Both of New York's finest newspapers, the Daily News and the Post, hit today with items regarding a former senator named John Edwards and a racy love child scandal the mainstream media doesn't want you to know anything about. Except the News and the Post, um, are the MSM, so this gets confusing! They're both basically saying the same thing — which is to say they're reiterating what the Raleigh News & Observer already told you: the Dems want this matter cleared up before the convention, yo. But it's a moment of significance, because two newspapers the city actually reads are saying this!
For two weeks since renewed but unproven reports that he fathered an illegitimate daughter appeared in the National Enquirer, Edwards has kept silent other than to denounce "tabloid trash."
Bad move, party pros say: His role at the Democratic convention, just 17 days away - and his political future - are now in peril.
This is interesting because, from what we can tell, it's the News' first instance of weighing in on the scandal.
The Post's Page Six, then, has this:
JOHN Edwards has gone, in a few months, from being one of the Democrats' strongest presidential candidates to a party pariah who won't be allowed to speak at the national convention later this month.
The handsome former North Carolina senator is considered a stirring orator, and still has 19 delegates pledged to him, which would make him a key speaker under normal circumstances.
But Edwards has been dogged by stories in the National Enquirer about an alleged affair with a campaign videographer, Rielle Hunter, who gave birth in February to a daughter said to be Edwards' "love child."
The Post, too, is new to the beat. It looks like Murdoch's paper might've first written about the scandal only two days ago.
Glad to have you kids on board the speculation train.
Editorial Director
Always thought he was nothing more than a snake oil salesman…….If it wasn't true, he would debunk these rumors in a heartbeat instead of letting his family and the Democratic Party scramble for pieces of the truth…he's pathetic!
He is a human being with good and bad qualities. His personal failures do not reflect on anyone but him. Politicizing this is ridiculous and a weak attack on the man's party. It is irrelevant.
See ya! good riddance jerk - and this coming from a lifelong DEM voting for OBAMA!
Wow!!
Mr Holier than thow, and a Democrat to boot….no can't be.
Fiona, I suspect you're exactly the kind of girl ole' Johnny-boy likes to meet in hotels.
Don't forget - this is a guy who made his fortune as an ambulance chaser. As shallow as they come. Looks like what Hollywood would cast as a oily poilician.
http://www.theweeklydonut.com/.....president/
I suspect by your name that you are not particularly conservative, whereas I actually am. You are entirely incorrect.
It is not irrelevant when he was asked about it and denied it while trying to run for president and his wife has terminal cancer.
Yes, people make mistakes, and all politicians lie, but when you're caught it's only natural people won't want to trust you and the media is going to attack him like they attack everything. I want to add, if he was serious about the job of president he should have been too busy and focused to be carrying on like this.
My point is that is irrelevant to the Democratic Party, and I agree that it does define the man's character. His behavior is unfortunate, but not unforgivable.
When he decided to run for president with no chance of winning, he got his terminally ill wife to get on board, despite having to take care of two young children as well(they had two babies in their late forties/early 50s). I remember thinking that Elizabeth couldn't possibly be enthusiastic to spend her last days on a failed campaign but she went along with it. Her reward… a cheating husband with a bastard child… an illegal cover-up paid for with millions in campaign funds… lies and more lies. John Edwards is scum. He and Balthazar Getty should take Sienna Miller and just disappear.