True, she's depicted as a snob in heavy denial who flies into inappropriate rages. But is that all? If she's wacky enough, remember, Edwards' decision to take up with another woman may be more explicable, if not excusable. ...
११ जानेवारी, २०१०
Does "Game Changer" get to the heart of the question "Just how wacky is Elizabeth?"
Mickey Kaus wants to know.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०२ टिप्पण्या:
It did seem like some of the framing of Elizabeth was overblown. Some things were obviously very bad, like making fun of her spouse in public, but other things seemed amped.
So yeah, I got the same let's-excuse-this-Hunter-thing vibe that Kaus got.
being bitch is a full time job. fuck ups like jon will never understand that.
Edwards' decision to take up with another woman may be more explicable, if not excusable.
Ahh, yes. Men scurrying to find a reason for why other men stray. Must be the little woman! After all, who could make love to a woman with stumps for boobs, right? AND SHE WAS CRAZY!
That's why Edwards ran to a woman who went around shoving her Office Depot business cards imprinted with "Truthseeker" on them.
EE gets zero sympathy on any of this. She made it clear that she is nothing more than a Hillary wannabe. She knew about John's activities, but purposely looked the other way and publicly denied it because she was in the pursuit of political power. Likewise, she even exploited her own medical issues, purposely and transparently seeking to use cancer as a sympathy ploy.
Except the "other woman" was crazy, too.
EE gets zero sympathy on any of this. . . . She knew about John's activities, but purposely looked the other way and publicly denied it because she was in the pursuit of political power.
Exactly right. In fact, her dissembling allowed her husband's campaign to survive through the Iowa caucuses, where he acted as a spoiler, allowing Obama to win that contest and, eventually, the whole campaign. Thus, we have her, among others, to thank for Obamaism.
The image of Mad Elizabeth driving her Liar husband into the arms of a whore is so easy to see that it must be true. John Edwards would never lie or cheat unless there was a good reason to Save The World. Which reminds me of Green Jobs and Cap and Trade planned for us by these same party of liars next. It must be the Tea Party anger that is driving the Democrats to lie to us, not all that easy money and exciting strange snatch. What more could a Democrat ever desire and work hard for except to be seen as Saving the World as a cover for easy money and strange snatch. What a country!
It's not an excuse, it's an explanation.
Men work for appreciation.
Sex-wise, one woman is as good as another.
If another woman comes up, it's because she shows appreciation he doesn't get at home, as a first guess.
The media narrative is the received feminist one.
he knew about John's activities, but purposely looked the other way and publicly denied it because she was in the pursuit of political power.
She's actually worse than Hillary on two fronts:
1- Hillary realised she could never compete with the bimbos Bill liked to sleep with. Like her heroine, Eleanor Roosevelt, she gambled on staying with her husband because she REALLY felt he was worth it: she knew he had a chance to go far, because he was bright, affable and had political savvy. It was a marriage of convenience from the get go, and in their case, it worked out.
Even Edwards' staff thought he was "asexual", and if they thought that, it's fairly certain that he wasn't an out-and-out cheater until this Hunter creature came about.
The Edwardses had just had a different marital dynamic than the Clintons.
2- Elizabeth Edwards had the example of Hillary Clinton before her, in dealing with a feminist who sublimates her ideals for at chance for power.
She knew what would happen if it got out that she had been complicit in Edwards' affair. All you have to do is look at Hillary walking to the chopper, after the Lewinsky scandal came out.
O.K., Ann, this seems like your big day for asking the wrong questions.
Adultery is never excusable.
Much ado about nothing in the American Elizabethan Error.
Wacky enougf to think Ann Coulter would not fire back when she used the death of a son to sandbag Coulter with the aid of Chris Matthews.
Adultery is never excusable.
Correct.
In addition the similarity between the Edwards and Palin stories seems to be the campaign staff trying to cover their butts by putting out (after the fact) all the dirt on their clients.
Just who is in charge of these campaigns? Who is making policy decisions? Who shapes the image of the candidates into the processed package we see? The candidates or a bunch of professional lackeys?
(rhetorical question...we know the answer)
Here is the real question. Why do we allow this to happen?
"Here is the real question. Why do we allow this to happen?'
I told you why.
Elizabeth Edwards isn't wacky, she's a hard core Lefty much like Hillary, who is known for her temper, also. I'm sure these women are terribly frustrated, having to put up with these, good-looking, empty suits to front for them because their personalities are too caustic for public exposure.
vbspurs said...
Edwards' decision to take up with another woman may be more explicable, if not excusable.
Ahh, yes. Men scurrying to find a reason for why other men stray. Must be the little woman! After all, who could make love to a woman with stumps for boobs, right? AND SHE WAS CRAZY!
They obviously think they can rehabilitate this slug, him, not her. Anyone who saw him debate Cheney and didn't feel disgust at this creep, a combination of a used-car salesman and a sleazy televangelist, has no standards.
Dust Bunny Queen said...
Adultery is never excusable.
Correct.
Funny how the people who do it always seem to be the ones who want to rewrite the rules to suit themselves, generally.
WV "derie" Something that needs a little eirre.
Elizabeth Edwards and John Edwards are unserious, goofy snobs who deserve to be mocked mercilessly. However, this salacious excerpt is just stale. Where was any of this when the actual story was happening?
Oh yeah. Now I remember...
From: "Pierce, Tony"
Date: July 24, 2008 10:54:41 AM PDT
To: [XXX]
Subject: john edwards
Hey bloggers,
There has been a little buzz surrounding John Edwards and his alleged affair. Because the only source has been the National Enquirer we have decided not to cover the rumors or salacious speculations. So I am asking you all not to blog about this topic until further notified.
If you have any questions or are ever in need of story ideas that would best fit your blog, please don't hesitate to ask
Keep rockin,
Tony
"In addition the similarity between the Edwards and Palin stories seems to be the campaign staff trying to cover their butts by putting out (after the fact) all the dirt on their clients."
The difference is the EE story is sourced by quotes from named staff members; the Palin piece is just the opposite, anonymous.
Seven:
Futhermore, John Edwards is the first son of a mill worker to become a snob. What a great country! Heh.
The Crack Emcee is absoultely correct. We should stop paying attention to this nonsense. The only answer is The Macho Response!
John Lynch said...
"Except the "other woman" was crazy, too."
Crazier.
Most crazy: John Edwards himself.
I am utterly amazed that someone who passed out a business card like Hunter's could ever get involved in a Presidential campaign.
Seems like that card would be a total disqualifier.
"This is your card?"
"Yes, sir!"
"Get the eff away from my candidate!"
WV: raphic I've seen lots of those.
I am utterly amazed that someone who passed out a business card like Hunter's could ever get involved in a Presidential campaign.
To top that off, it seems that Edwards himself was freaked out by her after just having seen her in the hotel lobby. The account, however, strongly suggested that their affair begun that night.
How does a man go from "Yikes, she's bringing the crazy" to "You're hot baby, let's do it" in the space of a few minutes?
It takes WOMEN several hours before they sleep with a total jerk.
wv: fixfib! Indeed.
And this is important how? Basically, I read the entire New Yorker article and it simply outlined to me the utter fecklessness and retardation of the Edwards campaign. In essence all it did was reinforce that he is a opportunistic ambulance chaser who when given the opportunity due to his new found infamy, decides that the grass is greener and therefore jumps the fence. His narcissism was already in place, his wife thinks he and his family are nothing more than illiterate, unread hicks, basically a nothing more than a cash-machine at this point for her highness, the irreverent cancer goddess, come author of not one, but two books, Mrs. Edwards.
The look at me cartoon was great by the way and I can seriously imagine her doing that and Edwards transposing Hunter over her. At this point, he is just going to wait for her to die, she will be somewhat immortalized, but only within her immediate enclave and no one will give a shit after 2 weeks. Edwards is going to wait, bide his time, and then rehab his image once she is gone. Just watch.
I tried to find the Edwards' estate on the map, because it's in the next county. Assuming they live on Edwards Drive (many rural roads around here are named for the property owners), appropriately, there are two trailer parks in spitting distance.
I think Edwards' cheating was a visceral response to his wife's illness, much as soldiers go whoring after battle. If there were earlier women, wouldn't we have heard about them by now?
Why do so many women find oily men like JE and Bill C attractive?
The sheer arrogance of John Edwards who expected to be Vice President or at least attorney General in exchange for his support after his new replacement wife hit the National Enquirer is what scares me about politicians that "Control the Media". Thank God for a few rogue media and candidates still out there.
The failure of John Edwards is an encouraging sign. Americans have good bullshit detectors, after all.
TG
The image of Mad Elizabeth driving her Liar husband into the arms of a whore is so easy to see that it must be true. John Edwards would never lie or cheat unless there was a good reason to Save The World.
That's a profound comment on many levels.
Gee, is there any reason to doubt, as Kaus suggests, that, like a lot of these tell-all works, the authors are relying on the political hack/flacks who fed them their hack/flack side of the story. But this one has these supposedly sophisticated tell-all flacks supposedly unaware of Edwards" affair. Until they were. And then they tried to stop him, because they.... Right.
They knew they'd have to live the rest of their lives in Siberia if they couldn't land another job, so none of this could be their fault, ya see....
Kaus notes the memorable parody "of the Third Reich as told by Woodward and Bernstein--i.e., after interviewing aides like Goebbels and Goering, who in the Woodstein account were always secretly trying to work behind the scenes to stop Hitler's schemes. (Then Tom Cruise went and made a movie of this parody.)"
"In fact, her dissembling allowed her husband's campaign to survive through the Iowa caucuses, where he acted as a spoiler, allowing Obama to win that contest and, eventually, the whole campaign."
To my recollection, Hillary Clinton never used this to reposition her own campaign, once the news was out, and Edwards gone. That was always a head scratcher for me. Why not?
Edwards' decision to take up with another woman may be more explicable, if not excusable. ...
Explicable? I think the one thing no one was looking for was an "explanation." He was a self-indulgent horn-dog. There's your explanation!
If Elizabeth is/was a bitch, that's beside the point.
What's with these rich and powerful donk politicians and the skanks they risk everything for? Jesus if you're going to throw it all away you'd think it would be for some ravishing sex bomb not the Hunter-Lewinsky types.
Everything about democrats is just so wrong.
Lets keep our eye on the target people..
His name is Harry Reid..
We are looking for senate staffers who might have possibly been groped by the senator ;)
Has Senator Reid ever groped Brooks?
New Age babes who have their rap down well can convince saps like Edwards that they're really exploring "oneness" and advancing the cause of World Peace by fu**ing them, creating positive energy and all that other BS.
A far more seductive illusion than tawdry pipe laying and hoping like hell the missus doesn't find out.
No.
Hunter is wacky.
The evidence for Edwards I could see was that she is controlling and not well liked by many. And perhaps not deserving the PR personna of Saint Elizabeth.
"Wacky" is too cutsy for Edwards.
What's with these rich and powerful donk politicians and the skanks they risk everything for? Jesus if you're going to throw it all away you'd think it would be for some ravishing sex bomb not the Hunter-Lewinsky types.
At least it's not with male prostitutes, dressing up in diapers, or double layered scuba suits with a butt plug.
"What's with these rich and powerful donk politicians and the skanks they risk everything for? Jesus if you're going to throw it all away you'd think it would be for some ravishing sex bomb not the Hunter-Lewinsky types.
At least it's not with male prostitutes, dressing up in diapers, or double layered scuba suits with a butt plug.
Two words for you ,Garage..Barney Frank
Adultery is never excusable. Belittling your husband's intelligence and background in front of others is never excusable. Lying to your supporters and keeping up a campaign that can only end in disaster is never excusable.
In short, there is no excuse for either Elizabeth or John Edwards. I'm just glad that neither one of them is anywhere near the White House.
wv: hypitubs: a new line of bathroom fixtures inspired by William H. Taft.
If the politicians stopped asking us to love them for their wonderful families, it wouldn't matter all that much how wacky Elizabeth is. Or at least there wouldn't be as much public debate about it.
What does the book have to say about Michelle Obama?
But just remember, we're so fortunate that Sarah Palin was never one heartbeat away from the presidency!
I don't want to hear one word about her from anyone who fell for the snake oil peddled by Erin Breckgirlovich himelf.
"At least it's not with male prostitutes, dressing up in diapers, or double layered scuba suits with a butt plug."
Ah garage it's clear that with your lack of creative imagination you must be speaking from firsthand experience. Not surprised.
Synova said...
MM, I didn't follow the thread about Elizabeth and John Edwards but my first *thought* was... when did it become acceptable to say that the lady dying of cancer is a horrible person?
Did she get *better*?
I think the so-called "immunity amulet" from criticism if you are a dying monster went away long before Poor Dying Saint Elizabeth and the dying Lockerbie Bomber who only-wanted-to-be-with-family.
Just as George Soros's "Holocaust Survivor" immunity only lasted a little while....
===============
knox said...
If Elizabeth is/was a bitch, that's beside the point.
No, that IS the point.
Or other factors. Back when Clinton was President and the Lewinsky scandal broke, my Mom, a published historian noted that FDR, JFK, LBJ, Reagan, and Clinton all had mistresses. That Ford and Hoover and Bush I didn't because they had very interesting wives that were engaging the whole term of the marriage. And that perhaps part of the problem with Truman, Nixon and Carter was that they should have had a mistress on the side to round them out more.
===============
Lem said...
Lets keep our eye on the target people..
His name is Harry Reid..
A reminder, you are posting on Althouse, where you have people of every political stripe.
Free Republic, Althouse is not.
Feel free to explain the many good reasons why Reid may be a goner, in your opinion...but don't presume to select "targets" for all at Althouse's happy little Blog to go after.
(Right now, I personally only hope Reid stays in out of ego, and doesn't follow the Dodd and Torecelli example of quitting early to get a more popular Dem in to "rescue our seat" from Republicans.)
FDR, JFK, LBJ, Reagan, and Clinton all had mistresses
Evidence as regards Reagan?
Reagan had a mistress?
Rielle Hunter seems to have been, at the time she destroyed the Edward's marriage and career, a practicing Witch, not that there is anything wrong with that. John Edwards probably still thinks it was all his idea.
LarsPorsena - "At least it's not with male prostitutes, dressing up in diapers, or double layered scuba suits with a butt plug.
Two words for you ,Garage..Barney Frank"
Last summer, Barney's lover was caught growing pot. Barney said that he was a city boy who didn't know what either pot or poison ivy looked like. (Very droll...one of those great excuses...that makes you admire a smart guy as a good liar).
Anyways, the point was that this happened in Maine, and media obtained a few pics of Barney and his boyfriend dressed in matching new LL Bean lumberjack costumes at a party of prominent homosexuals "summering" near Bar Harbor.
My wife said out loud "I wonder if there would have enough money in the world to get those two crooks to sing the Monty Python "Lumberjack Song" on air??"
Barney...
1. Male prostitutes, check! A whole ring of them in Barney's place.
2. Diapers? Likely in gay sex role play, because you can't get 'em too young.
3. Double scuba suit with butt plug? Unlikely, maybe to Barney's lasting regret he didn't check it out when he was younger. Now he is a pudgy old queen, but an immensely powerful one. So I guess he can still command 5-6 nubile young boys to don the gear and Barney could peel the wetsuits off each's hot sweaty body, pop that buttplug out like a party favor...Perhaps with help from one of his trusted Congressional aides.
Both Reagan and Eisenhower did not fool around when President - they had their nookie on the side earlier.
Okay, but again, evidence? I ask because I've got a whole library of Reagan material here, and I've never seen anything credibly implicating that he had an affair.
I'm stunned by the willingness of the campaign/staff people - for all parties, political and otherwise - to disclose all of these revelations.
The worst part of it - if I can put on my goo-goo hat for a second - is the complete absence of discussion of public policy.
As Madison said, men are not angels. Okay, but I still want to know what they're going to do as much as knowing who they're doing.
Was Ronnie's mistress supposed to be 1st or 2nd marriage?
Kay Summersby allegedly had an affair with then-General Eisenhower. Here's an article from the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/06/06/us/eisenhower-letters-hint-at-affair-with-aide.html?pagewanted=1
I have a dim memory that Nancy Reagan said that she and Mr. Reagan had been making the beast with two backs prior to their marriage, but can't recall any accusations of infidelity.
Ronald Reagan did indeed have an affair with Miss Money Penny, Lois Maxwell.
Here she is passing over her phone number.
Frankly, I am much more curious about Kaus's other unanswered question. It impacts us all much more than any wackiness on Elizabeth's part.
How exactly DID Edwards or anyone on his staff get the MSM to shut this story down?
Also, again, I need to bring up Hillary Clinton and her team. The Clinton's have never been noted for their fair play. Why weren't they all over this?
IIRC, Patti was born less than 9 months after they married, and Jane Wyman left him because she found SAG politics boring.
At the risk of all sorts of bad things being wished on me by the female commentators on this thread, I have to ask a basic question.
What is it with today's women that they seem compelled to go chasing married men?
I mean, Tiger Woods would still be playing in golf tournaments, Edwards might still be a viable politician, Clinton would not have perjured himself on national television, if some chippy said to herself "he's a married man and I should leave him alone." Or words to that effect.
Yeah, Tiger, Edwards, Wild Willie Clinton, and a whole lot of other men should have kept their zippers zipped, but unless one can demonstrate that rape was involved, it does take two to tango.
Why weren't they all over this?
That pot was black as the Ace of Spades!
There's a simple reason why the Clinton's weren't all over the Edwards sex scandal. Their polling told them that Edwards voters would choose Obama in a two-person race against Hillary.
After the scandal broke, Clinton supporters loudly bemoaned the fact that the story had been suppressed earlier, claiming that Edwards's presence on the ballot cost Clinton Iowa. Nothing farther from the truth. In the early days of the race, you were either for Hillary or you were against her, and she was happy to have the anti-Hillary vote split.
Big Mike,
"What is it with today's women that they seem compelled to go chasing married men?"
If you study NewAge, you'll find there's no shame in adultery or cheating because NewAgers see things "spiritually" and not morally - they accept an idea of duality, where there's no such thing as "wrong" or "right" except as one interprets it for themselves: basically, you can do whatever you want, as long as you don't get caught by others, who don't matter until they discover what you've been up to - plus, anything associated with Christianity is false to them (or worthy of rebelling against) and, thus, isn't worthy of respect. (That's the simplified version, anyway.)
With NewAge as the prevailing belief of our time - 65% of the American public is mixing it with everything else, remember? - we're bound to see an epidemic of this thought and behavior.
Enjoy!
Hillary Clinton is the only person who isn't getting any.
WV: tedistif
If you study NewAge ...
If I did that, I'd probably lose 100 pounds because I wouldn't be able to keep any food down for a month or longer.
The Crackmeister is absolutely correct once again. How could Edwards fall for such a person.
Actually Bush I did have a longtime mistress by the name of Jennifer Fitzgerald. When I worked at the White House back in the 80's we looked up her officer location under her e-mail record. She was stationed in Blair House, right across the street from the WH. Convenient, n'est-pas?
During the Reagan presidency, it was well-known in DC that Nancy R was scandelized by HWB brazeness about the affair. When Bush ran against Clinton, a very important Clinton campaign adviser said on national TV, apropos Clinton's sex scandels that "We know Bush has his own Jennifer story".
She was then shipped to South Africa until the end of the election. The affair ended soon afterwards.
Rene -
cite, please.
Unless you personally saw something, her proximity to Bush is, well, meaningless in proving more than proximity to Bush. Availability does not mean action.
Correlation is not causation. Repeat 10 times and put yourself to bed without dinner.
My money's on you've got nothing. Your whole inference = truth crap makes me think you work for Meia Matters.
Yeah, the fact that a woman worked in a nearby building is rather underwhelming.
As for Reagan and Wyman, as I read it, it was more likely that an affair went the other way if there was one. But neither of them ever spoke to it, so that's all just conjecture.
I have a friend whose brother's cousin had a job at the White House and he told me some stuff about Bill Clinton that was so bad, I can't even mention it.
"If the politicians stopped asking us to love them for their wonderful families, it wouldn't matter all that much how wacky Elizabeth is. Or at least there wouldn't be as much public debate about it."
When some people said that Palin was pushing her family to some odd degree and that meant that it was okay to attack her children after all, I couldn't help but wonder.
Politicians do that ALL THE TIME. It would be excessively strange if all the kids didn't get up on stage and wave to the crowd. It would be bizarre if the spouse was never interviewed. The cameras always pan to mom and dad and grandma in the convention audience.
The Clinton's were, indeed, "pimping out" Chelsea. (Granted, it's an obnoxious term and I wish people wouldn't use it.) Dick Cheney's daughter was on the campaign trail for him. Political wives like Michelle do their own tours and rallies and give speeches. And it's been noted that the candidate himself will bring up whatever hard-time or dead child in order to engender emotional sympathy. And if they don't, a reporter will ask. Again.
Even Edwards' staff thought he was "asexual", and if they thought that, it's fairly certain that he wasn't an out-and-out cheater until this Hunter creature came about.
Certain to whom? To me that looks like the profile of a guy who was cheating on his wife the day after they got married.
I met a Marine who had been an avionics technician on Marine One during the Clinton years.
He had some interesting stories; the Clintons were the sleaziest people he had met in his entire life.
Who knows the personal truth of any of this. To me John Edwards was a lawyer who basically made a small fortune as an "ambulance chaser", won a seat as NC senator, and probably wouldn't have been reelected by his constitutency for a second term. I never believed the programs and values he peddled were things he actually believed in. Elizabeth Edwards will probably die of breast cancer and John decided to look for another field to plow before the term on his current lease had expired.
Were there extraneous calculations and political plots (some extending for years, some occupying the space of a season)? Almost certainly. Will Elizabeth predecease John and return to the earth before him? Highly likely. Will John eventually follow her? Definitely, as will we all.
It would seem the satisfaction of a job well done, or a calling followed would give more satisfaction, even at the end, than an accumulation of accolades, expensive toys and the ascent of folks paid to agree to and publicize these convenient fabrications. Then again, I'll never have their money.
Chase/Freeman,
Is google broken on your PC or something?
Google brings up articles on the affair from Slate, wikipedia, etc. What do you want, me standing at the foot of the bed holding the candle,as the French say?
Do you think Donna Brazile in the Dukakis campaign (I said Clinton -- that was wrong) fell on her sword to say that Bush had a mistress on national TV unless it was a well-known fact in DC? Is that how you think campaigns work?
I have no idea why you think GHWB would be beyond such a thing. He was, in person, a very attractive man, in a way that didn't come across on TV. Is it so unusual for a man of the upper crust to have a well-placed mistress?
I say these things as a moderate republican, not as someone who seeks to tarnish Bush. To me, his private life was his business, and if Babs could live with it, I could too. But facts is facts.
I have a friend whose brother's cousin had a job at the White House and he told me some stuff about Bill Clinton that was so bad, I can't even mention it.
He he. I see what you did there, after Rene's flung-out accusation, AllenS.
Actually, I have two juicy facts about Clinton and sex, and you don't even need to take my word for it -- it's in the Starr Report.
- Apparently, Monica went back into the little room near the Oval Office where they would have their "trysts". The room was dark when she returned, but she still saw the outline of her lover, our Prezznit, choking the chiken.
Wait, this one is worse.
- He apparently asked the ravishing Ms. Lewinsky to insert one of those cigars of his into his butt.
As a book on the topic put it, there were some things even the American public couldn't handle at that time about the whole Monicagate.
Cheers,
Victoria
Politicians do that ALL THE TIME. It would be excessively strange if all the kids didn't get up on stage and wave to the crowd. It would be bizarre if the spouse was never interviewed. The cameras always pan to mom and dad and grandma in the convention audience.
Oh, absolutely the kids should get up on stage and wave to the crowd. So should the wife. It goes without saying that kids shouldn't ever be attacked. I don't care if she's interviewed.
I just don't want their family lore to become part of the package. I don't like the current appeals to make us love these people.
The cute family photo on the campaign website is there for a reason. You won't see that on the web page showing a law firm's partners.
The photo spreads in People Magazine and Vogue are to convince us to fall in love with this couple, this loving family. But we have no idea what is really going on.
As for interviews, that gets tricky. When Michelle Obama was sent to The View to wear a $99 dress as a counter-point to Palin's clothing controversy, that's pretty cynical.
Err, chicken...
wv: spitiou! I bet she did.
Rene wrote:
Google brings up articles on the affair from Slate, wikipedia, etc. What do you want, me standing at the foot of the bed holding the candle,as the French say?
Rene, those are still rumours. I've known about those "Jennifer" stories forever, I think I even recall them in the very early 90s when someone told me that the Reagans loved it, since they were jealous about how GHW Bush was so family-oriented and thought him hypocritical (Ron Jr. once observed that he got down on all fours to play with Michael Reagan's kids, and how it made him wince thinking of how his dad, the President, never did so).
But they are still rumours because there is no hard evidence, no letters, no archival interviews, nothing. Until that exists, you can say whatever you want, but it'll still be unsubstantiated speculation.
Certain to whom? To me that looks like the profile of a guy who was cheating on his wife the day after they got married.
Heh, Eric, I can't deny that might be the case, but notice that his staff bailed on him when it became apparent that he was conducting an affair. They easily could've done it in the 2004 election, had he been such a horndog as you surmise by my quote.
Vb,
Although I can't find it online, there was after the defeat of Bush I, an article in the Washington Post on the breakup in which JF lamented how poorly she had been treated in the dumping. I read this article with my own eyes, and I'm sorry if no one else here did.
You have very high standards for evidence, especially in the political realm. Are we to wait until these guys are dead and the archives are opened up before we make political judgements? It seems impossible for us to do so and be functioning citizens. Politically, the perception is the reality, because we have nothing else to go on in the clinch.
- He apparently asked the ravishing Ms. Lewinsky to insert one of those cigars of his into his butt.
LMAO
no pun intended
Rene wrote:
Politically, the perception is the reality, because we have nothing else to go on in the clinch.
But Rene, it cuts both ways, thankfully. For example, I just referenced in the Reid thread, the fact that Obama is said to have a black mistress, who was sent to the Caribbean during the election (supposedly on orders of Michelle Obama). Plus, there are the whole Larry Sinclair allegations.
Both stories are totally unsubstantiated, and in Sinclair's case, completely delusional.
But she would speak about this, since there are some written reports about the girlfriend ssent to the Bahamas story, for one?
I think not.
@Rene, given the antipathy that the MSM feels towards Republicans and their willingness to be the conveyors of any rumors and innuendo to the disparagement of Republican candidates, I'd say that if there was an affair, then the participants were very discrete about it. This is by contrast with Monica-the-harmonica blabbing details to "friends."
But as to whether the alleged Bush 42 affair ever really happened, that would require a woman willing to face the wrath of Barbara Bush if found out -- and I'm not certain that there's that much courage in the universe.
But she would speak about this
But should we speak about this...PIMF.
VB,
While right now you and I agree that the Obama rumours are unfounded, ask me again if after in the 2012 election a major republican campaign operative risks their career to announce this rumour on a national news show. Then, I may not think they're so unfounded.
You and I have beat this one to death. As a gentleman, I will be quiet now and give you the last word.
*curtseys to Rene*
...can't wait until Ann posts her "Sarah Palin to Fox News" post, because I'm dying to say.
OH NO! Oh well. She will make her first FNC appearance tomorrow on Bill O'Reilly. As if MSNBC weren't in enough trouble already.
My standards for evidence are high. I am not enamored with the standards of the political realm.
Not saying you aren't reasonable. But unless there's something more, I don't believe it any more than I believe the Obama rumor.
As for this:
He apparently asked the ravishing Ms. Lewinsky to insert one of those cigars of his into his butt.
Oh, great. I may actually die laughing now...
The funny part about Clinton with a cigar in his butt:
He never took it out!
Well we had a Democrat CIC and with a cigar up his but at least he lost the codes for the "nuclear football".
Still he would be an upgrade from the schmuck we are currently suffering under.
John Edwards is toast. He was just another empty suit with deep pockets. Like most of his ilk he refuses to man up. As thoroughly evil, detestable, criminally corrupt as Jesse Jackson is, at least he manned up. Took the hit for his wrong doing. Took responsibility too.
John Edwards is a coward.
Rene
Spinal Tap:
"I believe virtually everything I read, and I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone who doesn't believe anything. "
Why don't we shift the focus to another dirtbag, Peter Orszag, who dumped his girlfriend, with whom he was in a "long-term committed relationship," when she was three months pregnant and is now engaged to a news bimbo.
These people are all completely incapable of self-control or accepting real responsibility for their actions.
Take it away C-Emcee! (Gonna make you sweat ...)
t-man,
But he wasn't committed, committed, so it doesn't really count. Also, he never did that whole pinky swear thing, so we can't hold him personally responsible for walking away from his pregnant girlfriend.
I'm just glad I'm married because complying with all of these newfangled rules seems rather complicated and difficult.
Oh, great. I may actually die laughing now...
I was going to write "I should've mentioned this fact before, given the unanimous response!"...but I don't think I will now.
BECAUSE THE WORD VERIFICATION IS...
Reargoe!!
Synova,
"Politicians do that ALL THE TIME."
Yeah, but also bleah. I have very little favorable to say about Howard Dean, but I do recall hearing that his wife was basically just keeping her job and going about life as usual while he campaigned, and I thought, "Wow, how utterly sane."
Edwards, his wife, the bimbo, the lickspittle guy who took the fall for Edwards... the only normal human being in this big bag o' crazy is probably his limo driver.
But just remember, we're so fortunate that Sarah Palin was never one heartbeat away from the presidency! I don't want to hear one word about her from anyone who fell for the snake oil peddled by Erin Breckgirlovich himelf.
This would be true even if he had kept his zipper up. The pretty boy was a one-term back-bench Senator when Gore picked him for Veep to help shore up his appeal to the soap-opera-watching crowd.
No political party that would nominate such an undistinguished lightweight for VP is in any position to complain about Sarah Palin's experience (16 years in executive office.)
Even if Elizabeth Edwards is the Wicked Witch of the East, West, North, and South, John Edwards should have been man enough not to cheat on her. When you get married, you sign up for better or worse, in sickness and in health. If you think marriage is only for the good times, stay bloody single.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा