It's Over for John Edwards

[Cheney Killed Bambi]

Over.

John Edwards' furious mistress is demanding he submit to a DNA test, The ENQUIRER has learned exclusively!

Rielle Hunter - the longtime secret lover of the disgraced 2-time presidential candidate - wants definitive proof that Edwards is the father of her 14-month-old love child Frances and is working with a lawyer to take legal action, say sources.

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/john_edwards_mistress_rielle_hunter_dna_test_love_child/celebrity/66637

[MadBadger]

1. It was over for him a year ago

[Honeycombe8]

127. Yep. Gotta agree w/you on that one. He probably thought otherwise, but he would be wrong. nt

[CoffeeCat]

2. What's next?

Is John Edwards going to find a boiled bunny on his kitchen stove?

Man, John--you have replaced Michael Douglas as the poster for 'Why not to have an affair'.

Sad, sad situation for that entire family. It must be like a nightmare for all of them.

[I Have A Dream]

171. If the child is his and he's denying it, she has every right to insist upon this.

He's not a victim here. x(

(And I was an Edwards supporter.)

Be a man, John, and own up to this child if it is yours.

[tritsofme]

3. Yes, John Edwards' political career is STILL dead.

But if he ever gets lonely, I'm sure his hedge fund buddies would be more than happy to teach him some more about poverty.

[dionysus]

4. wah ahm lernin 'bout pahverty as part ah mah campaign...

like when mah daddy worked at tha mill....


poor smoove johnny...
:rofl:

[Hieronymus]

12. Making fun of one's accent is really not helpful.

[dionysus]

15. wah ah apologize suh or maam...

;)

[Empowerer]

73. None of this is helpful

I think it's very unseemly to make fun of or wallow in this family's misery.

These are real people who are going through something very, very painful. I feel sorry for all of them. Elizabeth is a wonderful womab who deserved none of this. And while I'm certainly not defending his behavior, John Edwards made a terrible, terrible mistake that hurt many people and that he is paying for dearly. That doesn't make him evil or less than any one of us.

It really saddens me to see people piling on and enjoying the wrenching pain of other human beings. The Edwardses are not cartoon characters or inanimate objects. They're real people who are going through real pain. How sad that so many people here are so hateful and cruel toward their fellow human beings.

[Bluenorthwest]

108. Mr Edwards and his wife

Stood on stages around America, with full knowlege of his long affair, and he pontificated in detail on the subject of his intense traditional views on marriage as a Sacrament to be defended against teh gay. He went on and on about how he was raised with Baptist values that are simply a part of him that he can not ignore at anytime, how his father was a Deacon, and how he simply can not come to 'cross that bridge' and support marriage equality, because he feels marriage is reserved for those who respect and honor it, like him.
He had no reason at all to use GLBT Americans as a scape goat, as a smoke screen for his own infielity. No reason at all, but to serve John and Elizabeth's agenda. He did not have to paint himself as a righteous man in a divine and sanctified union. He claimed that his relationship was holy, special, and righteous, and also that other people's relationships were not. While she knew all about his affair, and he knew exactly the sort of lie he was selling, and they both knew he was using GLBT people to sell that lie.

[Empowerer]

147. All that you say is true - but how does that justify glorifying in their pain?

My point is not that the Edwardses did nothing wrong but that the complete lack of empathy or even common human decency among some people here is very, very sad.

I've seen several threads on DU complimenting President Obama for his promise to appoint a Supreme Court justice who has empathy and harshly criticizing Republicans who dismiss him for his concern about empathy. Yet many here turn right around and viciously mock people whom they now feel superior to because those people have fallen far short of perfection.

But what do you think empathy is, anyway? It certainly does not involve mocking other people's human imperfections and failings, wallowing in their pain and insisting they deserve such derision from you because they have fallen far shorter of perfection than you ever would.

Many of you sound no different than Michael Steele with your "I'll give you empathy. Empathize right on your behind" sneering at the Edwardses. I'm sure that, just like you, he feels that the people he is talking about are just as deserving of his disdain as you feel John and Elizabeth Edwards are of yours. That's the problem with this kind of judgmentalism - those engaging in it can ALWAYS justify it because the people they're judging "deserve" to be treated that way. The only difference is who is doing judging.

Sad, sad, sad.

[MonteLukast]

134. Looks like you're kind of new to DU...

The ignore list is your friend. I've already used it on several Kenneth and Kennethia Starrs here.

[CreekDog]

92. i dare say it would be a relief to Edwards if people were making fun of the accent

considering the alternative.

[TheCoxwain]

28. NOT Funny ...

Not remotely funny

[dionysus]

33. how have ah offended your sensibilities, suh?

[janx]

135. You're killing me...!

:rofl: ...but only because Edwards turned out to be such a phony that he probably exaggerated the hell out of that accent (just as he exaggerated the "son of a mill worker" schtick).

[onefreespiritedchick]

146. Agreed :) n/t

[Ken Burch]

166. It'll turn out that the guy's actually from Scarsdale

And his real name is Winthrop Prescott Anglican IV.

[CTLawGuy]

145. are you

Jeffrey Beauregard (snicker!) Sessions, Sena-tuh from Alabama, perchance, with that accent?

[Ken Burch]

167. Or is THIS him?

[CTLawGuy]

170. I say nah I say nah I say

I hates Unions!

[JVS]

160. Remember Colbert's Virginia Turd-miner schtick?

[AtomicKitten]

5. I just cringe seeing this played out in the National Enquirer. n/t

[Puzzler]

14. The only positive spin I can think of, in an otherwise tragic saga...

... (and I mean mainly tragic for his wife) is that the National Enquirer ran the story before Edwards could have (possibly) got the nomination or a cabinet post.

This story almost certainly would have leaked out sometime.

[AtomicKitten]

21. I agree; the timing was best for all concerned. n/t

[Life Long Dem]

44. It's in the National Enquirer?

Wholly mackerel!

[AtomicKitten]

47. The OP linked to it. ;)

[Life Long Dem]

111. Well at least it's not the cover.

[Ken Burch]

172. It would have been better if the Weekly World News was still around

Then you'd have stories about Bat Boy attacking Edwards and Elizabeth getting revenge by dating the space alien.

[firedupdem]

6. He was done a long time ago. n/t

[madaboutharry]

7. This is just too pathetic for words.

I don't know which one of them is a bigger loser, Edwards or the mistress.

[Cheney Killed Bambi]

8. Edwards

He was the "adult" in the situation.

[Blue_Tires]

9. both

[tritsofme]

11. Why is she the loser?

If Edwards is the father, certainly that baby is entitled to child support, at the very least.

[dflprincess]

16. Overall I think the child may be the loser

with these two as her parents (and I was an Edwards supporter :banghead:).

Up until now wasn't the mother refusing to have the child tested? I think she should go all out and demand they appear on one of Maury Povich's DNA shows.

[Phx_Dem]

18. She's a loser, and worse, because she had an affair with a married

father of 3. She had absolutely no regard for the fact that this was another woman's husband; a woman who is dying of cancer. And the father of two very young children. He may be the one who actually cheated, but that doesn't excuse her appalling behavior.

As for child support . . . who do you think has been supporting her ass since she got pregnant? She's been staying in very expensive homes with monthly support payments. Her tantrum has nothing to do with child support. She's just pissed that Elizabeth has written a book. The woman is a huge bitch.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

22. did she promise mrs edwards she wouldnt hurts mrs edwards or was that john

its not her responsibility to take care of mrs edwards feelings. thats john edwards problem. john edwards, not the mistress entered into a marriage and it is his responsibility to uphold the vows of that marriage

what an idiotic post

[ShortnFiery]

32. I'm pinching myself with delight in this historic moment.

You and I actually agree. :hi: :-)

[IdaBriggs]

38. The woman is still trash for being the mistress in the first place.

Sleeping with married people because 'its not your responsibility to take care of the spouse' is some of the worst self justification for immoral, purely SELFISH behavior I have *ever* heard. We're not talking "he lied to me that he wasn't married" deception, which is its own form of disgusting, but 'its okay because *we* are (fill in the blank: horny, in love, stupid, soul mates, whatever).' Its a narcissistic view of the world that is best described as 'morally bankrupt' and I have to believe that karma is going to get her in a very unpleasant way.

Don't mistake my contempt for this woman's vile behavior as an excuse for John; if the child is his, he needs to go for joint custody/regular visitation. The child deserves two parents, if at all possible, but I agree with the wife in this case:

The mistress is pathetic. Hope she likes missing half her child's holidays, if John *is* the father! And if John is the father, he should go for custody/go after HER for child support (which should be a real kick in the pants, if she was keeping quiet for money).

End Rant.

P.S. I'm not going to debate this point further; obviously, 'do not sleep with other people's spouses, when someone thinks there is a committed monogamous relationship' is something I think decent people do, but if there aren't half a dozen 'but it was okay because we were (fill in the blank: horny, in love, stupid, soul mates, whatever)' justifications I will be surprised.

[ieoeja]

46. My justification for sleeping with two married women.

I really didn't care.

[stevenleser]

64. The exact opposite of what one would hope for humanity. Yeah, I knew it hurt someone, but I really

didn't care.

Great job. Way to be proud of lacking empathy. I'm really not a fan of genetic engineering but if we could use it to edit out people who lack sufficient empathy for their fellow human beings, maybe I'd have to consider it.

[Flying Dream Blues]

115. I'm with you. nt

[MellowDem]

78. Sounds like a Republican... nt

[Colobo]

88. And that's the problem right there.

[Raine]

144. That's very Republican of you

who cares about anyone else, you and what you want come first. :-(

[karynnj]

69. How much child support do you think a judge would award a

multimillionaire get from an unemployed woman? Also, it seems very clear that, even if the baby is John's Elizabeth feels the baby has nothing to do with her - just John. (a cold comment there)

No one here has said anything positive about Hunter - and that is what she deserves.

[Phx_Dem]

61. Only an asshole would have an affair with a married man and then

claim no responsibility.

And you're right, yours was an idiotic post.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

103. i think blaming the other woman is convenient and sexist idiots have always done it. nt

[northernlights]

96. I disagree...it is *all* our responsibilities

to not intrude on other people's marriages.

It is absolutely our responsibilities to each other -- and to ourselves -- to take care of someone else's feelings when their spouse is on a narcissistic binge.

She knew Edwards was married. She knew he was the father of 2 small children. That alone was enough to "just say no."

Edward's chose to cheat on his wife. Hunter chose to help him along with the cheating. That makes her a cheater too.

That they pursued their fucking while Mrs. Edwards was ill with cancer makes it all the more despicable.

Mr. Edwards and Ms. Hunter are seriously deficient as human beings.

And Edwards was once my first choice :puke:
I should have listened to my inner voice. I *knew* that incessant blinking was a sign of a liar...I just kept blaming it on the klieg lights because I *wanted* to believe him. :(

[ShortnFiery]

31. Oh please, she's no role model but it was EDWARDS himself who holds the lion share of the blame.

This woman didn't MAKE him cheat. Damn! If, Heaven forbid, I discover that my better half was cheating, I sure as shit would BLAME HIM first.

Yeah, I'd make a piss poor "politician's wife" because I would be kicking his ass with a talented divorce lawyer NOT blaming "the other woman."

Get real! John Edwards is THE HUSBAND and FATHER, not "the mistress."

John Edwards is to BLAME. It's sad and borderline pathetic to see these democratic politicians' wives defend their smarmy, low life husbands. I EXPECT that of the GOP but not of those within my Party. :(

[Phx_Dem]

77. Please point out in all of my posts on this thread, where I defended

John Edwards. I have never. I can't stomach him.

[CTyankee]

80. Let's just say they're equal partners in cheating and deception, which they are, right?

I won't let him off if you won't let her off, OK?

[cali]

45. uh, hate to break it to you, but slimeball johnykins is the one who broke his vows

he's the one that didn't care enough about his terminally ill wife and his children to keep it zipped. he's much worse than his sleazy mistress.

he's a scuzzy little shit of a man.

[Phx_Dem]

62. You don't have to "break vows" to be a scuzzy little shit of woman

either. I didn't give John a pass. I think he's scum. And so is his slutty mistress.

[northernlights]

106. I never promised not to hurt you

I just happen to get off on kicking people in the shins with steel-toed boots. Your tough break for being in line ahead of me. How dare you blame me for your pain. :eyes:

[October]

158. And Hunter committed adultery too by law

She's also a low life form - and the one who had the most to gain.

[karynnj]

67. and this woman's husband who vowed to be true isn't?

First of all, it might be that she now sees JRE will never marry her. If she knows the baby is his, I would assume she wants her child acknowledged.

To me one thing odd about Elizabeth's rather trance like comment of not knowing if the kid is JRE's is that this would mean they were together in April 2007 - a month after her cancer was found to be stage 4. A month after all the comments of support in March. Yet, Elizabeth did not say they were not together than.

[Phx_Dem]

76. I'm not giving John a pass at all. He's a cheating pig,

and his cheating is worse because his wife is dying. He's a thoughtless, untrustworthy liar. But this thread was really about John's slutty homewrecking mistress wanting a DNA test, so my comments focused mainly on her. If you wanna defend the skank, be my guest. I won't.

[karynnj]

79. Nope - haven't seen a single redeeming feature

In fact, that she is so sleazy and flaky, makes me wonder all the more what JRE saw in her.

[Phx_Dem]

81. Two selfish, thoughtless sleezeballs.

They made Elizabeth's remaining time on this earth, and the time with her children, miserable, brokenhearted and much more difficult.

:puke:

[karynnj]

86. Very likely true and immensely sad

This really has to be an incredibly tough time for Cate Edwards, who as a young law student is having to deal with a tremendous amount of pain in her family. Just dealing with her mom's health issues would be overwhelming. I can't imagine how tough it is to deal with the pain and anger her mom has - and I can't imagine how embarrassed and betrayed she feels by her dad. It has to feel like the safe protective cocoon her family likely was and should be simply blew apart - and publicly at that.

Even the little kids are of an age where all there peers likely know far too much about this. (My youngest was 8 when the Clinton stories were on TV and I can tell you the kids in the Hebrew school car pool (all of whom seemed to forget a parent was driving) knew way more than I had ever thought possible,

[northernlights]

104. he saw a female version of himself

a narcissistic, selfish, immature, lying skank to validate each other's okayness of what they were doing. :puke:

[MoonRiver]

71. What Phx_Dem said.

The mistress is a gold digger without doubt. :mad: That DOES NOT mean John Edwards is exonerated from responsibility. :mad:

[The Hope Mobile]

114. Completely agreed. Mistresses absolutely are losers.

In this case its worse because she knew he had kids and she knew his wife had cancer.

This, in no way means that Edwards isn't responsible for his behavior (and is a total scumbag for it-this is most definitely mostly on him) but she is equally responsible for hers.

Its called being decent. You don't fuck with married men *period* but when they have kids and their wives are dying that's about as low as you can go.

There's NO excuse for either of their behavior. And, yes, obviously she should get child support if a child came from this fucked up mess.

[1corona4u]

116. Yeah, like JE is a saint...

it takes 2 to tango. He is guilty of all the things you said about her. You say it all as if JE was less at fault. NOT.

He's a bigger scumbag for cheating on his dying wife, pretending that he didn't, and LYING about it all.

John had NO regard for his wife, AT ALL.

Jesus Christ.

[Number23]

141. I love how the mistress is the "loser" while the husband and his dying wife are the victims

Dying wife? Definitely a victim. Mistress? Shameful. Husband? Big, fat, lying, cheating, COLOSSAL loser.

He and he alone is the one in this sad trinity who broke vows and lied to people that he loved. He and he alone destroyed his credibility, his name, and his family.

[madaboutharry]

48. Any woman who has an affair with a married man,

in my humble opinion, is a loser.

[madaboutharry]

49. Any woman who has an affair with a married man,

in my humble opinion, is a loser.

[ShortnFiery]

59. Yes because we all know that ALL MEN are just *hapless victims* to evil women succubi.

:crazy: How very 12th Century of you to note that these poor MARRIED MEN are merely victims of the EVIL of "the feminine."

[madaboutharry]

60. How did you come to this conclusion from my post?

Stating that women who have affairs with married men are losers does not in anyway say that men are "merely victims of the Evil of "the feminine". Where did you get that?
You are wrong about my point.

[ShortnFiery]

34. A wife who "airs dirty laundry" for nation public view is not IMO, a role model for young women

either.

The ONLY *victims* in this mess are "the children."

The whole sorted TRIANGLE is a pathetic lot of humanity. :(

[newinnm]

90. I agree...

She should sit at home at be a good wife. Boys will be boys you know. Give me a break

[northernlights]

105. Elizabeth didn't air the dirty laundry

The National Enquirer did.

Now the laundry is out there, Elizabeth is perfectly free to express her feelings.

Her ability and right to express her feelings *may* potentially be the *only* good that comes from this.

Let people witness the consequences of seriously bad judgement, poor choices, and narcissism.

Even those who don't give a flying fuck about anybody except themselves may notice how the pain they've merrily dished out while indulging themselves has a way of finding its way right back to them.

I thought I read someplace that Reille was a new-ager. In that case, she and John are getting their first real doses of karma kickback.

[joshcryer]

125. Please don't pretend that she's not taking the opportunity to get paid, just like everyone else.

It's obvious what's happening here.

[customerserviceguy]

55. In this case, I'm going for the child

being the biggest loser, she will forever be known as the love child of a duplicitous philanderer, and the woman who would screw around behind the back of a woman who was known to be battling cancer.

[XemaSab]

95. The kid's going to be very wealthy

With enough money it doesn't matter how shady your parents are...

[customerserviceguy]

138. How much money is it worth

to have a totally screwed-up childhood? My answer: no amount of wealth can ever repay you, or fix it.

[XemaSab]

140. My response:

Which is more screwed up? Having Rielle and John as your parents and being rich, or having two sane, loving parents who are each working three jobs to keep from having the trailer repo'd?

Answer: they're both screwed up, but with one option you're more likely to be able to go to college, get a good job, and have a non-screwd-up adulthood.

[cali]

148. I disagree.. Give me two sane, loving parnts and a trailer over

Rielle Hunter and an absentee dad any day.

[karynnj]

65. Edwards - as he had far more to lose

and he lost:
- the trust of his wife
- the respect of many people who liked him
- his reputation
- much of the remaining potential he had (though being President was already not in the cards.
- he might even end up in jail if the campaign charges prove true.

Amazing that a man who could right now have been VP, is where he is.

[joshcryer]

124. Everyone is trying to cash out. This is the reality of the society we live in.

Get over it.

[kestrel91316]

10. I don't much care about the personal soap opera around this particular

private citizen. I DO feel bad for Elizabeth and their kids.

[karynnj]

70. I feel very bad for the kids - I felt very bad for Elizabeth last August

I would still feel that if EE were working on health care, taking care of her kids, trying to survive, and working out for relationship with JRE anyway she chose.

But, she has created a media circus of this once again. A book and a book tour spreading more details, we never needed to know. In addition, there is a weird coldness or denial when asked about the baby. To say that "it's not weird to hold babies who are not yours - politicians do it all the time. Now, while I loved the Obama and Kerry with babies pictures - they are at rallies with smiling parents there - not in hotel rooms after midnight with an admitted (former ?) mistress. To say that if the baby is John's it will be part of his life, not hers is sad.

[northernlights]

107. She will not be here to be part of the baby's life

What part of stage 4 cancer do you not understand?

She didn't create the media circus. Her philandering husband, his mistress and the National Enquirer did.

Maybe she just wants to share her side of this while she still can. There is much for narcissistic people to learn the experience, after all. Such as there are *victims* who *suffer* as a result of the selfish behavior. And that the suffering you inflict on others just may come back to bite you hard in the butt.

[Diane R]

13. I would imagine that Elizabeth's calling her 'pathetic' had something to do with this.

Elizabeth is all over the network and print media resurrecting a topic that was essentially dead. She apparently claims on Oprah that she 'has no idea' if the baby is John's. She's a smart woman, and I'm sure she knew exactly what would happen. I think this is Elizabeth's passive aggressive retaliation on John and Rielle.

[nomaco-10]

20. Yeah, you know it did....

The mistress was probably satisfied to be quietly paid off with a hefty check every month, but the whole sordid story resurrected by Elizabeth in her book probably pissed her off, as if even she had a reason to be the pissed off person in this whole scenario.

Human nature is a fascinating thing to behold. My southern mother had a dozen old sayings, one of them being "the more you stir shit, the worst it stinks". That one in particular might apply in this case.

Edwards is done and Elizabeth knows it. She's sick and maybe even dying, and for whatever reason just wanted to set the record straight. She's the only innocent party in this whole mess, and far be it from me to deny her her final thoughts on the whole fiasco. I just think I would have called up a divorce lawyer instead of a book publisher, but that's just me.

[SoCalDem]

30. Yup.. she said she wanted her children to know the truth.... well...

If that's the case, you have a face-to-face talk with the older daughter (who knows all the sordid details anyway, by now).. and you write a "private book" for your younger kids to read later..and if they decide to publish it posthumously (if there's still demand from the public), THEY choose to publish it..

This is about punishing JOHN EDWARDS.. (but it's punishing the kids too)

We all know how this stuff "works".. we don't need another book.. maybe they need the money :shrug:..he's probably not all that "rich" anymore, and she may not have "affordable" of medical insurance now that he's unemployed..

[nomaco-10]

43. I so agree. It crossed my mind too....

that she could have written a private, personal journal written especially and specifically for the younger children, and then put it away for safe keeping til such time that Elizabeth, herself or the older daughter deemed it age appropriate or necessary.

[karynnj]

72. Also, she could write something more thoughtful for the kids in a private book

The basic story in August has not changed with anything she has said or written. There is no one who can be thought of differently with version vs the August one.

What the kids could use would be something that would be impossible to write until she gets past the betrayal and anger. That would be something for the kids to let them forgive and know she forgave their father. It could do what she was said to want to do when she stayed with him - give the kids a remaining committed, loving parent if she passes away when they are still young.

[Neecy]

163. I have a different take on her motive....

She may indeed be trying to punish John Edwards, but I suspect she's preparing to re-enter the political fray - perhaps on the health care issue. She knows that if she doesn't get this behind her she'll be pestered about it to the detriment of her agenda so she writes the book, does an interview, and moves on. It's not that uncommon an approach.

[masuki bance]

35. Elizabeth is innocent here?

Now I've heard everything.

[nomaco-10]

37. What the hell is Elizabeth Edwards guilty of??? n/t

[ShortnFiery]

40. Demanding National attention and "blaming the other woman" instead of her smarmy husband.

It's just pathetic. Not unlike Mrs. Spitzer, the women who stand by these adulterous men blame EVERYONE ELSE especially the "other women" before they blame the true "villain" - their smarmy husbands.

It's a very dysfunctional existence not unlike "the submissive role" of an abused wife.

No, by taking this PUBLIC and beginning a mud slinging match with "the other woman," Ms. Edwards does not retain ANY semblance of "a victim" ... more like one of the three co-perpetrators. :puke:

[nomaco-10]

50. I said....

I would have called a divorce lawyer instead of a book publisher.

But, I do get it. She's hurt and angry. It's normal basic, human raw emotion. Do I think a tell all book was the right way to deal with it. No, but it was her call, she'll have to deal with the consequences of that particular choice.

You'll never convince me that Elizabeth Edwards is not the victim in this scenario.

[ShortnFiery]

53. No, considering her past behavior of snide remarks re: The Kerrys, I'm convinced that Ms. Edwards

is NOT a Victim in any sense of the term. She makes herself "the center" of attention and it's just plain sad. :(

[masuki bance]

54. She could have stopped John's attempt to kill the Democratic party

dead in it's tracks. She chose to roll the dice with the lives of millions of poor and hurting Americans.

[nomaco-10]

63. You give Eliz Edwards way too much credit....

What was she supposed to do, dash John Edward's overly ambitious, political aspirations for the national stage? Are you kiddin' me? You think wives have that much influence over their power hungry husbands in true life or especially even in politics?

That anybody would try to assign blame to a sick and dying woman trying to support her much loved and ambitious husband's dreams, is just mindboggling to me.

She said she didn't know til towards the end of the campaign. Not once was Edwards ahead in the polls against Obama or Clinton. No harm no foul. Give a sick, dutiful wife and the mother of his several young children a break. He's the scumbag, not her.

[karynnj]

74. You foget that her role was not just a passive approving wife

She was an attack dog from late 2005 on. She first attacked the Kerrys, who had done nothing to hurt either Edwards and who gave him the VP position.

She then viciously attacked both Hillary and Obama. It is not cool telling people in Iowa on the eve of the convention that Obama's plan doesn't cover pre-existing conditions. It is a trick Colson or Rove would have approved of - and who better than a woman with Stage 4 cancer to say this in a prepared speech.

Elizabeth wanted this run as much as JRE and she is lying saying otherwise.

[masuki bance]

83. If you stay ignorant of the facts, it's easy to believe in fairy tales.

She states matter of factually that she was informed just days after he announced his candidacy. That was in 2006, she happily went out there with this knowledge and played up the dutiful husband angle. If he had won the nomination, and then this came out, it would have been a complete disaster.

Until you catch up with the facts, maybe you should keep your feelings out of this.

[nomaco-10]

139. I stand corrected on the facts then....

I have no burning desire to debate this issue really. All I saw was a sick woman with a couple of small children and a narcissistic husband who she appeared to be just be trying to support at the time.

I was unaware that she was cognizant of his cheating and apparently turned a blind eye. Although that does make some difference, I still have some empathy for the woman.

Although I'm not completely understanding of why she felt the need to discuss the topic in a book, I still am trying to reserve some empathy for a sick, and more than likely dying woman trying to get some sort of closure about a very public betrayal, which must have been one of the worst times in her life.

I never supported edwards and I'm glad he lost. At this point, it all blood under the bridge. I have no problem with you, I hope you have no problem with me.

[beachmom]

130. John wanted to drop out when Elizabeth got sick again. SHE wanted them to stay in.

She could have stopped it. She didn't. Damned straight she had the power to stop it.

[MonteLukast]

133. Which would make it even more nonsensical and reckless...

... if he'd gone back to the mistress afterwards.

(BTW, I loved your response to the journalism thread on the Kerry group, where you said Sen. Bill Nelson didn't seem to use the internet that much. I still don't have a star so I can't yet post there.)

[masuki bance]

41. She participated in the whole tawdry affair, including

holding up John as a kind, loving, devoted husband who only cared for his wife. This after she puked all over her bathroom.

[customerserviceguy]

58. A divorce lawyer would take longer to dissolve that marriage

than the other way, "till death do we part". Looks like a part of what Elizabeth is trying to deal with as she ties up the matters of her life is being able to get her side of the story out, and if it hurts either Hunter or Johnny, that's just their tough crap.

[ejpoeta]

51. i feel bad for elizabeth edwards, but she was basically calling this woman a homewrecker.

and while i agree that the woman knew john edwards was married and had kids, and myself having never gone through something like this, i would have to say instead of blaming the woman like she did (and a lot of women do) blame john edwards. and ask the woman would she want to be involved with a man who would cheat on his wife? i can see how hurt elizabeth edwards is, as she should be. but the guy who promised to not screw around on his wife was john edwards, not this woman. though she should have known better, i think i would put more of the blame on john edwards. Poor elizabeth, though....like she doesn't have enough to deal with! but she did bring this whole thing back out in the open with her book. I don't blame her for it, as she needs to reclaim her own identity and not be defined by this. but I don't know how much this is about the other woman as it is about john edwards and his actions. i'm sure i am making no sense, here, but.... i tried.

[liskddksil]

17. And so was Spitzer's

and now more people in NY want him over Patterson.

[jenmito]

25. But Spitzer was successful as HIS scandalous behavior was discovered.

Edwards was already over.

[Raineyb]

36. I never wanted Spitzer to leave in the first place.

I wasn't really all that interested in where he put his dick as it has nothing to do with me. :shrug:

[ShortnFiery]

42. Not enough for him to win the election. No, I don't think so. He can redeem himself but not that

far. :shrug:

[BklynChick]

19. I think he could rally back from this, actually, but not for a very long time.

[jenmito]

23. It was over for him BEFORE the affair/child stuff came out...

Some just didn't realize it.

[nomaco-10]

52. I certainly did. He always struck me as disingenuous, always. n/t

[jenmito]

68. Same here. n/t

[Thrill]

24. Why is she just doing this now?

[jenmito]

27. She probably thought if she kept the baby's father's identity secret, she could

get back with JE one day. Now, though, she probably got angry and wants the truth out there, realizing she will NOT end up with him.

[WinkyDink]

102. Because now it's mano-a-mano with the book-touring EE.

[joshcryer]

126. Ding-ding. Everyone wants to get paid!

[kiranon]

26. If toddler is Edward's child, child has a right to know and to be financially

supported by her mother and father.

[Adelante]

29. I agree

Every child has that right. So, in a way, as mortifying as all this is to watch, maybe it's good Elizabeth forced Rielle's hand and a paternity test can result. It's the one good outcome I see in this sorry resurrection of the scandal.

[polichick]

39. What has taken so long? Jeez.

[ObamaKerryDem]

56. If this is true, and he's declared to be the father, who here is honestly going to be surprised?

Seriously, you can tell by looking at the pics she's his kid. Unless it's a VERY big coinsidence. And I say that as someone who's always liked him. A DNA test would just make it official.

What a sad situation all around. :(

[FrenchieCat]

57. No winners in this one......

that's for sure.

[JoePhilly]

66. Somewhere, Gary Hart is smiling.

[rucky]

75. Does adultery sway your vote, personally?

or just the perception that it'll sway everyone else's vote?

I ask because Clinton got impeached. Vitter, Gingrich, Rush, and Craig got nothin' much. Gary Hart got ran out on a rail.

It's nothing more than a weakness to exploit by the opposition, when the GOP is the opposition. But we're all to quick to hop on board when it happens to a dem. And maybe we don't get pissed enough when it happens to a repug?

We train people to treat us a certain way, and I'm beginning to think that the two sets of standards between Dems and Republicans stem from us demanding perfection of our own - just as much as the GOP demands it from us (and neither demand it of them).

[ClarkUSA]

82. When you're a president or presidential candidate, it's a whole other magnitude of scrutiny.

Vitter, Gingrich, Rush, and Craig got nothin' much.

But there was also the Republican "family values" Congressman from Staten Island who resigned after a mistress/illegitimate
child scandal last year. And who can forget Rep. Mark Foley, who almost singlehandedly delivered Democrats into the majority
in 2006?

It's not only Republicans who are the "opposition". It just seems that way, sometimes. For example, a Republican presidential
candidate found to have had a mistress and a kid on the side in 2008 would have been toast as well, with liberal bloggers merrily
leading the charge as they did with Foley in 2006. There are plenty of cutthroats on our side, too. :)

[Fire1]

84. His career was over when this first came out. n/t

[Fire1]

85. His career was over when this first came out. n/t

[karynnj]

87. Possibly before that

He could not make a third run having done poorly in the first 2 - no one would give him money. In addition, he went so far to the left, he likely made himself unelectable for state office in NC. Not to mention, there was likely some residue resentment that he spent only about 2 years as Senator before running for President. I doubt he could swing back again to teh Conservative Democrat he was in 1998.

I doubt there ever was a possibility of VP - there were far too many Kerry people in Obama's campaigns - and it is significant that when Kerry opted not to run, NONE of his people went to Edwards. He was not a good VP and refused to listen to the campaign. As to a cabinet position, he really had little experience and there might have been the same basic distrust.

[Fire1]

119. I don't think there was any resentment over his lack of tenure.

That meme was reserved for Obama from the right b/c he had even less time than Edwards. I think it was his far left ideals that made him unelectable. The publics lack of trust, I think has more to do with the fact that he initially lied about his affair and then found to have fathered a child all unbeknownst to a dying wife. He's screwed.

[karynnj]

151. "Far left ideals"??????

JRE was the most conservative Democrat overall to run in 2004 - and yes, I include Leiberman.

The lack of trust preceded the affair, when he basically disavowed everything he was for in his Senate career. You had to really already be 100% committed to JRE to believe that when he made about $500,000 for a few days of work a month at places of his convienience for a hedge fun company, it was to learn about poverty.

[Colobo]

89. Just a question: Can we forget about John Edwards already?

He's trash and his political career is over. Let's move on.

[masuki bance]

91. Pass that on to EE, I hear she reads DU.

[TexasObserver]

93. If John is the father, he needs to be a real father to the child.

At its core, this is just another child who isn't getting the acknowledgement from its father that should be a given. I don't care about John's personal embarrassment or delusions of future political options. I do care about Elizabeth, but if this child is John's, it means Elizabeth's children have another sibling, and that sibling is blameless and deserves respect.

A pox on John and his paramour for their parts in this sordid tale of betrayal by John to his wife, his staff, and his supporters.

[Cheney Killed Bambi]

132. Exactly

[cornermouse]

94. What concerns me most is the

message it sends to anyone who would consider taking up the populist cause. Between the upper crust who would oppose the populist message, the GOP, and the puritans in the democratic party, itself, I no longer believe that anyone will dare try to do anything to help us "little people" after the example that was and still is being made of Edwards both here and elsewhere. I guess we should consider ourselves lucky they didn't have enough power to do this when Roosevelt and Kennedy ran for president because after what I've seen here on DU, they would never have been president and Bush and Cheney with their crimes and violations of actual laws appear to be more acceptable than Edwards.

[cali]

98. please check out bernie sanders

and yeah, he may not be a dem but he is a member of the dem caucus and he was supported by the VT dem party as well as the national party. He's done far more for working people and the poor than liar sleaze johny hedge fund. And you know my objection to that pos was never his affair, it was his shameless, phony crap about caring for the under privileged. he never did one thing for the poor or working class when he sat in the Senate. Oh, your comments about Kennedy and Roosevelt reveal how little you know historically, not to mention that it's laughable to compare JE to either.

[XemaSab]

99. What has the populist cause got to do with

John Edwards? :shrug:

[WinkyDink]

100. Maybe those men who are for "the little people" should not mess around with their women-folk.

[karynnj]

156. Obama had a better liberal Senate record (US and IL) than Edwards as did John Kerry in 2004

There was no conspiracy against Edwards. The media was biased in his favor in 2004. It was clear after NH, that they were prepaing for the JRE takes the lead after the first multistate day - where the states (SC, MO, NM, AZ, DE, OK and ND) were NOT the best states for a MA Senator - Dean opted not to compete in them to work on the next series of states that were better for him. Even when Kerry won 5 of them, CNN among others called it a big victory for Kerry and a smaller one for Edwards. In fact, this was a sign Edwards did not have anywhere near the support he needed - if he lost states like this, which states was he going to win.

A week before SuperTuesday, the NYT printed an op-ed that said the Democratic nominee was named John, either Kerry or Edwards and then went on to make a case for Edwards. Now Kerry had won 16 primaries and Edwards 1. In addition, Kerry was more than 20 points ahead in all the big states poised to vote. Then in 2005, he and Elizabeth got very good positive coverage. That is why he was in the top 3.

The fact is that either of our last two nominees DID far more for "little people" than Edwards - and both, especially Kerry, did more to fight corruption. Edwards never broke about 15% in any poll and many people liked him less the more they saw. No one had to work to stop him - because he was never close to being the front runner. (The closest was that he had a chance to win Iowa - but even that would have still made him a long shot as he didn't have much support at all in NH.)

[northernlights]

97. so it finally dawned on the idjit Hunter

That if John was willing and able to lie to Elizabeth, his sick wife and the mother of his children, that he just might actually lie to his mistress too?

When, when, when, when, when are children going to learn that a liar is a liar is a liar?

Oh, that's right. When they wake up one day and realize they really are not superior to the spouse they think they're going to replace after all. :eyes:

[WinkyDink]

101. Never gonna change this ancient story!

[Bluenorthwest]

109. Here is one of John's many anti-equality quotes

spoken while he and Elizabeth were coveing up his ongoing affair. This one is mild compared to others. Why John Edwards just can not find it in his heart to support marriage equality:

"I was raised in a the Southern Baptist church, and so I have a belief system that arises from that. It’s part of who I am. I can’t make it disappear. … I’m just not there yet."

Where was that belief system when they were tested in his own life?

[Life Long Dem]

110. What Edwards was all about is not over for him.

And I believe he has said this, that his mission only tells him he has to work harder.

[cali]

112. yeah, Edwards was all about Edwards. I doubt that's changed.

[Clear Blue Sky]

113. It was over when this story first broke. Can't recover from that.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

117. John Edwards - as a former supporter, I feel like a cheated on wife myself

He had no business running with this scandal lurking in the background just waiting to break.

It's really very sordid when you assemble all the facts. He was picked up by a groupie outside of a hotel who hit on him by calling him "hot"?! He slept (euphemism) with her multiple times and found a way to put her on the campaign (!) for his further convenience as well as paying her for her "services"! He also apparently didn't use a condom, so if I were Elizabeth I'd be pretty pissed off about that. Who knows what he might have exposed her to? She could have gotten an STD. He lied about all of this ferociously. He appears to be sluffing off paternity. He appears to have gotten others to lie and intercede on his behalf. There's really no way to put a pretty face on his incredible duplicity, narcissism, vanity, sleaziness, etc.etc.etc.

[MonteLukast]

118. Why do you assume...

... that the affair started first and the job started second?

[Adelante]

120. According to former friends, fwiw

The affair started in March 2006. The company was formed in June 2006.

[MonteLukast]

121. All affairs start out nonsexually.

Which former friends said this? I found evidence for the date of the company kick-off, but not for the beginning of the affair. (and meeting him at the dinner party is not "the affair starting"). I need more evidence before I can trust the word of those former friends.

Even if they had "started" in March, she would've been a business associate, acquaintance, and/or friend at that stage... not yet a mistress. Hiring mistresses is sleazy, but hiring friends goes on all the time and is even encouraged. Networking really is the best way to find new work, and social and professional lines are muddied all the time in the process of making and establishing contacts.

And knowing her, she probably didn't know how to start a firm. She would've known how to make movies, yes; but making it into a business is something else. She could have been shooting before she officially started the company, wanting to get seed capital and organization in place first.
The timing of opening her firm does look strange, though. Right before she got her first check from the Edwards campaign. All sorts of nefarious things could be read into that... but what if she'd already produced a number of videos and hadn't yet made an official contract, and condition of pay was that she open a company and get a contract first? Because that would be the law. JE did know enough of what he was doing, to know that it would be illegal to pay her unless it was for professional purposes.

[Adelante]

122. I'll see if I can find the source again nt

[Adelante]

123. I found one

I remembered two separate friends saying this, but I only found this one:

Edwards said several times in his interview with ABC News the affair was short-lived.

But there is evidence that Edwards and Hunter spent months together in 2006, traveling the world and the country as he prepared for his second run for the White House.

One of Hunter's friends, Pigeon O'Brien, told the AP that Hunter told her the affair with ``John from North Carolina,'' who was married to a woman who had been seriously ill, began in March 2006. That conflicts with Edwards' statement the affair started only after he hired Hunter to produce several videos for his Web site, the first payment for which came in July 2006.

Hunter and a business partner founded Midline Groove in June 2006.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-7726975,00.html

I'm not really presenting evidence, so trust who you want. This is just something that has been said along the way.

[MonteLukast]

128. I certainly trust nothing that comes out of RH's mouth.

Too bad that was all you could find. You'd think that in this age of surveillance, there'd be a LOT more to sift through. Phone calls. E-mails. How come nobody has thought to look into communications records?

As it is, the only thing we have to go on, to make the case that the affair started first, are secondhand words ultimately from a woman I couldn't trust as far as I could throw.
She probably considered the moment she met JE "affair time", because of her belief, apparently, that she and JE were soulmates destined to be together. And, lots of people besides her read into friendliness and camaraderie as something a lot more.

[Adelante]

129. I'll keep a more open mind

Obviously we don't know all there is to know and may never, but I don't have any reason to think what John Edwards tells his wife is any more reliable than what Rielle Hunter might say.

[karynnj]

155. No one has access to JRE's phone records

They are not publicly available, any more than yours are - and the companies will NOT release them without a court order - and this is not a FOIA issue. Only now is there any suggestion of a legal charge.

[janx]

136. Pigeon O'Brien?

:shrug:

[Adelante]

137. So she is known

:D

[masuki bance]

154. "All affairs start out nonsexually"?

Where do you get that idea?

[Raine]

143. I feel the same

very betrayed.

[karynnj]

153. I never thought of that

I would imagine that chemotherapy really does a number on the immune system - so I would suspect that any time after she started treatment in 2004 or 2005, she would have been more vulnerable than usual - and usual is bad enough.

[David__77]

131. Never trusted him.

He oozed opportunism, and people really did pick up on that. He could have done more damage to the Democratic Party were he somehow elected president than we could imagine.

[Raine]

142. "Stick a fork in him, he's done"

and it couldn't happen to a "nicer" guy, what a sleaze. x( As a former supporter I want him to go away, I can't stand the sight of him. :puke:

[itsrobert]

149. Rielle Hunter = Homewrecker

And John Edwards = Creep

[cwydro]

150. He had to namedrop Barack

in that interview. That was the most pathetic thing I have seen.

[CBR]

152. I was a big Edwards supporter in 2004 and only decided to

support Obama in 2008 in December before the Iowa caucus. I am, to no surprise, relieved by my decision.

[DainBramaged]

157. Has anyone even questioned in their minds this could have been a set up from the git go?

Just askin', because I put NOTHING past KKKarl Rove.

[tritsofme]

161. What you mean like Rove forced Edwards to fuck her?

Or Rove forced him to lie about it to all his supporters?

Probably one of the dumbest things I've seen posted here.

[DainBramaged]

162. No, your reply was the dumbest

"click"


magic asshole disappearing device engaged. X

[JVS]

159. He is well and truly screwn.

[anonymous171]

164. Silly monogamist. Edwards was simply fulfilling his biological imperative to reproduce.

Who are you to fault him for it?

[HughMoran]

165. .

:rofl:

[cali]

168. how about faulting him for lying to his staff and supporters are do you

have a cute wittle excuse for that too?

[Adelante]

169. This has been kind of bothering me

We're all so busy with personal morality, we seem to be forgetting there was a political coverup here and a fraud on voters, with nothing moral about it.