He's done.

he wasnt a good dem when we didnt know this shit.

out the door. no more. done with him

that John Edwards is that bad.

self centered egomaniac.

we dont need him. we cant trust him. there are a lot more that are a lot better.

why bother.

kick him to the curb.

he was willing to take the nomination for presidency knowing this shit was coming out, knowing how much we need a win. fuck him

road you are on. Morality, uhhh no that isn't something that any of them are big on.

claim they are all losers.

nope.

than trying to elect them.

Elections are bought and paid for, and I think we would be just as well off with hiring Public employees to fulfill the people that we vote into Congress. The people that we now vote into Congress are mostly corrupt, and there is no excuse for that.

to stand up while having an affair and fathering a child with his mistress and preach on his opposition to marriage equality using his 'traditional Baptist view of marriage' as reason for that bigoted attitude. The man went on and on and on, claiming for not just himself, but all straight people a morally superior status, he said 'one man, one woman' no less, invoked his Deacon Daddy and said more than once that strict 'one man, one woman' views were 'simply a part of me'.
So you are saying he did all of that KNOWING the election was 'bought and paid for' because if you are privy to that then he most certainly is. So you say he did all that bashing of gay people KNOWING he had not purchased the election and would lose? So he attacked us from a hypocritical lying platform for no reason at all....
You seem to be buttering both sides of your toast. The man lied and I will not trust him nor will I trust anyone who claims I should trust him.

Where does all this vitriol come from? Edwards is no worse than many. And yes, Wade's death ended an aspect of his and Elizabeth's relationship and it isn't your business (or mine) to even know or speculate on it. Just... shut up.

DU really knows how to pile on someone like a crowd of kids in the playground.

but why bother with reality when you are busy protecting a loser

"he was willing to take the nomination for presidency knowing this shit was coming out, knowing how much we need a win. fuck him"

no, not all politicians get his label.

hermes daughter living in atlantis....

He has zero integrity.

what he did. Bill Clinton has no excuse, but Edwards does. He lost a son in a tragic accident and then lost his wife to cancer.

except for everyday, garden variety narcissism.

I bet anything Rielle wasn't his first fling; and his extra-marital affairs had nothing to do with his son's death.

how is his wife having cancer an excuse for cheating on her? How is running for President when he knew there was all this shit about to hit the fan, excusable? How is lying about a child being his, excusable?

been suffering from it. One see's John Edward's as a very out going Attorney, never seeing the person. He lost a son, and was about to lose his wife. I maintain that he was under very stressful circumstances in his life.

... sensible and humane. Your perspective is so rational. I'm amazed.

particularly breast cancer. Look it up. John is no different from the bastard who dumped my dying friend, no different from the many self interested and heartless creeps who do the same. No different from Newt. Leave them while they are sick. It is a disgrace when any man does this, a shame to our gender in fact.

Yep, I'm on many Edwards threads stating my opinion and the facts? Don't like it? Whine on, dear friend.

the truth about living the life, reaching the White House, knowing the secrets, coming close again and being shut out by corporate media managers, being fucked up and human and having humanitarian goals

In 2004, he was a media darling - the MAIN reason he was on the ticket at all. The media promoting him was why, with his very thin resume, he was even considered a serious candidate in 2004. Then when the VOTERS showed little interest, the media lobbied for him as vp - in many articles arguing that if Kerry did not pick him it would be because Kerry feared Edwards would outshine him. Forget that Kerry had just EASILY beaten him in the primary and had far more excited crowds in the primaries. Then when picked, the articles and interviews were sickening - with Kerry, the people's choice as nominee being asked if he hoped Edwards' excitement would rub off on him.

Edwards was a very uncooperative, mostly unless VP nominee, but was immediately deemed a serious candidate for 2008 in late 2004.

As to humanitarian goals, it seems obvious that Edwards would run on whatever he thought would work. It amazes me that some still see him as more committed to helping the poor than Democratic opponents who have REAL records of doing so - where Edwards in office had a voting record that looked like Evan Bayh's. Look at the choices that young Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Obama made. They did NOT use their social or academic positions to position themselves to make money - Edwards did. (Neither Clinton or Obama had family wealth - so forget that argument.) There is something to be said for choosing a candidate based on their record.)

Remember that Iowa is designed so a candidate does not need the most money or the media to win. Carter is the normal example of this, though in 2004, it was Kerry who had less party support and less money than Dean and less media support than Dean, Edwards, and Gephardt. For 2008, it was Edwards who spent the most time in Iowa - and there was a ceiling he could not get above. He could only sway so many people with his words - and in some parts of Iowa, the more he was seen, the lower his numbers went.

Edwards was a very talented politician in the sense that he was able to translate the skill he had honed as a trial lawyer in getting people to trust him when he spoke looking them square in the face with wide opened blue eyes. But, ultimately, he was a very flawed person.

If his goals were really what you think they are, the best way he could have helped achieve them would have been to ignore his huge ego and worked as the best team player he could have in 2004. The deck was stacked against them, but Kerry nearly pulled it off - even with Republican voter suppression in Ohio. Imagine if he had a REAL partner helping him instead of going rogue on things like the campaign slogan.

Not only did Kerry have a REAL record going back to when he returned from Vietnam in working for those less fortunate, imagine no SCJ Roberts or Alito -- and likely no Citizens United.

thank you for this thoughtful reply. will read fully later.

The reason was that the media covers the candidates with the most chance of winning and at that point, his chance was pretty non existent. The reason was that his chances depended on not just a win, but a BIG win in Iowa. He had very little support in NH and was polling third nationwide at the time of Iowa. In addition, it could be that part of his problem is that as he became the "Trippi" candidate using anger rather than the 2004 "sunny Edwards" tone, the media disliked the change.

When Obama won - and by a good margin (38% to Clinton and Edwards at 29 and 30) the media followed the winner (Obama) and the one leading nationwide (Clinton). The coverage turned to NH where Edwards was not really in the running. It was a close contest between Clinton and Obama.

Consider that in 2005 - 2007, Edwards was immediately pushed by the media as a serious candidate. Consider how little attention the media gave Biden, Dodd, and Richardson - mall men with far greater resumes. They polled lower, but could that be that they did not have the media support? For that matter, John Kerry, who had run a high road campaign and had been proven right on nearly all the points he pushed in 2004 - and whose 2004 platform influenced every 2008 platform, was given less media acceptance even when he polled better or the same as Edwards.

thank you for the thoughtful replies. agreed, the point at which Edwards was edged out of view; and it happened to coincide with him talking like a populist, whether he was one or not. he was still technically in the running, except on the TV.

Edwards was given coverage until he realistically had NO chance of winning. Consider how much more coverage he got than Dodd or Biden. If you watched the Republican primary, you may have noted that only those in the running got coverage.

He was speaking like a populist even in 2005 and 2006 when he and Elizabeth got a tremendous amount of coverage for their books - all positive.

fighting that cancer. " excuse " my ass. He didn't lose his wife to cancer ,he lost his wife because he was a cheating SOB.

I believe McCain was banging Cindy while his wife was lying in the hospital with Cancer and that he walked out on her at the time. Tell me why you feel so strongly about Edwards but not McCain (on this issue, of course).

Edwards on the other hand was someone that I had a hell of a lot of respect and admiration for. I believed in his talk and values. I expect that crap from someone like McCain or Newt. Hell, if I were a man, I would get rid of Cindy too. Elizabeth on the other hand was a kind, compassionate, caring woman. That's just my opinion.

extra marital affairs. They are both guilty of a a heinous offense's IMO, but they should be judged equal for this.

Last edited Fri Jun 1, 2012, 01:51 PM - Edit history (1)

while Hillary was fighting for her life against a vicious disease. So please stop with your equal shit. There was a difference.

Not to mention explaining why he helped push through the punitive and harmful bankruptcy bill. Basically, the man talked on the campaign trail like he'd never met the man who had been in the senate.
I really liked what he said about the two Americas and his attempts at populism did push Hillary and Obama to at least address poverty. That however does not make him a man of principle or someone who is worth the effort to rehabilitate in the public's eyes.
I'm no fan of adultery, but really I don't care as much as many do. If you're only looking at that single issue, you're missing the real point. This man has a long and well-established record of being a phony and cheating on his wife is way below betraying progressive ideals with actual votes in the senate.

Teddy51, Ed Schultz and Mike Papantonio know more then you know or something you don't know. Maybe that's why Schultz has a talk show and you don't.

Who also badly balanced the narcissistic tendencies that make it possible for a person to feel worthy to be a presidential candidate.

Using one's big head to make decisions about how to achieve the narcissistic-supply that keeps a candidate going is always best.

I didn't mention Clinton one way or the other. I commented on value as an asset and possible political rehabilitation.

On edit I'd add that politicians, men and women, must have the sort of self-image that flirts with narcissism to seek high office. IF they handle it well, we see them as self-confident leaders. If they don't we see them as arrogant, wrongly ambitious, with a disorder of self.

I don't think Edwards was guilty of a criminal action, so I'm glad he's not going to jail.

But as a human being, he's sorely lacking. And he almost got the Democratic nomination for President -- for an election which he would have surely lost as soon as the adultery came out. We dodged a bullet in the primary, thank goodness. Obama was a far stronger candidate. Hillary Clinton, too.

did in his political life posing as an elder statesman with the bushes & crying about haiti as he rakes in the money.

john edwards, that's a really bad guy, yes-sireee-bob.

insiders get away with everything, outsiders are reviled and sent to siberia for life.

corrupt as hell, with the most corrupt in the high seats of power.

that Bill was in BC at the same time as Cheney some months ago.

the in-crowd.

or that's my read on the photos i've seen.

i'd really be interested in what happened with carter. he just seems so obviously not in the club somehow.

There are few people more pushed by the media and the powers that be than Edwards was in 2003 - about 2006/2007. He had the Senate voting record that resembled Evan Bayh's and he went to the Bilderback conference.

about Bilderberg. They hand-picked Edwards for the Presidency.

... everything, you said. You are right, too -- Edwards will be back. The irrational one-note hysterics on DU should shut up. You're too extreme. What's up? Something's off... Plenty of men have done far worse. You call Edwards narcissistic but not Clinton? Not Newt, not McCain... Why only Edwards?

Just drink the kool-aid and go with the crowd on this one.

1) Hart had far more real achievements than Edwards
2) Hart's transgression was FAR less than Edwards. He had marital difficulties that he and his wife worked around. Edwards had a long term affair while his wife was dying and he denied his own child. It also does not help that he repeatedly lied in his come clean" interview. Even in the trial, he used the argument that it was his wife's "violent" temper that caused him to cover up the affair.

You are right that Hart managed to destroyed his chance of being President, but he did not incur the level of scorn that Edwards has deserved. The other thing is that Hart was already known as a policy wonk, who did serious work. Edwards was more the "front man" running on the policies his team developed. I know that all candidates have teams to develop their platforms, but some are more instrumental in setting the basic outline. Edwards' two campaigns were very different and neither reflected his term in the Senate.

who ruined his chances at becoming President. Not just Hart and Edwards. What about Teddy Kennedy? But his transgression too, like Hart's, was far less serious than Edwards. He just killed a woman. Oh, excuse me... and he turned out to be a darned good Senator!

tried to get away with.

Apples and oranges.

Clinton held fast with the line "I did not have sexual relations with that women". Hmm, That turned out to not hold water.

He lied when he denied it was anything but tabloid nonsense. He lied to Elizabeth that it was something like a one night stand and over in December 2006 - nearly a half year before he created his daughter.

Then, in August 2008, after he was "caught" he lied in his "come clean" interview - among other things denying that he fathered his daughter.

The other difference was that Clinton, at that point, was a 2 term President with many accomplishments. Edwards had squandered all his possibilities leaving very little that he could declare his own. I am old enough that I give him very little credit for his words that I had heard from many other Democrats with records that matched the words.

Clinton does this, but not John Edward's?

I posted hundreds of times that the lying in the primary by Clinton on the various issues should have been enough for the Democrats to have selected another nominee. ANY Democrat would have won as GHWB was at 33%! Clinton is brilliant and a very talented politician, but his moral code could use a lot of work - especially in telling the truth.

You suggested that JRE did not lie and Clinton did. I think, if anything, JRE;s lies were worse as he denied his own daughter.

what he did should almost be unforgivable, but my hope is that he can be rehabilitated.

fewer accomplisments (edwards had quite a few) does it, he's a scumbag?

what's that smell?

If you look back at my posts, I am not a Clinton fan. Nor am I an Edwards fan. The statesman I most admire is among the most honest men to have run for office, much less the Presidency. He spoke the truth to power as a 27 year old, even though it could have eliminated any chance for him to hold high political office, because he thought it was the right thing to do.

For a man who was considered a serious candidate for the Presidency, Edwards accomplishments were very very few. Obviously, he had more accomplishments than the man on the street.

Before becoming Senator, Edwards had a long & reportedly very successful law practice that started in 1978, & a lot of high-profile cases -- for example, one dealing with the safety of the US blood supply during the period of the AIDS crisis. In the 2004 primary he got the highest vote percent of any "D" but Kerry, & was chosen as K's VP.

I think his accomplishments before running for President were as or more substantial than Obama's, personally, and stand up well to Clinton's. Obama = Law prof & 1.5-term (9 years) senator. Clinton = AG for Arkansas (2 years) & two-term governor (9 years). Edwards = longer law practice & six years as Senator.

Edward's background is arguably the most working-class of the three and he's the only one who went exclusively to public schools & graduated from a state University.

I think it's interesting that there hasn't been a Pres who didn't go to Yale or Harvard since Reagan.

He didn't kill anyone did he?

Apples, oranges and Cactus Pear.

And I'd hate to trash that asset.

Fact is, middle class and other poor people help the poor all the time, and they do not say 'if you make me President I'll lift a finger'.
If helping the poor mattered to this mega rich man, he'd simply help the poor. He is not well known for his altruism. He's known for claiming straight people's marriages are 'sanctified one man, one woman' while having kids with more than one woman. That was how he used his time and money and power when he had it. And of course, Edwards was the first Democratic co-sponsor of the Iraq War Resolution when he was in the Senate. The first.

He'll retire to his mansion, and after a respectable period of dating every bimbo he can find, he will settle in with a young babe and get married, have another kid, be the toast of many parties given by important people, and live a life of luxury and ease.

He will be productive, but I can't guess what he'll do. He won't go back to the drudgery of working as a lawyer for ordinary people. He's famous, now.

Of course, the prosecutor may decide to try him again.

Damn, he went on to become President and still was a sexual deviant when Monica happened along. I sure was embarrassed with that Statement that he made " I did not have sexual relations with that women" when it turned out that he was lying his ass off.

while explaining why he opposed marriage rights for others. Edwards did. While he was making babies here and there, he was also standing up with his 'wife' to preach on the subject of his 'traditional Baptist views on marriage'. He said his Daddy was a Deacon, and that 'one man, one woman marriage is just a part of me'.
He exploited the fight for equal civil rights to craft a facade of rhetoric behind which to hide his mistress and extra offspring. He stood there saying 'look at the gay, I can not support that' while he was doing what he was doing, and he used us to cover up his own rot.
No one made him do that. Bill never did that. Liars like Edwards make it very personal when they claim that they are the metrics for morality, that they are so pure they get to judge others while invoking God.
A hate mongering liar.

AND running for President at the same time AND doing sex videos.

But Clinton definitely has a tragedy aura about him. A brilliant man with a tragic flaw.

He was President, so there's no need to do anything else besides write books and work for charitable causes. That's what former Presidents do. Oh, and give speeches for large sums of money. None of that will be open to Edwards, since he's never been President. Well, he could write a book, I guess.

Bill Clinton doesn't seem to have any remorse for what he did, or at least he has never indicated that he did. I remember that footage so well where Clinton was coming down the stairs (into the crowd) and Monica was there and he went right for her with a big hug.