posted August 11, 2008 12:44 PM            

In fact, one of the most vocal radical leftist organizations was organized to tell the rest of us to "Move On" from Kommander Korruption's adultery. These twits are still in operation as Move On dot Org.

So now, in leftist demoscat circles and in the leftist main stream media, John Edwards adultery while his wife was trying to fight off cancer is no big deal. It's not even an indicator of integrity, character or family values...not to them. But then, on the left adultery is one of the values they cherish.

posted August 11, 2008 01:03 PM            

From the start, the Edwards scandal has belonged entirely to the alternative and new media. The tabloid National Enquirer has done all the significant reporting on it -- reporting that turns out to be largely correct -- and bloggers and online commentators have refused to let the story sputter into oblivion.

Slate's Mickey Kaus has been foremost among the latter, alternately analyzing and speculating on the Enquirer's reporting and ridiculing the mainstream media for a fastidiousness that has seemed, from the start, wholly absurd. Like other commentators, he repeatedly alleged that a double standard that favored Democrats applied to the story. Like the Enquirer's reporting, the special-treatment charge is largely true, as anyone who recalls the media frenzy over conservative commentator and former Cabinet secretary William Bennett's high-stakes gambling would agree.

Edwards, 55, now admits that he had an affair with Hunter, now 44,in 2006, but denies that he is the father of the child she had in February. Andrew Young, another former Edwards aide, has said he is the baby's father. In a statement released Friday, Edwards said he was willing to take a paternity test; doubtless we'll hear more on that issue.

So far, so sordid.

But what's really significant here is the cone of silence the nation's major newspapers -- including The Times -- and the cable and broadcast networks dropped over this story when it first appeared in the tabloid during the presidential primary campaign. Next, the Enquirer reported that the unmarried Hunter was pregnant. Still no mainstream media interest. Indeed, never in recent journalistic history have so many tough reporters so closely resembled sheep as those members of the campaign press corps who meekly accepted Edwards' categorical dismissal of the Enquirer's allegations. Late last month, Edwards came to Los Angeles, and Enquirer reporters trailed him to the Beverly Hilton hotel, where he met Hunter and her daughter in their room.

The Enquirer went with the story, and when no major newspaper or broadcast outlet even reported the existence of the tabloid story, bloggers and online commentators redoubled their demands that the mainstream media explain their silence. The tabloid followed with a story alleging payments of hush money to Hunter and, this week, with a photo of Edwards holding an infant in what appears to be a room at the Beverly Hilton. As pressure mounted on major newspapers to take some aspect of the unfolding scandal into account, editors and ombudsmen issued statements saying it would be unfair to publish anything until the Enquirer's stories had been "confirmed."

Well, there's confirming and then there's confirming. One sort occurs when an editor mutters, "Find somebody and have them make a few calls." Then there's the sort that comes when that editor summons an investigative reporter with a heart like ice and a mind like Torquemada's and says, "Follow this wherever it goes and peel this guy like an onion."

Suffice to say that the follow-up of the Enquirer's story fell into the former category in too many newsrooms, including that of The Times.

Some of this reticence may have reflected a regard for the feelings of Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, who has incurable cancer. There was, however, every reason to set that deference aside.

First, it was less than unlikely that Elizabeth Edwards was unaware of the allegations. (She says now she knew of the affair in 2006.) Second, Edwards' name has surfaced as a possible running mate for Barack Obama and as a possible attorney general or Supreme Court nominee -- posts in which character and candor matter. Finally, throughout his political career, Edwards has made his marriage a centerpiece of his campaigns.

It's interesting that what finally forced Edwards into telling the truth was a mainstream media organization. ABC News began investigating the Edwards affair in October, but really began to push after the Beverly Hilton allegations. When ABC confronted Edwards with its story (which confirmed "95% to 96%" of the tabloid's reporting, according to the network), he admitted his deception.

posted August 11, 2008 03:17 PM            

quote:

---

With that admission, the illusion that traditional print and broadcast news organizations can establish the limits of acceptable political journalism joined the passenger pigeon on the roster of extinct Americana.

---

I somehow still feel skeptical that particular pigeon will die a belated, natural death.

juni

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted August 13, 2008 07:35 PM            

The good news: DNA testing has confirmed that John Edwards is not the father of Rielle Hunter's baby.

The bad news: The father is Bill Clinton.

Ha ha -- just kidding! It's almost impossible to get pregnant by having the type of sex Bill Clinton prefers.

Also, by now, everyone has heard the news that Edwards' mistress, Rielle Hunter, has refused to grant a paternity test.

I wonder if Edwards knew that when he was making his chesty offer to take a paternity test? Edwards gushed to ABC's Bob Woodruff: "I would welcome participating in a paternity test, be happy to participate in one ... happy to take a paternity test and would love to see it happen."

As Edwards knows, our paternity laws were written by Gloria Steinem, so if the mother doesn't want a paternity test, it can't happen. So when Woodruff asked if he was going to actually take the paternity test soon, Edwards quickly noted, "I'm only one side of the test."

With Rielle in on the scam, Edwards could boldly demand a paternity test and then self-righteously defend his mistress's decision to refuse a paternity test. How dare you gainsay this woman's right to her privacy! Because if there's one person who's gone the extra mile to keep Hunter from becoming a public figure, it's John Edwards.

Edwards is closely following the Kennedy model of responding to charges of misconduct. First, admit only as much as can be currently proved. Second, get the other party to block any further investigation. I guess he really is "Kennedy-esque"!

For example, when the cops found DNA on the murdered body of Martha Moxley in Greenwich, Conn., the Kennedy suspect, Michael Skakel, suddenly remembered he had been up in a tree that night masturbating! (Talk about a tree-hugger.) You can see how something like that could slip your mind.

After Teddy Kennedy plunged his car off the Chappaquiddick Bridge with Mary Jo Kopechne in it and then failed to report the accident for nine hours, Kennedy admitted he had driven off the bridge -- but said he was in a state of shock for the next nine hours, preventing him from reporting the submerged car with a woman trapped in it.

Indeed, Kennedy was so disoriented he was barely able to dream up a highly unlikely alibi.

The historical parallel to Edwards' pincer move with Rielle Hunter is that Kennedy ostentatiously demanded a full investigation –- while the Kopechne family stoutly objected to an autopsy of their daughter.

According to Senatorial Privilege: The Chappaquiddick Cover-up by Leo Damore, the evidence suggested that Kopechne died gasping for breath in the car while Teddy Kennedy was busy trying to convince various people to say that they were driving his car.

There were lots of houses nearby with lights on, but Kennedy avoided them after he escaped from the car, so he could sneak back to his hotel undetected and begin establishing an alibi. Evidently, Kennedy is better than Edwards at sneaking into and out of hotels.

If Mary Jo had suffocated, then she had been alive for hours after the car plunged into the water. But an autopsy was required to determine whether Kopechne had drowned or suffocated.

Both the coroner and the diver who retrieved Mary Jo's body from the car believed Mary Jo had suffocated, not drowned. The diver found her body contorted in the back of the submerged car as if she had been trying to press her face into the last air pocket in the car. The coroner concluded there wasn't enough water in Mary Jo's body to indicate a drowning.

But for the first time in Massachusetts history, no autopsy was performed in a possible manslaughter case. Mary Jo was buried within about an hour of her body being pulled out of the channel under the Chappaquiddick Bridge.

Naturally, Kennedy wanted a thorough investigation -- to clear his name! -- but the Kopechnes absolutely refused to consent to an autopsy of their daughter. What more could he do? The Kopechnes' lawyer, Joseph Flanagan, refused to say who was paying him to fight the autopsy.

Similarly, Edwards aggressively offered to take a paternity test, knowing that the New Age hippie chick who still thinks she's going to marry him would not hurt him by allowing a paternity test. Edwards certainly is adept at reading stupid women, or as his campaign called them, "the base."

posted August 13, 2008 09:01 PM            

juni

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~