NationStates Jolt Archive

Ages ago, I posted an article about John Edwards' affair and "love child" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=545691) from the National Enquirer.

Looks like it was true, at least the affair was...

Edwards Admits Sexual Affair; Lied as Presidential Candidate
In an ABC NEWS NIGHTLINE interview, Edwards Reveals He Cheated, But Didn't Father Child
By RHONDA SCHWARTZ and BRIAN ROSS
August 8, 2008

John Edwards repeatedly lied during his Presidential campaign about an extramarital affair with a novice filmmaker, the former Senator admitted to ABC News today.

In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 44-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter's baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.

Edwards said he knew he was not the father based on timing of the baby's birth on February 27, 2008. He said his affair ended too soon for him to have been the father.

A former campaign aide, Andrew Young, has said he was the father of the child.

According to friends of Hunter, Edwards met her at a New York city bar in 2006. His political action committee later paid her $114,000 to produce campaign website documentaries despite her lack of experience.

Edwards said the affair began during the campaign after she was hired. Hunter traveled with Edwards around the country and to Africa.

Edwards said he told his wife, Elizabeth, and others in his family about the affair in 2006.

Edwards made a point of telling Woodruff that his wife's cancer was in remission when he began the affair with Hunter. Elizabeth Edwards has since been diagnosed with an incurable form of the disease.

When the National Enquirer first reported the alleged Edwards-Hunter affair last October 11, Edwards, his campaign staff and Hunter vociferously denounced the report.

"The story is false, it's completely untrue, it's ridiculous," Edwards told reporters then.

He repeated his denials just two weeks ago.

Edwards today admitted the National Enquirer was correct when it reported he had visited Hunter at the Beverly Hills Hilton last month.

The former Senator said his wife had not known about the meeting.

Article continues (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5441195&page=1)

Well, well, there goes the slim chances of an Obama/Edwards ticket...

Before I judge him, I must know; what did she look like?

I agree with Goofball.

She was fugly... lol

In before the "SEE? THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T VOTE FOR OBAMA AND MUST VOTE FOR THE PARTY THAT COVERED UP A CHILD PREDATOR IN FLORIDA INSTEAD!!!" crowd.

He is a jerk. He should be home with his wife who has cancer. Bottom line.

In before the "SEE? THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T VOTE FOR OBAMA AND MUST VOTE FOR THE PARTY THAT COVERED UP A CHILD PREDATOR IN FLORIDA INSTEAD!!!" crowd.

They didn't cover him up, they tried to pass him off as a Democrat!

http://thecoredump.org/images/foley_democrat.jpg

They didn't cover him up, they tried to pass him off as a Democrat!

http://thecoredump.org/images/foley_democrat.jpg

Oh, f-ing goodie! :p

"Bad or Evil" people come in all forms. It does not really matter which political party they are affliated with. When a regular person commits a crime, we do not say "oh man, that child predator was a Democrat/Republican/Communist/Social."

In before the "SEE? THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T VOTE FOR OBAMA AND MUST VOTE FOR THE PARTY THAT COVERED UP A CHILD PREDATOR IN FLORIDA INSTEAD!!!" crowd.

Look at me, I'm a man made of straw.

Well, well, there goes the slim chances of an Obama/Edwards ticket...
Yeah. And any potential repeat run for president. Odd. Why did he come clear now?

Look at me, I'm a man made of straw.

Not so much straw when talking about a party that has continuously brought up "Family Values" and always tried to question the moral integrity of its opponents.

i dont think that an edwards VP run was in the cards. too "been there done that" anyway.

but he may have blown a job in the administration as "poverty czar".

i find it a bit creepy that the MSM is focusing so much on who john edwards had an affair with 2 years ago. if he were running for office now it might matter but i dont really care about it now.

Not so much straw when talking about a party that has continuously brought up "Family Values" and always tried to question the moral integrity of its opponents.

What he said.

Indeed, Whereyouthinkyougoing. But I've no idea why he did so now...

I suppose if the National Enquirer keeps guessing, its going to hit the mark sometime.

Besides, an Obama/Edwards ticket would have been too narrow anyway. They're too politically similar.

Thank goodness, I would not want him as my President anyway.

In before the "SEE? THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T VOTE FOR OBAMA AND MUST VOTE FOR THE PARTY THAT COVERED UP A CHILD PREDATOR IN FLORIDA INSTEAD!!!" crowd.

Lol... you're a very active democrat... (I am too, lol)...

Yeah. And any potential repeat run for president. Odd. Why did he come clear now?
he knows that they know and that they wont leave him alone until he admits it. they have been following him around for god's sake. thats how they know that he went to some hotel that the woman and her baby were staying at.

there comes a point where you just want it over with.

Look at me, I'm a man made of straw.

At least someone said it.

First: Mark Foley is a slimebag. He oggled under age boys and that is creepy. Yet he never had sex with underage boys.

Second: In 1983, Democratic congressman Gerry Studds was found to have sexually propositioned House pages and actually buggered a 17-year-old male page whom he took on a trip to Portugal. Studds is a slimebag who actually HAD sex with underage boys.

The difference?

When a Republican congressman is caught in a sex scandal, he immediately resigns and crawls off into a hole in embarrassment. His career is over. No support from the gay community for being outed for consentual sex with an adult.

When a Democrat, Studds, was caught having with a minor and he ran for re-election and was happily returned to office five more times by liberal Democratic voters in his Martha's Vineyard district. His detractors were denounced for engaging in a witch-hunt against gays.

Goes to show how "scandals" are treated differently depending on whether or not you are a Democrat. It must be the lower standards thing.

Indeed, Whereyouthinkyougoing. But I've no idea why he did so now...

Because half the pundits in the media were pressing him to shut down the Enquirer with more than just "Pshaw, tabloids!" It was either admit it and attempt damage control, or hide in a barrel without comment and take what came.

Considering Edwards as VP would have been stupid. He didn't carry his own (and my) state for Kerry in 2004. He's not a native and his Senate service was unimpressive. If he can't even deliver NC Electoral College votes, he's worthless to the Dems.

Stink raised, non-issue identified. Can we move on yet? Kaythxbai.

Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 44-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

:eek: but how will Rielle take this news? and will Obama finally come out of the closet now that his boyfriend is HIV positive?

*cue Eastenders drum thingy*

At least someone said it.

First: Mark Foley is a slimebag. He oggled under age boys and that is creepy. Yet he never had sex with underage boys.

Second: In 1983, Democratic congressman Gerry Studds was found to have sexually propositioned House pages and actually buggered a 17-year-old male page whom he took on a trip to Portugal. Studds is a slimebag who actually HAD sex with underage boys.

The difference?

When a Republican congressman is caught in a sex scandal, he immediately resigns and crawls off into a hole in embarrassment. His career is over. No support from the gay community for being outed for consentual sex with an adult.

When a Democrat, Studds, was caught having with a minor and he ran for re-election and was happily returned to office five more times by liberal Democratic voters in his Martha's Vineyard district. His detractors were denounced for engaging in a witch-hunt against gays.

Goes to show how "scandals" are treated differently depending on whether or not you are a Democrat. It must be the lower standards thing.

Agreed.

:eek: but how will Rielle take this news? and will Obama finally come out of the closet now that his boyfriend is HIV positive?

*cue Eastenders drum thingy*

Hahahahahahhaha. Brilliant.

At least someone said it.

First: Mark Foley is a slimebag. He oggled under age boys and that is creepy. Yet he never had sex with underage boys.

Second: In 1983, Democratic congressman Gerry Studds was found to have sexually propositioned House pages and actually buggered a 17-year-old male page whom he took on a trip to Portugal. Studds is a slimebag who actually HAD sex with underage boys.

The difference?

When a Republican congressman is caught in a sex scandal, he immediately resigns and crawls off into a hole in embarrassment. His career is over. No support from the gay community for being outed for consentual sex with an adult.

When a Democrat, Studds, was caught having with a minor and he ran for re-election and was happily returned to office five more times by liberal Democratic voters in his Martha's Vineyard district. His detractors were denounced for engaging in a witch-hunt against gays.

Goes to show how "scandals" are treated differently depending on whether or not you are a Democrat. It must be the lower standards thing.

And yet you had to go talk to the scarecrow.

Does anyone on NSG actually know what a strawman is? Or do you all just like saying it? (see, also, ad hominem).

And yet you had to go talk to the scarecrow.

Does anyone on NSG actually know what a strawman is? Or do you all just like saying it? (see, also, ad hominem).
you only said that because you are a poopyhead!

i am so sick of people like you bringing up formal debate tactics--this isnt a scholarly site.

And yet you had to go talk to the scarecrow.

Does anyone on NSG actually know what a strawman is? Or do you all just like saying it? (see, also, ad hominem).

What's so straw man about it? He was commenting that it wouldn't be long before the Republican Party or some group associated with them or working on their behalf uses this little non-news event to build an attack ad.

And yet you had to go talk to the scarecrow.

Does anyone on NSG actually know what a strawman is? Or do you all just like saying it? (see, also, ad hominem).

I know, it is bad form to answer a strawman with a strawman. Sorry but it is interesting the different standards that are applied in such arguments.

What's so straw man about it? He was commenting that it wouldn't be long before the Republican Party or some group associated with them or working on their behalf uses this little non-news event to build an attack ad.

To be sure, I meant the Republicans here at NSG, but that works just as well.

It's just ridiculous that the question whether someone had an affair or not can affect the person's political chances. There's no connection to aptitude or political issues whatsoever. And lying about it doesn't bring up the question whether the candidate is "trustworthy" or has "moral integrity" or whatever, because someones love life is an entirely private matter. Hell, someone could have a ..."fondness" for animals and still be the next Gandhi (or, if you don't like the guy, whoever else you think is an able leader).

The whole "hired despite lack of experience and presumably because of the affair" thing is debatable, of course. But if the statement that the woman was hired before the affair began is true, then there is also no problem.

Besides, the whole thing just shows that the public's priorities are screwed up. Is there really nothing more important to focus on? Like, for example, issues *gasp*? Or is the state of modern democracy really so poor that the media throws around every little insignificant bit of information just to smear a candidates image?

...Well, I guess it's never been different. Rrrridiculous.

I know, it is bad form to answer a strawman with a strawman. Sorry but it is interesting the different standards that are applied in such arguments.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Bill Clinton would be proud of him.

What's so straw man about it? He was commenting that it wouldn't be long before the Republican Party or some group associated with them or working on their behalf uses this little non-news event to build an attack ad.

An attack ad against who? Edwards did this to himself and it has nothing to do with Obama. Sure Edwards, who spoke out against Bill Clinton's extra-marital activities, is a hypocrite but it in no way effects Obama. I mean, the guy isn't even a Senator or a candidate anymore.

An attack ad against who? Edwards did this to himself and it has nothing to do with Obama. Sure Edwards, who spoke out against Bill Clinton's extra-marital activities, is a hypocrite but it in no way effects Obama. I mean, the guy isn't even a Senator or a candidate anymore.

And the last time facts stopped the Republican attack machine was when (Cf.: Kerry, John)?

An attack ad against who? Edwards did this to himself and it has nothing to do with Obama. Sure Edwards, who spoke out against Bill Clinton's extra-marital activities, is a hypocrite but it in no way effects Obama. I mean, the guy isn't even a Senator or a candidate anymore.

Don't forget that he aggressively used his wife as a campaign tool, spouting something about having strength in the face of her cancer, or somesuch.

When a Republican congressman is caught in a sex scandal, he immediately resigns and crawls off into a hole in embarrassment. His career is over.

or, you know, is the current republican candidate for president...

Don't forget that he aggressively used his wife as a campaign tool, spouting something about having strength in the face of her cancer, or somesuch.
which is completely irrelevant to anything.

cant make an attack ad out of it eh?

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

You attempted to steer the thread away from Edwards and to the evil Republicans who you unrightly say protected a child molester (in caps no less). That is a strawman, an attempt to refute a view by misrepresenting it or steering it into a topic of your choice.

By the way, you were successful. I love also love Princess Bride quote. Shows originality.

And the last time facts stopped the Republican attack machine was when (Cf.: Kerry, John)?

Ah, the VRWC still has power. I don't remember anything untrue being said about Kerry that did not come out of his own mouth.

or, you know, is the current republican candidate for president...

What sex scandal is this? The NYT hit piece? Please show me the evidence of a sex scandal involving McCain.

You attempted to steer the thread away from Edwards and to the evil Republicans who you unrightly say protected a child molester (in caps no less). That is a strawman, an attempt to refute a view by misrepresenting it or steering it into a topic of your choice.

By the way, you were successful. I love also love Princess Bride quote. Shows originality.

Oh, so, no you'll pretend the upper echelons of the Party didn't know about Foley's attempts now? And no, that's not what a strawman is. For that matter, you claimed you were answering a strawman with another. Guess what: Neither was YOUR retort a strawman. Shows how much you know.

Ah, the VRWC still has power. I don't remember anything untrue being said about Kerry that did not come out of his own mouth.

That YOU don't remember is YOUR problem. Swiftboating became a verb for a reason.

Oh, so, no you'll pretend the upper echelons of the Party didn't know about Foley's attempts now? And no, that's not what a strawman is. For that matter, you claimed you were answering a strawman with another. Guess what: Neither was YOUR retort a straman. Shows how much you know.

I will say the whole of Congress knows about such behavior and often hides it no matter which party does it. It is one thing to say they hide it and quite another to find out who actually does the hiding. Sorry, I want proof.

Did I not say that Foley is a slimebag? Now tell me I am wrong about the treatment given depending on party.

And yes, that is what I strawman is. Please define it differently if you wish but take a look at what I did. I took your strawman about Republicans hiding child molestors (untrue) and furthered it with my strawman of a Democrat who actually did molest children (true). Both are strawmen and I extended yours.

Shows how much you know. I must say this is an extremely funny turn of events.

That YOU don't remember is YOUR problem. Swiftboating became a verb for a reason.

Swiftboating = Telling the truth about a candidate's past.

Please tell me which part of Kerry lies you don't remember. Cambodia being seared, seared, into his mind? That he threw his medals in protest only to find them on the wall of his Congressional office? Kerry spoke lies about what is troops were doing during Vietnam and this generated a vast amount of anger towards the man who decided to ride his military service into the White House.

I will say the whole of Congress knows about such behavior and often hides it no matter which party does it. It is one thing to say they hide it and quite another to find out who actually does the hiding. Sorry, I want proof.

Did I not say that Foley is a slimebag? Now tell me I am wrong about the treatment given depending on party.

And yes, that is what I strawman is. Please define it differently if you wish but take a look at what I did. I took your strawman about Republicans hiding child molestors (untrue) and furthered it with my strawman of a Democrat who actually did molest children (true). Both are strawmen and I extended yours.

Shows how much you know. I must say this is an extremely funny turn of events.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Foley_scandal#Dennis_Hastert

A strawman is when you present an absurdized version of a view and claims that that is what your opponent is defending. I never claimed you were defending Foley OR Hastert's covering him. And I didn't claim Republicans as a whole did that either. What I said was that Republicans would use this in attack ads, never minding that some members of the GOP acted like, well, Foley. You didn't use a strawman either, you used a "tu quoque".

Again, shows how much you know.

Swiftboating = Telling the truth about a candidate's past.

So, not only is the world you live in a different one, its language is also? Nice to know.

Again, shows how much you know.

I know enough to know you won't back down no matter how wrong you are. I don't need another visit from the forum police.

You win. Now go bask in the glory of it all! Have a nice weekend as well. You earned it!

So, not only is the world you live in a different one, its language is also? Nice to know.

I forgot that I should only listen to those Vietnam vets that are approved by the Kerry campaign. Maybe instead of "reporting for duty" Kerry should have used "hope and change". That seems to shut down rational thought more effectively.

I know enough to know you won't back down no matter how wrong you are. I don't need another visit from the forum police.

You win. Now go bask in the glory of it all! Have a nice weekend as well. You earned it!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

And done we are.

I forgot that I should only listen to those Vietnam vets that are approved by the Kerry campaign. Maybe instead of "reporting for duty" Kerry should have used "hope and change". That seems to shut down rational thought more effectively.

So, after claiming swiftboaters were telling the truth and implying Obama might have been taught in a madrassa and is a Muslim (Don't mess with people with good memories, TSF), you go on to claim that I have shut down rational thought?

You seem to be under the impression that I really, really like Obama. I don't. He's not McCain, and that's good enough for now.

So, after claiming swiftboaters were telling the truth and implying Obama might have been taught in a madrassa and is a Muslim (Don't mess with people with good memories, TSF), you go on to claim that I have shut down rational thought?

You seem to be under the impression that I really, really like Obama. I don't. He's not McCain, and that's good enough for now.

Nice... lol...

It's strange how this conversation about John Edwards' affair has devolved so rapidly into an argument about "strawmans" and then about both parties' credentials. Frankly, I blame Smiling Frog for trying to imply that Democrats elect child molestors.

EDIT: I apologize if the last comment was a strawman.

So, after claiming swiftboaters were telling the truth and implying Obama might have been taught in a madrassa and is a Muslim (Don't mess with people with good memories, TSF), you go on to claim that I have shut down rational thought?

WTF? You now have to show me exactly where I said that Obama is a Muslim. Your memory is crap if that is what you believe.

Obama did live in a Muslim nation and did attend their schools. I did not see this as a reason to believe Obama is a Muslim but I also wondered why Obama would work so hard to deny he went to a Muslim school. Denial gives the story power. Considering his 20 years in an anti-American Christian church I am pretty sure he is not a Muslim. You can actually thank Hillary for that meme.

Once again, your memory is crap.

You seem to be under the impression that I really, really like Obama. I don't. He's not McCain, and that's good enough for now.

I thought you were lukewarm on Obama considering you don't understand much about his policies. I don't like either yet I have taken it upon myself to find out about their platforms and issues. Give it a go, you might change your mind about Obama.

Nice... lol...

It's strange how this conversation about John Edwards' affair has devolved so rapidly into an argument about "strawmans" and then about both parties' credentials. Frankly, I blame Smiling Frog for trying to imply that Democrats elect child molestors.

EDIT: I apologize if the last comment was a strawman.

Studds was a child molestor and they did elect him. True story.

Studds was a child molestor and they did elect him. True story.

Okay... so?

That does not mean that ALL Democrats want to elect child molestors.

Considering his 20 years in an anti-American Christian church (...)

I thought you were lukewarm on Obama considering you don't understand much about his policies. I don't like either yet I have taken it upon myself to find out about their platforms and issues. Give it a go, you might change your mind about Obama.

1- Oh, right, it failed me, you implied he is anti-American with an idiotic attempt at guilt by association. Silly me. :rolleyes:

2- Does McCain favor staying in Iraq? Yes. Was Obama against that useless bloodbath in the first place? Yes.

Even IF that weren't enough for me, I'd point out that McCain's economic policy is based on the same principles that, guess what, CREATED the problem.

Ages ago, I posted an article about John Edwards' affair and "love child" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=545691) from the National Enquirer.

Looks like it was true, at least the affair was...



Article continues (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5441195&page=1)

Well, well, there goes the slim chances of an Obama/Edwards ticket...

I honestly don't care right now. What's far more important--and what should be focused on, coverage wise--is the Russo-Georgian conflict. Yet all of the American media outlets are stuck to some stupid sex scandal. It's sickening.

Don't forget that he aggressively used his wife as a campaign tool, spouting something about having strength in the face of her cancer, or somesuch.

Well, her cancer was discovered after the relationship ended, it's not like he was using both of them at the same time.

WTF? You now have to show me exactly where I said that Obama is a Muslim. Your memory is crap if that is what you believe.

Obama did live in a Muslim nation and did attend their schools. I did not see this as a reason to believe Obama is a Muslim but I also wondered why Obama would work so hard to deny he went to a Muslim school. Denial gives the story power. Considering his 20 years in an anti-American Christian church I am pretty sure he is not a Muslim. You can actually thank Hillary for that meme.

Once again, your memory is crap.



I thought you were lukewarm on Obama considering you don't understand much about his policies. I don't like either yet I have taken it upon myself to find out about their platforms and issues. Give it a go, you might change your mind about Obama.

If you don't think he's a Muslim why does it matter at all if he lived in a Muslim country and went to a school there? If it doesn't matter, why would you bring it up?

Oh and also, what makes you think it's an anti-American church? Do you have any proof of it?

What sex scandal is this? The NYT hit piece? Please show me the evidence of a sex scandal involving McCain.

shit, i forgot about that one. nah, i'm talking about the fact that mccain did exactly what edwards just got caught doing. i guess its ok because he eventually legally ditched the wife he was cheating on?

So? Its his personal business, not mine, nor yours, nor the media's.

Just a bit more evidence of what anyone with eyes and ears should've already known about Edwards. The guy's an unctuous, play-acting creep. It's practically written on his forehead.

Here she is:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/POLITICS/08/08/edwards.affair/art.hunter.extra.jpg

What do you think?

Here she is:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/POLITICS/08/08/edwards.affair/art.hunter.extra.jpg

What do you think?

...guy's got taste, I'll give him that.

And, since I don't really care what things politicians do in their spare time, as long as it is legal of course, I say well done him.

Although if he did it at the same time as his wife had cancer... thats just low.

Frankly, I don't see why anyone cares. I didn't realize that John Edwards was in any way relevant. Didn't he fail to win the Democratic nomination twice now? Wasn't he already a laughably failed VP nomination?

Had the Enquirer picked up a scoop that Obama had an affair, now THAT would be juicy. But this, this is like breaking the story that someone like Dick Armey had an affair. It's a little bit shocking, but really, does it matter?

Goes to show how "scandals" are treated differently depending on whether or not you are a Democrat. It must be the lower standards thing.

http://www.idrewthis.org/comics/idt20050530investigations.gif

Frankly, I don't see why anyone cares. I didn't realize that John Edwards was in any way relevant. Didn't he fail to win the Democratic nomination twice now? Wasn't he already a laughably failed VP nomination?

Had the Enquirer picked up a scoop that Obama had an affair, now THAT would be juicy. But this, this is like breaking the story that someone like Dick Armey had an affair. It's a little bit shocking, but really, does it matter?
ive been reading on slate the justifications for the serious journalists to cover this story. they are SOOO jealous that the enquirer got to stalk edwards for proof of an affair and they didnt.

they insist that its because he is a public figure.

but being a public figure is why its not illegal to write suspicious shit about someone not a reason why its OK to pursue gossip.

which is what this is. its not legitimate news. its not important. its just salacious.

http://www.idrewthis.org/comics/idt20050530investigations.gif

Do you wanna be my new best friend? :D

I for one think the major news outlets such as AP and the networks owe the National Enquirer an apology and a bit of respect

respect for WHAT?

spreading gossip and stalking 2 people for the purpose of getting compromising photos?

the MSM needs to get back to real journalism and stop envying the tabloids for being able to live in the gutter.

People who say that they could care less about the affair and write stuff like “it’s time for Americans to grow up” need to do some maturing themselves because they’re giving politicians in general and adulterous politicians in particular a big fat free pass to obfuscate and lie at will.

Unable to deny any longer that he had had an affair with a campaign worker, he insisted on parsing. It was all a mistake. If she was paid off, it wasn’t my money. And, in what may be a new high in the annals of weaseldom: my wife’s cancer was in remission. …

He had no idea why his national finance chairman has been funneling payments to his ex-mistress, and he was apparently never tempted to pick up the phone to ask. His 2 a.m. visit with the woman, Rielle Hunter, at a Beverly Hills hotel last month was a secret mission to keep her from going public about their liaison, the briefness and meaninglessness of which cannot be stressed too often. And he has no idea what baby that was in The National Enquirer picture. …

If Edwards’s political career is toast, it will be because he has always seemed to be less than a sum of his parts: the position papers, the “Two Americas,” the photogenic grin, the supersmart wife. The only piece of the package that consistently disappointed was the man himself. He wasn’t a very good running mate for John Kerry, and as a presidential candidate, he always struck me as being about 2 inches deep.