Breaking news: Edwards admits affair, denies paternity

Thumbnail image for breaking.jpgFrom the Associated Press, this afternoon:

Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Friday admitted to an extramarital affair while his wife was battling cancer. He denied fathering the woman's daughter.

Edwards told ABC News that he lied repeatedly about the affair with a 42-year-old woman but said that he didn't love her. He said he has not taken a paternity test but knows he isn't the father because of the timing of the affair and the birth....

ABC said a former Edwards campaign staffer claims he is the father, not Edwards.

In 2006, Edwards' political action committee paid $100,000 in a four-month span to a newly formed firm run by Rielle Hunter, who directed the production of just four Web videos, one a mere 2 1/2 minutes long.

Hunter's daughter, Frances Quinn Hunter, was born on Feb. 27, 2008, and no father's name is given on the birth certificate filed in CA.

Meanwhile, the National Enquirer has posted photos it says are of Edwards visiting his baby in a CA hotel last month, as I previously noted.

edwards with love child.jpg

I again commend Rielle Hunter for not aborting her high profile crisis pregnancy.

I again note it has taken MSM forever to give this any coverage, obviously because the guilty cad is a liberal Democrat.

[HT for AP story: reader Michael B.; HT for Enquirer story: proofreader Laura Loo ]


Comments:

Or could it be the MSM is a little more careful about verifying facts than a supermarket tabloid?

Posted by: PPC at August 8, 2008 3:20 PM


I again note it has taken MSM forever to give this any coverage, obviously because the guilty cad is a liberal Democrat.
..................................

More likely because it isn't news worthy. Gossipy crap and speculations aren't news. I remember a time when participation in gossip was considered unChristian behavior if not out and out sinning. Unless you know something to be absolute truth you are baring false witness by perpetuating rumor, insinuations and speculation.
And high profile crisis pregnancy? Please! Do explain what the 'crisis' was. Such dramatics!

Posted by: Sally at August 8, 2008 3:30 PM


Soooo...if it's a liberal Democrat, it's gossip, but for a conservative Republican, it's News?

Posted by: RSD at August 8, 2008 4:07 PM


I don't care about McCain's adultry. I don't care too much about Edwards'.

Posted by: Hal at August 8, 2008 4:27 PM


Soooo...if it's a liberal Democrat, it's gossip, but for a conservative Republican, it's News?

Posted by: RSD at August 8, 2008 4:07 PM
..................................

Gossip is gossip and those that participate and perpetuate gossip are untrustworthy as well as unworthy of respect.
People in glass houses.............

Posted by: Sally at August 8, 2008 4:55 PM



Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Friday admitted to an extramarital affair while his wife was battling cancer.

I"m sorry but this man is scum of the earth in my books. Any man that's doing this while is wife is sick and suffering is a complete and utter cad. He should be kicked from here to China. What a hosebag.

Posted by: Patricia at August 8, 2008 5:14 PM


I know, kind of reminds me of Newt Gingrich

However, we're all human and deserve forgiveness

Posted by: Hal at August 8, 2008 5:26 PM


Sally,
I tend to lean towards your point of view, that this is "gossipy". But then, the question I have is how does one differentiate between what is "news" and what is "gossip"? Times have certainly changed since we now have 24 hour news and the Internet.

Posted by: Janet at August 8, 2008 5:31 PM


Hal, as I recall Newt was carrying on an affair while his wife was in the hospital for cancer treatment, and apprached her with divorce papers in her hospital room. McCain carried on an affair and got rid of the old wife when she became inconveniently old, poor and disabled after a car wreck.

Since that did not keep Newt and John from being the darlings of the right, I am sure they will forgive John Edwards.

Posted by: PPC at August 8, 2008 5:46 PM


Sally,
I tend to lean towards your point of view, that this is "gossipy". But then, the question I have is how does one differentiate between what is "news" and what is "gossip"? Times have certainly changed since we now have 24 hour news and the Internet.

Posted by: Janet at August 8, 2008 5:31 PM
.......................................

When we are very honest with ourselves, we have to admit that even public people's personal lives are not our business. Some like to excuse their enjoyment of gossip and expressing their personal prejudices as 'discerning' the person's morality. As if using the word 'discernment' makes gossipy judgementalism somehow riteous. A pig with a bow on it's head is still a pig to my way of thinking.
Where do you draw the line between news and gossip?

Posted by: Sally at August 8, 2008 6:06 PM


Sally,

Some like to excuse their enjoyment of gossip and expressing their personal prejudices as 'discerning' the person's morality. As if using the word 'discernment' makes gossipy judgementalism somehow riteous. Where do you draw the line between news and gossip?

I think those in the news business have always struggled with this question. We talk about "idle gossip" which seemingly has no purpose other than exposing the "dirty laundry" of others. Teaching your children what is morally right or wrong and using a person's behavior, good or bad, as an example is less offensive to me than typical idle gossip, but only if presented in such a way that the child knows idle gossip is not acceptable. The difference between news and gossip? If there is a specific point to be made about an individual and the news about them is made public for reasons other than ruining their good name, then it may be legitimately newsworthy IMHO.

Posted by: Janet at August 8, 2008 7:51 PM


Another elephant in the living room here is why, if the "liaison" was over in 2006 (excuse for the baby not being Edwards'), he was sneaking around at all hours so recently in order to still see the "liaisona" and supposedly another man's child. Hmmm?? It's a question of honesty and integrity in one who was also recently being considered as a possible VP or Attorney General.

Posted by: KC at August 8, 2008 8:22 PM


The Enquirer? Seriously, woman, you need to improve your sources. You would never take anything a PCer cited from the Enquirer seriously. You must be hurting for a good story if you're scraping the floor underneath the bottom of the barrel.

Posted by: Leah at August 8, 2008 8:30 PM


Well, it was the Enquirer that smoked Edwards out into the open. So HE must have taken them seriously...especially when pictures are worth a thousand words!

Posted by: KC at August 8, 2008 8:45 PM


Why didn't Jill post about this?
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation/AP/story/632841.html

And why does she dye her hair? Is she saying God made her wrong (like people who want sex changes are saying God made a mistake)? And why doesn't she dye her eyebrows? If she's going to go to hell for being vain then she might as well go all out. How anti-Christian can you get?

Posted by: Jess at August 8, 2008 9:00 PM


This is wonderful:
http://happilychildfree.com/rants/?p=121

Posted by: Jess at August 8, 2008 9:19 PM


Rielle Hunter is not my lover. She's just a girl who claims that I am the one, but the kid is not my [daughter].

Posted by: bmmg39 at August 8, 2008 10:09 PM


Edwards is a disrespecter of women. Cheats on his wife, who campaigned for him while fighting cancer. Probably, continued the affair after exploiting her cancer diagnosis on the campaign trail. He has an affair with a women he says he never loved -- just paid money to. Has a daughter who he will not acknowledge. Probably derailed the candidacy of 1st serious woman candidate for the presidency. As Mastercard would say --- priceless.

Good to see the pro-abortion folks support him -- it must have to do with the disrespecting women part. Bravo, you folks never surprise me!

Posted by: LB at August 8, 2008 10:37 PM


"Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Friday admitted to an extramarital affair while his wife was battling cancer.

Im sorry but this man is scum of the earth in my books. Any man that's doing this while is wife is sick and suffering is a complete and utter cad. He should be kicked from here to China. What a hosebag."
Posted by: Patricia at August 8, 2008 5:14 PM

SO you think we should put Edwards on the same plane to China with McCain?

Posted by: phylosopher at August 9, 2008 6:04 AM


"Why didn't Jill post about this?
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation/AP/story/632841.html

And why does she dye her hair? Is she saying God made her wrong (like people who want sex changes are saying God made a mistake)? And why doesn't she dye her eyebrows? If she's going to go to hell for being vain then she might as well go all out. How anti-Christian can you get?
Posted by: Jess at August 8, 2008 9:00 PM"

Or, not to single Jill out here, many women wear it, but many fundamentalist women do not wear makeup, especially lipstick, as one of its purposes is to make the facial lips similarly prominent and enticing in their similarity to sexually aroused vulvar lips.

This type of sexual advertising is certainly understood by the same people, as they were all to willing to discuss pants with messages a few months back.

Posted by: phylosopher at August 9, 2008 6:12 AM


Has anyone else wondered why Edwards is wearing scrubs? The kid's about 6 months today and certainly isn't a newborn in the photo. Could it be photoshop?

Looks like we need some investigative JOURNALISM here.

Posted by: phylosopher at August 9, 2008 6:18 AM


"Rielle Hunter is not my lover. She's just a girl who claims that I am the one, but the kid is not my [daughter]."

Michael Jackson? Billie Jean?

Posted by: Jasper at August 9, 2008 7:31 AM


Has anyone else wondered why Edwards is wearing scrubs? The kid's about 6 months today and certainly isn't a newborn in the photo. Could it be photoshop?

Looks like we need some investigative JOURNALISM here.

Posted by: phylosopher at August 9, 2008 6:18 AM

I don't think those are scrubs. He's wearing an ugly light blue T-shirt.


Posted by: Janet at August 9, 2008 9:27 AM


Jasper:7:31:
Pretty good. Lol.

Posted by: Janet at August 9, 2008 9:28 AM


Jess,my son's birthday was 05/06/05 but I went into labor on the 5th. For some reason (I was on so many medicines I don't remember anything) it took like 12 hours from the time they knew labor was inevitable til they did the c-section so he was born at 6 am the next day.

My daughter was due on the 11 of august, so we knew she could have been an 8/8/08 baby. Of course, she was a trouble maker and decided to come a few weeks early.

Regardless, I don't judge anyone who elects to have a c-section. I would never choose it (it was chosen for me) because the recovery is hell,but if that's what a woman wants and it is safe, why not?

I mean it's setting yourself up for a lifetime of c-sections since most doctors shy away from v-bacs these days, but as long as the baby gets out safely and the mom leaves healthy I don't really see the issue other than from an insurance/medical cost point of view.

Posted by: lauren at August 9, 2008 9:50 AM


Well, it was the Enquirer that smoked Edwards out into the open. So HE must have taken them seriously...especially when pictures are worth a thousand words!


Because Photoshop doesn't exist... or something. So... does that mean those pictures of Bill Clinton with aliens were legit too? Must be so.

You can't hoestly be so blind.

Posted by: Leah at August 9, 2008 9:56 AM


"Michael Jackson? Billie Jean?"

Jasper, ten points and control of the board...

Posted by: bmmg39 at August 9, 2008 12:02 PM


I know, kind of reminds me of Newt Gingrich

However, we're all human and deserve forgiveness
Posted by: Hal at August 8, 2008 5:26 PM


Hal, the difference in general between Republicans who give scandal and Democrats who do is this; Republicans resign on their own or sometimes after the Democrats hound them whereas Democrats whine, say they made a mistake, and then remain in public office.

Posted by: Eileen at August 9, 2008 1:37 PM


Hal, the difference in general between Republicans who give scandal and Democrats who do is this; Republicans resign on their own or sometimes after the Democrats hound them whereas Democrats whine, say they made a mistake, and then remain in public office.

Which is why Eliot Spitzer is still governor of New York.

Posted by: Alexandra at August 9, 2008 1:42 PM



Hal, the difference in general between Republicans who give scandal and Democrats who do is this; Republicans resign on their own or sometimes after the Democrats hound them whereas Democrats whine, say they made a mistake, and then remain in public office.

Which is why Eliot Spitzer is still governor of New York.
Posted by: Alexandra at August 9, 2008 1:42 PM

and why Senator David Vitter is still in the Senate.

Posted by: hal at August 9, 2008 1:47 PM


While John Edwards was at fault for everything surrounding the affair and lying to the public with respect to his Presidential candidacy, the only fault I can find with Elizabeth is that she supported her husband and even campaigned solely for him - deceiving the public and knowing in private he was a bald-face liar. Otherwise, Elizabeth is a much stronger person (even with cancer) than her wimpy husband or I could ever be. My prayers are with the entire family.

Posted by: LauraLoo at August 9, 2008 1:52 PM


We may all deserve forgiveness, however, we may not deserve to be President.

Having an affair is one thing and the only people that really need to forgive Mr. Edwards about this are God, his wife, and his kids.

However, lying about this as he ran for the highest office in the land requires the forgiveness of all his campaign workers and the American people since the Presidency is a position of trust and he demonstated that he is nither worthy of the office or trustworthy enough to hold any office.

What else did this guy do and what did he lie about when he was a trial lawyer that made millions off of plaintiiff awards? As the Bible promises, "your sins will find you out". How true. If I was a prosecutor, I'd be investigating this guy's cases to the hilt. He should also be disbarred.

Elliot Spitzer, the guy who becmome governor by pointing his self-righteuous finger at everyone, found this out as well. This is what happens to people when pwoer it the aim and not servanthood to people. Why? Because power causes pride and an inflated sense of self-worth and we all know how destrcutive pride is.

This is exactly why the likes of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are so dangerous to this country. Barack does not have a histroy of servanthood that qualifies him to be President and Hillary is a power hungry reprobate. They are willing to promote abortion, when they damn well know it's wrong, for the sake of being elected. Servanthood's results are humility, the exact opposite of what these people are.

Further, I am surprised at some of the outrage by Edwards' supporters. I suppose there would have been less outrage if he had already been selected as the Presidential nominee as there would have been nore to lose. This is what gets me about Liberals, their sense of morality is always dictated by convenince and cost. It's called moral relativism, a philosphy straight from the pit of hell.

Want proof? Just look at Bill Clinton. Where was the outrage of the left when it was proven that he did the dirty deed and then committed perjury?

Liberals........pathetic.

Posted by: HisMan at August 9, 2008 3:20 PM


HisMan 3:20: Want proof? Just look at Bill Clinton. Where was the outrage of the left when it was proven that he did the dirty deed and then committed perjury?

Liberals........pathetic.

"Outrage of the left" meant adoration turned to toleration. Relativism at its best.

Posted by: Janet at August 9, 2008 4:40 PM


"They are willing to promote abortion, when they damn well know it's wrong, for the sake of being elected"

I reject your premise. What makes you assume Obama and Clinton "know" abortion is wrong?

Posted by: Hal at August 9, 2008 6:06 PM


Oh come on, HisMan, there are 8 crillion examples of what you'd call "immoral" people who at least aspire to be called "conservatives."

Posted by: Doug at August 9, 2008 8:18 PM


Hal:

As educated and smart as these people are with the abilty to reason, they know abortion is wrong.

Further, the Clintons were previously pro-life until it became politically expedient not to be.

They are power hungry wolves willing to rip apart a defenseless baby in the womb. Their damnation will be justified.

Again, liberalism represents the worst of human nature.

Doug:

Conservatives are not sinless and perfect. I'm talking about the principles one tries to live by. And we all fail at it.

The problem with Liberalism is that it represents a flawed view of the world and who God is.

Posted by: HisMan at August 10, 2008 1:09 AM


what about me HisMan? I'm as educated and smart as Mrs. Clinton. Do I "know abortion is wrong?"

Posted by: hal at August 10, 2008 1:43 AM


The difference between Republicans and Democrats TODAY is when Dems get caught with their pants down like Governor Spitzer and now John Edwards they take their lumps for it. Republicans like Senators Vitter and Craig, even Newt Gingrich, lie until they're found out and then just give everybody the finger like Rush Limbaugh with his drug habit. Confessed sex-criminal Senator David Vitter recently had the audacity to publish an editorial under the title "Defying Law" (about illegal immigrants. I wonder whether he has ever had intercourse with an illegal immigrant whore. He's from Louisiana so probably yes.)

Want to read about something more important than John Edwards' sex life? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/08/AR2008080802919.html

Posted by: SoMG at August 10, 2008 3:21 AM



what about me HisMan? I'm as educated and smart as Mrs. Clinton. Do I "know abortion is wrong?"

I don't think you have to be smart and educated to feel in your heart it is wrong, and I do believe you do know it in your heart, Hal.

Posted by: Bethany at August 10, 2008 7:56 AM


Conservatives are not sinless and perfect. I'm talking about the principles one tries to live by. And we all fail at it.

The problem with Liberalism is that it represents a flawed view of the world and who God is.

HisMan, I see both "Liberalism" and "Conservatism" as flawed views of the world. Religious stuff I'll leave to the individual, at least for now.

The big political parties and what comes to be associated with both the "L" and "C" in general is flawed, IMO, because it can't be otherwise - it's so generalized and politicized in efforts to be more palatable to more people, basically more vote-getting friendly, that broader and more applicable truths are often passed over.

Posted by: Doug at August 10, 2008 9:08 AM


"As educated and smart as these people are with the ability to reason, they know abortion is wrong."

I could just have easily have said, as educated and smart as these people are, with the ability to reason, they know there is no God. See, most of us equate what we personally believe with the "truth." HisMan does this all the time. I do too. I think anyone who says they believe in God is either not too bright or lying about it. HisMan thins anyone who says abortion is not immoral is either not too educated about what abortion "really is" or is lying about it.

Posted by: hal at August 10, 2008 12:26 PM


Hal@ 12:26,

I think anyone who says they believe in God is either not too bright or lying about it.

Some of the brightest minds in the world have written on the existence of God. I'm sure bobby could give you a list a mile long. Certainly they are not liars or simpletons. If you want to read a short, but interesting book that asserts the logical existence of God, try this book (Don't be taken aback by the title, it's not a simple read): "Common Sense 101: Lessons from G.K. Chesterton (Paperback) by Dale Ahlquist (Author).

Editorial Review. "C. S. Lewis is almost certainly the most popular twentieth-century Christian apologist--almost because he is very closely rivaled, if not surpassed, by G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936), the English writer of all kinds of prose and verse who was the most beloved public speaker and debater of his time, adored as much by his famous sparring partners G. B. Shaw and H. G. Wells as by anyone who agreed with him. In 21 quotation-laden chapters, Ahlquist, president of the American Chesterton Society, presents Chesterton's Christianity. The most famous convert to Catholicism of his time, Chesterton stressed the permanency of the faith and its rootedness in common sense, by which he meant the ordinary human considerations conducive to family and community fellowship. Humility and humor, as much as wisdom and logic, and a candid, conversational manner suffuse his writing, and at least the manner has rubbed off on Ahlquist, thereby ensuring that this is one of the most enjoyable works of Christian "propaganda" you will ever read." Ray Olson
Copyright American Library Association. All rights reserved.


Posted by: Janet at August 10, 2008 12:50 PM


I know there are intelligent people who believe in God. Bobby B and Obama to name two.

I was trying to make a point about HisMan's statements about Obama and Clinton (i.e., They're too smart to think abortion is moral.)

Posted by: hal at August 10, 2008 6:28 PM


The best writing I've seen so far about Edwards' affair:

If John Edwards' infidelity is news, and he's not a candidate for anything, why isn't John McCain's? He reportedly had numerous affairs in the years after returning home from Vietnam to a beautiful wife who had been disfigured in a car accident, and ultimately, by his own reports, he zeroed in like a laser on beautiful a 25-year-old heiress upon meeting her one evening in 1979 while he was still married, promptly lied to her about his age, and almost as promptly left his wife for her. We all extol John McCain for enduring 5 years of extreme hardship in Vietnam. But aren't his first wife's circumstances much like Elizabeth Edwards'? After all, the first Mrs. McCain waited in agony (and presumably fidelity) during those five long years for her beloved husband to return from Vietnam, raising their children while he was away and undergoing dozens of painful operations herself, only to be repaid by a philandering husband who ultimately left her for a younger woman.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/drew-westen/catching-the-wrong-john-w_b_118064.html

Posted by: SoMG at August 11, 2008 12:28 AM


I recently became informed about how McCain left his first wife for reasons that SoMG mentioned above. McCain admitted that due to selfishness he left her and eventually married Cindy. However, McCain was upfront about his poor behavior and while it doesn't justify it, I can appreciate him moreso for his honesty and admission of sin.
Now the Edwards fiasco has as many legs as a centipede. Edwards admits on Nightline that "Elizabeth knows everything - all the details of what happened." Why then was Elizabeth unaware that he was making visits to the hotel to see Rielle?
There is NO WAY I could ever trust Edwards in word or in deed. I just thank God he wasn't the Democratic nominee, even though I'm a conservative. What a laughing stock we would be to the world (as if we don't have enough perception problems) if Edwards was exposed just months before the general election.

Posted by: LauraLoo at August 11, 2008 6:25 AM


There is NO WAY I could ever trust Edwards in word or in deed. I just thank God he wasn't the Democratic nominee, even though I'm a conservative. What a laughing stock we would be to the world (as if we don't have enough perception problems) if Edwards was exposed just months before the general election.
Posted by: LauraLoo at August 11, 2008 6:25 AM

It would have been a big issue domestically, but I doubt we'd be "a laughing stock" to the world. The rest of the world doesn't get excited about these types of scandles, except to laugh at us for caring.

Posted by: Hal at August 11, 2008 11:33 AM