John Edwards To Admit He Is The Baby Daddy
By Nicole Belle Saturday Aug 15, 2009 5:30am
According to WRAL News, sources expect former U.S. Sen. John Edwards to admit that he is the father of his former mistress' 18-month-old daughter.
Edwards confessed last August to an affair with Rielle Hunter, who worked for the Edwards presidential campaign in 2008. Edwards has denied father her daughter, saying the relationship with Hunter ended before the child was conceived.
I will reiterate again that it is my belief that the extramarital activities of any one is not of interest. However, I do think it's instructive to note the character of someone who would break so callously the promises made to those closest to him.
However, let me also say (and I do this as a former HUGE John Edwards supporter), WHEW!!!! I'm so glad his campaign blew up when it did. It's bad enough that he took his marriage vows so casually, but to be dumb enough to do so without taking precautions against this kind of eventuality does not speak well for Edwards' intelligence at all.
Login or Register to post comments.
...I believe that means he had sex with the baby momma.
like that.
Let's just leave it at "he is the baby's daddy". :-)
I agree Nicole. I am glad it came out early in the race. Knowing this situation was there and then him trying to keep running in the race knowing this was out there was just irresponsible.
Who gives a shit. This is old news and really it doesn't effect my life. I don't care if is screwed a elephant. Really why do we care? If we aren't hanging Vitters, Ensign, and Sanford why should we give a shit about Edwards. They are all dogs.
A powerful sign that politicians just don't have a clue.
Why would you do something like this when you know everyone's eyes are on you and there is a special group of people just waiting for you to make any mistake at all. You have no room for error yet these guys error all over the place.
And I also feel that it is nobody's business who you have sex with no matter what job you are in, it's too bad the media and the right wing in this country don't feel that way.
Even the ones with some thing resembling humanity suck. The Democratic party sure dodged a McBullet on this guy.
Again why do we care? He didn't make it out of the primary. Who cares. It doesn't effect any of our lives. Really. You can't reason with stupid.
http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ja...
.
Dearest Nicole,
We love you. This is beneath you.
because its a scandal piece?
edwards has always been a fraud
he made his mark, first by proclaiming to be the most conservative of dems...then when it was politically expedient, he became the most liberal
the man was only interested in personal power...he didnt care about country, party or family
im glad he was outed and is out
He's gay now?
Oh wait, ann already said that.
Well I guess this is another of ann's stories blown to floowy.
A friend of mines father produced 3 kids before divorcing and moving in with his boyfriend. It has been known to happen.
I am pretty sure John is not gay. He was just thinking with the wrong organ and now he has to play the cards dealt.
....one more reason for gay marriage......at least ya can't get caught with a baby that isn't yours....:)
In a hundred years, the wrong-wing conservatives will spread the lie that it was their idea to give homosexuals the right to marry.
What about his terminally ill wife and his two, legitimate children?? What about how his stupidity and selfishness affects them??
Using the excuse that 'the other organ' made him (or any man) do it makes me want to hurl.
And had a fourth, a son, Wade, who died at age 16.
When "Uncle Joe Mccarthy" comes running to your defence, I think it's time to re-examine strategies.
Seriously though, it's damn easy to condemn and spit on John Edwards, but none of us are involved in his situation. I do agree that politically, this was a boneheaded move of historical proportions; he was running for President, for God's sake! But otherwise, I remain firm that this isn't any of our business. His career is pretty much over, anyway. What does spitting on him as he walks by accomplish, aside from making us feel morally superior?
cheating on your wife of 25(?) or more years while she has cancer and you have fathered 4 children with her and are running for the highest office in the country......just plain stupid. And about as narcissistic as you can get. Some (not all) of these politicians become enamored of themselves and their fame & success (happens to regular businessmen, too) and begin to think that they can get away with anything and nobody will know. If you want to have an affair, get rid of the wife first. Otherwise, suffer the consequences. I was a big John Edwards fan, too, but devastated to find my hero had feet of very crumbling clay.
You call him "as narcissistic as you can get," accuse him of being (or having been) "enamored" with himself, his fame, and success, of thinking he could "get away with anything" and no one would be the wiser, ad infinitum. The problem with such broad strokes is that they are made without evidence - they are assumptions.
While it is tempting to dehumanize the man and to try and differentiate ourselves from him, no one here has ever walked in his shoes. I can't help but feel that people are a little self-important, making glib remarks about those they've never met as though their thoughts matter when they really don't. This has nothing to do with you or me.
I suppose it is safe to presume that you are a man.
Clarify please.
Typically, it is the male of our species who considers infedility something to be expected and therefore frowns upon the reporting of it because it is banal and trite. Well, it is banal and trite and therefore not worthy of the paper it is printed on. However, when a public official who might have won the nomination for president engages in it while running for that nomination, (which would have cost the democratic party yet one more election), it is MAJOR news. And it will continue to be major news. Your sex life is none of my concern. But a presidential candidate's in America? Totally my concern.
It really, really shouldn't be your concern.
What people do behind closed doors is their business. I'd rather that than a country where people lose their Goddamn minds because one dude gets his kicks from wearing diapers.
let the little head do the thinkin', it happens
I'm not saying there should not be a price to pay for Edward's behavior, but when are we going to get over the FACT that men - and women to a lesser degree - cheat. It's an evolutionary imperative.
There are six billion people on this planet. Only two things are required: copulation and eating. I have traveled on business for years and seen some of what anyone would think of as the best husbands cheat.
We are primates. Study chimpanzee behavior and you'll see sexual behavior amazingly similar to human sexual behavior. While things have changed culturally since the advent of agriculture 12,000 years ago, we're not changed much in evolutionary terms. Men are driven to spread their seed and women are driven to find a mate to take care of the offspring. We see this when women marry money, or stability, or the nerd gets the prettiest wife. And I've seen this when excellent husbands screw some available woman on a business trip. Developing cultures, which vary greatly across the globe, continue to illustrate this.
This should not excuse any behavior. It should however give it some context. Edwards was not stupid. He's just your typical alpha male.
You forgot poop.
Interesting that creationists hold that the world is only 7000 years old. That's when clear-cut patriarchs essentially took over large portions.
So I did..... that reminds me of a joke: all the different parts of the body got together to decide who would be the boss of the body. The brain spoke up first saying "I do all the thinking and without me...well nothing." The hands spoke up and said "we allow you to make the world you live in and we should be the boss. The legs spoke up and said "we take you to the places you think of and want to live in so we should be the boss." The eyes said we should be the boss because we guide all the thinking, making, walking...." About that time the asshole spoke up and said "I should be the boss of the body..." before he could finish the brain, eyes, hands, legs broke out in uproarious laughter. The asshole couldn't finish and was very insulted.
So he clamed up... the legs got wobbly, the hands inarticulate, the eyeys crossed, and the brain foggy... finally they gave in and the the asshole be the boss.
Moral: you don't have to have to think, walks, make, or see to be the boss. You just gotta be an asshole.
Mantra of a republican.
'he just acted like a man' >> a dishonest man with no integrity or moral fortitude. I'm sure the magical sky genie will forgive him.
I've been had by lots of politicians (so far all Democrats I might add).
During the California Primary last year I was living in Connecticut and was going to vote absentee.
The ex and his wife BEGGED me to vote for Edwards. I didn't like Hillary or Obama because of their heath area "mandate" ideas so I voted for Edwards. About a week later he dropped out of the race when he didn't really need to. His health care reform proposals were far more progressive than either Hillary's or Obama's.
Had he stayed in he might have used his clout with his endorsement to sway the other candidates position on health care...
Oh well. Had again.
Bullshit. Men are driven to spread their seed and then you say this should not excuse any behavior. Flip a coin.
Well if they gotta do some seed spreadin', let them do it in a seed packet or a furrow in the ground.
The Bible says that it is unlawful for a man to spill his seed.
Jeez, I sure hope it was about gardening.
I said it should provide context. Going back to the chimps, the females are punished harshly when caught cheating... not so the males... see what I mean.
We have evolved into humans. We have culture and mores that we use to temper our natural inclinations. We just should not forget from whence we came.
We share more DNA similarities with canines than we do with primates. It could explain the close kinship between the two species. That said. The Alpha Male in some wolf packs is allowed to have more than one mate. However, there is still only one Alpha Female and all other females and lower ranked males will adhere to her.
I found her on the freeway in L.A. and saved her.
Let's just put it this way. She's not the type I can take to the "dog park" and let off the leash to "play" with the other female dogs.
I tried that once. I lost a nice blouse from the blood stains left from that "episode".
She's a true "bitch". (Excellent guard dog though).
We most certainly do not share more similarities with cainines than simians, hominids, or any other primates.
Your assertion is rubbish.
Regardless, genetics doesn't trump human societal behavior, which has less to do with allelic variance than pre-frontal cortical disuse.
I thought we came full-blown from the head of Gawd?? (not Zeus, that Xian fellow).
http://people.hsc.edu/drjclassics/mythology20...
Unless you're referring to Adam Kadmon:
http://img2.allposters.com/images/BRGPOD/2025...
only men came from Gawd (it says in Genesis that God created MAN in his image) and woman came from one of Adam's ribs -- it says it in the Bible -- of course it doesn't mention where those dinosaurs in the Garden came from or the saddles they had on them.
Your knowledge of psychology is rather one-dimensional. What you said could be used to excuse rape, since rape occurs all of the damn time in the wild. The truth of the matter is that we have our intellect and we use this to better ourselves; we are not slaved to our throbbing biological urges, and anyone who says so is no different than those who, in the 17th and 18th centuries, blamed their own actions on the arrangements of the stars.
Yes, a dumb, ordinary man, with no ability to control his impulses. That's just the kind who shouldn't be president. We've already had enough of those.
I, too, was a huge supporter and am thankful that he imploded when he did. What a waste of talent. It wasn't just his loss or his family's loss (however extended that may now be), but it was the country's loss. He ran on a great platform, and even if he hadn't secured the nomination, he might have served as attorney general. Now, he just mopes around at home waiting for other shoes to drop. Let this be a lesson to us all.
I figure most politicians are fraudulent about self presentation, and I don't really care. They are not my friends nor boyfriends.
In 2008, Edwards was the only one talking about class and poverty issues, so I supported him. His position on healthcare was a hell of a lot better than Obama's or Clinton's.
My only problem with this issue that is no business of mine, and that only concerns his immediate family, Hunter, and her child, is the arrogance and stupidity of thinking that this wouldn't torpedo him. And that's a huge problem. I'm glad it came out when it did.
Does this mean he gets his own show on fox now?
The baby is alive and healthy. Honesty is never rewarded at fuxNoise.
$800.00 bonnet?
LOL
I was never a big Edwards supporter as he came across to me as sort of insincere. Having said that, I heard yesterday on tv that a whole lot of people knew what was going on long before it was made public. The lady didn't even attempt to hide it from her friends. I'm glad the rug was pulled out from under this before he got closer to the election. What I don't understand is why he keeps going out in the public about it. Couldn't he privately admit the child is his? Just settle things whatever they are in private.
His arrogance still has him believing he might be able to get out of it. This is called pathological "NARCISSISM!"
How are the republicans gonna play this:
He had straight sex not gay
There was no abortion
And he was caught changing diapers, not wearing them.
They'll ask to see his birth certificate and call him a Muslim
If he were a member he would have stayed in the race.
They tell their congress zom-bots that since they are god's chosen, their sins don't offend god.
Mighty convenient for the amoral.
*
Was the child one of god's children or John's child?
Considering how quickly Democratic supporters are stabbing the man in the back--resorting to the same, tired talking points (he spends a lot of money on frivolous things, he is effeminate, etcetera)--I am not so sure that Republicans are the ones we ought to be worried about.
I'm also glad he quit when he did. This entire incident speaks a lot about his character. He lies when cornered, can't take the heat (of his wife's illness), and denied his own child. Kind of a sorry excuse for a human being.
If the baby was a Muslim, wouldn't it have to wear an Italian table-cloth over his head?
Only if it were made out of muslin.
*
Half-breed muslin. Similar to Kente cloth but woven with enough confederate cotton to pass.
Kunte?
This is offensive on so many levels. NOT the least of which - I really wish, if he had to be such a bastard - couldn't he have picked someone with some class? What an insult to Elizabeth. What an insult to those of us that thought highly of him.
*
If he was sincere with what he said in his campaign, he wasn't didicated enough to it to pass up a roll in the hay, knowing full well it could cost him his career and so much more. And why in the hell didn't he use protection? Just fu*king stupid!
I suppose this country will never get over "sex and religion", in no particular order............but having lived through 12 presidents, I seem to remember that a few of them were not exactly at the pinnacle of purity either............just sayin'.........
Check out:
Sat, 08/15/2009 - 06:39 — ysbaddaden
(different link)
http://www.hardscrabblehome.com/fpdb/images/c...
I understand what you are saying but those were days when people weren't running around with phones that were also cameras. Videos weren't on the internet faster than hell. Plus people were not in touch with one another as rapidly as they are now. To have a president who has a family and a child by another woman just doesn't cut it these days.
Without engaging in the age-old argument over what exactly intelligence is, I think this is more a case of judgment (associated with the narcissism that plagues almost every major political candidate) than intelligence. When one is as narcissistic as these people are, there are likely to be lots of decisions and actions that don't look intelligent.
As a one time supporter, I'd just like to say -- John, why don't you and Sarah Palin run away together and never come back.
Were you there? How do you know that his relationship with this woman was the result of his narcissism? For all you and I know, he actually fell in love with his staff member, and was conflicted and tortured by the whole thing. I am not asking you to break out the world's tiniest violin, here; I'm simply asking you to refrain from offering sweeping generalizations about something you're entirely ignorant of. No one's ever going to truly know the details - we just know that Edwards acted incredibly foolishly. We don't know why.
...because we've seen his behavior since...SINCE...he did what he did. And it speaks volumes about his character and personality. Maybe you haven't been paying attention or we just see things differently, but the point of this affair, as is often the case, is less the original act, and more the behavior afterward.
You can write any scenario you want for what Edwards did originally, but you're wasting your time trying to pretend that there is any justification for his behavior subsequent to the affair.
Note: I would be "entirely ignorant" if I had never seen John Edwards, observed his public behavior contrasted with what is known of his private behavior, and been exposed repeatedly to his lies and shifting stories. That is a far cry from total ignorance.
So, when you say "see, that's what I'm talkin' about," you're a) exposing your own ignorance and b) protesting a bit too much.
Arguing that I am 'protesting too much.' Trying to bully me into submission with the implication that by defending Edwards at all, I must too be a moral coward of some kind.
I am not offended, but I do think it's an intellectually dishonest tactic on your part.
In any event, I don't conflate 'justification' with 'understanding.' You can argue that you've watched a million different Edwards clips, have read interviews, have seen him at rallies, ad nauseam - it doesn't make you a participant in the original scandal and it doesn't make you qualified to pass vitriolic judgement on another human being.
You might as well argue that you're qualified to speak about Michael Jackson's personal life too, since I'm sure--like most people in this culture--you've seen his videos and concerts and scandals and interviews.
We all think that he fucked up, but going out of your way to shout about a stranger being a jerk and an asshole and so on just says more about you than him, don't you think? I am not saying he's innocent or that he's misunderstood; I went about providing a hypothetical example to illustrate my original point about it not really being our business.
...you're obviously on the moral outrage wagon and when comments are as filled with hyperbole as yours are, it's a waste of time to continue a discussion.
Bully you? You're kidding, right?
You might as well argue that you're qualified to speak about Michael Jackson's personal life too, since I'm sure--like most people in this culture--you've seen his videos and concerts and scandals and interviews.
We all think that he fucked up
I don't think anything of the kind, because I don't spend (and haven't spent) a single second thinking about Michael Jackson. I didn't care for his music, I never saw a concert, never watched more than a snippet of a video, and avoided his interviews and scandals like they were terminal diseases. It's too bad he's dead, but I am not now, nor have I ever been even remotely interested in anything about Michael Jackson. May he rest in peace.
...it not really being our business.
Ah, but that's where you're wrong. When people who seek public office behave in such reckless ways that it could threaten the well-being of our entire country it is my -- and every citizen's -- business. Public trust comes with a price. Had Edwards kept his secret and been elected, the disruption that the exposure of his behavior would have caused could have done immeasurable harm to countless people. For example, if we were in the middle of forging health care reform, the scandal could easily scuttle the legislation or weaken it severely.
In general, I am completely uninterested in the private lives of celebrities and politicians. The only time they matter is when the repercussions of reckless or criminal behavior threatens to harm the wider society. I originally supported Edwards. Had he succeeded in winning the presidency, the mess his behavior would have caused is truly alarming.
Actually, I think your comments sound a lot more like shouting than mine do. You should take your meds, calm down, and perhaps we'll agree more about some other topic.
As for passing judgment on another human being, as a citizen it is my responsibility to pass judgment on the behavior, beliefs, and judgment of any who seeks a public office that affects me. In this case, since Edwards' own behavior and lack of judgment have most likely and rightly disqualified him from ever running for office again (never say never), the judgment is more in the form of a post mortem about someone I once supported and who, with my help, might have held high political office. Since I have to take responsibility for the candidates I support, I most certainly will judge them in any way relevant to their holding political office.
Further, had the scandal broken later, Edwards might well have been in an important appointed position. Again, exposure could have done great harm to issues I care about.
I've had my say. Do your worst.
PS I'm a little amused by your comments. Re-reading them, they seem to touch on all the common Internet blog comment complaints so neatly, that it makes me think either they were generated by a app designed-to-whine-online, or you're just practicing. Either way, they seem a little off.
PPS It's also funny that you've directed your outrage at me, when so many people here seem to agree. If you yell at one of them, maybe they'll keep you busy with further responses.
PPPS And finally, I have to feel really sorry for the innocent people in his life. Ciao.
I'm on a "moral outrage wagon?" How so? Because I'm suggesting that perhaps we should be cool and not quite so concerned with grabbing the pitchforks and torches? In my mind, that's the opposite of moral outrage!
Perhaps you're referring to the fact that you very strongly implied that I 'doth protest too much,' which I take exception to - in principle. I wasn't exactly gnashing teeth; I was pointing out that it was a low blow and in my experience people often try to silence anyone who dares sympathize with the Devil by accusing them of being secretly in love with said Devil, which is unfair to say the least.
While I will acknowledge that perhaps my tone isn't coming across entirely well (we are, after all, having a discussion on the innertubes), it would be helpful if you considered the possibility that you have completely misunderstood my tone. I disagreed with you and said your comments were unfair because--unless you were in the relationship with Edwards--you are by no means an expert on him or his personality. I used Mr. Jackson as a hypothetical example, because regardless of whether or not you're a fan of his music (let alone his grotesque personal life), you have probably been exposed to a lot of him. But any celebrity will do, and it's not uncommon for people to say, 'Oh, so-and-so is such an asshole!' as though they know the individual personally. It's silly, in short.
You are obviously correct to judge a candidate and it's normal to feel burnt (and as someone who once went about singing the man's praises myself, I certainly do), but the original post wasn't saying that he isn't qualified to hold office, it was speculating (in an tone indicating utmost certainty) about why he cheated and what he was getting out of it. Such talk is merely useless conjecture, in my opinion. Edwards screwed up, and that's both the beginning and the end of what we know or what we should know. After all, we're going to quietly bury the man's career; what else is necessary?
I donated several times to his campaign, and attended a campaign event (a first for me). For the record, I REALLY don't care about the sex lives of the rich and famous...it was his duplicity and recklessness that I found so shocking. I feel better now about the timing of his campaign implosion: at least he hadn't gone deep enough for this scandal to be of any use to the Repukes.
It is disappointing that he was unable and / or unwilling to walk the talk....
well, of course...
no way that flake was going away without the prize...
hey, maybe it WAS "love"... but, my personal belief,
hunter was/is an opportunistic thief.
and edwards was a typical man... always thinking first
with his little head...
bummer.
Typical man, check yourself.
Ayup...still hanging there...
I was also a big Edwards fan in the beginning days and months. That he carried this bound-to-be-revealed secret makes me sorry to have trusted him. That his wife was also carrying this secret is more devastating to me.
Elizabeth Edwards seems, to me, to be one of the smartest women in this country. How could she have known this and still gone through the charade we came to learn about (via the Enquirer no less). And of course he's the fucking father. May he be redeemed by doing the right thing by this child.
Elizabeth Edwards, absent this stupid decision to play along, should have become our HHS Secretary.
I feel bad for his kids, all of them. The grown ups had choices, they do not.
Too right.
Too bad Edwards wasn't elected
We'd now have a First Bastard.
But...but...but you're a Hillarista!
/snark
I like what Christ had to say about judging others. (But don't get me wrong: I'm an atheist).
Umm, could I please go get that stone I just threw? It slipped out of my hand, I swear.
But I too think he was wrong on that one.
Did I swear? I didn't mean to. It must have slipped out of mouth just after the stone slipped out of my hand. Father forgive me because I just keep fu*king up.
Good sense of humor.
Thank you and I like you too. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsKO_r76kfQ
Where are you? There are thirteen men and one woman and no one is screwing the woman. You're in a gay bar.
that are not canon to the King James version of the Bible... Jesus did have a solitary relationship with a woman. It is believed that it was left out because they powers that be (the Catholic Church) didn't want to have a female that Jesus saw as an equal.
but the bible is such BS that I, like it's adherents, can pick and choose too.
Some believed that the Dearly Beloved he often addressed was Mary.
Some early sects believed he taught his followers through her, making her like the key disciple, like his Shakti.
It is always easier to let slip the stone than to withhold it, you know?
I do like what you said above about the children, though; those poor little people are stuck in the middle of something that would be terrible enough without the press being all over it like white on rice.
Actually people are expected to judge and discern.
In Judaism, in which the "historical" Jesus was a part, some would be ostracized for intransigent ways.
However, it serves as a warning against hypocrisy.
If we eliminate ever man who cheats, we'll get no alpha male to run the show (Nixon notwithstanding).
The Church would redefine what it means to cheat.
Constantine never converted until on his death bed, but he was friendly to Christians. He had multiple wives. So the bishops defined that as a "Wife of the First Order," and "Wives of the Second Order."
Riddle me this, did Jacob ever divorce Leah before marrying her younger sister Rachel?
That sounds like a question about a soap opera. Can I phone a friend?
As long as you punch regis philbin in his mirthless smirking face first.
What are we playing here, Millionaire or Whack a mole?
I thought the latter necessitated the newest issue of Playgirl.
I don't think Jacob would have had to divorce... multiple wives were cool with Jehovah.
So why wasn't YHVH married himself?
Oh wait, that's Onan.
Unless you count Shekhina.
And of course he knocked-up a 13 year old virgin.
I thought she hooked up with Han Solo?
uh, I mean, Yeah.
What bullshit comments. Were any of us there, anyone know what the Edward's relationship 'really' was? He wasn't your fuckin' husband, for Christ's sake. 60% of American men and 50+% of American women report indulging in extramarital sex. I don't see anywhere that the statistic applies only to politicians, meaning that more than half of those tut-tuting here have done the same thing. Can you say hypocrites? Oh yeah, he was dishonest about it. Look at the cheap puritanical shit someone puts up with when they're honest or open. What uptight, judgmental, sexually-conflicted, down-right vicious prudes we Americans are?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgTPH5y1-ZI&fe...
Remember when women everywhere were screaming that Hillary ought to have left Bill Clinton? The fact that they made it work after a lot of fighting and confusion and hostility should speak volumes about their relationship. (But then, I think they're one of the few legitamitely in-love couples in Washington. If you have ever seen them speak about how they met or fell in love, etcetera, it is in their tone of voice - their eyes.)
Anyway, it's much easier to scream 'Dump the asshole!' when you're not the one in a relationship with the guy who fucked up. It is just a simple case of projection - of living vicariously through someone else.
Traditional English folk song:
http://sniff.numachi.com/pages/tiBSTDKNG2.html
`nobody read Genesis. God often encouraged man to spread his seed though he wasn't big on lying about it.
Except times have changed....looks to me like Eden is pretty much full to the brim with humans. Time to turn off the spigot..!
http://dummidumbwit.files.wordpress.com/2009/...
I think maybe you're taking out of context- or just misremembering- where that quote happens in Genesis. It has nothing to do with Eden or the Fall, but occurs after the Flood, long after the Fall.
Eden represents the world of pastoralists- hunter gatherers and shepherds- who lived off of what the Earth provided. These nomads, by necessity, didn't want to have many children. If there was a drought it was difficult to feed the tribe and the tribe would die off. If there were predators, women of child-bearing age carrying one infant were vulnerable- those forced to carry more than one were dead meat.
Noah's world is completely different. Agriculture- the Fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil- is common. Mankind no longer relies on the fruits of the Earth to nourish itself, rather the fruits of mankind's own labors (irrigation, granaries) . Humans learned to grow enough crops to feed an ever-growing population. We learned to build walls to keep the predators away, then we learned to make weapons that would wipe out predators altogether.
I wasn't misremembering or taking anything out of context....
just 'dead meat'...
i liked him too, and spitzer, and gary hart, and the other lame ass bozos who didn't have the smarts of a bag of hammers....ohhhh......thank you for everything senator. really. now just go away. we've got work to do.
In another lifetime I was plugged into NC politics. People around me endorsed him like crazy but I was sceptical. Something didn't feel right.
I know what you mean about something just not feeling right. To me he was a little too dramatic when he spoke.
I know what you mean about something just not feeling right. To me he was a little too dramatic when he spoke.
It's kind of funny to me how many people will come along afterwards and say, 'Bah, I knew he was a phony all along!'
I was there. I never dreamed that a sex scandal would take him out. He had a menu of negatives from which to choose but this wasn't on my radar.
How great is this! The MSM will run the story 24/7 for the next week or two so we don't have to be burdened with any other news--except of course the town hall protests. What a great country!
He's a big disappointment. Personally, I feel that his cheating is no one's business but his own and his family's. However, the fact that he had the audacity to cheat, knowing that there was a very real possibility of getting caught and having his platform, or position, completely undermined, enrages me. It smacks of arrogance and entitlement, as well as poor decision-making skills.
ever. sure, i respect the work he's done but he was/is just a little too slick. i don't know what it is, but it bugs me. i don't even care about infidelity that much, it's beyond that, he's just not someone i would trust.
I have a hard time trusting a man whose hair doesn't move.
Boehner or Donaldson??
And Shatner.
He will be judged by Jesus, who according to some, was born without a penis.....
Seriously, I couldn't give a tinkers damn about the sex lives of politicians-
Hell, FDR, the greates president of the last century, was with his mistress when he died...
I think when there are little kids involved, it matters. It shows what their parents are made of and what their parents put first.
When Bill Clinton got impeached for a BJ, there were leaders all over the world saying "wtf, I thought that was one of the perks?!)
Frankly, I want the man with his finger on the button to have that relaxed freshly f#cked look on his face. He'll be less inclined to be mean.
Lou Dobbs' problem.
No other explanation... except he's a idiot.
who ain't gettin' any.
Good point, but if Edwards had been nominated and this shit came to light we would have been screwed. So I don't think this speaks to his intelligence, more to his lack of judgement.
We should be more like France (with the food too)
But I like women who shave their armpits.
Ya think she shaves her pits?
http://www.tourismjunction.com/images/statue-...
But having said that it's time we men make some adjustments and learn to appreciate women as they are... take high heels for example, that's for men, and it's a cruel thing.
I'm gay.....
I'm not gay. Now that that is out of the way, let's go grab a beer.
Not as bad as this though:
http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/i...
Besides shaved pits and shaved faces and pubes mean less rug burn.
I like this one better ys. Easier to look at and it will make you laugh.
http://homework4dummies.com/2009/05/29/cooles...
Doesn't it look like he needs more than one wife?
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/84/223247181_1...
I wonder what john ashcroft would think of this statue?
WHO ACTUALLY CARES? Why anyone would waste even a minute of their lives worrying about this crap is beyond me.
This is pure tabloid news. One might as well dwell on the fact that President James Buchanan was in fact gay, and in a gay relationship with his vice president
Nobody really does care a hell of a lot and most here are just having fun with it. Maybe YOU'RE the one wasting precious moments of your life reading your way through it just to make your comments?
John Edwards: Yes it was my baby but I was confused. I honestly thought it was a large burrito.
done John Edwards.
my first reaction was about the baby. how many people do we know who are not aware of who their real parent(s) is and suffer because of the added stupidity of no one telling then the truth?
maybe he can support and cherish and love the child, if it is truly his.
shouldn't the little girl be the #1 consideration here? not his stupidity...
John Edwards is today's Strom Thurmond. Except John had the decency to admit it before he died.
What a decent man you are John.
Please....?
It refers to being the parent of a child with someone to whom you're not married.
"He's my baby daddy" does not reference the age of the father at all.
I was purposefully a little flip, because tabloid stories like this are not my favorite.
Login or Register to post comments.