If John Edwards gives a damn about our cause . . .

If John Edwards gives a damn about our cause, he will come absolutely positively 100% clean today.

Letting the story come out in dribs and drabs via half truths and misleading statements only keeps the story alive.

We don't need daily or weekly updates and exposes exploring when it really started and ended and who were the lawyers and who paid the lawyers and where did the money come from and how much money was paid.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics /AP/story/643902.html

The longer the story stays alive, the more all Democrats are hurt by it.  Because, according to the mass media, the only cheaters in the modern political era are Democrats.  Don't believe me?  Read this:

"Edwards joins a long, and probably growing, list of politicians and public figures who can't seem to keep their flies zipped. Think Spitzer, Clinton, Hart."
http://www.miamiherald.com/living/story/ 643022.html

Not Eisenhower, not Reagan, and certainly not McCain.

The only way to end the story and stop hurting our cause is for John Edwards to try a new tactic - - tell the absolute truth once and for all and stop being a self centered egotistical jerk.

PS - Do not - - DO NOT - - expect the leaders of main stream religions or main stream media to point out the sexual peccadillos of conservative cheaters.  Apparently, unless a conservative is caught with a boy, like Rep. Foley, there's no sanction. (See Senator Vitter - - he hasn't had to resign in disgrace, has he?  no calls for his impeachment, recall, removal or expulsion, right?  no weekly update stories about him in the papers, you notice?)

Tags: 2008, John Edwards (all tags)

Comments

36 Comments

Get this story out of the newpaper !!!

Tell the full truth today!

by kosnomore 2008-08-16 07:31AM | 0 recs
Who cares?

Maybe the reason "the media" spends more time on Democrats' affairs is because Republicans are smart enough to simply shrug and move on, while Democrats twist and writhe, abase themselves and beg forgiveness.

Honestly, how does the history of John Edwards' penis affect your life?

by username 2008-08-16 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Who cares?

Me thinks kos has a crush on him and is just jealous. After all, he is an attention whore.

by venician 2008-08-16 08:02AM | 0 recs
JE runs with these skeletons in his closet - -
hurting his sick wife, his kids and all democrats in the process - - - and I'M THE ATTENTION WHORE ????
PS - IF YOU FEEL THAT WAY, DON'T GIVE ME ATTENTION.  BUH-BYE!
by kosnomore 2008-08-16 12:13PM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards ...

I have to honestly say that this is my first and last comment about this whole deal. I never liked JRE.  I never trusted JRE.  Over on the great orange site back in the early stages of the primaries, I stated that every time I heard him speak, I had visions of the snake oil salesman from the old western TV shows.  There was just something there that wasn't genuine, and I couldn't put my finger on it. Perhaps this still isn't the whole deal, but it shows to me that he was not what he was posing as, and that's a deal breaker.  He's done.

We always knew who Hillary was and is, and we always knew who Obama was and is, but we never knew the 'real' JRE. Now we do, time to 'turn the page' off his story.

by emsprater 2008-08-16 08:02AM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards ...

how did you not get banned there?

It is funny for how important Big Orange think they are, that their first three or four candidates got tossed out early without a thought.  And somehow, that was not a mellowing discovery.

by Brandon 2008-08-16 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards ...

I left there on my own as part of the boycott.

I was not 'banned' probably because I was not 'anti' anyone, I was 'pro' for my chosen candidate.  The only 'anti' type commentary I continually posted there was 'anti-propaganda', no matter who's propaganda it was.

by emsprater 2008-08-16 09:14AM | 0 recs
Sigh.

Boycott?  You mean the own led by a PUMA that didn't even show up for that huge PUMA convention in the 5 star hotel (Days Inn)?  http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/ comments/the_truth_about_puma_conference 08_you_cant_spell_conference_without_c o_n/

What was it, something like a total of 15 people who revolted?

by Hill4Life 2008-08-16 10:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

And it's funny how emprat tries to claim that he was never antin anybody, when during the primaries he was one of the most vocal Obama haters.

by venician 2008-08-16 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

Please provide proof that I was ever an 'Obama hater'.

You won't, because you can't.

Voicing my preference for one candidate over another doesn't count as 'hate'.

by emsprater 2008-08-16 12:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

Me.  I remember too.  You were one of the worst offenders.

by Hill4Life 2008-08-16 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

Again, provide your proof.

You can't, it doesn't exist.

by emsprater 2008-08-16 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

Nice try, but you can't tie me to the 'puma' group (I have openly renamed their movement 'Selfish Obnoxious Whiners'multiple times here on MyDD).  I've never visited their sites and don't care to.

The 'boycott' of dKos was more about the principle than the person leading it, who at this point is of no matter. Kos did lead a vituperative anti Hillary movement, any supporters were shouted down, and he survived.  But he did it without any 'hits' to drive up his numbers from me, and others like me.  Likewise, NoQuarter doesn't get 'hits' from me either.

by emsprater 2008-08-16 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

So you got sucked into the PUMA movement without realizing it you were following PUMA trolls?  If so, don't look at the following.  IT'S A TRAP!!  http://don.antville.org/static/Don/image s/cc.jpg

by Hill4Life 2008-08-16 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

You need a good correspondence course in reading comprehension.

I've posted one diary here, go look at it and look at the time line.  You'll see I've never been a 'puma', and never sided with that group, and subsequently here on MyDD I have called some of them 'out' on their stance.  Not all Hillary supporters seek to be part of that troup.  

I've stated numerous times my intent to vote for Obama.

I consistently comment in response to folks who have no intent here other than to denigrate the Clintons. Propaganda and misinformation can't continually be left unrebutted.

Leaving dKos was my choice for the stated reasons, and I have never even 'peeped' back at that site since.  It's like missing a bad hangnail, all you feel is relief that it's not there anymore.

Sorry, I never click on any link that I can't discern beforehand where it will take me.

by emsprater 2008-08-16 12:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Sigh.

Don't waste your time on that troll, emsprater.

by skohayes 2008-08-16 02:30PM | 0 recs
Boycott, LOL!

I've seen some lame ones in my time, but that took the cake.  There must be a corner somewhere for them.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-08-17 03:34AM | 0 recs
disagree

I think he was wrong to admit to any of it. I think it was wrong for party insiders to encourage him to come out and address it. And I think it's wrong for him to do anything now or in the future to feed this story.

The lady won't take a paternity test. She's not on welfare. The state doesn't have a right to force her to take the test. The nosey public sure as shit doesn't have the right to demand that she take the test. Leave her the hell alone.

As for him, he's not in public office or a candidate for public office. Of course people are curious about all the details, but it's not information we actually need to have to make decisions about how to vote. So bury the damn story. None of the parties involved should be commenting to anyone.

by Mobar 2008-08-16 09:21AM | 0 recs
Re: disagree

I don't think the party insiders had anything to do with the interview.  ABC News went to him and told him they were going to run the story and they had their own facts about it and he did the interview to head them off and twist it his way- that's why he did the interview.

by reasonwarrior 2008-08-17 03:10PM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards gives a damn about our cause .

The reason why the media focuses on the dems is because they are more interesting than repugs.  The repugs are boring and are not too bright.

by Spanky 2008-08-16 10:03AM | 0 recs
You sound so, concerned, Kos no more.

Wonder why.

In regards to Edwards, he's actually a fluke.  The Edwards affair is in a weird way helping us, not hurting us.  His affair is so similar to McCain affair, that the longer is stays in the spotlight, the longer we have to tag John McCain as the adulterer he is.

by Hill4Life 2008-08-16 10:08AM | 0 recs
Yup, it's great for democrats !
It'll do wonders for our party with the evangelicals we're finally starting to make common cause with!
Why didn't I see that?
by kosnomore 2008-08-16 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: You sound so, concerned, Kos no more.

I agree.  There's a good chance Rick Warren asks McCain about his affair and divorce in tonight's forum.  Do you really think that would have been asked if not for the Edwards affair?   Everyone realizes what a scum Edwards is for cheating on his sick wife.  It's an easy line to draw right to McCain cheating on his wife after a debilitating accident, after she had stayed faithful to him during his 5 years in captivity.  And soon people will start looking at Cindy McCain's behavior, she is after all the Rielle Hunter of that story.

by Piuma 2008-08-16 12:21PM | 0 recs
Once "did you ever commit adultery?"
becomes a legitimate question, you don't know where it will lead.  
Seriously, honestly, did you ever think the JE allegations were true?  I didn't.  My FIRST comments on the subject were that the reporters should burn in hell for causing stress to a woman with cancer.  
But the JE story, plus all the adultery comments tossed at McCain, have legitimated the question.  Let's hope our prez nominee and whoever is picked for VP are better than a majority of Americans.  
by kosnomore 2008-08-16 12:56PM | 0 recs
Quit the Britney Paris mentality

Personally, I am really tired of the Paris Hilton/Britney Spears mentality of the Edwards scandal. Edwards told his version of the story that his affair ended in 2006. Elizabeth was not diagnose until March of 2007. He did not cheat on Elizabeth when she was sick. Get your facts straight. While I do not agree with what Edwards did, you can't condemn him for cheating unless you want to condemn the other Presidents who have cheated such as Lincoln, JFK, FDR, Bill Clinton, Johnson, Jefferson, Truman and Eisenhower. The media, Wall Street, and perhaps some of those lousy corporate democrats did not want Edwards to speak at the convention. They are terrified of his anti-corporate progressive populist message. They are scared of his message reaching millions of people. I have been talking to alot of indies and repubs about Edwards and most of them would have still voted for him. They realize the whole scandal is personal and he did not break any laws. They really could care less. But what they do care about is getting their sons and daughters home from Iraq, a better energy policy, and cheaper health care. They also realize that corporate greed is a big reason why our economy is so f*cked up. All you have to do is look at the correlation between the defense contractors who donate money to politicians (dems and repubs) and see how they continue to vote for funding for Iraq. Same with the health insurance industry and the politicians. The same people also are really suspicious of the timing of when it came out. They are suspicious because some dem insiders forced Edwards to confess. Why would some dem insiders want Edwards to confess right before the convention? The MSM (except for Fox) was basically ignoring it before he confessed. It's very suspicious. It actually made some of them take another look at the democratic party. I'm guessing most of them will vote for Barr or Nader instead so it won't help McCain or hurt Obama.

by harmony590 2008-08-16 01:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Quit the Britney Paris mentality

For someone asking others to "get your facts straight" you certainly have yours wrong.  Elizabeth diagnosed with cancer in 2004 and was still treating it in 2006 although she thought it was in remission.  The MSM was not ignoring the story when he confessed.   Quite the opposite, they were pressuring him to explain why he was caught at the Beverly Hilton at 2 in the morning.  The reason why he finally confessed as much as he has was that the MSM were beginning to take his silence as validation of the National Enquirer story and Edwards was looking to stop it before it went all the way to making him the father of the child.  You can make your case without twisting reality.

by Piuma 2008-08-16 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Quit the Britney Paris mentality

Here, Here!!! Thanks so much harmony590 for the most intellingent take I have seen so far on all this crap!!

Just wish I would have written it.

by RDemocrat 2008-08-16 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Quit the Britney Paris mentality

Quite frankly, I think it makes more sense for a spouse to cheat on a sick spouse than a healthy one. With a sick spouse, one can say that at least the cheating is purely 0of  a physical nature and has nothing to do with emotional cheating.

by Pravin 2008-08-17 09:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Quit the Britney Paris mentality

It's fairly obvious that baby is his so he had to still be cheating on her after March 2007.

by reasonwarrior 2008-08-17 03:14PM | 0 recs
Edwards is a phony

Good trial lawyer=great car salesman

It's really hard to tell when folks like him are lying because they are soooo good at being fake.

by ttjackson 2008-08-16 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: we are fucked!

How will America really get a full night's sleep
until the DNA is taken care of?

Will Delegates losing sleep over this issue effect
our Convention?

Will those of us here in Denver preparing for political action
http://www.tentstate.org/

..fuck up because we are losing sleep over this?

This may just be one of those tipping points in our political history...

Thank YOU for this Diary...

by nogo postal 2008-08-16 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: If ?
Yeah I rec'd this...
I believe only by advancing your insight will
this American Nightmare end...
by nogo postal 2008-08-16 03:02PM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards gives a damn about our cause .

Yeah he should come out and say I tried to be nice but the truth is it is none of your fucking business.

I am so sick of this - why the hell is it a problem that HE had an affair why the double standard? There are plenty of politicians that do a hell of a lot worse when it comes to bankrolling very longeterm mistresses while they parade around their wives.

Maybe as a party we need to band together & say ENOUGH WITH THESE STORIES WE WANT REAL NEWS ABOUT THE HELL THIS COUNTRY IS IN. That's the scandal that is impacting us, NOT  someone's personal marital situation.  At the end of the day the air that I breathe won't be any better if John Edwards is faithful to his wife or not.  But the policy he could change COULD directly make my life better. And we need EVERYONE to START passing the meme along that ultimately we care about ourselves & not someone's private life.

by jrsygrl 2008-08-16 06:11PM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards gives a damn about our cause .

Thank you!!! For another cry of sanity in the darkened wilderness!!

by RDemocrat 2008-08-16 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards gives a damn about our cause .

Thank you! Are you also on dkos? I think we may have had a nice conversation when Edwards was in the race still & how we viewed him to be most comparable to a Bobby Kennedy.  If not, never mind...:)

by jrsygrl 2008-08-17 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: If John Edwards

You know, I was totally wrong about Hillary winning the nomination but I pegged Edwards right- he was 100% hypocrite.

Don't look for him to come clean voluntarily.  He went kicking and screaming to that interview- and when he was there, everything he told were NEW lies.  I don't think he knows how to tell the truth.  There will need to be a federal investigation on his campaign finances- he'll tell the truth under oath- but that's the only way you'll get it.

by reasonwarrior 2008-08-17 03:05PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads