General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsdkf
(37,305 posts)WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Apparently.
calimary
(81,350 posts)for something younger, prettier, leggy-er, and blonder.
But then again, if you want just plain ol' assholes, look at just about anybody with an "R" after their names.
trumad
(41,692 posts)WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Douche.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)!!!
trumad
(41,692 posts)WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Why?
trumad
(41,692 posts)I want you to have fun.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)You mean there's life outside of DU?
Tell me more...
Rex
(65,616 posts)horrible...
TheManInTheMac
(985 posts)And every person (many of them DUers) who donated is a victim.
So, yeah, what Will said.
Bake
(21,977 posts)If not, he's just a lying cheating jerk.
Bake
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,747 posts)Can't believe it. I never, I mean never give big money to politicians. And the one time I do, BANG, he turns out to be John Edwards.
Paper Roses
(7,473 posts)SCantiGOP
(13,871 posts)My wife and I couldn't decide who to vote for in the SC primary. Congressman Clyburn (minority whip) has a big fish fry every election year on the eve of the state convention. All 8 candidates were there, so we personally spoke to four of them, including Obama. The final debate was the Saturday before the Tuesday vote, and we both decided that, based on the moving speech Edwards gave about poverty, that he deserved our vote even though he didn't appear to have a chance.
What really pissed us off later was thinking: What if he had locked up the nomination before the scandal came out? That might have damaged the party so badly that the replacement candidate would have been unelectable. That is unforgivable.
BTW, after the SC vote, I switched to Obama while my wife joined the Clinton camp. We both enthusiastically supported and worked for Obama after he secured the nomination.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)The trial is over funds from a single "donor". The case is over whether they were political donations or not political donations.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)Misuse of campaign funds outside of FEC guidelines and expenditures reporting is a criminal offense. So is filing a fraudulent FEC report. He allegedly used campaign funds illegally and now stands trial for it. He allegedly filed a fraudulent expenditures report with the Federal Elections Commission and now stands trial for it.
Trying to distract from that by referring to it as "being a cheating lying creep" is a disingenuous attempt at misdirection. Political slight-of-hand, if you will. It's an interesting attempt to frame a criminal lapse as an ethical lapse in order to portray John Edwards as not criminally-culpable and reduce the severity of his infractions in the public opinion by applying language which, while negative, does not carry connotations of illegality.
Misappropriation of campaign funds is illegal.
Nobody has ever gone to jail for being a creep.
Frame his infraction as the second rather than the first and you sway public opinion.
using your campaign funds to keep your concubine in a luxurious mansion?
I have a low income. I donated as much as I could afford to Edwards Campaign, then I donated more. It REALLY PISSES ME OFF to consider how Edwards treated my hard-earned donation.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)You better call the prosecution ASAP before they go any further with this trial then.
And allow me to posit some confusion while I have your attention. You seem to post in favor a lot of RW policies, which doesn't quite mesh with a nonsensical defense of Edwards being pure as the driven snow. What gives? Just a devil's advocate thing going on?
Lawlbringer
(550 posts)Or do you mean it in a symbolic sense? Stuff like that fascinates me.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)she posted here under her own name and I believe also at some point under a pseudonym.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)hlthe2b
(102,309 posts)WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)hfojvt
(37,573 posts)she posted here a few times back in 2004 or something. Had maybe 20 posts, or 40 tops. So she wasn't a DUer in the sense that I am a DUer, williampitt is a DUer, H20man is a DUer, or even WaltStarr or HannahBell or NSMA were Duers. How much lurking she did, if she posted here under a pseudonym, it's kinda hard to tell (although I am sure EarlG or homeland security could find out )
It was certainly cool that she was here for a time, but to actially be a DUer (in my eyes) she'd have had to actually stay and be active, and that did not happen.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)to criticize DUers for having low post counts.
x
*sigh*
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)and a DUer with a low post count would be somebody who registered in 2004 and posted a little bit, and then read a lot and then posted again in 2006 ... EE didn't do that. Although, like I said, I have no idea how much she read after she seemingly stopped posting. Maybe she kept reading the greatest threads, and certain journals, etc.
She didn't however, remain an active DUer the way you and I (et. al.) have.
Texasgal
(17,045 posts)I know I lurked for years before I signed up.
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)And not for the better.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)Anyone who's posted here and made an impression big or small is a DUer IMHO.
There are DUers who posted here ten years ago when I joined that I still remember.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)+1
snooper2
(30,151 posts)ROFL, I thought this post would be picture worthy so I googled freeper troll and this is the first image
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Yes.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)some of the notorious disruptors fondly* and I'm sure other DUers do too. And I'll wager beer and travel money on that!
A DUer is a DUer, both the great and not-so-great, both the sublime and the ridiculous.
*ETA: And some of them not-so-fondly, but they're all part of DU's colorful story.
mzmolly
(51,001 posts)to be exact.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)Could that mean I unknowingly argued with her?
hlthe2b
(102,309 posts)It is only for that reason that I wish this would just get resolved quickly and with far less media sensationalism. After Melanie Sloan and CREW came out to denounce what they claim to be overcharging on the finance issues, I had to question a bit as well.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Compared to the mass murder, election stealing, and war crimes committed by some of his contemporaries still running around Scott Free, Edwards is just a Sleezy Li'l Shit. Not worth bending the election laws to prosecute him.
progressoid
(49,992 posts)I met her during the campaign. Such a lovely person.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)She didn't have enough posts to start a new thread, so she posted in an existing one. Skinner quickly fixed that problem.
Very sad. Cancer is tragic enough, even without having to deal with a lying, cheating, dirtbag of a husband.
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)dembotoz
(16,811 posts)and with assholes like paul ryan out there
i wish he was still around
frylock
(34,825 posts)yep. dropped my absentee in the mail the night before he dropped out.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)I didn't. She seemed like a good person when I saw her interviewed on television and I have no reason at all to think she was not all that and more. But I have no idea what her relationship was with her husband. I have no idea what kind of a home life they had or what kind of living arrangements they had. I have no problem at all with you or anyone else making such assumptions and I don't think John Edwards deserves otherwise. I just always refrain from judging anyone else's personal life when I really have no idea about the situation. Bill Clinton cheated on his wife and lied about it. Fuck that guy, too, right?
cali
(114,904 posts)kind of arrangement that enabled him to screw other women with her blessing. But leave that aside. We knew what we were getting with Bill Clinton. Genifer Flowers, anyone? JE pontificated about the sanctity of marriage and opined that that was why he couldn't accept marriage equality. In addition, much as some of us may have despised Clinton's behavior, the repubs trying to impeach him resulted in dem circling of the wagons.
Oh, and Clinton's wife wasn't dying of cancer.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)I'd say that would rank up there with "pontificating" in my book. But that's fine. That seems to be the trouble you get into when you start judging other people. Those you like you have an excuse for, those you don't... well, you don't. And I'm not at all suggesting anyone had "an arrangement", I'm simply saying that I don't claim to know or want to know what is happening in someone else's bedroom. That goes for people I like as well as people I don't.
cali
(114,904 posts)marriage was so holy that he couldn't endorse marriage equality.
And guess what? We ALL (yes I mean you) judge other people. All of us.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)I can honestly say that I do not judge situations that I know nothing about. And since I know nothing about what goes on in the houses of people I have never met, I simply don't judge personal behavior regarding who cheated on whom or who was at fault in a divorce or anything like that. I wasn't in the bedroom with them. I have no idea who the "good guy" is. A woman runs off and leaves her husband and kids. I could say "what an asshole", but maybe her husband has berated her daily for the last 20 years. Maybe I should applaud her for leaving. My position is, I don't have any idea what goes on in someone else's house, so I choose not to form an opinion. Now if there are facts involved, like domestic violence or some other criminal act or a public statement that is clearly a lie, then, yes, I will judge that behavior. Things I know I can judge. I'm not pulling a Jesus here. I'm not telling you or anyone else not to judge John Edwards for his sex life. It's a free country, sort of. I just pointed out why I don't.
Horse with no Name
(33,956 posts)Did you send me a tweet yesterday?
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)I hope you didn't click the link that came with the tweet.
Horse with no Name
(33,956 posts)This is the message that came from your account:
Hello someone is making nasty things about you
Then I clicked it and got this:
URL Terminated
The TinyURL (c5x6zfe) you visited was used by its creator in violation of our terms of use. TinyURL has a strict no abuse policy and we apologize for the intrusion this user has caused you. Such violations of our terms of use include:
Spam - Unsolicited Bulk E-mail
Fraud or Money Making scams
Malware
or any other use that is illegal.
If you received spam, please note that TinyURL did not send this spam and we do not operate any email lists. We can not remove you from spammer's database as we have no association with spammers, but instead we recommend you use spam filtering software.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)...was the title of the heack-sent message. It came with a bit.url link that, if clicked, fucks your Twitter account like mine was fucked.
People need better hobbies.
Horse with no Name
(33,956 posts)Although I had to say I was a little flattered you tweeted me...until I realized you had no way in hell to know it was me!
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)and if you are serious about saving him, you are going to need my help ..." Trinity
Much as I love EE (I still have a three inch button that says "Elizabeth Edwards for first lady" I think she meant far more to John than she does to me. And that he wishes she was still alive. If she was still alive, I don't think she would be saying "fuck that guy". I don't think she showed that kind of acrimony to the man she was with, and presumably loved, for a long time.
cali
(114,904 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Unfortunately, there wasn't time to see if they could "work things out".
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Neither is John, but based upon what I've read, she wasn't a person who people here should emulate.
tkmorris
(11,138 posts)Care to share what makes you say that?
closeupready
(29,503 posts)during the campaign, she blurted during a conference call, "If we (meaning she and John) don't get health care, nobody does." (Paraphrasing.)
There are other examples.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Provide, please. Your first one was gibberish.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)They did a story about her and her nastiness in 2008, I believe.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)??
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)See post #59
snooper2
(30,151 posts)as Elizabeth Edwards despairingly tears off her shirt in front of her husband and his campaign staffers. Yick. (You can read the excerpt in Heliemans native publication.) But the rubbernecking impulse is nearly irresistible, from one campaign tableau to the next.Even though we already sort of know the Clintons sling grenades tucked neatly inside their campaign mud, its fascinating to get inside Bills head during his rough, Nixonian ("I am not a racist." treatment of Obama. Exactly who made Hillary, woman and candidate of steel, cry that morning at the diner? The lead-up to the Clintons' end-game endorsement of Obama is captivating, because so many people think it won't happen, party bonds being as delicate as pride.
The biggest hook in Game Change goes right back to the absolutely bizarre story of the EdwardsesJohns vanity and self-obsession (and simultaneous lack of self-awareness); Elizabeths incredibly, suddenly fraught life; Rielle Hunters utter whackjob-ness; and how things spun out of control for all of them. Most readers will just shake their heads in disbelief that a groupie managed to infiltrate the ranks of what was briefly a well-oiled campaign machine. What seems unfair is the unsympathetic insider characterization of Elizabeth Edwards as an abusive, intrusive, paranoid, condescending crazywoman. A cancer-stricken wife whose megalomaniacal husband embarks on an affair with a sycophantic nut seems warranted in her bitchery.
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/01/game-change-the-book-about-the-raciest-race-ever
http://www.datalounge.com/cgi-bin/iowa/ajax.html?t=9922158#page:showThread,9922158,2
With her husband, she could be intensely affectionate or brutally dismissive. At times subtly, at times blatantly, she was forever letting John know that she regarded him as her intellectual inferior. She called her spouse a hick in front of other people and derided his parents as rednecks. One time, when a friend asked if John had read a certain book, Elizabeth burst out laughing. Oh, he doesnt read books, she said. Im the one who reads books.
During the 2004 race, Elizabeth badgered and berated Johns advisers around the clock. She called Nick Baldick, his campaign manager, an idiot. She accused David Axelrod, his (and later Obamas) media consultant, of lying to her and insisted that he be stripped of the responsibility for making the campaigns TV ads. She would stay up late scouring the Web, pulling down negative stories and blog items about her husband, forwarding them with vicious messages to the communications team. She routinely unleashed profanity-laced tirades on conference calls. Why the fuck do you think Id want to go sit outside a Wal-Mart and hand out leaflets? she snarled at the schedulers.
Elizabeths illness seemed at first to mellow her in the early months of 2005but not for long. One day, she was on a conference call with the staffers of One America, the political-action committee that was being turned into a vehicle for Johns 2008 bid. There were 40 or 50 people on the line, mostly kids in their twenties being paid next to nothing (and in some cases literally nothing). Elizabeth had been cranky throughout the call, but at the end she asked if her and her husbands personal health-care coverage had been arranged. Not yet, she was told. There are complications; lets discuss it after the call. Elizabeth was having none of that. She flew into a rage.
If this isnt dealt with by tomorrow, everyones health care at the PAC will be cut off until its fixed, she barked. I dont care if nobody has health care until John and I do!
Couple quick google searches, I guess it all came from that "Game Change" book and also some Vanity Fair pieces
lpbk2713
(42,762 posts)Too bad she got hooked up with wutsizname.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)pecwae
(8,021 posts)Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)making novel interpretations of the law:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1225203
Rex
(65,616 posts)I have no sympathy for her Ex.
mahina
(17,680 posts)What a worm.
Aloha Elizabeth, wherever you are.
hlthe2b
(102,309 posts)ElizabethEdwards Donating Member (29 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov-05-04 08:32 AM
From Elizabeth Edwards
Since I cannot start a thread (which I think is a good rule by the way), I have to hijack one -- at least briefly. I do want this thread to continue on, though, because the topic is so important. (Moderators can feel free to move this, of course.)
But I also had something I wanted to say to all of you. You know that I read DU and have for quite some time, long before any of you knew my name. I really appreciate the support you have given me on this latest hurdle and before. It means a lot to me and to John.
Now that I have more time, I will post some, too. But today I want to share something inspiring, part of a letter from Thomas Jefferson. This is from the new Bernstein biography of Jefferson. Jefferson sent the letter in 1798 after the passage of the Sedition Act:
"A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public debt. If the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake."
RIP, Elizabeth. You are missed.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Thanks.
mulsh
(2,959 posts)I ask because I've been related to at least four couples where one of them has eventually died from cancer. I was privy to lots of details only those closest to people in that situation can know. Not everything, of course, but enough to have seen at least one person carry on an affair with the other person's "blessing". (one of my set of grandparents)
As far as the Edwards go I have no idea what they discussed or agreed to or how any one in that family dealt with Mrs. Edwards conditions. I know a little of what those involved have made public. That's why I'm not passing any judgement on John Edwards or Elisabeth Edwards.
And yes, I not only remember Elizabeth Edwards was a DUer I enjoyed and miss her posts.
cali
(114,904 posts)she discussed the affair on TV appearances, for one thing.
mulsh
(2,959 posts)I read a couple of other articles but this coming straight from Mrs. Edwards.
I avoided reading about this matter at the time. I haven't read anything much from John or Elizabeth on this matter. I don't care much about what goes on in other folks marriages. Even politicians who's views I agree with.
I'm married, I don't cheat on my wife. When I had girl friends I didn't cheat on them. Those are my choices. I don't admire people who are in any committed relationship who cheat but that's their choice. P
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)gives me pause.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Care to elaborate?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)just coming from *some* democrats.
no speculation intended on possible motivations or affiliations. i haven't looked into it. but the (what i consider to be out of proportion) continuing wrath makes me interested.
cali
(114,904 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)inna
(8,809 posts)inna
(8,809 posts)nt.
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)I've encountered some great people here at DU. And I've also met with a few that remind me distinctly of Bush's "backwash".
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Not a question. A statement.
Feel free to elaborate if you can.
BlueIris
(29,135 posts)but bashing him is beneath me.