "can lead a country decently".

rana | August 8, 2008, 5:08pm | #

"Rana, John Edwards was your source of hope in men?"

"What else are we supposed to say? That's he's an amoral douchebag? We already knew that. Now we need to discuss the details, and that includes the quality of his poon-on-the-side."


Well, I just realized my cry for help could be interpreted in many ways...

I meant Jezuz'friggin'Christ, are there any decent guys left? you know, some guy who doesnt cheat on his dying wife?! (and, no, Nigel, it would be beyond absurd to pin my hopes on Edwards- whom I believe to be a pretty-boy-closet-gay. And, Epi, go ahead and discuss away the "nailability" of Hunter.. que mas queda?)

shrike | August 8, 2008, 5:11pm | #

Look, the pertinent question is, which is more important, Freedom or Morals?

The Moral Party, the GOP (stop laughing now) obviously will choke back their communion wafer on this tidbit - all the time pushing for prohibitions against reproductive freedom.

The Freedom Party will denounce Edwards in astonishment - but yet uphold his principals - so I ask you, "who is the better man"?

Me? I prefer JFK over Nixon.

Same reasons..

Yes, I know. Marilyn looks good now. Tricky Dick looks like he was holding Billy Graham's dick in his mouth the whole time....

Give me a humanist over a reject anytime...

Pro Libertate | August 8, 2008, 5:12pm | #

Wretched scum but good president is something we can only assess after they've been in office. My point is that if I know the guy is a creep, I'm not voting for him. And I'm not limiting this to sexual issues, either.

The Spitz | August 8, 2008, 5:13pm | #

Now do you understand why I did what I did?

Colin | August 8, 2008, 5:14pm | #

It seems to me Clinton's indiscretions involved illegalities. And I wouldn't be surprised if Edwards broke campaign finance laws. Oh, and then there's Barney Frank.

Nice try, though, dude.

joe | August 8, 2008, 5:17pm | #

he has been cheating on his cancer-stricken wife with a gal named Rielle Hunter.

had been. or was. or used to. This story is about an affair that ended in 2006.

Pretty boys with ugly wives mean one thing, and it starts with "closet".

She's hot in their wedding pictures.

joe | August 8, 2008, 5:19pm | #

It seems to me Clinton's indiscretions involved illegalities. Nope. Not even an accusation of anything illegal about the affair.

And I wouldn't be surprised if Edwards broke campaign finance laws. I'm sure you wouldn't.

Oh, and then there's Barney Frank. From what I've seen, that was a huge scandal that got a lot of press when it broke. Back when I was in first grade.

Nice try, though, d00d.

Matt J | August 8, 2008, 5:20pm | #

This is just the icing on the scumbag cake for Edwards.

Remember him sending an aid to scam a free PS3 out of Walmart even as he was bashing them on the stump.

Or this little jewel from Bob Shrum on why Kerry was queasy about him as a running mate.

Edwards had told Kerry he was going to share a story with him that he'd never told anyone else—that after his son Wade had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home, laid there and hugged his body, and promised that he'd do all he could to make life better for people, to live up to Wade's ideals of service. Kerry was stunned, not moved, because, as he told me later, Edwards had recounted the same exact story to him, almost in the exact same words, a year or two before—and with the same preface, that he'd never shared the memory with anyone else.

The guy is sleaze incarnate. I'm sorry for his wife, but that's what you get for marrying an obvious douche.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 5:20pm | #

I won't defend the GOP, but do you really believe the Democratic Party is the "Freedom Party"?

This is a party that wants government involved in every facet of our lives (outside the bedroom.) This is a party that would confiscate every gun tomorrow if they could away it, this is a party dedicated to robing the fruits of our labor in order to create an equality of outcomes.

Please.

shrike | August 8, 2008, 5:22pm | #

Wretched scum but good president is something we can only assess after they've been in office. My point is that if I know the guy is a creep, I'm not voting for him. And I'm not limiting this to sexual issues, either

But you're a fucking idiot.

I oppose Edwards' socialized medicine too. But if that were OFF the table - with 70% of Congress opposing it... he is EXACTLY the type president a Libertarian would want.

Anti-war, anti-drug war, anti drag war, anti nation building, anti all wars....

Its just the Socialized Medicine sticking in your craw - where that issue should be killed in the House of Representatives.

Zeb | August 8, 2008, 5:23pm | #

Honestly, is it really so hard not to fuck you staff? I have been going through my whole life not having inappropriate affairs and doing so wouldn't even ruin my career.

But why should I give a fuck. I've always thought Edwards was the biggest fake piece of shit in a whole pool full of fake pieces of shit. Just glad he won't be running again.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 5:25pm | #

Here you equivocating again, joe.

As long they promote your goals, anything they do is golden.

If I recall Clinton lied about the affair(s) under oath. That's a crime in every world but yours.

That Barney Frank did what he did 30 years ago, makes what he did okay? He's still serving the last time I checked.

J sub D | August 8, 2008, 5:25pm | #

Bottom line -

Edwards is a one term senator and losing VP candidate. In the history books he'll be an asterisk.

See ya.

joshua corning | August 8, 2008, 5:26pm | #

he has been cheating on his cancer-stricken wife

I predicted that Obama/Edwards would lose to McCain/Romney.

Can I get a mulligan?

shrike | August 8, 2008, 5:28pm | #

I won't defend the GOP, but do you really believe the Democratic Party is the "Freedom Party"?

You're goddamn right.

Because there is no FREEDOM - until my personal DNA, right to die, right to conceive, right to fuck who I want, right to avoid Christ Fags who push mandatory prayer, right to marry, right to hate GOP gayFags, right to Blasphemy, right to porn (Gawd Bless you old useless Cawk, Larry Flynt) etc is FUCKING RESPECTED by the Goddamn Legislature!

Seitz | August 8, 2008, 5:29pm | #

That's a crime in every world but yours.

Actually it's not. You may want to read a perjury statute some day.

This is a party that wants government involved in every facet of our lives (outside the bedroom.) This is a party that would confiscate every gun tomorrow if they could away it, this is a party dedicated to robing the fruits of our labor in order to create an equality of outcomes.

Normally I'd assume this was satire, but since everything else you've posted has been pretty bat-shit insane, I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry.

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 5:30pm | #

If I recall Clinton lied about the affair(s) under oath. That's a crime in every world but yours.

It's only a crime if they had a legal basis to ask the question in the first place.

Which they didn't.

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 5:32pm | #

shrike, this:

Because there is no FREEDOM - until my personal DNA, right to die, right to conceive, right to fuck who I want, right to avoid Christ Fags who push mandatory prayer, right to marry, right to hate GOP gayFags, right to Blasphemy, right to porn (Gawd Bless you old useless Cawk, Larry Flynt) etc is FUCKING RESPECTED by the Goddamn Legislature!

is not what is called being a help.

J sub D | August 8, 2008, 5:33pm | #

I predicted that Obama/Edwards would lose to McCain/Romney.

Can I get a mulligan?

Nope. I predicted Edwards would be Obama's VP choice as well. Oh well. Do I want to go double or nothing?

rana | August 8, 2008, 5:33pm | #

OK, now I put my estrogen aside...

I had to look up a picture of Hunter (inquiring minds want to know)...

Well, she is not a beauty but she is not a troll either. Dunno, if I were a guy, and really drunk, I'd do her.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 5:33pm | #

Great reply to my arguments. You can only reply with insults. I wonder why?

And why don't you explain perjury statues, genius? Why wasn't it perjury?

Seitz | August 8, 2008, 5:35pm | #

And why don't you explain perjury statues, genius? Why wasn't it perjury?

There's this thing called materiality. You may want to look it up. I'd help you, but I'm too busy trying to confiscate everyone's guns and redistribute everyone's wealth. It'd be a lot easier if they'd come out of their bedrooms, since that the one place I won't go.

joe | August 8, 2008, 5:36pm | #

Colin,

You don't know what the word "equivocate" means, do you? You keep misusing it to a degree that makes it obvious.

If I recall Clinton lied about the affair(s) under oath. Which wasn't the question. You wrote that Clinton's "indiscretions" involved illegal behavior, in response to the observation that Democrats' affairs don't usually involve criminal acts. Pointing out that he lied a few years later in a deposition is wholly irrelevant. Why weren't people upset about Bill Clinton's affair? Because the affair didn't involve any illegal acts. Nice try, though, dude.

That Barney Frank did what he did 30 years ago, makes what he did okay? First, he didn't do anything illegal, his lover did. Second, what part of "it was a big scandal and got a lot of press" is eluding you? Nice try, though, dude.

J sub D | August 8, 2008, 5:38pm | #

It's only a crime if they had a legal basis to ask the question in the first place.

Which they didn't.

Wrong. It was perjury in a civil lawsuit. Ask my mayor or county D.A. about how that works.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 5:38pm | #

If it were immaterial, why didn't his legal team object? He certainly must've had more than adequate council.

R C Dean | August 8, 2008, 5:38pm | #

This story is about an affair that ended in 2006.

Sez who?

Look, if he's dropping by her hotel room at 2:00 am, I won't find it hard to believe that he's not still, you know.

Who visits their ex-mistresses in hotel rooms, anyway? At 2:00 am?

Who has pictures taken with someone else's baby, in a hotel room, wearing a t-shirt?

I'm not sure what it would take to convince me that he's not a lying sac, still trying to retain some tatter of a career by pretending he wasn't banging the skank while his wife was sick with cancer.

Pro Libertate | August 8, 2008, 5:39pm | #

Well, I may be a fucking idiot, but I'm a principled fucking idiot. Besides, I don't like Edwards for a whole host of reasons.

BDB | August 8, 2008, 5:40pm | #

I don't buy that it stopped in 2006. I also don't buy that the baby isn't his.

Hes a slimebag.

BDB | August 8, 2008, 5:41pm | #

BTW joe how does it feel to defend adultery?

joe | August 8, 2008, 5:43pm | #

You might be right, RC. I may have misread that.

shrike | August 8, 2008, 5:44pm | #

Elemenope-

Autonomy over your body and self-direction is the primary Foundation of LIBERTY!

I respect you!

But please tell me how personal moral decisions are subject to the whims of government?

YES, I do hate "religionists" who want to legislate these decision for all.... I have a PROFOUND BIAS to personal autonomy.....

joe | August 8, 2008, 5:45pm | #

BTW joe how does it feel to defend adultery?

I wouldn't know. How does it feel to defend keeping people in poverty? I've noticed that you have this annoying habit of not agreeing with every thing ever said by people who find an example of poverty. You must be so ashamed.

shrike | August 8, 2008, 5:45pm | #

Well, I may be a fucking idiot, but I'm a principled fucking idiot. Besides, I don't like Edwards for a whole host of reasons.

Case settled.

BDB | August 8, 2008, 5:47pm | #

The thing thats fascinating to me is the self-destructive streak. He wanted to get the nomination of the Democratic Party KNOWING something like this could blow up in October and hand the election to his opponent.

BIngo | August 8, 2008, 5:50pm | #

rana:

All the decent men are married... or bitter misogynists after dealing with the horrible women out there.

Seitz | August 8, 2008, 5:51pm | #

If it were immaterial, why didn't his legal team object? He certainly must've had more than adequate council.

I'm not here to teach you the rules of evidence. You generally cannot object (except as to form) in depositions or grand jury hearings (during which the "legal team" isn't even present in the room).

Hey, here's an idea, why don't you do some of your own research, find a clue or two, and get some of these answers for yourself?

Colin | August 8, 2008, 5:52pm | #

How does it feel to defend keeping people in poverty?

Explain how can something or someone can keep people in poverty.

And what's your plan for poverty? Redistributing wealth?

shrike | August 8, 2008, 5:53pm | #

The thing thats fascinating to me is the self-destructive streak. He wanted to get the nomination of the Democratic Party KNOWING something like this could blow up in October and hand the election to his opponent.

Bingo. This poster has identified the fatal flaw of Edwards.

Unsubstantive Kurt | August 8, 2008, 5:54pm | #

Its just the Socialized Medicine sticking in your craw

"Just"?

Yeah, just that one little thing...

Dagny T. | August 8, 2008, 5:55pm | #

Well, she is not a beauty but she is not a troll either.i>

Rana,

I agree! At least she's not a whale. The guys on this site have high standards, I'll give 'em that.

Obviously Spitzer's was hotter, but that's just this girl's opinion.

Dagny T. | August 8, 2008, 5:55pm | #

Close tags, much? Sorry.

PapayaSF | August 8, 2008, 6:00pm | #

Joe, for quite a while there were many on the left claiming that even consensual sex between an employer and employee was per se sexual harrassment, because of the power imbalance. If it's not illegal, it wasn't for lack of trying on their part. Of course, after Lewinsky, the previous overwhelming importance of expanding sexual harassment laws went away, for some strange reason....

Shrike, it's absurd to say that except for the socialized medicine thing, Edwards is fine with libertarians. The guy made millions suing doctors, and thus making giving birth more expensive, based on junk science (the idea that babies wouldn't have cerebral palsy [IIRC] if only the doctors had done a Caesarian section). Most libertarians dislike scamming trial lawyers.

joshua corning | August 8, 2008, 6:01pm | #

I meant Jezuz'friggin'Christ, are there any decent guys left? you know, some guy who doesnt cheat on his dying wife?!

Yes and they are all married and wont cheat on their wife to be with you.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 6:02pm | #

Well, I clearly don't have the legal expertize you have, scholar. All I know he was convicted of perjury by (an albeit partisan) House. 50 Senators voted to convict him of obstruction of justice.

And later on, in a different sex scandal, he was cited for contempt of court, causing the suspension of his law license.

If you don't want to consider these "crimes" relating to a sex scandal, fine with me.

joshua corning | August 8, 2008, 6:03pm | #

How does it feel to defend keeping people in poverty?

Actually joe to find that out i would ask you.

prolefeed | August 8, 2008, 6:05pm | #

rana | August 8, 2008, 4:55pm | #

Fuck. Are ALL men alike?!!! Someone, please, give me some hope.

Well, unless you think all men are amoral twits like Edwards, then, no, we're not all alike.

Got three sisters, each of whom ran through dozens of dirtbags before they found a decent guy.

If every guy you date invariably turns out to be pondscum, perhaps you need to revisit which guys you ignored while getting attracted to the pondscum, and ponder if you somehow systematically screened out the decent ones. Your search parameters may need tweaking.

Just sayin' ...

Colin | August 8, 2008, 6:06pm | #

Well said, joshua.

Seitz | August 8, 2008, 6:08pm | #

Well, contempt is not a "crime". And no, you don't have the legal expertise that I do.

50 Senators voted to convict him of obstruction of justice.

Every single one of them Republican. What a shock. They probably could have gone 40 votes to convict him of kidnapping the Lindbergh baby.

So no, they aren't "crimes" related to a sex scandal, but even that completely misses the point that the SEX IN QUESTION WASN'T INHERENTLY ILLEGAL! It's really not a difficult concept to grasp. It's not like trying to pick up on high school boys. It's not like going to a prostitute. It's not like soliciting sex on airport bathrooms. It's sex between consenting adults. Making any sense to you yet?

What Edwards and Clinton did was pretty despicable. It wasn't criminal. Big difference.

Seitz | August 8, 2008, 6:10pm | #

soliciting sex on airport bathrooms

Or even in airport bathrooms.

joshua corning | August 8, 2008, 6:10pm | #

http://nymag.com/images/2/daily/intel/07/10/10_hunter_lgl.jpg

I would do it.

Note: I do not have a wife, cancer ridden or other wise

Bingo | August 8, 2008, 6:11pm | #

Lying about it in court is criminal.

Seitz | August 8, 2008, 6:13pm | #

Lying about it in court is criminal.

Not necessarily, but that's already been covered.

Bingo | August 8, 2008, 6:13pm | #

Jesus christ, if I'm ever a rich ass trial lawyer I would hope to find a better mistress than that. Does she share a stable with Sarah Jessica Parker?

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 6:14pm | #

Autonomy over your body and self-direction is the primary Foundation of LIBERTY!

Yup.

But please tell me how personal moral decisions are subject to the whims of government?

They shouldn't be. But my point was not so much the content of your post so much as the form.

YES, I do hate "religionists" who want to legislate these decision for all.... I have a PROFOUND BIAS to personal autonomy.....

I don't hate them, I just think they're wrong. Everyone (including me) gets stupid around their own pet issues, informed as they may be by subjective and un-reflective experiences, personal bias, lack of data, and so forth. Christianists in America are only *dangerous* because there are a sizable number of them, they are manipulating a common and foundational cultural trope (getting in the back door of the bullshit detector, as it were), and have founded a parasitic relationship with a much larger major political party.

rana | August 8, 2008, 6:16pm | #

Prolefeed,
Thanks for the advice... I will let my single girlfriends know.
I am married to a great guy, who, up to now, has given me no reason to believe he would do this to me.
Mine was a knee-jerk reaction to a situation I have seen happen to someone very dear to me.

I supposse I cant blame you for thinking that my experience with men has been bad or that I am somehow a man hater... Quite the opposite (i guess I have been lucky).

Joshua,
Edwards IS married. And if he cheated on his cancer-stricken wife with an average-looking woman, he would just about die to be with me!!!

But not that I'm looking to cheat on MY husband.
Just sayin'...

Urkobold™ | August 8, 2008, 6:18pm | #

DAGNY T.,

TELL THE URKOBOLD MORE ABOUT YOUR GIRL-LUST FOR SPITZER'S WHORE.

Bingo | August 8, 2008, 6:18pm | #

Just remember rana:

There is no "I" in threesome.

joshua corning | August 8, 2008, 6:22pm | #

And if he cheated on his cancer-stricken wife with an average-looking woman, he would just about die to be with me!!!

Not to delve to far into Edwards psyc but it is not beyond reason for a man taking care of his dying wife to want to bag something. Looks might not be the major motivator here. (note: I actually think for her age hunter is pretty good looking)

Paul | August 8, 2008, 6:23pm | #

OK, now I put my estrogen aside...

Edwards put his aside, too.

I'm here all week.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 6:24pm | #

Well, I'm certainly going to nitpick legal definitions, and I made clear the partisan nature of the conviction. The fact is the scandal(s) wasn't only about sex.

And it's still yet to be seen if Edwards broke any laws.

My intended original point was only that a political sex scandal should be treated equally, regardless of political party of the participant.

joe | August 8, 2008, 6:24pm | #

The thing thats fascinating to me is the self-destructive streak. He wanted to get the nomination of the Democratic Party KNOWING something like this could blow up in October and hand the election to his opponent.

I don't think this is true. People in positions of great power and influence, who've had a great deal of success, often come to think of themselves as untouchable. He probably thought he was so brilliant and smooth that he couldn't get caught.

Explain how can something or someone can keep people in poverty. No. I will explain something else, though, since the rather obvious point I made had, surprise surprise, eluded you: being skeptical or indisposed towards the statements a group of politically-minded people make about Subject X is not the same thing as defending X. I need to explain this to a self-proclaimed libertarian? That's pathetic, Colin.

Papaya SF, I think your smooshing a great deal together here: Joe, for quite a while there were many on the left claiming that even consensual sex between an employer and employee was per se sexual harrassment, because of the power imbalance. There is a small group that contends that all such relationships are, by definition, sexual harassment. There is a much larger group that recognizes that the power imbalance can complicate things. Even among the latter group, there are differences over where to draw the line. Among "leftists" as a whole, there is probably something under 10% who would consider it sexual harassment for a boss to carry on with an employee who keeps coming onto him.

joe | August 8, 2008, 6:29pm | #

My intended original point was only that a political sex scandal should be treated equally, regardless of political party of the participant.

Actually, your original point is that they ARE not treated equally. When someone pointed out the difference between a sex-only scandal and a sex-and-crime scandal, you came up with two examples.

One was Bill Clinton - an episode in which, when an act of questionable legality was committed years later, resulted in the New York Times and Washington Post running editorials calling for him to resign from office.

The other was Barney Frank - an episode which, when an illegal act by Frank's lover came to light, resulted in massive media coverage and calls for him to resign.

And you did this in response to the story about Jonathan Edwards' affair, which is getting wide media coverage and producing haughty denunciations, and which doesn't appear to involve any illegal activity.

Matt J | August 8, 2008, 6:30pm | #

Obviously Spitzer's was hotter, but that's just this girl's opinion.

You get what you pay for.

shrike | August 8, 2008, 6:31pm | #

I don't hate them, I just think they're wrong. Everyone (including me) gets stupid around their own pet issues, informed as they may be by subjective and un-reflective experiences, personal bias, lack of data, and so forth. Christianists in America are only *dangerous* because there are a sizable number of them, they are manipulating a common and foundational cultural trope (getting in the back door of the bullshit detector, as it were), and have founded a parasitic relationship with a much larger major political party.

A subtle difference from me - but you might have a future is politics - I DON'T!

Good wordsmithying on your part.

You are good. For real.

I am a fucking Irish bastard. I hate these cocksuckers like TallDave.

Let the difference be noted - and duly celebrated!

shrike | August 8, 2008, 6:33pm | #

I don't get to post here often, boys - maybe twice a week.

But I promise, from now onward I will ratchet my hostility up.

Fuck the bastards.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 6:34pm | #

I'll admit I'm having a difficult time understanding the charge you're making against me. But being called "pathetic" by someone of your caliber is the supreme badge of honor. Thank you.

And you can't answer the original question because you have none. It's you and your socialism that's pathetic.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 6:38pm | #

Actually, your original point is that they ARE not treated equally.

You missed a word, bub. Take a look again. I said "intended."

joe | August 8, 2008, 6:39pm | #

I'll admit I'm having a difficult time understanding the charge you're making against me.

Gee, you don't say.

Um...you're welcome?

And you can't answer the original question because you have none. Yes, there can't possibly be any other reason why I'd decide not to be distracted from pummeling your sorry ass by a threadjack after you took a shot at me.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 6:43pm | #

Gee, you don't say

I say. I say. Please rephrase. In English this time.

Pummeling my ass, eh? Better take a look at your own backside. It's pretty red.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 6:45pm | #

And it's you who threadjacked -- by lodging that "poverty" attack in response to that guy's question relating to infidelity.

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 6:46pm | #

Well...thanks, Shrike. I hope I don't have a future in politics, though. I do not relish the notion of a nation (or any other polity) going through my and my family's life with a fine-tooth comb to "vet" me.

And I've got a little Irish in me, too. :)

joe | August 8, 2008, 6:57pm | #

I say. I say. Please rephrase. In English this time.

Already done, at 6:29.

Your accusation is bullshit. Comprende?

And it's you who threadjacked -- by lodging that "poverty" attack in response to that guy's question relating to infidelity.

Wow. You aren't kidding, are you? You actually didn't understand that I was using poverty as an example to demonstrate the illogic of BDB's charge. You thought I was...wow.

Good night, Colin, and I'm sorry. I'm going to go pick on someone my own size now.

Jon | August 8, 2008, 7:02pm | #

Paul | August 8, 2008, 6:23pm |
OK, now I put my estrogen aside...

Edwards put his aside, too.

I'm here all week.

AAAAA OOOOO!

Seriously though ... politics attracts shitstains. Said shitstains that happen to be very good at telling people what they want to hear and then deflecting criticism on others. Essentially their entire existence is about not being accountable.

So honestly I'm not surprised.

Pug | August 8, 2008, 7:03pm | #

That Barney Frank did what he did 30 years ago, makes what he did okay?

I'm sure you apply the same standard to John McCain who was nailing a beer heiress half his age while his seriously injured wife lay in the hospital.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 7:04pm | #

No, joe, you're bullshit. You and your bankrupt philosophy. Comprende, you condescending sack of shit?

Good night, Colin, and I'm sorry. I'm going to go pick on someone my own size now.

I think they might arrest you if you attack an infant.

Colin | August 8, 2008, 7:09pm | #

Pug, I would never defend McCain. In fact, I don't really have any problem with Frank. The funny part of that whole story was that Larry Craig was one of his chief accusers.

All I'm trying to say is that these scandals should be treated equally.

ellipsis | August 8, 2008, 7:16pm | #

I would think after the 60s and 70s, no one would be available to claim the "Virgin Mary" trophy of political purity.

That it matters says more about the state of Americans than it does its leaders. Lawyers and CEOs and doctors have affairs all the time, and no one cares. But if it's a politician, the wrath of God is at hand.

DJ Voton | August 8, 2008, 7:18pm | #

I am a fucking Irish bastard. I hate these cocksuckers like TallDave.
How charming.
I don't get to post here often, boys - maybe twice a week.
What a shame.

Elemenope | August 8, 2008, 7:24pm | #

DJ Voton has clearly never been to Ireland. :)

shrike | August 8, 2008, 7:28pm | #

Oh DJ Voton....

How you fucking cut me down. I love this shit.

Tell me who YOU are, you fucking low-life. You see, I am a defender of Liberty, the stuff of Revolutionaries.. I LOVE our secular Republic and respect our Democracy - never mind the subtle difference. You won't emerge from your fucking empty sepulchre - shorn of your forlorn "saviour". Wait for him like an idiot, full of nothingness - just a empty sound signifying nothingness.

Your rock is good for you. Stay there.

Episiarch | August 8, 2008, 10:01pm | #

And I've got a little Irish in me, too. :)

LMNOP, you slept with joe?

ZING

Thank you, thank you very much. Please don't forget to tip your waitress.

John C. Randolph | August 8, 2008, 10:02pm | #

So, fluffy the trial lawyer is a slut. Why should we care? Did he lie about it under oath or something?

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 8, 2008, 10:04pm | #

What's really funny to me about this fracas is the way the dems are sputtering "but McCain did it too!", as if that excuses Edwards.

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 8, 2008, 10:06pm | #

You get what you pay for.

My understanding was that a major part of what Spitzer was paying for was silence. I don't think he got that.

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 8, 2008, 10:07pm | #

Explain how can something or someone can keep people in poverty.

Simple, Robert Mugabe and other kleptocrats do it every day. You tax away their earnings or inflate their savings away from them.

-jcr

Gilbert Martin | August 8, 2008, 10:07pm | #

This is perfect illustration of the liberal bias of the mainstream media who willfully ignored this story as long as they could - in constrast with gleefully playing up a (still) unproven affair that McCain supposedly had decades ago.

DJ Voton | August 8, 2008, 10:31pm | #

DJ Voton has clearly never been to Ireland. :)
Nope. There are more drunken assholes than I'll ever need on this side of the Atlantic.

rakune | August 8, 2008, 10:43pm | #

"Edwards IS married. And if he cheated on his cancer-stricken wife with an average-looking woman, he would just about die to be with me!!!"

Pics or STFU.


Just kidding - about the STFU, not the photos.

Virginia Harris | August 8, 2008, 11:30pm | #

Thanks to the suffragettes

I admire Elizabeth Edwards for standing by her man. Thanks to the suffragettes, women have choices in their lives. She doesn't have to stay - she wants to stay.

Politicians will be politicians!

Betcha don't know which president had a love child while running for office, and how that helped women win the vote.

Most people are totally in the dark about HOW the suffragettes won.

Now finding out the sexy, shocking truth is as easy as opening your e-mail.

"The Privilege of Voting" is a new e-mail series that follows eight women from 1912 - 1920 to reveal ALL that happened to set the stage for women to win the vote.

Two beautiful and extremely powerful suffragettes -- Alice Paul and Emmeline Pankhurst are featured, along with Edith Wharton, Isadora Duncan, Alice Roosevelt and two gorgeous presidential mistresses.

There is a ton of heartache, and lots of hot affairs on the rocky road to the ballot box.

Presented in a unique sequential e-mail series that makes discovering history fast and FUN! Each exciting episode is a about 10 minutes - perfect to enjoy during coffeebreaks, or anytime.

Subscribe free at

www.CoffeebreakReaders.com/tpovpage.html

atrevete | August 9, 2008, 12:39am | #

I'm just waiting for the press conference where Elizabeth is bravely standing by the side of John Edwards.

And when he starts to "explain", in the middle of the first answer to the press questions, just ONCE, I'd like to see her, the wife, take off her shoe and beat the ever lovin' shit out of him with it.

dbcooper | August 9, 2008, 8:29am | #

FYI, Rielle Hunter ran with the same crowd as Jay McInerney in the 80's, and was used as a character (Alison Poole) by him and Brett Easton Ellis.

"You were hanging out with that bimbo Alison something … Stoole?"
"Poole, honey," I reply calmly. "Alison Poole."
"Yeah, that was her name, " [Elizabeth] says, then with unmasked sarcasm, "Hot number."
"What do you mean by that?" I ask, offended. "She was a hot number."
Elizabeth turns to Christie and unfortunately says, "If you had an American Express card she'd give you a blow-job."

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/08/allow_bret_easton_ellis_to_int.html

Bruce Majors | August 9, 2008, 9:21am | #

and my 2 questions:

1) Are we being fed this story because the other stories are about other affairs. including with guys. (I heard rumors several years ago about Edward's bisexuality, but theywere just rumors) like this Andrew Young character you says he is Rielle Hunter's baby daddy. and who claims to have been sleeping with Rielle at the same time Edwards was.

2) Do we smell Miss Hillary's fingers on this story? which comes out just in time to cut off Edwards' VP chances?

J sub D | August 9, 2008, 9:44am | #

Lying about it in court is criminal.

Not necessarily, but that's already been covered.

If you're a Clinton sycophant, he didn't commit perjury. If you're a Clinton hater, he's worse than Nixon vis a vis obstructing justice and perjury. If you're an honest observer with no dog in the fight, Bill Clinton commited perjury about his sexual affairs in a sexual harassment lawsuit. It was obviously a lie and obviously material to the matter at hand.

Hardly an impeachable offesne IMHO, but definitely perjury.

joe | August 9, 2008, 10:03am | #

in constrast with gleefully playing up a (still) unproven affair that McCain supposedly had decades ago.

Gil, McCain has admitted the affair, and is MARRIED TO HER.

Good Lord, you make Colin look like Walter Cronkite.

Matt J | August 9, 2008, 11:37am | #

My understanding was that a major part of what Spitzer was paying for was silence. I don't think he got that.

The call girl didn't rat him out. He got caught on wiretaps haggling over price. If he had shut up and paid up he would have been fine.

brotherben | August 9, 2008, 11:42am | #

Edwards spent $1200 on a haircut. Now he is gonna pay alot more for gettin a little trim.

Colin | August 9, 2008, 2:19pm | #

Now you're really insulting me, joey, comparing to a liberal hack like Cronkite.

Go back to Kos -- you're running low on material.

MEDIA CRITIC to the URKOBOLD | August 9, 2008, 2:53pm | #

TIS A SHAME ABOUT REMOTE CONTROL BEING CANCELED. NOW COLIN IS TROLLING FOR FOOD.

atrevete | August 9, 2008, 3:22pm | #

WHY doesn't Elizabeth just DIVORCE him. He claims that baby don't look like him and he's "not in love" with Rielle - is this supposed to IMPROVE his image? THAT is supposed to make Elizabeth want to stand by him?

He's clueless about how much a scumbag this makes him look. This is some Maury Povitch shit.

smartass sob | August 9, 2008, 7:41pm | #

Hardly an impeachable offesne IMHO, but definitely perjury.

See, I've never quite understood that. Presidents can be impeached for "high crimes and misdemeanors." Isn't perjury a misdemeanor?

whit | August 9, 2008, 8:27pm | #

(referenced as illegal) "looking for gay sex in airport bathrooms."

actually, there is an excellent free speech case here that even if craig WAS *looking* for or soliciting gay sex in a bathroom, that it is not illegal.

clearly, sex in the stall can be illegal - (indecent exposure), etc.

but "looking for gay sex" or soliciting it or whatnot, as long as there is not a monetary transaction (which of course would be prostitution - which SHOULD be illegal - but isn't in most places) is free expression.

if craig had walked up to a guy in the bathroom (using the urinal, for instance) and said "hey wanna have sex ?" that would not be illegal . so, doing a "symbolic version" via wide stance etc. shouldn't be - either.

think about it.

i realize he pled guilty, but from a pure aclu'ish free speech angle, there cannot be a crime in LOOKING for or soliciting sex (and we're not talking about sexual harassment power relationships in the workplace here).

assuming craig didn't merely have a "wide stance" (lol), you cannot criminalize looking for or asking a person for sex (or a date, etc.).

anarch | August 9, 2008, 8:50pm | #

prostitution - which SHOULD be illegal

whit, did I understand this to be your opinion? If so, why should prostitution be illegal?

whit | August 9, 2008, 11:17pm | #

I *meant* should be LEGAL. obviously. considering it IS illegal almost everywhere, that should be obvious. or maybe not

but it was still my bad for the typo.

anarch | August 10, 2008, 6:51am | #

Ah good. Or perhaps bad, in that, as you point out, it IS illegal almost everywhere.

Because I live a sheltered life, I considered it possible that I'd missed the liberalization/abolition of laws against prostitution along with those against adultery, sodomy, etc., and/or that it's simply always been legal in more places than I imagined.

I'm not a great fan of prostitution, but even leaving aside victimless crimes and the proper role (if any) of the state, I don't know how a third party would distinguish commerce from an exchange of gifts.

sasob | August 10, 2008, 7:32am | #

...I don't know how a third party would distinguish commerce from an exchange of gifts.

I assume they do so by determining if one of the "gifts" in the exchange is a sexual favor.

anarch | August 10, 2008, 7:43am | #

And not when the other gift is also? Or the other gift is dinner and a show? Or a car? Or a pretty house in the burbs with kids and a dog?

John in Nashville | August 10, 2008, 1:57pm | #

Regarding the ilegality of prostitution:

Can anyone think of a service/activity, other than sex, that it is lawful to give away but unlawful to sell? The only ones I have thought of are voting and organ donation.

anarch | August 10, 2008, 2:47pm | #

Well, isn't it impermissible to sell your children, but permissible to give them up for adoption?

anarch | August 10, 2008, 2:51pm | #

Also, while not illegal tout court, dispensing legal and medical advice for compensation is strictly licensed, but so far as I know a layman can with impunity offer unremunerated counsel. Goes for fortune-telling, too.

stuck in 200 | August 10, 2008, 4:07pm | #

Gil, McCain has admitted the affair, and is MARRIED TO HER.

Or married to one of them, at least. In a remarkable coincidence, the rich one.