Say It Ain't So, John!

[chefmike]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-stranahan/say-it-aint-so-john-why-p_b_115165.html

[yodajazz]

One of the responses in the page link:


scarlettm512 See Profile I'm a Fan of scarlettm512

Let's see, there are major questions still unanswered about 9/11, voting irregularities in Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004, Bush deliberately used falsified info to claim Saddam had WMDs and led us into an immoral and illegal war, torture has been approved and redefined by our own justice department, the US has engaged in illegal spying on American citizens, the media is now pushing another war with Iran because the neo-cons THINK they maybe might be considering one day pursuing nukes, the economy is tanking and we are facing a likely DEPRESSION, not a recession ....

BUT, the BIG story is John Edwards' possible love child!??! WTF?? Have we lost our collective minds?

Yes, if true, Edwards is a cad and, unfortunately, just like 95% of all the other politicians in DC who cheat on their spouses -- let's not forget McCain has his own allegations of an affair that have already blown over. But America isn't bankrupt and hated by the world because Edwards cheated on his sick wife.

If progressives want to stay ahead of the story -- that is exactly what they will remind everyone about. Stop wasting time on stupid tabloid gossip and and ask why the media invests so much time on crap like this and ZERO time on all of the IMPEACHABLE offensives of the Bush administration. Americans would rather debate the scandal of adulterous sex than admit that we are dangerously close to a fascist state -- if we aren't, in fact, already one.

[SarahG]

One of the responses in the page link:


scarlettm512 See Profile I'm a Fan of scarlettm512

BUT, the BIG story is John Edwards' possible love child!??! WTF?? Have we lost our collective minds?

We used to have competent collective minds? Come on now, that's just sensationalism there. The American people have always cared more about their bread & circus than reality.

[yodajazz]

If this story is true, the more I think about it, I say that he was seduced. She was an former actress. I dated an actress and I know that they are trained to use their whole body to express themselves, and also to use real life drama to improve their craft. Plus I think that it is natural for people to be attracted to others in positions of power and fame. It is said that we love our partners for the way they make us feel about ourselves. So she would have to feel very special to attract a man, who could have been president. It looks worse because of his wife’s illness, but probably her illness made it harder for her to be there for him as he fought for the most important job in the world.

The story does make for good drama, as good as any made for tv movie. But there are life and death issues for people around the world that are far more important.

One issue I will mention is that we feel that we have the right to go into someone else’s sovereign nation and kill people by dropping bombs, (specifically Pakistan, but we have done it on other nations). How would we feel if Canada bombed homes in the US to kill French Canadian separatists, and it also harmed innocent people? Questions like this have more bearing on our lives as angry foreign people can strike a US interests. John Edwards story is really mostly the story of one or two families.

[thx1138]

Tell me again: what was Jeff Gannon doing wandering around the whitehouse in the wee hours of the morning? :>)

[hippifried]

Why is this a story?

[trish]

Turns out, John's now admitting the affair. Why is it a story? Who knows? But we should have seen it coming: no married man gets a $300 haircut to impress his wife.

[JelenaCD]

Trish ,
The reason it is a story is beacasue if he doesn't uphold his commitment to his wife then how can you expect him to uphold his commitment to anything ? Also the fact that he lied about it until now shows he is not worthy of being counted on for the public trust , fact of life that as a public official you are held to a higher standard then a private citizen and the higher the position you seek the more the standard goes up .

[JelenaCD]

What is more disturbing is that Obama wants Edwards as attorney general . Yes, lets get a personal injury trial lawyer as attorney general ? This fraud Edwards made $ on junk science , made $ on dumb jury pools . Edwards made people believe that some birth defects were the doctors fault and now the doctors don't want to perform births because the malpractive insurance is so high and the cost of an unnatural birth is higher because of terrible lawyers like Edwards , now lets make him Attorny General , unbelievable !

[trish]

The reason it is a story is beacasue if he doesn't uphold his commitment to his wife then how can you expect him to uphold his commitment to anything ?

Good point. It's one good reason not to vote for John Sydney McCain III. He began two timing his wife at about the same time he entered politics. He found the connections of his new paramour's wealthy father much more advantageous to his career. Besides, his wife was ill, and apparently he never really cared much for the children. So he divorced his family and married Cindy Lou Hensley, the only child of the founder of Hensley & Co. With the aid of his new connections he became the Republican representative from Arizona.

There was another time McCain didn't live up to his commitments: the time he confessed, under torture, to war crimes. Now one can forgive him such an transgression. After all, he was tortured. However, he has recently seemed to forget how serious a crime torture is and how ineffectual at getting the truth.

So thanks for pointing all that out, Jelena.

Oh and you've mentioned that
What is more disturbing is that Obama wants Edwards as attorney general .

I'm pretty sure that's non-issue, now.

[JelenaCD]

Trish
Nice reply , your correct , i can't dispute ! McCain is not a great candidate like i said before , i prefer Romney yet you have what you have , McCain is better then Obama in my limited view yet even he is no great leader , both canidates are limited .

[trish]

Let's see, Obama is able to commit and wins on character. Obama has the correct stance on torture. Obama understands the difference between Sunni and Shiite and he knows Iraq doesn't share a border with Pakistan. Obama is also aware of the fact that domestic oil companies already have offshore leases in the Gulf of Mexico and all along the southern coast of Alaska which they are not currently drilling. McCain seems to think we can't commence off-shore drilling until we give them the east and west coasts of the continental U.S. as well.

But yeah, I understand, in your view McCain comes out on top.

[JelenaCD]

Trish ,
Obama is a flip -flop again
He was againest drilling and then when the opinion polls come in that americans want to drill he says yes limited drilling , he is not a leader , he is opinion poll tracker just like Clintons flaw , leaders hold steady regardless of public polls ! I understand McCain changed positions also , yet he beat Obama to the punch , like i said , i don't trust any politician !

[trish]

He did not flip flop on drilling and there are no polls that unequivocally establish the American public wants off-shore drilling. Obama offers drilling as a possible compromise package. You're for drilling, so why are you complaining? Off-shore drilling has already been approved off the shores of Alaska and Texas, but the oil companies are not drilling on all those leases. Why should they when they're EXPORTING domestic oil? So nobody beat anybody to the punch on off-shore drilling. McCain wants to GIVE the oil companies NEW leases off the coasts of California and Florida. Obama knows that's neither right nor necessary. So in the end, McCain's big stand on off-shore drilling is just another republican give away...another free lunch for big oil. If McCain gets his way, it's Exxon that beats us all to the punch, because that oil, right now, belongs to us, the American people. If Exxon drills it, it goes on the world market.

[JelenaCD]

Exxon paid 61 billion in taxes to the federal government this year already so we are not giving it away for free. Consider this year Exxon is projected to pay more taxes to the USA then the bottom 50 % of all tax payers. It doesn't matter where the oil is sold , supply goes up price goes down in the USA . Would you rather keep giving $ to iran , Saudi Arabia , Russia instead of oil companies at home that pay taxes?
Back to the main subject great column today from Kirsten Powers on Edwards
JOHN Edwards "shocked" the political world yesterday by admitting he'd cheated on his wife of 30 years with a campaign aide, Rielle Hunter.

If it looks like a phony, walks like a phony, quacks like a phony, it's a phony.

There's nothing particularly shocking about a politician cheating, and there's even less shock in learning that Edwards has been lying through his teeth about his own affair. In fact, we should assume that his detailed timeline about the affair is likely just another lie.

As is usual with people who've been unfaithful, he's already told a string of lies. On July 23, Edwards denied the recent allegations and called the National Enquirer story "tabloid trash."

Last October, he said: "It's completely untrue, ridiculous. I've been in love with the same woman for 30-plus years and, as anybody who's been around us knows, she's an extraordinary human being, warm, loving, beautiful, sexy and as good a person as I have ever known. So the story's just false."

There are many honorable people in politics who aren't cheaters - but the ones who rise to the top have a disproportionate problem with staying true to their spouses: FDR, Bill Clinton, John Kennedy, Woodrow Wilson, Lyndon Johnson to name a few. Even the "honorable" John McCain cheated on his first wife with his current wife Cindy - earning him the ire of the Reagans, who excommunicated him from their circle of friends.

But something about Edwards always seemed uniquely phony, even by the standards of politics. Actually, nothing about him seemed authentic.

Who was he? Apparently, whatever he thought people wanted him to be. In 2000, he helped found the "New Democrat Coalition" for the centrist Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) along with Sen. Joe Lieberman and others. Then, for his 2004 presidential run, he staked out the populist "Two Americas" theme. By 2008, he'd completed a total morph into a class warrior who pandered to the farthest reaches of the Democratic Left.

The poor suddenly became a great concern to him after his 2004 loss - yet he saw no disconnect in building a massive mansion as he crusaded for the poverty-stricken. He discovered New Orleans when he wanted to make his 2008 campaign announcement, but was nowhere to be seen back when the tragedy occurred.

In campaign focus groups, people would say something about him was "too perfect," that there must be "something wrong with him." A YouTube clip of him obsessing over his hair captured what so many felt: He was more concerned with appearances than anything else.

Edwards' statement yesterday explained: "In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic." Is he really past the narcissism bug? In an ABC interview airing last night, Edwards took great care to explain that he only cheated on Elizabeth when she was in remission - not when her cancer was full blown.

What a relief.

By the way, Edwards isn't the only one dishonored. The media accepted his denials of any affair - while holding at least one other candidate to a different standard. The New York Times insinuated in a front-page story that McCain had had an affair with a lobbyist - an allegation utterly without evidence. And MSNBC's Keith Ollberman broke into scheduled programming to hawk the story.

But it's Edwards who most deserves our disgust.

Normally, cheating on your spouse is a private matter. Many Americans wind up facing it; many families stay intact and recover. I hope that's so for the Edwards family.

But this is not a private matter: Following his affair, Edwards chose to run for president, using his family as a centerpiece for his campaign. In June of last year, he accepted the Father of the Year Award from Father's Day/Mother's Day Council. Shortly afterward, he renewed his vows with his wife and provided pictures to People magazine.

And in December, Katie Couric asked the candidates about the importance of marital fidelity in assessing a presidential candidate. True to form, Edwards said that it was a "fundamental" way to "judge people and human character" - but shouldn't be a "controlling factor" in choosing a president.

Unfortunately she didn't ask him what it would tell you about a politician if he used his family as a campaign prop and then lied to the public repeatedly about an affair.

[trish]

Exxon paid 61 billion in taxes to the federal government this year already so we are not giving it away for free.

Hey, great reasoning! I paid property taxes this year on the property that I own; and I paid income tax as well. So can I now expect the city to give me the lot next door? It's not like it would be for free, right? :roll:

[chefmike]

This fraud Edwards made $ on junk science , made $ on dumb jury pools . Edwards made people believe that some birth defects were the doctors fault and now the doctors don't want to perform births because the malpractive insurance is so high and the cost of an unnatural birth is higher because of terrible lawyers like Edwards , now lets make him Attorny General , unbelievable !

Those evil trial lawyers. Of course the insurance companies have our best interests in mind. Of course doctors shouldn't be held accountable for their malpractice. Is there any BS spewed by Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. that you don't lap up, Jelena?

[JelenaCD]

Birth defects are genetic , the trial lawyer slime want to pin blame on the 'evil doctors ' it;s absurd . The dem party is full of it on trial lawyers , these guys are just no good at all , they are in the game to make $ on dumb jury pools , it's pathetic and you should know better !

[yodajazz]

Birth defects are genetic , the trial lawyer slime want to pin blame on the 'evil doctors ' it;s absurd . The dem party is full of it on trial lawyers , these guys are just no good at all , they are in the game to make $ on dumb jury pools , it's pathetic and you should know better !

There are lots of mistakes made by doctors. My son's shoulder was injured at birth. If the doctor had been there to order a C section, my son maybe would have been able to play the sports that he loves. We decided not to pursue it legally, but we do consider it becuase it appears to be a life long injury. So I guess only and 'evil person' would want to take our case, according to you.

While you are busy judging Edward, I recall reading an article, saying that the Justice Dept has 900 cases of fraud, by Goverment contractors, to pursue and it can only do about 100 per year. The article said that the Bush adminstration has be repaid 14 million dollars so far, by going after over charging. These people are violating the public good/trust, which affects both the rich and the poor, whereas John Edwards is really a family affair. This experience is common to countless poeple. Even some of the books of the Bible were written by a leader who had hundreds of women concubines, Solomon. And he was renowned for his wisdom. And it has not stopped people from believing what he wrote was the 'word of God'.

I wonder if some evil lawyers will sue the contractors, whose shoddy work has killed a few of our soldiers in Iraq. Accountablity should not just apply to welfare mothers.

[NYBURBS]

Birth defects are genetic , the trial lawyer slime want to pin blame on the 'evil doctors ' it;s absurd . The dem party is full of it on trial lawyers , these guys are just no good at all , they are in the game to make $ on dumb jury pools , it's pathetic and you should know better !

Trial lawyers, corporate interests, etc, etc, etc... Those interests have access to both parties, as do other major lobbies. It's a problem we have in our system of government; in my opinion it's due in large part to the lack of term limits, thus members of Congress are in a perpetual re-election mode.

With that said, there are issues with class action suits, malpractice suits, etc. A group of lawyers sues a company, get tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in legal fees and you get some notice from the court that you're eligible to receive a coupon for 50 cents off your next purchase :roll: These insane legal fees end up increasing our overall cost of living. Same issue with malpractice, the potential liability is so great that it has helped to push up the cost of our health care system.

This is not to say that people should not have a means of redress when they have been done wrong, but perhaps we need to either readjust our concept of who is liable when, or place a limit on the damages and legal fees that can be awarded.

Lawyers provide a valuable service and to simply write them all off as slime is unwise in my humble opinion. In a civilized society we have to maintain an ability for people to settle their disputes without resorting to violence.

[trish]

Here's just a few recent headlines:

CBS, Stern Settle Breach of Contract Suit

Cmedia, Respond2 face breach-of-contract suit - Portland Business ...

Microsoft Files Suit Against Timeline for Breach of Contract ...

Usmagazine.com | $150000 Breach of Contract Suit Against Vanessa ...

It is commonplace for one company to sue another, or to sue an individual for breach of contract.
It happens all the time. The widget company orders some thing-a-ma-bobs from a second company, because widget's utilize thing-a-ma-bobs.
Unfortunately the shipment is late and when it arrives it turns out they're metric and don't fit the specification. The thing-a-ma-bob company spent a lot of time and money meeting that order. They claim they met the contract. The widget company claims not. Business is impossible without the infrastructure of law (and the other services that government provides) to straighten out these sorts of messes. Corporations can't survive without contracts and it's the network of laws, lawyers, courts, judges and enforcement that insure reasonable contracts are binding.

Some of these suits go to trial and are argued by trial lawyers. But generally we understand trial lawyers as being something different.

Jelena whines, [quote]...trial lawyers , these guys are just no good at all , they are in the game to make $.../quote]

Why else would they be in the game? Isn't that what capitalism is all about? You argue all sort of outrageous things in favor the product you're selling and hope for a profit. In spite of her claims to be a libertarian, I've notice other places that Jelena really has a socialist conception of the social values markets should observe.