August 10, 2008

Rielle Hunter conveniently refuses to subject her baby to a DNA test to determine whether John Edwards is the father.

ABC News reports.

So Edwards can deny that the child is his and say he's perfectly willing to take a DNA case to prove it. Now, all we need is a test to prove that Edwards and Hunter didn't arrange it so that she'd look like the one who chose not to demonstrate whether Edwards is the father. Maybe some sort of test to determine if he's paying child support (directly or indirectly)? But that would be far more complicated and invasive than the DNA test.

Looking at it another way, why do we care? Let the mother raise her child in peace, and stop wasting our attention on the details of the life of a now-irrelevant man. Oh, but then, why must Edwards be seen as irrelevant? Many, many politicians have affairs. We would stupidly limit the pool of potential public servants if we excluded all the men who had had affairs. If Edwards is just another one of those guys, his confession that he had an affair — years ago, and he's sorry — has restored him to suitability for public office.

45 comments:

rhhardin said...

We care about it because his wife has cancer, so she has fatal disease moral high ground.

Audience, audience, audience.

Bob said...

I'm just happy I'll now never read about Chief Justice John Edwards in a newspaper or online. Thank you, Rielle Hunter and National Enquirer, for making that happen.

AllenS said...

We care because we are compassionate, with a bit of voyeurism thrown in. Nothing sells like sex.

downtownlad said...

I don't give a shit. His wife got fat anyway, so its understandable. A man has his needs after all.

downtownlad said...

But I will add one thing - he should have done the moral thing and paid for her to get an abortion.

The Drill SGT said...

Its already a given that he's a slimey POS. At this point, the only folks who should be concerned about what happened are:

1. Liz Edwards (maybe she doesn't care)
2. His campaign donors (maybe they don't care)
3. The IRS (they certainly care about what could be millions of dollars moving around without taxes paid, plus tax code issues of converting donations into hush money for personal gain...

Millions? well what does it take to own/lease a posh Santa Barbara home, which overlooks the Pacific

You don't get anything overlooking the ocean for less than 2 million, and posh wasn't the description of somebody in Ashville NC, it was the description by somebody else who had a house overlooking the ocean, so that IMHO makes it a 4 million dollar house :)

show me the tax return :)

does it need to be all love child all the time? absolutely not, but it would be nice to know who paid the taxes on what money...

splooge isn't the public's business, graft, fraud, tax evasion, corruption, extortion is the public's business.

michaele said...

I perversely care because I can all too easily conjure up Edwards with his fake squinty eyed sincere look standing at a microphone and after listing some of America's failings, telling us "We're better than that". All throughout his national public life, he oozed smarmy oiliness. It did surprise me that he was so aggressively forthcoming about being willing and eager to take a paternity test. Now I understand why it was safe for him to do so. Hunter's response was already known and paid for. Reptiles have fascinated me all my life.

Meade said...

John Edwards is in remission.

michael farris said...

And this way, even if he isn't the father, everyone will think he is. At least I think everyone should think he is until proven otherwise. Sorry John, your too little, too late attempt at coming clean doesn't convince me that you've stopped lying.

Now, Enquirer: your goal is clear, collect that baby's DNA!

jjm said...

"We would stupidly limit the pool of potential public servants if we excluded all the men who had had affairs."
How about revising this to "all the politicians"? Why are women given a pass?
Jim

Bob said...

Michael Farris: Now, Enquirer: your goal is clear, collect that baby's DNA!

So instead of the splooge-stained dress, we have the poo-stained diaper?

LOL!

AllenS said...

Don't put anything past the National Enquirer. They could get the child's dna from a used diaper, and a fabulous hair left behind from John Edwards.

Ann Althouse said...

jjm said...""We would stupidly limit the pool of potential public servants if we excluded all the men who had had affairs." How about revising this to "all the politicians"? Why are women given a pass?"

Because the issue is the stupid limitation of the pool. Let's say there are 1000 eligible males in the potential President pool and 20 women. Eliminating the sex cheaters leaves us with 10 men and 18 women. The pool limitation problem has to do with the men.

Michael_H said...

This sorry episode confirms everything I believed about John Edwards.

Two Americas, my ass. Two families is the real truth.

Smarmy bastard.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Meade writes: John Edwards is in remission.

If his mission was to place his emission in Ms. Hunter, well, then MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Middle Class Guy said...

According to a former boyfriend, the NY Post and the NY Daily News, MS. Hunt was a former party girl. She was a voracious club girl in NYC with he whole life revolving around sex, drugs, and clubs.

I find this rather charming and cute. The Breck Boy and the Splooge Girl.

The only real victim here is the child. What is the Splooge Girl going to tell her when she asks- "Who's my daddy?"

Middle Class Guy said...

downtownlad said...
I don't give a shit. His wife got fat anyway, so its understandable. A man has his needs after all.

But I will add one thing - he should have done the moral thing and paid for her to get an abortion.

My your set of standards and morals, he should have found a pool boy instead of a party girl.

What if she was the one who felt it was moral not to have an abortion? I think that she set him up so she would be set for life.

The Drill SGT said...

Because the issue is the stupid limitation of the pool. Let's say there are 1000 eligible males in the potential President pool and 20 women. Eliminating the sex cheaters leaves us with 10 men and 18 women. The pool limitation problem has to do with the men.

Doesn't that either imply that there is a comparable pool of 990 women and 2 men that cheat with politicans (and we know that most affairs are among the same social circle) or that though men are nore likely to cheat once, there must be a smaller pool of political groupies out there that sleep with hundreds of male politicans. So if you are a female political aide, you are implied to have low moral character?

Is that what you meant when you slandered males just then?

Or are most of those politicans gay, and screwing each other rather than the public for a change?

Ann Althouse said...

Drill Sgt: I'm assuming that the partner is not presidential material.

The Drill SGT said...

but you are implying that political campaigns are cesspools of splooge and implying that not only are female staffers likely to have low morals, they are also not presidential material?

where else can a candidate or a politican meet the bimbets, without effort or notice? politicans are usually very tightly scheduled :)

so either politicans wives are sluts and they hit on each others wives or their staffers are whores. (taking things of value in return for sexual favors)

Brian Macker said...

"Looking at it another way, why do we care?"

What's this 'we' shit paleface? I don't care.

"Many, many politicians have affairs. We would stupidly limit the pool of potential public servants if we excluded all the men who had had affairs."

In fact, women attracted to power is one of the perks of office. Limit that and you'll reduce 'public service'. ;)

Pogo said...

For some men, the presidency has been a brothel of sorts, and politics in general the aphrodisiac of choice for men seeking power but not pretty enough for Hollywood or industrious enough for business.

So it is with great pleasure that I watch the detumescent Edwards slink away, tail between his legs.

But Ann, do not believe for a second that sex scandals would be fewer in a more feminized legislature. The nature of extramarital boompsing would change, but not the frequency.

Randy said...

Because the issue is the stupid limitation of the pool. Let's say there are 1000 eligible males in the potential President pool and 20 women. Eliminating the sex cheaters leaves us with 10 men and 18 women.

Sounds like your statistics are way off-base.

Robert said...

I never like John Edwards- his lawyer tricks- his father as a mill worker spiel- and my favorite: how he made all that money working for a hedge fund so he could learn about wealth creation.

He is now twisting in the wind because of all his slime- I hope whose ever child that is has a happy, normal life.

And I hope being a sleaze isn't hereditary.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Would Jimmy Carter--he who lusted after women in his heart, if not in his pants--still be in the pool or not?

PatCA said...

Hunter (Druck) is already getting $15,000 a month from Edwards' campaign manager. I'm sure it's not a payoff or hush money, though. That would be wrong.

The Drill SGT said...

PatCA,

what would a "posh Santa Barbara home, which overlooks the Pacific" cost to buy?

The Drill SGT said...

PatCA,

what would a "posh Santa Barbara home, which overlooks the Pacific" cost to buy?

Zeb Quinn said...

even if he isn't the father, everyone will think he is

That's exactly right. He's outed. So why is he so intent upon keeping up this part of the charade?

As for the National Enquirer, the reporter who broke the story, Alex Hitchens, says he's got very strong sources saying Edwards is the father.

Pogo said...

"So why is he so intent upon keeping up this part of the charade?"

Because his defenders will defend, and his detractors detract, and never the twain shall meet.

At least until the DNA is found, say, in streetside garbage, not that anyone would do such a thing.

John K. said...

If we didn't invest so much power, real or imagined, in the singular office of the President, we could more readily afford to not be concerned that we were limiting the potential talent pool by excluding from consideration proven scumbags. The President should be more of a mere figurehead. He should be first and foremost a moral, upstanding person. He should be able to take ungodly amounts of vacation time (as Bush has done) without detriment to the country. (But his salary should be slashed accordingly.)

chickenlittle said...

Splooge mom only encourages the paparazzi.

AllenS said...

The story in the bible about Noah inspired John Edwards. Two Americas, two women, two families, too much money...

Peter Blogdanovich said...

Our nation's political immune system is about to reject John Edwards. Let's hope some of the same surface features that enabled detection and rejection of this pathogen are now available to our immune system for assessing the threat from Obama. He is, after all, a very similar critter.

Original Mike said...

I'm shocked. Host assured us of Edwards' sincerity, and now this. I'll never trust a politician ever again.

vbspurs said...

Splooge mom

God, it would be so awesome if this was popularised, and tracked back to Chickenlittle on Althouse.

Let's Google Bomb it into existence!!

blake said...

This was the cheapest home in Santa Barbara that I could find that had a view of the beach. About $6 mill--$33,000 a month depending on downpayment and interest rates, etc.

Actually on the beach is gonna drive up the price a lot.

If anyone wants to buy it, let me know and I'll go through realtor school and get a license for the commission.

Bissage said...

Let's Google Bomb it into existence!!

Damn! Now it looks like there’s no way I’m ever going to convince people to say “spooge” without the “l” in there. I mean, I care deeply about spooge but don't give a Tinker’s cuss about splooge. Oh well.

Wait a minute. How about I fire off one last, desperate shot at the impossible?

*Olympic theme song plays*

Results 1 - 10 of about 447,000 for spooge. (0.14 seconds).

Results 1 - 10 of about 203,000 for splooge. (0.21 seconds).

Well, that does it. I’m spent.

But you guys go right ahead. Keep on saying “splooge.”

I’m going to keep reading it as “spooge.”

In my MiiiIIiiiIiiiIiIIiiiiNNnNnnnDdDD!!!

Pastafarian said...

Althouse said: "Let's say there are 1000 eligible males in the potential President pool and 20 women. Eliminating the sex cheaters leaves us with 10 men and 18 women. The pool limitation problem has to do with the men."

I understand what you're saying here: That selfish, narcissistic men are more common among public office seekers than among the overall male population; that these men will have a greater opportunity to commit adultery, as they're in a position of power, which women find attractive; and that it takes only a small fraction of the overall female population to provide 990 cheating women for these cheating men.

But I think that your numbers are a gross exaggeration, perhaps in an attempt to stimulate conversation or traffic.

You don't suppose that the overall percentage of men that are willing the cheat is considerably larger than the percentage of women who are, do you? Because this makes little sense, and it contradicts my own experience. I think the numbers of cheaters of each gender is pretty close to equal, despite stereotypes to the contrary.

I'd guess that about 50% of men would commit adultery, and maybe 40% of women; the difference between the two numbers balanced by the larger average number of partners for the cheating women.

And I don't think that public service draws only the most noble of women, while attracting men who are scum. Again, I just don't see evidence for this.

At least not by this large of a factor.

I think a better estimate would be: If we started with 1000 male and 20 female public office seekers, and eliminated cheaters, we'd probably be left with about 250 men and about 10 women.

Roger J. said...

I dont care about who Edwards is boinking; I would have liked that the msm paid more attention to the war in the caucuses--but please--would someone just silence downtownlad? his post about Ms Edwards weight was so far other the top as to make me puke

Professor Althouse: I enjoy this blog very much; and I know you have to be attuned to speech issues; but as God is my witness--Downtownlad's bile posts merit his banning--and if you arent willing to do that, I will find another blog. Thanks

Pogo said...

Roger, don't go.

Just pile on DTL.
or ignore him.
He's insane, so it hardly matters.

Ann Althouse said...

1. I don't really have a way to "ban" people. I can only delete posts and/or demand that the person go away.

2. I don't delete/ban/ask people to leave ban for merely saying unpleasant things in an ugly way.

3. I think some ugly things are worth saying/useful to read. Not necessarily that one, but my free speech standard is very tolerant.

4. You can skip commenters you know you don't like. You can also reason with or insult them.

Laika's Last Woof said...

Ms. Hunter's welfare checks were coming not from my tax dollars but from the very people who would raise my taxes to enlarge the welfare state.
Now there is one less champion of the welfare state thanks to the fertility of a single mother on welfare.
As Rielle's Guru might say, it's Karma.

Trooper York said...

But the worst thing you could do is to mock them for their unpleasant habits. Like hitting on older women, or claiming everyone is a racist, or slutting around airport bars, or worst of all having sex with chickens.

Because that would be wrong.

Trooper York said...

Nobody is perfect.