Google Rielle Hunter

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
If you like this story, digg it!
and tell me why the hell I am not hearing her name all over my television all day and night.

The only way this would be more suspicious is if she had produced triplets by that primping cock sucker.

We, my fellow Americans have been had, more than we realized.  What else have we allowed to happen in our names?
< Obama on offshore drilling (poison pill?) | CNN Ran My McCain/Edwards Story!...Maybe >
 Display:

The reason I'm not talking about it is: I. Don't. Care.

The same reason I'm not in shoe price threads or haircut outrage posts. It's nonsense, and way too "normal" a scandal to pique my interest.

by MedfordTim on 08/02/2008 04:44:14 PM EST


If Mitt Romney was the father, rather than John Edwards. How much would you care then? How much ink would the story be getting from the Drive-By Media? Now then, tell me there is no such thing as media bias.

by KenTX on 08/02/2008 05:21:28 PM EST

[ Parent ]

I don't care if it said McCain gal pal Heidi Montag was the father.  I don't believe the National Enquirer.

Apparently, you are willing to believe anyone who says what you want to hear.  That simple concept is the underlying principle of Fox News.

by ProfRich on 08/02/2008 11:38:59 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Romney isn't a candidate.

by MedfordTim on 08/03/2008 05:39:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Because even the shitty easily duped clowns we call MSM journalist have too much respect to run stories based on the reporting of an organization that has been proven in court over and over and over again to lie for a living.

Is the right wing so detached from the truth and reality they can no longer grasp this?

by ProfRich on 08/02/2008 05:17:14 PM EST


This one. Right here. You'll be seeing it again, because I'm going to force ProfRich to eat this post in the very near future.

John Edwards will not be Obama's VP, unless they want to guarantee defeat.

John Edwards will not be running in 2012.

John Edwards is out of contention for 2016.

John Edwards will never be president.

Gary Hart is a more likely possibility than John Edwards.

I only wish I could have looked into his eyes at the moment his face was "ashen-white", so I could smile at the motherfucker when he realized he will never achieve his dream.

by KenTX on 08/02/2008 09:07:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Last week it was announced that there were three vetted VP choices for Obama--none of whom were Edwards.  He hasn't been talked about as VP very much at all.  So, this tidbit of "news" doesn't mean anything in terms of the general election.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I haven't even considered Edwards to be an option for future presidential candidate even though I was a supporter of his.  It's too far away to worry about right now.  

Why is this not news?  For the above reasons, as well as:

1.  There is still no substantive proof that this is Edwards' love-child.

2.  Adultery is not illegal, and some people actually have open marriages. 

3.  Nobody cares.

Anyway, I know you know this and just wish things were different.  Maybe you could create your own anti-Edwards ad and air it on The Young Turks since advertising is so cheap.  Have at it Hoss!!  ;) 

by desertpear on 08/02/2008 09:29:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Why is this not news?  For the above reasons, as well as:
1.  There is still no substantive proof that this is Edwards' love-child.
2.  Adultery is not illegal, and some people actually have open marriages. 
3.  Nobody cares.
Anyway, I know you know this and just wish things were different.  Maybe you could create your own anti-Edwards ad and air it on The Young Turks since advertising is so cheap.  Have at it Hoss!! 

Let’s run a quick poll to determine if Young Turks care about charges of adultery.
spencer
cenk
rev24
ihavenobias
dogger
bfaul
Oh, now I get it! They only care if the charges are leveled against Republicans!
Does the love child belong to John Edwards? That’s an easy question to answer. All it takes are a couple of quick schwabs on the inside of a couple of cheeks.
Edwards has been eliminated from the VP job. He has nowhere to go.

by KenTX on 08/03/2008 01:04:26 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Perhaps it's because Republicans run on how snow-white they are in terms of sexual mores and "family values."

HYPOCRISY.  It's what's for dinner.

by jarett on 08/03/2008 03:47:53 AM EST

[ Parent ]

We only care when it is from an even remotely trustworthy news source, not when it is from an organization of professional liars.

I promise you I would care equally less if it was about McCain or Bush and the source was the National Enquirer.  Why can't you get this?

And how is this story even relevant when women in Appalachia are having half human half bat alien babies fathered by chupacabras?  Have some perspective man!

by ProfRich on 08/03/2008 01:56:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]

I do think Edwards is a kind of a dick if he's cheating on his wife,  especially with her having potentially terminal cancer. Other than that I don't particularly care.  I don't recall him campaigning as an outstanding example of marital fidelity or denouncing others for their sexual indiscretions.  I feel differently on it depending on what face a politician presents to the public.

A few examples: 

David Vitter: I have always found him pompous with his "family values" horseshit and I strongly suspected he was singing the song he's supposed to sing, as opposed to living the life he's supposed to live.  This was proven in the most spectacular fashion and for that I confess to being very pleased.  It was like a Christmas present when the news came out.  He's right up there on the hyprocrisy scale with people like Jimmy Swaggert and Ted Haggard.  Such people have no problem imposing moral judgements on other people.  They see themselves, though, as being in a privileged class for whom those same rules should not apply.  This gets to the heart of what I dislike about Republicanism as practiced by George Bush and his ilk.  They would outlaw abortion for ordinary people, crow about their morality, then quietly arrange over a golf game with their doctor buddy to take care of their teenage daughter's "little problem".  Such people deserve any humiliation that they get. 

Larry Craig:  The truth is I found his case a little sad.  It must be a lonely, repressed man that goes looking for sex in airport restrooms.  I kind of felt sorry for the guy, even if his "wide stance" defense was worth a thousand good jokes.  On the other hand, if he hadn't taken public stances (wide or otherwise) against homosexuality himself I would have felt a lot more sympathy for him.  It's the hypocrisy, don't they get it? 

Mark Foley: This business of hitting on underage people is creepy as hell.  I think he should have been fired immediately.

Bill Clinton:  The Monica thing was a big yawn.  I think that Paula Jones is nothing more than a skank he hit on that wanted to weasel as much money as she could out of the deal.  He certainly deserved the aggravation she caused him, but we didn't.  She deliberately waited till he was president to press charges and was used as a pawn by the Republicans, and to hell with the dignity of the United States.   I blame Clinton and the Republican party about 50/50 for bringing this ridiculous tabloid emphasis on people's personal sexual lives into the common public discourse.  Now that they've gleefully opened that pandora's box the more Republican reputations that burn in its flames the better.

Remember Bob Livingston?  I didn't give a crap about his affair either.  It shouldn't have been necessary for him to resign just because he cheated on his wife.  On the other hand, he had to do it because like other conservative hypocrits he made a big deal out of publicly denouncing Clinton's affairs.  He had become an embarrasment to the party.  His "virtue" in resigning wasn't nearly as noble as it sounds.  I know someone who knew him fairly well personally and he was hot to start lobbying.  He had been thinking about it for years and the only reason he was considering staying on was because he might become speaker of the house.  His outing meant that was no longer possible and he knew it, so he left.  He's made a killing doing lobbying since then.  Poor thing.

John McCain:  If he was having a fling I don't care, not even a little, unless that lobbyist woman would be fucking him in return for favorable legislation rather than for fun, after all, buying influence is wrong no matter what currency is exhanged.  I really don't consider his leaving his first wife a big deal either.  That's between him, her, and his current wife.  It's a non-issue for me as long as I don't hear him harping about someone else doing it and how virtuous he is.  I don't recall McCain being a pompous ass about other people's sexual morality.

by bfaul on 08/04/2008 05:40:40 PM EST

[ Parent ]

First, Foley. His conduct was unprofessional (in addition to being creepy). A congressman can't be fired, but what happened to him was entirely appropriate. Okay I don't really disagree with you there.*

McCain: I understand where you're coming from, but there's a principle in public life of avoiding the appearance of impropriety. That means not engaging in activity that might be misconstrued as against the law because its impossible to prove what the actual motives were. So whether this nice gentlelady was exchanging sexual favors for legislation is immaterial. If they had an affair, it was flat out improper. The same as if John McCain say, had had an affair with a russian spy. She might defend herself by saying she had no intention of compromising state secrets. In the eyes of the law, it doesn't matter what her intentions are. There are potential mitigating circumstances, but I haven't heard any that apply in this case. Of course, there's no proof that McCain had an affair either. Are any of you lawyers out there that can tell me if I'm wrong about impropriety (I concede I might be, but this is my current understanding)?

Similarly its no more acceptable for monica goodling to say "I broke the law in hiring practices, but I did so unwittingly" than it is for me to say "I was driving 30 mph over the speed-limit Mr. Officer, but I wasn't looking at the speedometer", because both of us would still be breaking the law.

*critics will say the same logic applies to Bill Clinton  & Miss Lewinsky. They're absolutely right. The standard for a president is obviously higher than a congressman since he is subordinate to no-one, and so the punishment is not going to be the same, but I'll still concede the point. Whether it rises to "high crimes and misdemeanors" is not debatable--the answer is no.

by hazmat on 08/04/2008 06:04:33 PM EST

[ Parent ]
There has never been a more perfect example of outright hypocrisy. But what else would we expect from a partisan hack like you?

by KenTX on 08/04/2008 07:54:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]

I trust bfaul and myself to vote for someone other than democrats if they ever fuck up the country as bad as you lot have. In contrast, you will happily vote for and defend the larry craigs of the world long past the point when they have lost all credibility in the public sphere.

That is what a partisan hack is.

by hazmat on 08/05/2008 01:42:31 AM EST

[ Parent ]

I forgot about Eliot Sptizer because I don't care about Eliot Sptizer.  He was governor of New York and I would never have been able to vote for him either way.  He fucked a hooker, got caught, and he resigned.  I don't see him pretending he still has a moral standing, unlike Vitter or Craig, who are still out their preaching, just like Swaggert.  Worse, the bastards are still trying to pass morality legislation.

I know exactly what you're fishing around for. You're looking for a distraction, plain and simple.  This I understand.  If ever there was a group of people who needed distractions right now it's the Republicans.  They need something, anything to take people's minds off of how bad they suck at governing. 

You may as well ditch that moral outrage stuff.  It doesn't suit you well.  You've blown your cover too many times here.

by bfaul on 08/07/2008 03:27:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
ken tells you to.

by hazmat on 08/02/2008 09:53:30 PM EST


Seriously Ken?  You're calling the end of Edward's career over a story in the enquirer?  The same magazine that had the following headline right below the story on Edwards...

Former Moonlighting star Cybil Shepherd is haunted by ex-lover Elvis Presley.

Seriously though we really should get Maury on the case!   Sen. John Edwards you are.... NOT the father...

by alphasigmookie on 08/03/2008 01:57:55 AM EST


They have a history of digging up dirt that ends political careers.

In 1988, Gary Hart was the leading Democrat candidate until...oooopsie doooopsie!
ooopsie

by KenTX on 08/03/2008 03:55:15 AM EST

[ Parent ]

I am not saying it isn't true, I am just saying we have no reason to believe its true.

Just like I am not saying that McCain is meeting with aliens in secrete to appease them is not true, I am saying we have no reason to believe its true.

In the Hart story, there was evidence and people who came out on the record.  The MSM found this and reported it.

Here we have exactly as much proof as we do McCain is an alien appeaser.  It is true because the National Enquirer says so.  Therefore, if you insist this is true, then you have to insist everything they say is true.

If you have even a shred of credibility, this would put you in an untenable position.

by ProfRich on 08/03/2008 02:06:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
And of course rehab is in Georges future

Drunk George

Faced with the biggest crisis of his political life, President Bush has hit the bottle again, The National Enquirer can reveal.

Now I must ask being as The Enquirer and Globe are owned by the same parent company can we also rely on the ground breaking news from them as well?

Cheating Bush

And what about the DIVORCE?

Laura to George shut the fuck up

We can understand why Laura would want out

Condi Shrubs other wife

That and the fact that he's tooting again

Bush, blow, total asshole

 Ken you have made the little old ladies and the trailer trash bimbo's who rely on the scandal sheets to get their news very happy by validating the accuracy of the stories they read.

by Hubble on 08/03/2008 04:41:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I really enjoy seeing him "hoist on his own petard".

by bfaul on 08/04/2008 05:47:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The number three hit is your old buddy, the beautiful and humble, KenTX.

All I'm doing is changing America's opinion of Democrats, one google hit at a time.

by KenTX on 08/04/2008 06:16:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
This story makes me very happy. You can't tell, but I'm smiling right now.

John Edwards will NEVER be president.

Read this and deal with it. Your pain makes me feel so good.

by KenTX on 08/04/2008 06:40:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]

That story is a week old.  But I'm glad to see it "confirmed" by a real "news" source.  Go team!

And why do you respond to your own comments? 

by Spencer on 08/04/2008 06:54:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
To drive up the google hit counter, of course. Why do I employ an occasional phony title? To drive up thread readership and participation. Why do I bait Tiny? Because he and desertpair do an outstanding job of making liberals look foolish. I hate to admit it, but the rest of you guys are actually pretty smart.

by KenTX on 08/04/2008 07:43:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]

KenTX is calling me stoopid again ;(

Ken, it is obvious you aren't used to conversing with intelligent women and feel a little threatened by it.  Maybe it's because you have a really tiny penis or something.  I must really annoy you for you to call me out all the time like this.  That means I'm doing my job.

by desertpear on 08/05/2008 01:30:04 AM EST

[ Parent ]

What's a wink/frown emoticon supposed to convey?  Popeye?

by Spencer on 08/05/2008 02:24:46 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Because he forgets what nic he is signed up as.

by ProfRich on 08/04/2008 10:04:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]

"Your pain makes me feel so good."

My pain?  What makes you think I care?  He's been out of the running.  That's why the press is yawning.  The guy I've been pulling for is still in it.

by bfaul on 08/04/2008 07:54:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]

This just show that "conservatives" will spin anything as long as it depicts some one that they deem as the opposition in a bad light.

Strike One: But let's look at the source...oh..the ever so reliable Nation Equirer and parent publication of the  World Weekly News that bills itself as "The worlds only reliable news source." Sounds a bit like Fox's self proclaimed "Fair and Balanced" slogan. NE and it sister news source WWN are responsible Pulitzer level material like this:

The McCainiac Proposes Alien Amnesty!John McCain visited hallowed ground for UFOlogists, using Area 51 to promote his plan for granting interstellar working visas.

As a neighbor of alien-rich New Mexico, the Arizona senator has long supported the rights of extraterrestrials who wish to work in America, according to Humma Kavula, his liaison for alien affairs

 

Strike Two: No matter, in the simplistic conservative world increasing or high ratings is symbolic of accuracy. This is often cited for propagandists like Limbaugh, and entertainment outlets like Fox News etc as paragons of truth and accuracy. Sorry...NE has lost 5 Million readers in 7 years.

Strike Three : Irony is not lost on on John McCain  supporters . Note comment his affair with a lobbist:

"The story is a total smear. It's speculation and rumor based on unnamed sources with an axe to grind. The New York Times has lowered its standards to the level of the National Enquirer. And voters will see it for what it is, including evangelicals. All they need to hear is three words: New York Times."

 So....case closed, thanks for playing!

by MRFred on 08/03/2008 12:18:53 PM EST


Let's face it, Edwards won fewer delegates than Ron Paul. His endorsement of Obama didn't stop Hillary from whipping Barack in Kentucky a week later. This is not a bigger story because John Edwards's political career was over long before the mistress and love child were exposed.

by Twba on 08/04/2008 06:44:27 PM EST


If he had a political future it was as an appointee (cabinet, judge etc.)

by ProfRich on 08/11/2008 08:59:53 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Edwards wasn't going to be appointed to anything important. Everyone influential enough to affect the appointment process had already figured out that Edwards is a fake.

Kerry talked with several potential picks, including Gephardt and Edwards. He was comfortable after his conversations with Gephardt, but even queasier about Edwards after they met. 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. Kerry said he found it chilling, and he decided he couldn't pick Edwards unless he met with him again.

[Bob Shrum p.454-455]

by Twba on 08/11/2008 04:03:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
in other contexts. It is a very creepy anecdote.

by hazmat on 08/11/2008 04:08:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
 Display: