[stevesnj]

I know he wasn't after her looks. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5441195&page=1


He lied about the affair at first then admitted it...not shocking for today's politicians but at least he didn't lie about going to war.

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by stevesnj 

He lied about the affair at first then admitted it...not shocking for today's politicians but at least he didn't lie about going to war.

Fantastic way to derail your own thread.

[stevesnj]

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth 

Fantastic way to derail your own thread.

Mwwaaahhhhahaha

[dcmacdaddy]

Man, there is plenty of ugliness to go around with this story. (And I'm not talking about anyone's looks yet.)

Edwards has an affair while his wife is recovering from a diagnosis of cancer.
One of Edwards staffers has an affair, with the same woman, after Edwards does. This staffer winds up getting the woman pregnant.

So, we've got a couple scumbag men who can't keep their pants zipped while they're married and one predatory woman going after married men who know one another.

Yup, lots of ugliness to go around with this story. So long, John. It's been nice knowin' ya.

[goMac]

At least his wife has known since 2006. That should remove some of the awkwardness.

That said, I'm really glad he's not the nominee.

[zerostar]

I am glad too, funny thing how closely this parallels McCain's own indiscretions, yet Edwards does it and he is going to "take down the entire democratic party" according to CNN.

Funny how in the primaries Edwards didn't mean squat, was never a contender, didn't matter.... yet now they have some mud he is the dooming of all of them. Too funny.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by zerostar 

I am glad too, funny thing how closely this parallels McCain's own indiscretions, yet Edwards does it and he is going to "take down the entire democratic party" according to CNN.

Exactly, I think the McCain camp will be pretty quiet on this one. McCain basically did the same thing to his last wife after she ended up in that car accident.

Regardless, it won't stop the right from screaming about how McCain would never do such a thing while Obama would because he's a lefty.

[Chongo]

There are those who believe that HRC wanted him out of the way. David Kendall (Bubba's lawyer) has connections at the National Inquirer. Pundits had Edwards on the veep short list.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

There are those who believe that HRC wanted him out of the way. David Kendall (Bubba's lawyer) has connections at the National Inquirer. Pundits had Edwards on the veep short list.

Possible, but unlikely. Hillary knows she's not high on the veep list to start with. She'd have to take down a lot of other people too.

[zerostar]

I don't think that is beyond her... hahaha

[chris v]

What's interesting is the way this came out. What in the hell was he doing at her hotel at midnight if the affair was over 2 years ago, and who tipped off the Enquirer that he'd be there? There's some sort of weird set-up going on, here.

Not that I feel sorry for the dude. Why can't politicians just keep the damn thing in their pants? It seems like such a simple concept on the face of it.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by chris v 

. Why can't politicians just keep the damn thing in their pants? It seems like such a simple concept on the face of it.

It isn't just politicians who can't keep their "thing" (it's called a penis) in their pants. Most of the men who go to brothels in Nevada are married men, and cheaters come in all shapes, sizes, colors, political affiliations, and income groups. We just like to pick on politicians because they're an easy visible target, and it distracts us from having to focus on the real issues facing our country.

[Dork.]

At least Spitzer did it in style, with high-priced callgirls in expensive hotel rooms. This sounds like the Democratic party is taking a step back in the quality of their extramarital affairs. It wasn't an anonymous gay encounter in an airport bathroom, though, so I guess they're still ahead of the Republicans, at least in this key metric....

[chris v]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

It isn't just politicians who can't keep their "thing" (it's called a penis) in their pants. Most of the men who go to brothels in Nevada are married men, and cheaters come in all shapes, sizes, colors, political affiliations, and income groups. We just like to pick on politicians because they're an easy visible target, and it distracts us from having to focus on the real issues facing our country.

I don't know about you, but I have an agreement with my wife that I don't sleep with other women. I like being married to her, so I think I'll stick to it. It's possible to vow fidelity and mean it.

I'm torn because I'm a live-and-let-live kind of guy, But it isn't just that he couldn't keep his dick in his pants. That's a human failing. When I was in my early twenties, I was all-too human a couple of times. I guess what peeves me about Edwards (Yes, I know over 50% of married people, men AND women, cheat) is 1, his moralizing on Clinton back when, 2, the fact that this WOULD have come out had he gotten the Democratic nomination and scuttled any chance for a Democratic victory in the presidential race this year, (say what you will about our screwed-up priorities as a body-politic -- I'm likely to agree with you) and ran anyway, and 3. the way he trotted out his wife with Cancer as a sympathy leverage during his primary campaign with this in the background.

Yeah, we elect the kind of guys we wouldn't leave our kids with then all shout surprise when thy get laid, I know, I know. Maybe we should look at who we're electing, but there's a long road of public education that needs to be done before this sort of thing stops mattering as much as it does in political races. Character is supposed to matter in our leaders, but scum floats, somehow. It's a fact that we've got to deal with, other pressing issues or no.

[Atomic Rooster]

Glad to hear he's not a closet gay republican, not there's anything wrong with that.

But I hear that Edwards likes scrabble.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by chris v 

I don't know about you, but I have an agreement with my wife that I don't sleep with other women. I like being married to her, so I think I'll stick to it. It's possible to vow fidelity and mean it.

I'm torn because I'm a live-and-let-live kind of guy, But it isn't just that he couldn't keep his dick in his pants. That's a human failing. When I was in my early twenties, I was all-too human a couple of times. I guess what peeves me about Edwards (Yes, I know over 50% of married people, men AND women, cheat) is 1, his moralizing on Clinton back when, 2, the fact that this WOULD have come out had he gotten the Democratic nomination and scuttled any chance for a Democratic victory in the presidential race this year, (say what you will about our screwed-up priorities as a body-politic -- I'm likely to agree with you) and ran anyway, and 3. the way he trotted out his wife with Cancer as a sympathy leverage during his primary campaign with this in the background.

Yeah, we elect the kind of guys we wouldn't leave our kids with then all shout surprise when thy get laid, I know, I know. Maybe we should look at who we're electing, but there's a long road of public education that needs to be done before this sort of thing stops mattering as much as it does in political races. Character is supposed to matter in our leaders, but scum floats, somehow. It's a fact that we've got to deal with, other pressing issues or no.

Don't forget his heavy-handed denial of the "lies" back when they first starting sniffing around this story. Use your brain, John. If a reporter is asking you about it, you're caught. At least just demure for the time being, but don't go and lie on camera. Dimwit.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

Glad to hear he's not a closet gay republican, not there's anything wrong with that.

But I hear that Edwards likes scrabble.

At least he didn't have his boyfriend running a male "escort" service from his DC apartment.

[stevesnj]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Don't forget his heavy-handed denial of the "lies" back when they first starting sniffing around this story. Use your brain, John. If a reporter is asking you about it, you're caught. At least just demure for the time being, but don't go and lie on camera. Dimwit.

Tell that to Bush on WMD reasons for the war.

[placebo1969]

Originally Posted by stevesnj 

Tell that to Bush on WMD reasons for the war.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

At least he didn't have his boyfriend running a male "escort" service from his DC apartment.

Wow. That's some ancient history.

Ancient enough that you forgot he didn't have any knowledge it was happening, reported it to the House Ethics Committee as soon as he found out, and the attempt at expelling him was fronted by none other than Larry "I'm not gay, I had toilet paper on my foot" Craig.

Go fish.

[Randman]

Pretty ****ing sad when people have to try and defend his cheating on his wife and lying repeatedly about by bringing up other's garbage.

Is he as bad as others? No. Is he still a slimebag? Yes. Are people stupid? Many are.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by stevesnj 

Tell that to Bush on WMD reasons for the war.

While we're at it should we tell this to Clinton as well? Albright? Kerry? Pelosi? Kennedy? Daschle? Levin? Graham? Gore? Byrd? Waxman? etc...

A veritable who's who of your heroes duped by the idiot George Bush prior to his presidency.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

At least he didn't have his boyfriend running a male "escort" service from his DC apartment.

Originally Posted by subego 

Wow. That's some ancient history.

Ancient enough that you forgot he didn't have any knowledge it was happening, reported it to the House Ethics Committee as soon as he found out, and the attempt at expelling him was fronted by none other than Larry "I'm not gay, I had toilet paper on my foot" Craig.

Go fish.

Riiiight, and Bubba didn't inhale. Edwards is an exception to the rule.

[besson3c]

I think I know where this thread is going!

[vmarks]

Edwards tried to delay the news until the Olympics in hopes that his story would get buried.

Elizabeth Edwards (remember her? John tried to use her cancer as a way of boosting his campaign) is apologizing for being complicit in the lie to the public.

Basically, the nation gets to see what we in North Carolina have known for a long time: John Edwards isn't much of a man, isn't worthy of elected office, and that it's difficult to suppress the fact that he's a low-life hiding behind a decent hair-cut.

Or, as we say here, Bless his heart.

[Chongo]

From what I understand, Edwards "choose" not to run for reelection after saw the writing on the wall, he was going to get trounced.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Randman 

Pretty ****ing sad when people have to try and defend his cheating on his wife and lying repeatedly about it by bringing up other's garbage.

Exactly!

Some people can't seem to see the world from outside of their political beliefs. What John Edwards did was wrong REGARDLESS of his political affiliation or what other politicians might have done or not done that was similar in nature. Infidelity is wrong no matter who does it, why, when, where, or how they do it.

While his behavior of cheating on his wife while she was going through cancer treatment is mirrored by the similar actions of Newt Gingrich and his first wife, one of them (John or Newt) is not morally better than the other because of their political affiliation: They are both scumbags of the highest order and will forever be scumbags of the highest order as a result of their acts of infidelity.



I have some extra personal animosity towards Newt Gingrich but that is not due to his politics. It is because he aggressively tried to hit on my then-wife at an academic research conference--she is a scientist at NASA--where he was giving the keynote speech. (She told me about it after returning from the conference. Apparently it happened at the meet-n-greet held after the keynote.) This was when he was already remarried to the new wife after divorcing the old one while she was dying from cancer.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by stevesnj 

I know he wasn't after her looks. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5441195&page=1


He lied about the affair at first then admitted it...not shocking for today's politicians but at least he didn't lie about going to war.

Someone needs to drag up the "Edwards is a pig for using his wife's cancer" thread from last year. Nuff said.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Riiiight, and Bubba didn't inhale.

This displays only a surface knowledge of the events involved.

I can see how at first blush that both Clinton and Frank seemed to have made claims where only they themselves could know the truth. Likewise, they each had a pretty compelling reason to lie should they have been guilty.

However, the analogy completely breaks down after that. Frank was investigated for 10 months (!) at his request. The escort himself, who was the source of the allegations, was unable to get anyone to corroborate his claims (even phone company records showed he was lying), while everyone who was questioned said Frank was telling the truth.

The escort himself, when asked (repeatedly, under oath) if he or his clients had sex in the Congressman's apartment, he replied "[n]ot that I can recall at this time".


Phun Phact: The escort, Stephen Gobie, was a convicted felon before he and the Frankster shacked-up, and one of the convictions on his rap sheet was for "oral sodomy". I'm pretty sure that's a technical term.

Did I mention I know a lot about this case?

[besson3c]

Honestly, whether we are talking about Edwards, another Democrat, a Republican, whatever, I just really have a hard time caring about stories like this. I know that news sources like CNN are going to be wringing their hands over this story for months to come, and this thread will probably go on for many more pages.

Seriously, what is the draw here? It seems like everybody just can't resist getting in their two cents about whether Edwards is a scum bag, or isn't too bad, or whatever... After a while it sort of sounds like an episode of Judge Judy or something.

Who cares? This applies to Larry Craig et all as well...

[Atheist]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Some people can't seem to see the world from outside of their political beliefs. What John Edwards did was wrong REGARDLESS of his political affiliation or what other politicians might have done or not done that was similar in nature. Infidelity is wrong no matter who does it, why, when, where, or how they do it.

And some people can't seem to see the world from outside of their personal beliefs.

For all we know, the Edwards had an arrangement allowing one or both to mess around on the side.

Edwards' fault is being careless and then lying about it.

If he wants to have sex outside his marriage, that's between he and his wife. I certainly won't judge him on that.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Atheist 

And some people can't seem to see the world from outside of their personal beliefs.

For all we know, the Edwards had an arrangement allowing one or both to mess around on the side.

Edwards' fault is being careless and then lying about it.

If he wants to have sex outside his marriage, that's between he and his wife. I certainly won't judge him on that.

I certainly *will* judge him on that. No doubt about it. I assume that if one is making a long-term commitment to another person that fidelity is part of that commitment. And until Elizabeth Edwards comes forward and says that they had an open relationship and she wasn't bothered by his dalliance with the videographer and approved of it, I will standby my negative judgment of John Edwards.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

he aggressively tried to hit on my then-wife at an academic research conference--she is a scientist at NASA--where he was giving the keynote speech. (She told me about it after returning from the conference. Apparently it happened at the meet-n-greet held after the keynote.)

DId he give her his hotel room key? Did he invite her to go on vacation? Did he ask her out on a date? Please, give some details!

I'm always curious about this stuff, because a few times I've had people come up to me and say "I heard you were hitting on so-and-so the other night". Problem is, in most of these cases, all I did was engage a lady in conversation. How that was "hitting" on someone, I'll never know. But apparently, the women thought I was making moves on them... enough to tell their friends about it afterwards.

I've been tempted to go up to some of these ladies and say "Hey, if I'm not asking you out, if I'm not inviting you back to my hotel, if I'm not asking you for your phone number or offering you a night out on the town - then I'm not hitting on you."

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

DId he give her his hotel room key? Did he invite her to go on vacation? Did he ask her out on a date? Please, give some details!

I'm always curious about this stuff, because a few times I've had people come up to me and say "I heard you were hitting on so-and-so the other night". Problem is, in most of these cases, all I did was engage a lady in conversation. How that was "hitting" on someone, I'll never know. But apparently, the women thought I was making moves on them... enough to tell their friends about it afterwards.

I've been tempted to go up to some of these ladies and say "Hey, if I'm not asking you out, if I'm not inviting you back to my hotel, if I'm not asking you for your phone number or offering you a night out on the town - then I'm not hitting on you."

She said he was by himself at the buffet for the meet-n-greet so she went up to talk to him. They chatted a bit--she said he was pretty knowledgeable on science education needs to keep the US competitive with the rest of the world. She noticed he was a bit tipsy and multiple times her asked her to come back to his hotel room with him and then, if I remember correctly, asked if he could meet up with her the next day.

[Big Mac]

It was always obvious that Edwards was the definition of scum. I wish a more substantive scandal had taken him down, but this will do.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

DId he give her his hotel room key? Did he invite her to go on vacation? Did he ask her out on a date? Please, give some details!

I'm always curious about this stuff, because a few times I've had people come up to me and say "I heard you were hitting on so-and-so the other night". Problem is, in most of these cases, all I did was engage a lady in conversation. How that was "hitting" on someone, I'll never know. But apparently, the women thought I was making moves on them... enough to tell their friends about it afterwards.


I've been tempted to go up to some of these ladies and say "Hey, if I'm not asking you out, if I'm not inviting you back to my hotel, if I'm not asking you for your phone number or offering you a night out on the town - then I'm not hitting on you."

It's not the truth or innocence which matters, but the seriousness of the charge.

[subego]

Never mind.

[subego]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

I'm always curious about this stuff, because a few times I've had people come up to me and say "I heard you were hitting on so-and-so the other night".

I've heard more than one woman tell me that when they would listen to Bill Clinton speak publicly, they felt like they were being hit on.

[Monique]

It is only important in the United States because you are puritains and this is not a compliment.

[subego]

^^

Sisterhood in action.

[Atheist]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

I certainly *will* judge him on that. No doubt about it. I assume that if one is making a long-term commitment to another person that fidelity is part of that commitment. And until Elizabeth Edwards comes forward and says that they had an open relationship and she wasn't bothered by his dalliance with the videographer and approved of it, I will standby my negative judgment of John Edwards.

Wow! So you make assumptions about people and then judge them on your assumptions. That's cool!

[subego]

Originally Posted by Atheist 

Wow! So you make assumptions about people and then judge them on your assumptions. That's cool!

Hasn't it been stated that Elizabeth has "forgiven him"?

Perhaps he's making the assumption that one must transgress in order to be forgiven.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by subego 

Hasn't it been stated that Elizabeth has "forgiven him"?

Perhaps he's making the assumption that one must transgress in order to be forgiven.

Yes. And if she had to "forgive" him for his actions she probably was not okay with those actions in the first place: You don't forgive someone for doing something if that action was not a transgression, if you approved of said action. So my assumptions about their marriage--that it was not an open marriage where sex with others was allowed and accepted--is valid.

[Eug]

In the greater scheme of things I don't think the affair per se is a huge deal.

The bigger deal is his lying about it.

At least the Italians will freely admit it.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

... multiple times her asked her to come back to his hotel room with him and then, if I remember correctly, asked if he could meet up with her the next day.

Thanks for the details.

On another note, I just got a private message insinuating that I may be headed down the road to being charged with harassment if I "don't change the dynamic", so let me clarify my earlier post...

Early 1990s. College parties. I'd be in the dining hall a day or two after a party, and sorority girls would come up to me and ask me "So, are you going to ask Becky/Christy/Jessica out?", and I'd be puzzled because all I did was talk with the woman like I would anyone else.

Looking back at my post, I can see how someone could get the wrong impression. My point was more or less that sometimes a person can think another person is hitting on them when in fact, the other person was simply being friendly or nice.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by Eug 

In the greater scheme of things I don't think the affair per se is a huge deal.

The bigger deal is his lying about it.

In context of the 2008 Primaries it is.
If Edwards had not run his supporters would have broken in a large enough proportion that Hillary would have taken Iowa. Thus Obama wouldn't have gotten that first large momentum push. That could have made it much harder for him to take the caucuses that followed.

The whole landscape of the early primaries would have been different and it may have led to a different outcome. First Hull, then Ryan, and now Edwards. Obama should by buying all the women in their lives houses and vacations.

I don't really care that he cheated on his wife or that he has a bastard child. What I find troubling is that he thought this could ever have stayed secret. That seriously questions his grasp on reality and what he thinks is within the realm of his control. That's why I totally buy his excuse that his ego got the best of him. Having that hidden in his recent history and still choosing to make a run for president was foolish and delusional.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Eug 

In the greater scheme of things I don't think the affair per se is a huge deal.

The bigger deal is his lying about it.

At least the Italians will freely admit it.

I don't really care about the affair, or his lying about it. I expect that out of people with huge egos who think they deserve to run the world. Not that I approve, but it's not a surprise.

I'll say what I've said before...I do care that he lacked discretion and used his wife and her illness as a political prop. That shows poor decision making on his part. If you can't be discrete about your personal life, you aren't going to do it professionally either. That was Bill Clinton's problem.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

In context of the 2008 Primaries it is.

Perhaps, but that's not to what I was referring.

I was referring to all the faux moral indignation displayed by so many about it. Personally I just don't see it as a big deal. Sure, if he married my sister I'd find it a bigger deal, but he didn't marry my sister.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

That was Bill Clinton's problem.

And yet, Bill Clinton is still a huge draw and gets a lot of respect from the general public.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Eug 

And yet, Bill Clinton is still a huge draw and gets a lot of respect from the general public.

Really? "Respect"? I don't really think so. As far as being a "huge draw", I'm not so sure other than in solid red states he's such a big deal either. The media however LOVES him!