E Edwards: Please Don't Advocate Health Reform Until You Stop Lying About John

Did Edwards get elected President and I missed it?

What incoherent junk. Nobody's a John Edwards fan anymore, but Elizabeth a great spokesperson for health care reform.

This column is a pantload.

Uh, yeah, credibility of this piece: Zero.

Unrec, burn it with fire, etc.

but Hunter herself says that DNA testing has not yet been done and she still isn't sure that she will permit it unless ordered by the courts.

The story about her relocating to NC was in error and later retracted.

Why should Elizabeth Edwards stop her advocacy because of her husband's or his mistress's behavior?

You beat me to that exact sentiment.

No DNA testing?

That Koolaid taste good?

Tell you what, she has as much right to keep doing good work for sane public policy and you have to be a belligerent advocate for silencing people you have disagree with. But she is gonna come out of it looking much better than narrow minded people who want to put her in a time out somewhere.

Who happens to be the father of a given baby is irrelevant here. Health care is very important. I welcome what Elizabeth Edwards has to say on the health care issue. I could care less about her opinion regarding John's alleged son. If she were to lie on that subject (and I don't care whether she is or not), I would not blame her. Lying about that does not, in any way, invalidate her opinions regarding health care.
:dem:

-Laelth

JE and the mistress aren't worth wasting time on. Hell won't have either one of them in the end.

It doesn't change what Elizabeth has to say just because she has a whore chasing husband.

Lee S. isn't worth reading either.

Elizabeth isn't the guilty party here.

Usually doesn't comment after posting either. Typical drive-by's.

it is so well deserved here.

There is another one who posts here. Very similar to this one.

is a common behavior among the least insightful. It is also common for those looking to incite.

I expect that the person who posted this will soon bring us an article that blames the baby.

that because of this highly publicized trainwreck, John Edwards should no longer be considered an appropriate spokesman for poverty in America.

I am wondering if this is the supposed counter argument: That Elizabeth shouldn't be considered an appropriate spokesperson for health care.

Now, what parties could benefit from pushing that kind of counter argument? :think:

"And William said:

I can sympathize with Edwards. My wife is lying in a coma, and the doctors do not expect a full recovery. The whole experience has been very traumatic, but I have learned a valuable lesson. When I get my license back there will be no more DWI on my part. And that's a promise.... But that's not the immediate problem. My wife has all sorts of hot friends visiting her, and you should see the nurse on the night shift. My problem is how do I approach the touchy question of post mortem dating with these attractive women. I don't want to appear insensitive, but life is for the living... I would welcome the advice of any Edwards' voters on this difficult subject."

Always looking to stir up trouble. Nothing constructive to offer.

Respectfully submitted. :)

Allrighty then.

for the Presidency and she participated in the cover up. If they had been successful, we could have had a nominee crippled going into Nov. 4th.

IMHO, it is not up to us to judge any of the Edwards'. He did not become the nominee, so we don't have anything to worry about, do we?

Elizabeth has had a tough life. I refuse to sit and judge her.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4210378


(Lots more links, just do a basic search)

Again, if the Edwards had succeeded in elevating John to the highest positions, it would have been a complete clusterfuck.

I won't be a party to overlooking that.

What does that have to do with Mrs. Edwards' stance on healthcare.

eta: that link you have there leads to an OP who was one of the nastiest trolls here who finally got well-deserved granite.

The fact is that her personal story coupled with her intelligence and articulateness make her a very good advocate for many things in the healthcare bill. There are many people who worked longer or at a more detailed level with healthcare policy, but few have the
ability to make people see what the basic issue really is.

To put this in context, I thought JOHN Edwards was worthless, even when I believed he was an excellent husband and I had problems with Elizabeth Edwards lying about Obama's health care plan on the eve of the Iowa caucus when she told people that under his plan, she could not get coverage. So, I was not a fan of either.

However, I see her as a powerful proponent of why insurance is needed and why pre-existing conditions should not be considered. Not to mention, even if I thought she was an awful advocate, what gives me (or anyone) the right to say that she has no right to speak? The fact that she is eager to do this, even as she faces both family and health problems, is impressive.

Did you stop to think that working on this may be what lets Elizabeth deal with the series of blows she has had and both raise her two little kids and work through the effects all this had to have on Cate? The fact that she can do this shows what a strong woman she is. While I don't understand why Elizabeth Edwards does somethings related to her husband, I don't see how anyone could be unimpressed by her strength in dealing with the bad cards she was dealt.

call a big press conference to announce that John was a hound?

never masturbated, then you are absolved. What a crock of shit you piling on here! Piss off and leave the adults to do adults thing!

I always knew I would find an appropriate place for a reference to a googolplex

Here is Lee Stranahan on health care reform-

To Rahm Emanuel,

I thought you were supposed to be tough. I heard you were a fighter. I didn't know you'd be fighting against real health insurance reform. I didn't know you'd be fighting against the millions of people like me who elected Barack Obama.

You started the compromise by not putting single payer, universal health insurance on the table. BusinessWeek is saying that the health insurance lobby "has already won." You compromised with big Pharma, agreed not to negotiate and as Tommy Christopher has pointed out, you covered it up.

Now, you're putting on the "Rahm Show'" and calling ads going after lobbyist funded politician "f**king stupid"?

No, your compromises and politics over people attitude are stupid. People's lives and health are at stake so you're worse than stupid, worse even then f**king stupid -- you're deadly....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-stranahan/no-rahm-your-compromise-o_b_254475.html

but some are much more clever/manipulative than others. Konnichi Wa lasted a while, but he eventually got the boot. This one will slip up and get the ol' heave-ho as well.

The Edwards are prominent Democrats. I'd say there is plenty of room for interest on a board of this type.

Then you'll see what else this poster's "interests" are.

yes, it IS Lee, and if you don't like it than STFU.

Just because you make your living digging up shit on people and pontificating about it, doesn't make it legitimate.

If people want to know about the affair, they should ask the ones who were intimately involved.

Why do people feel the need to poke at a persons wounds publicly?

King also pressed her on her Cancer- saying "well, you're stage 4 right"- the guy's an asshole.



:shrug:

by the fucking National Enquirer. And, since Edwards is not longer in public office it's really none of anyone's business whether DNA tests have been done, will be done or what the results are.

Regardless of what the real story is in the matter of Rielle Hunter's baby, it absolutely does not preclude Elizabeth Edwards from having an opinion and a voice on health care reform.

Huffington Post is a fucking rag on the same level as the National Enqurirer. They should spend as much time bashing their own shoddy reporting as they do bashing Elizabeth Edwards and President Obama.

...I won't question any former supporter's wanting to nail down the timeline in this sordid affair. Anyone who donated to the Edwards campaign, as I nearly did, ought to care what was done with those funds, and see how their candidate's story holds up.

Edwards has already lied to us; that much is fact. I think it worth asking whether his behavior was criminal.

Never seems to find anything negative about his Republican buddies, but hammers Dems on a daily basis.

Never his own opinion, just shitty hit pieces, cut and paste.


Drive-by troll.

And this article is idiotic.

National Enquirer isn't reliable.

Here's the National Enquirer article re John Edwards, garbage that it is.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3860438
The woman linked to Presidential candidate John Edwards in a cheating scandal is more than six months pregnant and telling a close confidante that Edwards is the father of her unborn child, The NATIONAL ENQUIRER has learned exclusively.

snip...

But The ENQUIRER has now confirmed not only that Rielle is pregnant, but she is also living in Chapel Hill, N.C. in a gated community, just a few streets away from Andrew Young, who has been a key official in Edwards' campaign.
Dec. 2007
_________________________________________________________
National Enquirer's affair rumor dispelled, says John Edwards
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3771938

John Edwards believes he's stared down The National Enquirer. The tab's editors have been promising a followup to The Enquirer's Oct. 10 story romantically linking the married presidential candidate with a female campaign staffer.

Edwards and the woman - identified on the Huffington Post and elsewhere as Rielle Hunter - denied allegations they'd had an affair. But one Enquirer source insisted that the tab would provide further evidence in the form of e-mails to a friend in which Hunter supposedly confided details about her love for the former senator.

_________________________________________________________
National "Enquirer" Hitjob on Edwards
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2495887




etc, etc....

Every time I see a post from you, it's an unrec'd hit piece on Obama or other Dems.

"No".

I remember too well John chastising Bill Clinton for his own peccadillo. I also remember Elizabeth's smug remark in an interview early on in the primaries that her life choices had made her happier than Hillary's, while knowing full well that her husband was running for president having had an affair with a staffer.

Say whatever you say about the Clintons, but neither one of them acts morally superior to anyone else. Bill never wagged a finger at another sinner and Hillary never chortled in glee at so many others' downfall who had previously berated Bill for his actions. Not at Vitter, not at Craig, not at Sanford and not even at Edwards.

I wish Elizabeth the best with her health and family problems, but I do not admire and respect her as I used to anymore.

:(

She's every bit as smugly self righteous as her husband. Furthermore, she is always going to be connected to her out of favor husband, and as a result, no one other than the most knee jerk partisan is going to be swayed by anything she says.

During the primaries she initially attacked Hillary far more than John. Aside from the previously mentioned interview (she ended up calling Hillary and apologizing for her comments), she also said that John was more of an advocate for women than Hillary. At that point she KNEW what John had done. I'm just so disappointed in her. What would have happened if John had been the party's nominee and the disclosure of the affair and baby had come out 2 weeks before the convention? We probably would now have president McCain, and worse yet, vice president Palin.

How she resolves her marital situation is no one's business but her own, but I'm just saddened that she's not the person I thought she was. Although my heart goes out to her children who will some day lose their mom.

What a sorry mess!!! Why can't so many powerful men seem not to be able to keep it in their pants?

Geez......

x(

anti-gay rhetorical blankets to cover up the truth of their own marriage. John went on and on about how his view of marriage was 'simply a part of me' because of his 'deep Baptist values' that meant he saw marriage only as 'between ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN". This is why John and Elizabeth claimed my family should not have equal rights, you see, because they were so holy. John wept about being the 'son of a Deacon' and claimed that marriage traditions were so important to him that he could simply not see extending them to the sinful, Bible breaking gays.
These are not people to be admired. They are vicious slanderers of their fellow Democrats, and they slander simply for personal gain. Very rich people, who feel the need to slander other families for gain.
From the moment their lies became public knowledge, I have asked them in public and in private to apologize to the GLBT community, and to all of the families they puked on to make themselves look more Presidential. But they have not. Elizabeth continues to speak of how they are 'traditional' and that 'other woman' has a child Eliz calls 'it'.
What they did was wrong. It was wrong like that girl who carved a B on her face. The Edwards pointed fingers at others to cover up the damage they were inflicting upon themselves. He stood up there and painted himself as Mr Holy, while he was having the affair and Liz knew it. And part of his Mr Holy Routine involved disparaging equal rights, gay Americans, and using religion as a bludgeon like hand prop, to wave around as a smokescreen.
They should have and could have apologized for the things they said. It would cost them nothing to do so.

I always had a feeling that John was a bit of an ambulance chaser, but I did admire Elizabeth. Which makes her hypocrisy all the more disappointing.

:(

DAMN YOU!!

I am so disappointed.

Can't you ever think of anything good to say?

But just know, you slip up and blow your cover and it is Pizza Time.

Democrats and liberals do not attack women for being betrayed by their husbands. WTF does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

Who CARES? DO you realize that Elizabeth sometimes comes to the DU? Do you have any idea what a load of crap it is to paste a picture of her husband's mistress like she's some shining madonna?


CRAP!

We have enough trouble without this kind of divisive bs.

:thumbsup:

MYOFB!!!!:mad: :mad: :mad:

:puke:

What does her cancer have to do with this?

You are too obsessed with her husband!

Elizabeth Edwards has lost the the right to comment on or campaign for healthcare reform, an issue about which she is impassioned and knowledgeable and has been actively campaigning on in recent years, because she refuses to publicly confirm or deny an intensely personal, private and painful matter, ie whether or not her husband fathered a child during the affair he had with another woman?

Jeez, I'm so stupid, I thought she lived in America, not Iran.

it is the fundamentalists who use control over women as just one of many ways they attempt to keep the world from changing past their antiquated, cruel fundamental belief system (translated to a need for control and power). Dominating women, humiliating them, etc are just one way they maintain their superiority as men. Any minority will do for these people, so long as they can keep the status quo wherein they enjoy great privilege (like the white republicans whining about Sotomayor's racism). We can see the right wing fundies in America perpetrating the same bs.

Here's an interesting NYT article on this very issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/magazine/23clinton-t.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1&emc=eta1

Democrats and liberals do NOT try to control women like this. this is pure right wing bullshit. They don't even realize how transparent it is, because their hostile value system is so intrinsic to their attitudes.

She can say whatever she wants about that whole mess and she's been much more kind than many other women would be.

Might well turn out to be correct, but the author is jumping the gun, big time--and making assumptiops about what Elizabeth knows now, and what she knew a year ago.

comments about a matter that primarily involves her husband and his transgressions. She should simply tell people to ask John, and then she should stay out of it and above it all. (Plus, she may be still in a bit of a denial phase.)

It's clear now that Edwards is a cad, a liar, a phony, and possibly a soon to be criminal for spooning campaign funds to his girlfriend. But that's him, not his wife. People should quit asking Mrs. Edwards about a matter that involves two other people. Mrs. Edwards is not a party to the adultery and the child born.

But that is a cute baby, for sure. Sounds like John is going to stay involved with her (or him?).

you suck at posting a pick with the woman and the kid? What are you trying to say?

So I don't judge her and I don't care if she wants to be in denial about her husband.


I believe she is a GOOD woman. Who among us doesn't have faults?

She is SICK with TERMINAL CANCER.

AND SHE IS TRYING TO HELP OUT COMMON FOLK.




Let's not turn against our friend!

health care, I admire her for that. The assholes on here blaming her for her husband's trangressions are a bunch of idiot and they are so pure! fuck them!

We have a Dem President.

We don't need to bash Elizabeth, who only wants to help the uninsured.



If people must dwell on the past, they should bash John (and I won't do that - but if people MUST bash, do it to him, not Elizabeth).



Should Elizabeth read this post.... THANK YOU for what you are doing (and I have health insurance). I want EVERYONE to have it.

I still don't get John Edwards. What the hell was he thinking?

They were meant for each other, at least in that regard.

So fuck this bullshit defense of him.

The fucking nerve to have run for president with this in his past demonstrates an ego and form of selfishness that is most disturbing.

As for Elizabeth:

She can say whatever she wants, whenever she wants, wherever she wants as far as I'm concerned.

:nuke:

And is the OP aware that Elizabeth Edwards is/has been a DUer?

:wtf:

Elizabeth lied about knowing John had a mistress, when he ran for President. She also made some snarky remarks about Hillary.

I used to think Elizabeth was pretty cool, but I get aggravated hearing her complain about John. It's sad, it's tawdry and I don't see that her complaining about John is getting her any sympathy.

I don't think either of them is as morally pure as they try to make us think they are.

Any time she is on TV, I just change the channel.

That writer needs more problems to occupy her time.

is wrong, she's the victim here.

...but I am sick and tired of this woman AND her husband!

This is a shit opinion.
The woman is freaken dieing and she is going to go to her grave knowing the man she thought loved her more than life itself betrayed her. Probably more than once. And I was a big Edwards supporter in the past.

don't you have other dems to shit on?

We need every single-voice for health-reform and public option to speak out now more than ever. She along with Dr. Dean have been the two of the most consistent and powerful voices in the media. Silencing her from this debate is exactly, what the GOP and Insurance companies would love. The fact that she he has an enormous amount of credibility on the health-care subject, based on her experiences, gives her the ability to reach those who can be persuaded to support reform. Most people have moved past these personal issues, and its time for this board to as well.