Mickey Kaus is very upset that the media not paying attention to the alleged John Edwards affair, and in a piece called the Agony of the MSM, he lists all the people not paying sufficient attention to the matter. Let me break it down for you.
The reason no one is paying attention is not because, as you might think, John Edwards is a media darling and they just love him to bits and pieces. Quite the contrary. I have never cared much for Edwards, and even I recognize that he got the absolute worst media coverage during the primary- he got none at all. They ignored him. He was the invisible man. And if you doubt that no media coverage is worse than bad media coverage, take a gander at the McCain campaign, which has shifted to gaffe-o-matic mode while trying to do ANYTHING to get some media attention while Obama is overseas.
The reason no one is paying attention to the alleged affair and love-child is simple. You guys have made standard affairs boring (I know, I know. You claim to be a Democrat.). No one is claiming Edwards was seen in two wetsuits hanging from the ceiling with a dildo lodged in his rectum. There is no DC madam with a black book involved. No one has transcripts of him instant messaging teen-age congressional pages or crashing their dorms in a drunken stupor. There is no arrest record for soliciting oral sex in an airport bathroom, complete with feisty confrontations with the arresting officer on video tape. There is no religious hypocrisy and gay prostitution and meth-fueled sodomy binge to talk about.
In short, aside from the fact that all there is to the story is an Enquirer report, it is just boring. You all have made standard affairs pedestrian and dull. Even when you use the phrase “love child,” what it boils down to is a guy allegedly sleeping with a woman. Pretty tame stuff, given what the GOP has provided us for the past few years.
Now maybe if he got caught engaging in oral sex with goats. That would probably get some attention.
Gold Star for Robot Boy
Kaus: Concern troll par excellence.
The Dude Abides
Not sure why Mickey Kaus wants to revisit the Edwards non-affair, as it dredges up the old stories about Mickey’s serial goat blowing.
Splitting Image
Even then it would depend on which one was bottoming.
zuzu's petals
Heck, I thought it might be about Novak having an affair with the guy he ran over.
Now THAT would be worth sitting up for.
bago
Up and over the hood to be precise.
Brachiator
Two talk radio hosts have been flogging this story hard for the past two days, in part because Edwards was here in the L.A. area to give PR support to a program sponsored by the mayor of L.A., who also has had his own mistress scandal. These guys have been trying to work the extra special outrage angle that Edwards should be with his sick wife instead of having an affair.
Despite this, even the other hosts on the station think the story is boring.
I also think that the GOP smear machine, which otherwise would love this stuff, does not want to invite comparisons to John McCain’s past with respect to this kind of thing.
Phoenix Woman
I also think that the GOP smear machine, which otherwise would love this stuff, does not want to invite comparisons to John McCain’s past with respect to this kind of thing.
No freaking kidding.
Is this how desperate they are? I mean really, is this how desperate they are? And didn’t Kaus fall for the “Clinton knocked up a black hooker” bullshit peddled by “Justice Jim” Johnson to Joe Klein?
Kevin
How is Mickey Kaus treating those goats, anyway? Did he run off, or send them flowers?
Calouste
Btw, which parents with a name like Kaus, who don’t want school to end up as a major trauma for their kid, name him Mickey?
I guess he has to write all that crap to pay the psychiatrist bills.
benjamin
Actually, as much as I hate to say it, Kaus has a point.
Like it or not, Edwards is a potential AG and is a major figure in the party. It is a story.
I don’t like Kaus and am not willing to buy everything has to offer but I would expect the MSM to at least look into it.
If there was an incident involving the Hilton security, it should be easy enough to prove or disprove
Kevin
It is up to the tabloid to provide some proof; why should “MSM” outlets look at it?
Kevin
It is up to the tabloid to provide some proof; why should “MSM” outlets look at it?
jrg
Clearly the lack of coverage of Edwards’ penis is proof of liberal media bias. Thank God we still have freedom-loving publications like the National Enquirer to combat the Soros media machine.
Proper, publicly-approved uses for John Edwards’ penis are critical for the future of this nation. I propose a panel made up of Baby Suri, Katie Holmes, Brangelina, and Doctor Phil to get to the bottom of this dire threat to our way of life.
Kevin
Okay, I only clicked the ‘Submit’ button once… grr.
Jim Treacher
You mean like giving a specific time, date, and location? With names of witnesses? The name of the guy who allegedly rented the rooms and drove them there?
Phoenix Woman
Oh my dog.
Is Mel Brooks controlling John McCain’s brain?
Any minute now, expect to hear him start singing “Springtime… for Hitler… und Zhermany!”
Zifnab
So, let me get this straight. The third place Democratic pick for President who didn’t get any media attention beyond the occasional “If this guy loses, we’re down to chicks and black people for nominee” is now the center of an affair that no one cares about?
And this is a shock to who now?
Robert Novak crashed his corvette into some biker guy. Michael Weiner Savage announced his disbelief in autism. And, like, four different celebrities are having babies. All of these people have more star power than John Edwards at the moment.
Oh, and don’t forget we’re going through a mortgage meltdown, the start of hurricane season, the middle of a Presidential race, two wars, and the run up to college football season.
But stop the presses, cause a tabloid newspaper says
they’ve found BatboyJohn Edwards might maybe be having an affair or something.AnneLaurie
If there was an incident involving the Hilton security, it should be easy enough to prove or disprove
Yeah, like the “Obama snorted coke with a gay hooker” bullshite that the wingnut media bottomfeeders were so lathered up about. Or the “Michelle Obama hates whitey” tape. Concern trollling at its finest.
Kevin
At 9:45 PM Pacific time, last night, Joe Shlabotnik and Judy Wankstain saw you leaving the Chateau Marmot with a transvestite hooker, from a room rented by Joe Klein.
I have a specific time, named witnesses, and an alleged person who rented the room.
You were saying?
DaveinLA
Nobody told me she had a dick?!??!?
Who give a fuck about John Edwards? If this story gets any traction in the MSM, then Perez Hilton should start blogging about Vanna White…
Jim Treacher
And I can prove you wrong. I can account for my whereabouts at that specific time. I can prove I wasn’t even in the same state. And Joe Klein couldn’t even pick me out of a lineup.
You were saying?
Delia
Oh, aren’t there classes somewhere for concern trolls? I mean, they’ve got to rise to a higher level than this or they’ll get sent back to the re-education camp. I remember when I saw the Edwards love-child story on the cover of the Enquirer in the supermarket, and I thought, “Sure, the Enquirer just makes shit up. That’s what they do.”
But if you spend all your time at No Quarter or someplace similar, you just naturally think all people are dumb and credulous, and you don’t have to work any harder than this to sow doubt. That’s the down side of hanging out with idiots.
Jim Treacher
I’ll bet you said the same thing about the Limbaugh Oxycontin story.
Nancy Irving
Could the lack of interest be because:
1) There is no evidence to support the rumor;
2) The Democrats never claimed to be the party of sexual purity anyway;
3) Edwards is no longer running?
Incertus
Kaus is doing everything he can to poison the Democratic brand. He has to, if McCain is going to have a chance in November.
Jim Treacher
Oh, and Kevin, I’m guessing “Joe Shlabotnik” and “Judy Wankstain” would turn out to be fictional when I sued you for libel.
Ed Marshall
Hey, Jim, are you sure you aren’t the furrie that goes by cigarskunk? Your blog looks really familiar.
Kevin
LOL. And you know that the “witnesses” the National Enquirer used are real people, how?
Calouste
Elvis Presley reported that he saw Jim Treacher meeting with his mistress and love child at 10 PM on Sunday 7/20 in the Las Vegas Hilton. According to Elvis, the room was rented for Jim Treacher by Ronald Reagan, who also picked up Jim Treacher from the airport and drove him there.
See? Easy.
southpaw
I think I’d agree that there’s enough here for the MSM to pursue the story.
I’d just add to John’s point that–if it’s true–in addition to being boring, it’s totally bleak. If you believe the Enquirer, John Edwards has a child with some crazy, sleazy looking person and they’re meeting up in has-been hotels behind his wife’s back. That’s news, but not the sort I’d want to talk about at work. It’s the sort of news that puts me off my breakfast. It’s just a sad human mess, and I wouldn’t buy a paper to read about it.
Jim Treacher
Because they work there. Because they’ll be the first ones on the stand if he sues. Which he won’t, because then he’ll have to submit to DNA testing to disprove their claims.
LOL.
I know what a furrie is, I think.
TenguPhule
Is it fall already? The nuts are falling out of the woodwork.
Jim Treacher
And, again, easy to disprove. Because you gave specifics, see. If it’s as easy for Edwards to do disprove this, I’m sure he will.
southpaw
The nuts are falling out of the woodwork.
Oh, come off it. It’s just me and the hard core wingnuts at Gawker:
Kevin
you keep saying about lawsuits against the National Enquirer by Edwards. The National Enquirer don’t even need to prove that their allegations are true to win a lawsuit by Edwards against them. A basic “huh? what? those guys told us this crap? we thought they were giving us the real dope” defense is usually good enough, even when they knew what they were printing is crap.
Jim Treacher
I honestly don’t know what this means. But if it’s not true that John Edwards spent 5 hours in a hotel room with a woman he was alleged to have had an affair and a baby with, I’d say he’d have every right to sue.
southpaw
I honestly don’t know what this means. But if it’s not true that John Edwards spent 5 hours in a hotel room with a woman he was alleged to have had an affair and a baby with, I’d say he’d have every right to sue.
Because Edwards is a public figure, he’d have to prove actual malice on the part of the Enquirer to win a defamation suit. That means he would have to prove that they actually knew the story was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth; it’s a reasonably high bar (compared to what ordinary private citizens have to prove), and it’s how the Enquirer gets away with most of what they do.
What Edwards (or Hunter or the hotel) could do, and hasn’t yet done that I can see, is issue an actual denial that contradicts a relevant fact in the story. What Edwards has said is: “I don’t talk about these tabloids. Tabloid trash is full of lies.”
Jane_in_Colorado
I don’t know if it’s truth or fantasy. Either way, it matters because… ?
Jim Treacher
Okay, that I understand. But if it’s a bunch of lies, wouldn’t he have a case for malice since they’ve been on his case for so long? Or did that go away when he didn’t sue them last year?
The one detail that made me start to think there was something to this story was the bit about Hunter going to Andrew Young’s house for dinner. So Young supposedly gave his pregnant mistress a BMW, moved her from New Jersey into a million-dollar house in his own gated community a few miles from Edwards’ HQ, and even had her over for dinner with his wife and kids? Maybe I’m overly suspicious, but that doesn’t ring true to me.
F-Dog
Did Kaus ever demand a follow-up on the Inquirer’s claim that George W. Bush was a falling-down drunk? Or was he helping to form the ‘wall of silence’ on W’s upcoming divorce along with the rest of the media?
Seriously, though, Republicans like Kaus should be thrilled this Edwards business isn’t gaining traction. If the MSM doesn’t save its bullets for Democrats who are, y’know, actually running for office, this race will be over by August.
Calouste
In the UK btw, the publisher would NOT get away with it. The threshold for malicious libel is a bit lower there. Funnily enough, even though Murdoch owns a decent chunk of the UK press as well, and some of the tabloids are pretty much crap, there’s no equivalent of Fox News or Limbaugh over there.
Lancelot Link
This is the same tabloid that wrote about George Bush’s binge drinking and affair with Condoleeza Rice, correct? Isn’t that a bit more newsworthy?
myiq2xu
Let’s see, Obama’s amin competition for the Democratic Senate nomination back in 2004 had to drop out when tabloid trash about his personal life surfaced. Then the same thing happened to the GOP nominee.
This stuff on Edwards surfaced last fall, when Edwards was one of Obama’s main opponents. The “rumors” helped torpedo him in Iowa. Now we have Edwards saying he would accept the VP job, and suddenly the Enquirer gets tipped to where and when they can catch Edwards with his hand in the nookie jar.
Probably just a coinky-dink.
myiq2xu
BTW – Why not change the name of this place to “Goat Juice”
Y’all really have an unhealthy fascination with the topic.
dslak
Unless you count Fox News, that is.
dslak
OMG Obama set up John Edwards?! You’d better get No Quarter on top of this right away!
PeterJ
Fixed.
myiq2xu
Stevieeboy! I thought I recognized the stench.
Conservatively Liberal
I find it humorous that John mentions someone who blows goats and
myiq2xuGoatBoy decides to visit.Timing is everything. ;)
PeterJ
myiq0.8xu, sorry, but that’s not me. I just thought it was some great advice for dealing with trolls like you…
btw, any luck selling your vote?
myiq2xu
If you really want to turn your fantasy of getting gang-banged by a herd of goats (like when you lost your ass-cherry) I know someone who is willing to help.
All you have to do is agree to sign away the video rights and wear a G-Dub mask, and this guy will arrange for as many goats as you can handle.
Apparently there is a market for that stuff in parts of the Middle East and Oregon.
myiq2xu
Not so far, I may have to just save it.
Conservatively Liberal
I would suggest that Mickey and
myiq2xuGoatBoy get together and double team a goat, butmyiq2xuGoatBoy once told us that he prefers to be the catcher and we know that Mickey only blows goats.They would just end up fighting over it and the goat would get away.
oh really
Funny, I remember Edwards getting lots of attention. Let’s see there were those haircuts. And his house. And his haircuts. And his house. And his haircuts and his house. And his house and his haircuts.
What you mean is he got no substantive fair coverage.
Like a real professional journalist, Marc Ambinder explained at Atlantic.com on July 17, 2007:
And, John, of course you don’t like Edwards. After all, you’re a Republican. You didn’t abandon the Republican Party; you quit on a bunch of authoritarian thugs (which of course is what the Republican Party has become), but your essential “Republicanness” shows through quite often.
Michael D.
If Edwards is having an affair, it is news, and it should be reported and investigated. He ran his campaign as a family man with family values, etc.
If this was a Republican having an affair, it would be all over the news and there would be 500 comments on this post.
calipygian
The National Enquirer also had many exclusive stories about Bush’s return to alcoholic drinking, which would seem to me to be a MUCH more important story than where John Edwards puts his pee pee.
slippy hussein toad
Actually as much as I like to say it, Kaus is a hack with no credibility. The source of this is . . . the National Enquirer?
We’re all the way over to the red on the bull-o-meter. If the Enquirer reported that the Sun rises in the East and sets in the west, that day I would standing outside at sunset with a compass. If Kaus repeated the report I wouldn’t even waste my time, and would assume that there was no Sun. He’s got a flair for reporting the opposite of truth.
Also, fuck him.
Michael D.
Don’t get me wrong, I know this is the National Enquirer. I’m just saying that if there IS anything to the story, it should be investigated. I didn’t mean to imply that anyone should take the Enquirer seriously.
bago
myiq is not awarE of all internet traditions
gbear
Has anyone ever seen Jim Treacher and Mickey Kause’s goat at the same time? I don’t think so…
Krista
But you are taking it seriously Michael, as are others on this thread. You’re basically saying that it should be used as a source of news leads. The Enquirer digs up the dirt, and then the MSM follows up on it to see if there’s anything to report.
And upon occasion, there has been. Stopped clocks, and all that shit. However, if stories in the Enquirer should be used as leads, then why did we see no MSM coverage when they broke the story on June 12th about Bill Clinton’s affair with Julie Tauber McMahon and his subsequent fuckathon with anything that moved? They had names, dates…all sorts of legitimate-looking info. You’d think, during Hillary’s historic campaign, that the MSM would have at least investigated such a juicy lead.
If The Enquirer is such a reliable source of news leads, then how come we haven’t seen MSM stories about Oprah and Steadman breaking up, or Angelina and Brad breaking up? With our celeb-obsessed media, you’d think they’d be all over that.
But they’re not. For all that any of us know, the MSM media did investigate all of the above stories, and HAS investigated the Edwards story, and has found that all of those stories are utter bullshit.
And Michael, this sentence of yours is emblematic of what’s wrong with your viewpoint:
No, hon. You’ve got it all bass-ackwards. What you should be saying is this:
Investigating prior to reporting is news. Reporting prior to investigating is just gossip.
John S.
It’s a conspiracy, man!
Obama is behind the whole thing!
Where’s that tinfoil…
/myiq
Doug H. (Fausto no more)
Sincerely,
Vince Foster
linda
where are the photos documenting this?
the national enquirer claims to have been on the story for a while and waiting in ambush for this hook-up; and then chasing edwards thru the hotel as he tried to duck them.
where are the photos.
Xenos
.
Dude, some of us tend to sleep between 10:48pm and 4:50am. I would hate to think I could be such a hypocrite just by being unconscious.
As for Edwards, it is newsworthy, but it is really early in the newscycle for what could amount to a career ender for a prominent politician. Give it a couple days for due diligence, OK? And has wnyone verified the existence of the putative love child?
slippy hussein toad
My wife told me about a journalism class she took in college, and that their imbecile of an instructor invited someone from the Enquirer in as a guest one day. The class ripped him to pieces and sent him packing. This was some 20 years ago.
They haven’t gotten more credible since then. And I have gotten into the habit of dismissing out of hand as bullshit ANY claims Mickey “goat-blower” Kaus makes. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise.
Wilfred
Here’s the Times doing its job: narcostate
A j’accuse for the ages.
Dennis - SGMM
If this was a Republican having an affair he would explain that Jeebus had forgiven him, his wife had forgiven him, and that the rest was private. End of story – other than his being welcomed back by his colleagues.
The argument that if it isn’t true then why doesn’t Edwards sue the Enquirer overlooks the fact that the standard for libel in this country is so high that almost no one sues – no matter how scurrilous the story. As for the media investigating the story, it’s almost impossible to believe that the media was presented with a salacious story about a a then-candidate and didn’t investigate. They probably did and they probably found that there was no there there.
August J. Pollak
And I can prove you wrong. I can account for my whereabouts at that specific time. I can prove I wasn’t even in the same state.
Well? We’re waiting.
John Cole
Why? We going to charge him with adultery and pin a scarlet A to her chest? None of these people is accused of breaking any laws or doing anything wrong. Why does it need to be investigated?
b. hussein canuckistani
Krista-
I like those tall black dominatrix boots of yours. I especially like seeing you apply them to Michael.
Shygetz
Well, actually he IS accused of doing something wrong (cheating on his wife, which most people would agree is wrong), and it is grounds for a fault-based divorce so it does have legal consequences. Edwards did run as a family-values guy and he does still have political aspirations, so I would have no problem with an investigation IF there is really something there. But, then again, it’s the freakin’ Enquirer. Seriously.
gil mann
I’ll bet the story’s true. The Enquirer got sued over scurrilous reporting so many times back in the 80s that they usually get their ducks in a row before running with this kinda stuff.
I’ll also bet that nobody gives a shit, since a)he’s not the nominee, b)the majority of married people admit to having cheated, so you can just imaguine what the actual numbers are, and most importantly, c)contra Michael D, Edwards isn’t a social-con scold.
What does the “D” stand for? “Kaus?”
Joshua
They didn’t ignore him. They just only printed stuff that made him look like a fag or a communist. Remember the haircut thing? If you don’t, I really can’t blame you – it was a low point (albeit one of many) in the media.
Georgette Orwell
“If Edwards is having an affair, it is news, and it should be reported and investigated.
No, hon. You’ve got it all bass-ackwards. What you should be saying is this:
This should be investigated, and if Edwards is having an affair, then it is news and should be reported.
Investigating prior to reporting is news. Reporting prior to investigating is just gossip.”
Bravo, Krista, beautifully (and intelligently) said. Your spot-on last two lines should have much more exposure in reference to many, many “stories.”
Joshua
It wasn’t that the media ignored him. The media certainly was eager to print anything that made Edwards look like a homosexual or a communist. Certainly, the haircut debacle was a low point, albeit one of many, for the media in this country.
Obviously, having an affair with a woman goes against the storyline the media set up for him.
El Cid
I think the National Enquirer will be forthcoming with a story documenting that Al Gore is fat.
Ed in NJ
I can’t believe anyone thinks the MSM is burying this story after the horrible coverage Edwards got in the primaries.
All this is is the National Enquirer making an unsubstantiated claim, without any clear proof, no photographic evidence.
My guess is that the mainstream media is not reporting it because there is not enought there currently to run with it. But that doesn’t mean it’s not true and they aren’t doing their own investigation at the moment.
Bottom line is, the National Enquirer prints so many false stories, the MSM would be foolish to take anything they say at face value without hard proof.
Krista
Sadly, I don’t have those boots anymore. Myiq’s goat ate them.
Bob In Pacifica
Look, Jeff Gannon was not only a fake reporter, planting crap at news conferences at the behest of the administration, his record of going in and coming out of the White House suggested that either the security at the WH sucked at keeping records or he was having sleepovers. Dubya wouldn’t have been the first gay President.
So how come the media doesn’t care about getting to the bottom of that story?
NonyNony
No one has tackled John’s major point, which is:
This is boring. Who cares?
It’s boring from multiple angles. First – inactive political figure has an affair – oooooh! shocking! Second – inactive political figure might have a bastard child – OMG! This is an event that has NEVER EVER OCCURRED BEFORE IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY! STOP THE PRESSES!
John’s right – this isn’t interesting news. This is barely interesting tabloid fodder. If Edwards were currently, you know, active in a political campaign it might (MIGHT) be newsworthy. If he’d made the bonehead move that Gary Hart did of daring the press to prove he was having an affair (which, people don’t seem to remember, was the ACTUAL NEWSWORTHY PORTION of that story – the actual affair, not so much. The fact that he idiotically dared them to follow him and then led them right to his mistress? THAT was the man-bites-dog bit).
If the allegations are true (and as Krista points out, investigation to find out if they are true should always come before printing allegations – otherwise it’s just gossip and tabloid fodder). I’m not even sure it would be newsworthy then, though with our Puritanical American Culture it certainly would sell papers so that people could devour all of the news of the “affair” and then get to feel smug and superior to those involved.
Get over it. If you don’t like John Edwards just don’t like John Edwards. Stop looking for “character” reasons not to like him and just do like Cole does – accept the fact that you don’t like him and move on. It makes life so much easier – especially since it’s only a pipe dream that he’s going to be involved in an Obama administration in any serious sense (seriously folks – he’s moved way too far to the left for Obama to stick him in a role where he gets to make actual policy, and there’s about zero chance of him becoming AG – he doesn’t have ANY experience for an AG position. The best that Edwards might hope for is “Secretary of Health and Human Services” and even that would be a stretch.)
Xenos
RE Gannon-
Imagine that happening in the Carter or Clinton White House. It is an old, dull trope, but just do the thought experiment some time. Republicans would launch impeachment investigations just on that issue.
“What do we tell the children?”
gex
“What Edwards (or Hunter or the hotel) could do, and hasn’t yet done that I can see…”
Excuse me, Senator, but when exactly did you stop beating your wife?
Sometimes you just need to refuse to engage with the dangerously unhinged. Even if you win, you lose.
Zifnab
Because McCain has been making, like, a gaff a minute and Obama is rocketing himself and the Dem brand through the stratosphere with his Barack-the-World Tour. So anything that can bring people back down to earth would be really, really helpful right now.
See, that’s your pre-9/11 mentality talking. Edwards should be arrested, waterboarded, tried and convicted in a secret court, flogged in public, and publicly hanged. Then Congress can convene an investigation a few months later in which all the major players in the case can state how they’re suffering from spontaneous amnesia.
Has the Don Siegelman case taught you nothing?
harlana pepper
omg, there have been so many LOL moments in the last week or so, but this post is just gold!
Original Lee
IIRC, only a few celebrities have sued the Enquirer successfully and won. I believe Carol Burnett is one. It’s extremely difficult to refute the Enquirer because they make sure their sources are on tape saying the critical pieces of information in the story. All the Enquirer has to say is that they believed the source was a credible witness and produce the tape. They can ask all the leading questions they like to support the story they want. But, they cannot solicit someone to produce the tape, i.e., they cannot provide a script, have someone read it into a microphone, and then pay them (although it is very difficult to prove that they didn’t do it).
If the MSM still knows how to do fact-checking, it’s likely the story isn’t getting any traction because Edwards was somewhere else.
For myself, I don’t even remotely start considering whether or not there is something to a tabloid story until I see it on the front covers of at least 3 different ones.
orogeny
Is it even remotely possible that the Enquirer would be in the middle of a multi-year investigation, would follow Edwards into a hotel where he remained for 5 hours, with a NE reporter on the scene waiting for him to come out…and would not have a single freaking photographer waiting for him when he came out!??!
I would think that under those circumstances, the Enquirer would have had a battalion of photographers there, covering every exit, hanging from trees, hiding in bushes, dangling from helicopters, riding window washer platforms down the side of the building…
Seems a bit hard to believe.
Ricky
Your post touches on so many things not worth noticing, starting with Mickey Kaus.
BTW, I know goats. Cabrito al horno is a favorite of mine.
Goats wouldn’t give Kaus the time of day.
Gus
Pun intended?
Jim Treacher
That’s tabloid trash. They’re full of lies. I’m here to talk about helping people.
(Apparently that’s a sufficient response.)
Jim Treacher
That’s a good point. One theory is that they’re waiting for him to specifically deny it (unlike his non-denial yesterday) and then hit him with the pictures. There’s also talk of the hotel’s surveillance tapes. But yeah, if they’ve got pictures, they need to produce them.
Of course, then there’ll be cries of “Photoshop!”
joe in oklahoma
why is kaus complaining about msm not reporting rumors of a private affair in National Enquirer of all places, but not complaining about MSM ignoring John McCains stupid remarks about Iraq, Iran, his wife, Obama, etc?
nothing like focusing on REAL news, hunh?
John Cole
Jim- Again, who cares? He isn’t some moral crusader, he isn’t in office, he is just some former Senator running a non-profit.
Personally, I would not be surprised if all the rumors are true, but again- who cares. Now if Obama names him as his running mate, then it is relevant. For now, though, notsomuch.
FWIW- I think the best evidence that this is not true is that he is still alive. I would not be the least bit surprised if Elizabeth shot him were he actually cheating.
Jim Treacher
Oh, nobody.
joe in oklahoma
seems to me, given a perusal of his writing history, that Kaus is obsessed with what he thinks may be other people’s sex lives.
he needs meds, not a blog
capelza
It’s the National Enquirer. Has this country so descended into crappy stupidity that anything printed in it gets or should get any attention beyond the supermarket check out stand?
If Edwards wore diapers and called a hooker mommy, well, I think he’d be a much more interesting person…and if he then co-sponsered a Federal marriage Protection bill with a toe-tapper..then yeah this might be news, if it came from somewhere besides the NE. What’s next, political editorials in the NE? Will their editors guest on Hardball or Fox?
Truthfully. I really miss BatBoy. Weekly World News..now there was a tabloid I loved!
RH Potfry
Ambulance-chaser extraordinarie John Edwards prostituted his cancer-addled wife for campaign contributions while apparently screwing a Hollywood socialite.
Yes, there are no goats involved that we know about, John. Just naked ambition and narcissism.
Yawn, my ass.
Brachiator
Wow. This is not true at all. Did you pay attention to Edwards’ campaign? He ran as someone who would fight for the little guy.
This also is totally false, and it also ignores how the media loves to create a pleasing narrative about newsworthy people by deliberately smoothing over a more complex reality.
One of the infotainment shows did a puff piece on Cindy McCain where the interviewer asked how they met. Cindy went on about their first meeting and how romantic it was, and how it was love at first sight for her.
Absolutely no mention of adultery or McCain’s first wife, who had bravely withheld information from her husband about the serious injuries that she had received in a car crash.
So, the Ballad of Cindy and John is just another wonderful tale of romantic love fulfilled.
But there has never and will never be gaggles of posts about this, not even from fundamentalists who ordinarily like to drone on about how the Bible says you should never divorce, and certainly nothing about breaking one of the 10 Commandments.
Obviously, there has been coverage about McCain’s early life, and even speculations about McCain’s judgement about and treatment of women. But follow-up eventually peters out, and is easily drowned out by the sentiment that McCain is lucky as hell to have married a babe who was hot, rich, white and blonde.
Because that’s the American dream, baby!
joe in oklahoma
proof potfry?
Gregory
Fixed.
Jim Treacher
You like to make hilarious jokes about Rush Limbaugh popping pills, right? Of course, we all do. Well, we wouldn’t even know about that if the Enquirer hadn’t broken the story.
capelza
Was Rush the subject of an official investigation? Why yes he was. And did Rush at some point prior to that say all drug users should be arrested? Why yes, yes he did. Was Rush doctor shopping for narcotics, why yes, yes he was…
Did John Edwards say that adulterers should be arrested? Has his alleged crime been the subject of an official investigation? No and no.
TenguPhule
Can we file this one with the ‘Kerry had an affair with an Israeli Student’ stupidity folder?
Jim Treacher
So: a former vice presidential candidate (and a contender for VP this year) possibly having a love child with a campaign worker isn’t a story because he’s never specifically said, “You shouldn’t have babies out of wedlock with women named Rielle.” Also, investigations don’t count unless they’re official. Okay, sounds good, just trying to get a grasp of the ground rules.
TenguPhule
Michael D, do you enjoy being rickrolled or something?
They’ve floated this same concrete shit balloon against almost every Democrat. Who can forget the Drudge report about the Kerry affair…that didn’t happen.
Fool you once….
w vincentz
Wowsers!
This thread had me spitting coffee all over my keyboard.
So, I think I can make some sense of it…
Some want a heterosexual investigated, then explain his conduct.
Some want to dismiss an admitted goat cock sucker.
Here’s what I think needs investigation…Johnnie McPain is shown repeatedly talking nonsense while standing in front of a display of cheese. Cheese comes from cow, sheep, and goat udders. Those udders have teats.
Has anyone explained Johnnie’s fascination with the product of udders? Huh? Why did he babble in that situation?
THIS IS NEWS!
capelza
Jim Teacher..
So, are you all over the tawdriness of John and Cindy McCain? And the crippled but increibly loyal first wife he dumped for her?
I do not approve of adultery, but if goober land is all up in arms about the NE accusing a potential VP candidate, then I think that people need to ask themselves something. Why is that GOP adultery is apparently so forgivable, but Democratic ones are not.
Jim Treacher
“Why are you talking about X but not Y?” That old gag. You might as well just say it: “Hey, look over there!”
Your original point was that we shouldn’t pay attention to anything printed in the Enquirer. Well, the Limbaugh story was printed in the Enquirer, and it got plenty of attention beyond the checkout stand. That’s all I’m saying.
Fledermaus
First off I think this gives too much credit to Kaus. Kaus is pro-Kaus and that is it. If I remember correctly he had some minor roll in the “John Edwards scoop” and is pissed he’s not getting his fame and fortune.
Other than that he only hates democrats because a teachers union once forced him to blow goats as a small boy. Hence the current rumors that he enjoys blowing goats.
orogeny
I’m an Edwards supporter, voted for him in the primary and would like for him to be Obama’s VP, so please don’t start the “concern troll” stuff that has become a staple of this site. At this point, I don’t see any reason to believe the Enquirer’s story; as I said earlier the lack of photos makes me think it is BS. But, if the NE produces real evidence that Edwards has had an affair and fathered a child with his mistress…of course it’s news! You may not like it, I don’t like the fact that our society is more concerned with a candidate’s sex life than their ability to govern, but that’s the way it is. I continue to hope that it’s not true, but if a politician is stupid and irresponsible enough to screw around on his wife while he’s in the national spotlight, maybe it should be news. I don’t think that it is unreasonable to expect a certain level of self-control from the folks who want to govern us.
w vincentz
Limbaugh. Sounds like Limburger (as in cheese).
There’s proof.
RH Potfry
Proof of what?
RH Potfry
Interesting that you’ve staked out the “it can’t be true” position. Most of your liberal brethren have been smart enough to realize that this is, in all likelihood, true, and have preemptively (like Mr. Cole) staked out the “it’s really not news or important cause you Republicans are the real sex-dogs” position.
What will you do if it is proven to be true? Simply slide over?
John Cole
I dunno- it just seems to me that this story isn’t very sexy, and again, I can’t stand Edwards. Pedestrian really is the best word I can come up with- it just seems so ordinary, and add to it the fact that he doesn’t even hold an office, and it is more so.
On the other hand, if he were a moral crusader, running around yapping all the time about my business and how I should conduct my relationships, or one of the family values crowd, then there would be something there. Hell, look at the Spitzer affaie (but wait- I thought it would not make the news if a Democrat did it!). That was given wide coverage not because of the affair- that was almost a side issue. What made it news and a big deal is that it was a shitload of money to spend on a young hooker by a guy who made his name busting prostitution rings. Hypocrisy, illegality, political implications, and a current officeholder. All of those elements are missing from the Edwards story.
One is kind of boring, and if true, you think “What a jackass,” feel bad for Elizabeth Edwards, and move on. The other scenarios, though, have a certain cachet that the Edwards story does not. Not to mention the potential for criminal wrongdoing.
John Cole
That isn’t what I have said at all.
But then again, you are an idiot.
RH Potfry
It’s exactly what you said.
RH Potfry
oh, I forgot: douche-bag.
orogeny
John,
I agree that’s it’s not sexy enough to get major media play, but if it’s true it will still be enough to end Edwards chances for national office. I think it will play for a few days and then Edwards will quietly return to his law practice.
Jim Treacher
Hypocrisy, illegality, political implications, and a current officeholder. All of those elements are missing from the Edwards story.
Two elements that aren’t missing: a bastard child and a highly popular wife who’s dying of cancer. Yawn!
Batocchio
Kaus is still flogging this, when he isn’t blowing goats?
The Grand Panjandrum
Whoa! A thread with goat blowing, chicks with dicks, Elvis, gang bangs AND myiq2xu?
The blog gods love us and want us to be happy.
John Cole
And the point of it being boring is not because “republicans are the real sex-dogs,” as you claim I am stating, but because all it is is sex. There is nothing else. In all the cases I listed above, it was sex plus a number of different things. The moral crusading minister who is part of Falwell’s empire got with a dildo in his anus. A House Republican with a history of working to criminalize internet crime against minors caught diddling pages. And so on.
It isn’t the sex, it is the other factors. For all I know, Edwards is engaging in really freaky sex with the woman. But that is just it- he is just having sex, and there is nothing else to make the story, shall we say, “sexy.”
Jim Treacher
Dude: there’s a baby.
John Cole
So what? You really think the NY Times and MSM should go live with allegations that Edwards has an out-of-wedlock baby with no proof whatsoever? Based on a NE story?
And why do I always end up fighting with you people about people I hate? I can’t stand Edwards. I had to fucking defend Limbaugh, too. And Bennett.
Although it is becoming clear this is a nation of busybodies.
Jim Treacher
You really don’t think a presidential candidate stepping out on his dying, incredibly loyal wife and having a baby out of wedlock with a campaign worker — allegedly — is newsworthy?
I think they should investigate it, and debunk it if it’s not true. And maybe they are as we speak. Anything’s possible. There are enough specifics in that story that it should be easy enough to slap down, if none of it ever really happened.
P.S. “You people”? Et tu, John?
RH Potfry
Exactly what I mean by “sex-dogs.” I don’t mean a ferocious appetite, but the kinky stuff. Your point is that the bizarre nature and kink in the Republican incidents make Edwards’ incident standard fare, not particularly newsworthy. Fine. But when a Presidential candidate positions himself as a rock through his wife’s battle with cancer, and it’s discovered that he’s screwing someone on the side, I don’t need a dildo in his (or her) ass for the story to rise to newsworthy.
Besides, my original point was directed at Tenguphule, and I was merely asking him/her if they planned to change their defense of Edwards from “it didn’t happen” to “it’s unimportant” if evidence was presented.
Krista
Maybe it’s true, maybe it’s not. But the main gist is that the Enquirer’s story isn’t getting traction in the media, and there are two likely reasons as to why:
1. They already looked into it, and there just wasn’t enough proof upon which to base a news story. (my theory)
2. They couldn’t be arsed to look into it, because they didn’t think it was newsworthy enough, due to the “newsworthy” bar having been raised sky-high by Foley, Craig, et al. (John’s theory)
Then, we have the highly unlikely reason as to why:
1. IOKIYAD
Why is that unlikely? Well…wasn’t the Enquirer also recently blaring a cover story about Bush having an affair with Condi? You’d think the media would have picked right up on that. After all:
Could be that there was no “there”, there.
Could be that after the Clinton years, hetero marital infidelity just isnt’ newsworthy anymore.
But let’s not pretend to ourselves that the only reason Rush’s story was followed and Edwards’ isn’t is because of the poor right-wing being continually persecuted by the Liberal Media(tm), okey-dokey?
TenguPhule
Monkey trolls just like to throw poo against the wall until something sticks.
Jim Treacher
If I’ve said something to insult you personally, I apologize.
TenguPhule
What will you do when this is proven just another NE shitfit?
Shut up and slink away until the next fake scandal?
I’ve seen this movie before and frankly, you trolls are just pale imitations of the ones in 2004.
TenguPhule
Yes, the Drudge theory of journalism. Make a big whoop about something that isn’t real and thereby give the impression that it is real and leave an impression of scandal no matter what the evidence says in the end.
Swiftboating, the next generation.
RH Potfry
Tenguphule has some unresolved anger issues, me thinks.
Jim Treacher
If it’s not true, Edwards should have no problem disproving it. A simple paternity test would suffice. Then he could sue the Enquirer and shut it down. That would be good, right?
Or, he could keep making non-denial denials and let the kid grow up surrounded by whispers. Nobody’s saying that’s not an option.
Fledermaus
Nope. Just a low tolerance for stupid. You’ll find a lot of that here.
John Cole
Ok. Now you aren’t even trying.
What is motivating you is concern for the kid?
christian cunningham
i am a liberal who stated reading you blog over a year ago. i love your sense of humor and you make me laugh out loud. What you say is often just plain old common sense and we all could use more of it.
Josh E.
No. The National Enquirer loses and settles libel suits regularly. It’s built into the business model.
And it’s already been explained to you that it’s extremely difficult for a public figure to win a libel suit.
Concern Treacher
Good point, who cares about some dumb baby. It’s just sex. Hell, it’s not even gay sex. Never mind.
How’s Carol Burnett doing these days?
Conservatively Liberal
This is the ‘have you stopped beating your wife’ problem for Edwards. Far too many bottom feeders in our country presume ‘guilt’ before innocence, so if someone makes an allegation against someone they do not care for then those people presume that person is ‘guilty’ until they prove themselves innocent. And if the accused ignores the allegations, then these same bottom feeders automatically presume guilt. After all, if the accused was innocent then wouldn’t they fight any allegations against them?
On other words, the right wing ‘guilty until proven innocent’ meme.
What I find hard to believe is that the National Enquirer had this hotel staked out for five hours and no pictures are forthcoming. So then the bottom feeders go off on the ‘they are holding them in reserve so they can get Edwards to dig himself a deep hole before they expose them’ tangent.
You can’t win in a situation like this, and it is complete bullshit. I really don’t care for Edwards as a politician, but I am sick of the bottom feeders who feed on shit like this.
Maybe the Republicans are thrilled about this because it involves a man and a woman? Maybe they are so used to their pols hanging out in men’s restrooms and chasing young male Congressional pages that something involving a man and a woman is novel to them. ;)
slippy hussein toad
The burden of proof generally falls upon the one making the claim.
Wait, let me rephrase that.
“The burden of proof generally falls upon the ASSHOLE making the scurrilous claim.”
Concern Treach
Good point, who cares about some dumb baby? It’s just sex. Hell, it isn’t even gay sex. Never mind.
Which is much appreciated. Could you please explain how Carol Burnett did it?
And they’ve provided specific details that so far haven’t been refuted, let alone disproven. If it’s a pack of lies, you’d think he’d be fighting back.
Josh E.
Because she told the Enquirer the story was false before they printed it. Any more dumb questions?
w vincentz
I’ll end this thread (as I’ve done so many others) by saying that those that believe the “truth” in the National Enquirer also believe in the “truth” of every word that John McCain says. If this is not a fact, I’ll listen to what Rush Limbaugh says about it. He’s equally as credible.
Concern Treacher
Well, so did Edwards. He’s denied the whole thing all along. So why wouldn’t he have a case for libel if none of it is true? (I apologize in advance for the dumbness of that question, and humbly await your instruction.)
slippy hussein toad
Thank you, vincentz, but I will end this effing thread . . .
In reply to Dennis, if this was a Republican having an affair, it would be reportable if said Republican was a man who accidentally fucked a woman who was not his wife. They would report it with little or no embarrassment, and the Republican would be identified on Fox News as a Democrat, and then he would be welcomed back into his life and career, and probably his phony marriage, without any effort whatsoever to apologize, ask forgiveness, or even explain himself.
However, if the Republican left office after allegations of an affair, and one of his young female aides just happened to turn up dead in his office with multiple head injuries, and was then autopsied by a physician with revoked credentials and no credibility as a witness, being widely known as a liar, the press would fall over themselves to not say a single fucking word as it would be too horrifying to imagine that a (nother) good-looking Republican had turned out to be a murderer. Of course, failing to undertake wild speculation about a Democrat with the same problem would be, of course, of course, irresponsible.
Also, he would then get his own timeslot on a TV show, even though it would be clear to anyone watching him that he had zero talent as a news host and of course no objectivity whatsoever. Plus, there’s that whole cloud hanging over his head about his fucking credibility.
harlana pepper
Fuck that dissing Elizabeth Edwards shit. WTF do you get off with implying she would shoot her husband like backwoods trailer trash? Every time I’ve seen Elizabeth Edwards and from all I know of her, she is an incredibly intelligent, accomplished, deep, thoughtful, resourceful woman.
Woops, but she’s strong-willed, guess that’s what done her in!
TenguPhule
National Enquirer, you stupid fucks are peddling this as a reliable source…I thought you’d already hit bottom with Drudge.
Concern Treacher
Well, that’s certainly a compellingly expressed point.
liberal
Concern Treacher wrote,
Aside from the likelihood that he did a calculation and decided the negative impact of the attention generated by a trial far outweighed the negative impact of not suing on people like you…
It’s hard for public figures in the US to win defamation suits (cf New York Times v. Sullivan). (IMHO that’s a good thing.)
Concern Treacher
“People like you”? I believe the phrase is “you people.”
Yeah, it’s hard to win them, but not impossible. Carol Burnett won hers, and all they said was that she had a few drinks at a dinner party. If they invented an illegitimate baby fathered by a past and possibly future VP contender, and concocted all these details, aren’t they opening themselves up even more to liability?
Ricky
Thousands of satisfied goats thank you for your continued interest in this thread.
Kausflies
Concern Treacher
Well played, sir, well played.
Josh E.
Really? Edwards heard that the NE was going to print a story about how the encountered him outside the hotel, and contacted them and told them it was false before they printed it?
Concern Treacher
Oh, I thought you meant the stuff about the illegitimate baby. Okay, the hotel story, obviously he can’t tell them that was false, considering they had him cornered in a bathroom in that very hotel. So you’re right, he’d have a lousy case for libel, since it’s the truth.
Hey, you guys have a great weekend. Keep rockin’!