John Edwards is a lying cad, and a complete disgrace

Edwards Admits Sexual Affair; Lied as Presidential Candidate
ABC News

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.

Oh, well that makes it all right then. She was just a warm mastubatory aid for your enjoyment, not someone you at least thought of as a human being.

What an complete, utter, contemptible cad.

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.

And we should believe you because...?

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.

So, in essence, she was paid for sex.

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.

You know, the only thing worse than having the affair and cheating on your wife, humiliating her and your children publicly, of making the National Enquirer a CREDIBLE news source, of confessing to ABC News, which is second only to Fox in its hatred of liberals, are these pathetic, vile excuses you offer.

What difference does it make whether your wife was in remission or not? What bloody difference did it make as to where you parked your penis?

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.

So, you were back renewing your boinking rights?

Sir, if I were not opposed to violence, I would punch you in the nose on behalf of decent husbands and wives everywhere.

Since becoming pregnant, Hunter has lived under assumed names in a series of expensive homes in North Carolina and, more recently, in Santa Barbara, Calif.

Edwards denied paying any money to Hunter to keep her from going public but said it was possible some of his friends or supporters may have made payments without telling him.

Damn, you just can't stop lying, can you?

I cannot believe I ever considered voting for you. Apparently, I need to recalibrate my cynical setting.

You sir, are a filthy cur.

(And no, this does not in any way rise to what the Republicans have done, not even in the same ball park, but censure is warranted).

Comments

How could you?

How could you ever have considered voting for him?

Probably because you wanted to see an end to poverty. Or maybe because you support Universal Health Care. Or maybe you wanted unions to have a stronger voice. Or maybe you wanted real environmental standards. Or maybe because you wanted us to leave Iraq. Or maybe because you wanted a tax system that was actually fair.

I didn't vote for him because I thought he was perfect. I worked for him because he was right on all the issues.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

But how much of that was a lie?

Edwards ran for president, KNOWING this time bomb was ticking away. Then, once the bomb goes off he he shows not only is he prepared to humiliate his wife, but his mistress as well by telling the public "I didn't love her"?

Then, after admitting he been LYING to us for over a year, he then insults our intelligence by telling us more bald-faced lies.

No, Edwards just showed us what he was really all about, and it isn't pretty.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

You speak for me, Kosh

The really frightening part is that if President Kerry were running for reelection this year, this would probably hand the presidency to McCain.

I could personally forgive someone who has an affair. But to have an affair while your wife is dying? Disgraceful.

Mr. Edwards, I hope you had the decency to apologize in that interview.

The Christian approach

I could personally forgive someone who has an affair. But to have an affair while your wife is dying? Disgraceful.

I am unaware of a teaching of Christ that makes exceptions to the principles of forgiveness and grace for scenarios like John Edwards's.

Since you trumpet your Christianity in your very username at this site, I reckon you regard yourself as knowledgeable; perhaps you could enlighten me.

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

In this instance, forgiveness

for his conduct as regards his wife and family is not my affair, nor my business. It is theirs. I only address his public statements and the lie he told us, his supporters. Whether I forgive him or not his sins as a politician and fellow human is not something he'll lose sleep over, I'm sure.

But, forgiveness requires true contrition, and I don't see much of that in his statements so far.

Because he has made this issue public by his conduct and lies, he has placed us in the distasteful position of having to evaluate and judge his conduct. That in itself is rather unforgivable, politically speaking.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

forgiveness is an act of grace

not earned.

"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." -Voltaire

"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." -Voltaire

If I recall correctly...

Never mind....that was 2004...........ish...long day



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

Dangit, hit enter too soon

Meant to say that it's going to take a lot longer to forgive the guy.

Hysteria

Oh, well that makes it all right then [Edwards claims he didn't "love" Ms. Hunter]. She was just a warm mastubatory aid for your enjoyment, not someone you at least thought of as a human being.

So, those are the two choices? Love or masturbatory aid?

Can you think of any other reasons why a person might be motivated to have sex with another? I can think of several, some good and some bad.

Is the fallacy of the excluded middle really the best tool we have to express our grief and upset over yet another regrettable instance of human fallibility?

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

I was drawing an extreme comparison

since Edwards seems to think that all he had to leave it at was "I didn't love her".

Yes, I agree that there are lots of reasons in between, but Edwards seem to think that since love wasn't involved, it some how wasn't as big a betrayal.

The fact that he then went and met with her again, WITHOUT telling his wife, doesn't help matters.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

You seem to be enjoying this

Might I suggest that you have no idea what he was thinking, and probably, neither does he.

Might I also suggest that you not bring this particular line of comment anywhere near me in person.

Thanks.

"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." -Voltaire

"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." -Voltaire

Oh don't threaten, DFL.

There are a lot of us who really loved the JRE we know - the political JRE. Now, you being who you are and what you do, may know him more personally and better, so you may have more personal feelings, but macho "don't bring that anywhere near me in person" assertions sound silly. What are you going to do? Bop him in the nose? Kick him in the balls? What?

This incendiary topic doesn't need more gasoline thrown on it.

I suggest to you, my friend Kosh

That this:

The fact that he then went and met with her again, WITHOUT telling his wife, doesn't help matters.

is between Mr. and Mrs. Edwards. Maybe you should step back a second, or 60.

Americans are such a bunch of Puritans.

It makes me sick. How is it any business of this twisted 24hr spin cycle to hound people to death like this? We are so busy peering into other people's private lives that we let our country slip away bit by bit.

How do we presume to try and fit anyone else's relationship into a tight box?

Progressive Democrats of North Carolina

AMEN, LoftT

This finger-pointing and damning of the man is what I find disgraceful.

This affair has zero to do with anything of relevance to this country or state.

I'm sad for him and for his family, and I'm really dismayed that Kosh would be so quick to join the holier-than-thous on this non-issue.

He made it a public issue by dignifying the question

with an answer last year. Now that he has admitted than he lied and carried on an affair (his words), he places himself in the position of being judged.

His explanation of his conduct is offensive. I had NO desire to know anything about his sex life. But, he, by his own conduct and decisions, has allowed it to become public fodder.

Thus, I judge his words. He is a politician, his words are all I have to judge him on.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Wrong again, Kosh

It was a public issue while he was running for office. It might be a public issue if he were currently occupying a public office. He isn't.

How it becomes so very important NOW that he lied THEN (as if that's what people are all hopping up and down with excitement over) is not clear, but I can see you're practically drunk on self-righteousness here.

Your tone of high and mighty moral indignation makes clear that you'd blast the man no matter what he said and no matter how he said it.

The only issue attaching to this story that can be called legitimate is whether campaign funds were used to illegally. So far there is ZERO evidence of that.

I don't care who a person sleeps

with as long as the person is above the age of consent. It is strictly a personal matter. I am waiting for the politician who has the courage to take a stand for privacy.

BUT, once you lie, you are doomed. Once you lie, especially when you lie EMPHATICALLY, you made the issue my business. I didn't ask Edwards, nor did I care who his sexual partners were. He could have been having daily threesomes with his wife and every male and female intern on his staff. Not my business. If a reporter asks him about it and he says "none of your business", then I will be there to support him and cheer him on.

But once he decides to make it the public's business by dignifying the question with an answer, he is committed. His actions are now part of the public record and will be judged accordingly.

David Allen

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Also not unprecedented

Daniel Barenboim had a long-running affair, which produced children, with another woman while married to Jacqueline du Pre, who was dying of multiple sclerosis.

And before one consigns Barenboim to the flames, one might consider his work with the late Edward Said on the West-Eastern Divan orchestra, which may have done more for reconciliation and understanding between Israeli Jews and Palestinians than the work of any politician since the Camp David accords.

Or maybe all we care about is politics of the sexual sort.

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

A bit from Psychology Today

This brought to mind something I read a while back.

It's natural for politicians to risk everything for an affair (but only if they're male)

On the morning of January 21, 1998, as Americans woke up to the stunning allegation that President Bill Clinton had had an affair with a 24-year-old White House intern, Darwinian historian Laura L. Betzig thought, "I told you so." Betzig points out that while powerful men throughout Western history have married monogamously (only one legal wife at a time), they have always mated polygynously (they had lovers, concubines, and female slaves). With their wives, they produced legitimate heirs; with the others, they produced bastards. Genes make no distinction between the two categories of children.

As a result, powerful men of high status throughout human history attained very high reproductive success, leaving a large number of offspring (legitimate and otherwise), while countless poor men died mateless and childless. Moulay Ismail the Bloodthirsty, the last Sharifian emperor of Morocco, stands out quantitatively, having left more offspring—1,042—than anyone else on record, but he was by no means qualitatively different from other powerful men, like Bill Clinton.

The question many asked in 1998—"Why on earth would the most powerful man in the world jeopardize his job for an affair with a young woman?"—is, from a Darwinian perspective, a silly one. Betzig's answer would be: "Why not?" Men strive to attain political power, consciously or unconsciously, in order to have reproductive access to a larger number of women. Reproductive access to women is the goal, political office but one means. To ask why the President of the United States would have a sexual encounter with a young woman is like asking why someone who worked very hard to earn a large sum of money would then spend it.

What distinguishes Bill Clinton is not that he had extramarital affairs while in office—others have, more will; it would be a Darwinian puzzle if they did not—what distinguishes him is the fact that he got caught.

(source)

recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

I agree completely with the article

It is farcical to think that people, especially driven, powerful people don't have sexual affairs outside marriage. Antrhopologically/genetically speaking, humans, especially human males are wired for it.

But, you can't have it both ways. Either categorically state that your sexual life is not open to question by reporters/politicians, or stick by the ethical/morale codes you publicly claim to adhere to.

When asked if you are having a sexual relationship with person "x", there are only three acceptable and ethical responses:

1) Ignore the question.
2) Declare the answer as not the person's business.
3) Answer truthfully.

You don't get to lie, then garner my sympathy because people got nosey and you got caught in a lie.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

We're not too far apart on this

I empathize with your disappointment in John Edwards. He was my favorite of the "electable" Democratic slate during the primaries (Kucinich and Gravel didn't have a chance).

I think we continue lumber along under the heavy and needless burden of sexual puritanism in this country. I look forward to the day when a prominent politician will deal with the sexual and anthropological realities of the human species frankly, openly, and without apology. We've just about topped that hurdle with recreational drugs, thanks to George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

I would liked to have seen John Edwards break some ground on this. He didn't.

My other take on this is that a lie about personal matters should punished (in terms of social disapprobation) in proportion to its consequences.

I see the consequences of Edwards's lie here as negligible. His cost/benefit analysis was surely a rational one, given the sexual neurosis that infests our culture.

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

Doesn't it make you wonder what will happen when

it is de riguer to have female world leaders? A female US President? I won't use Hillary Clinton in this example, because people would say she was just taking her turn. I suspect that the "cougar in chief" would be painted with a big old Scarlet Letter. But I could be wrong. It's happened before.

Darwinian historian?

Oh, good grief. (And no offense, Brenden, since I assume you're just inserting this into the discussion because it's an interesting take on the topic.)

Even if you accept the premise that powerful men have a predisposition to spread their genes around, the real question is why do some powerful men have their affairs exposed, and why do some manage to stay under the radar? Or in other words, why is this "normal" tendency sometimes used to end or damage the careers of particular politicians? And what's the common thread among presidents and presidential contenders who have been exposed and vilified?

And for an answer, I think you should turn to Marxist historians. It's commonly understood that George H. W. Bush had a mistress while in the White House. We've got pretty convincing evidence that John McCain has had an affair recently with a lobbyist, and we know for a fact that soon after his entry into politics he was philandering on the wife who kept the faith while he was a P.O.W.

On the other hand, we've got Bill Clinton, about whom the case could be made that Linda Tripp was encouraging Monica to make an advance so that Tripp could take the story to Kenneth Starr - who had declared even before Clinton took office that "your boy's getting rolled." We've got Jesse Jackson, whose affair and illegitimate child was exposed suspiciously close to the time that he led the fight for a fair recount in Florida in 2000. Gary Hart. Elliott Spitzer. And now John Edwards.

So the issue is not the mistakes our genes force us into, but how the price we pay for those mistakes is manipulated by the wealthy and powerful.

Complementary analyses

I think these are complementary analyses, Doug.

The Darwinian approach gives the lie to the actual media narrative behind politicians' philandering.

The Marxist analysis explains, at least in part, the selection processes behind which politicians' philandering get intense media attention.

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

Owe certain reporters an apology

So, have we heard any retractions or apologys from bloggers who castigated reporters a week or so ago for reporting this story?

Have you ever heard of a liberal shooting up a church?

You won't hear one from me

My protest about the reporting had nothing to do with whether the story was true or false and still doesn't.

My protest was and remains the same -- that this has ZIP to do with the public interest.

He isn't a candidate. He isn't occupying a cabinet or other political office. There are no clear implications for how this story affects my life or yours or the public's.

There is no evidence that campaign funds were used to make life cushy for Ms. Hunter, though if that is found to be the case the Mainstream Media can certainly tout it as justification, and Edwards will have to answer further questions, probably in a court of law.

But does anyone really believe that's what was in the minds of news editors when they said, "oh baby, we gotta to to town on this one?"

Bullshit. This was a game of GOTCHA - with lots of sales implications and virtually no legitimate public interest angle.

That occurred to me, too.

In fact, I was just thinking, "gee, when I've pronounced upon some subject, why do folks persist in their errors?"

However, despite your *possibly* sarcastic snip there, I have admitted being wrong multiple times on this blog. It's just rarely necessary.

And again, I'm wondering why you would call for anyone to retract criticism of the press for points that remain the same regardless of the truth of the affair.

I personally don't think

I personally don't think it's anybodies business but he and his families'. I don't recall him ever making any moral judgements regarding anybody else or regarding government policies so it seems to me that it's a none issue. He isn't even running for anything now. Regarding his recent statement admitting he had had the affair, from the quotes I heard on WTVD he sounded extremely humble about it. He admitted he had gotten to the point for a while where he thought he was special, become very self centered etc. etc. and said have at it to the public.

I'm a moderate Democrat.

Oh but he did judge Bill Clinton for having an affair

I don't recall him ever making any moral judgements regarding anybody else

This is what Edwards said when Clinton finally admitted the truth: "I think this president has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter...It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen."

Glass houses and all.

And

He is also credited with making a speech that was powerful enough to prevent that President from being removed from office for that crime.

And lets not forget that Bill Clinton lied under oath. John Edwards lied to ABC. And while Bill Clinton spent almost a decade after that lie as the most popular Democratic Politician in the country, John Edwards' career is now finished.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Too soon?

Isn't it a bit soon to write Edwards's epitaph?

I think he could still serve an important role in the Obama administration.

Put him in charge of the Human Resources and Services Administration’s Community-Based abstinence education program.

--
recently transplanted from Indianapolis, IN to Durham, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

--
Garner, NC

I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson

No, it's not time to write his epitaph

Hell yes he could still serve. We won't know in what regard for a long time, and it might take a while for him to muster the resolve to do it, but he could. He certainly could.

Not on the ballot.

John Edwards is a political public figure and not just an average citizen. Many like myself trusted in the man to do the right thing politically. Because of that I will hold him accountable for his actions just like I do all black, brown, white and other folk. He is not an exception to the rule.

Visit me on the web The Political Agitator

"I swore never to be silent whenever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." - Elie Weisel

"I swore never to be silent whenever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." - Elie Weisel