Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

John Edwards a Lot Short of 99%

As my kids would say -- and they are my kids -- du-uh! Did anyone think that Rielle Hunter's baby -- or "it," as Elizabeth Edwards refers to the child -- was not fathered by John Edwards? The National Enquirer reports that DNA evidence confirms what was rather obvious all along: Edwards is the father. "Being 99 percent honest is no longer enough," Edwards pronounced after the story broke a year ago. If the Enquirer's right (and Howie Kurtz says he wouldn't bet against it), looks like Edwards wasn't anywhere in the neighborhood.

By Ruth Marcus  | August 14, 2009; 1:23 PM ET
Categories:  Marcus  | Tags:  Ruth Marcus  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Right-Handed and Proud
Next: I Was Wrong! Probably!

Comments


Huh?? Is there supposed to be more of this? Or is this a buyout column?

Posted by: waterfrontproperty | August 14, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Thank God or to stay P C goodness for the Enquirer!

Posted by: adamnescot1 | August 14, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

I ignored his pretty boy looks because I thought his economic populism(not the race baiting right wing kind) was just what the country needed-boy was I wrong-I should have followed my first impression.

Posted by: george22_1999 | August 14, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Once again, Anne Coulter and Sean Hannity were right on target. They had him pegged from the beginning.

When will the libs stop living in fantasyland?

Posted by: SteveTomson | August 14, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Gee, anyone surprised by this?

It's breathtaking to think of Edwards' egotism, selfishness, etc., that he could still run for the Democratic nomination during 2007-2008 after this happened. If he'd become the nominee and this news came out during the general campaign, McCain/Palin would have won. He was willing to risk everything he claimed to believe in, all for his personal ambition.

Also, if his timeline on when he told his family is to be believed, his children got to watch Daddy AND Mommy lie about this for over a year. What an inspiring example for those children, and what role models for all parents.

Posted by: bpai_99 | August 14, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

John Edwards, and the popularity he engendered among millions of Democrats who voted for him in the primaries, hanging on every one of his "Two Americas" speeches like celebrity crazed teenagers once again validates PT Barnum.

From my perspective, those same idiots went on to worship the current occupant for many of the same reasons --- infatuation with a slickster.

When this great American experiment in socialism is finally put to rest, we'll need to erect a statue to PT on the Mall.

Posted by: Curmudgeon10 | August 14, 2009 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I still would like to know why the question of who Edwards boinks is any business of ours? It was and remains none of our business.

Just because a person has blue you-know-whats doesn't mean he can't be an excellent President, vice president or atty general. In Europe such a dalliance would have been ignored for the political and intellectual gifts, and yes, the public morals Edwards brought to the table. But here he gets crucified by the opposing party confessing the name of Jesus even as the accusers pursue their own affairs with men, women and police officers in the next airport stall. What hypocrisy.

Similar private failings beset a large number of past leaders that we revere today: Bobby and Jack Kennedy, Ike, FDR, just to name a few. Contributions such people made to past generations are lost to this one due to the busybodies who can't tell public from private.

Posted by: mccheese0 | August 14, 2009 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Ruth Marcus is an anti-feminist who degraded both female cadidates in the last Presidential election - particularly blasting working mothers.

She is a sympathetic supporter of all the Misters and a damning enemy of all the others. Ugh - make her just go away.

Posted by: mgd1 | August 14, 2009 6:55 PM | Report abuse

zzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted by: itsagreatday1 | August 14, 2009 7:00 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was narcissistic and uncompassionate when he said that even though his wife had stage 4 breast carcinoma that he was still running for president.

Posted by: SanFranDoc | August 14, 2009 7:06 PM | Report abuse

I find it so very hypocritical of the main stream media over their total failure to investigate this story from the beginning. This guy ran TWO TIMES for national office!! But, there was no stomach to go after a fellow liberal....so, the likes of a tabloid had to lead the MSM by the nose, and pull them with a logging chain just to get any ink on the paper!

Conversely, each time Sarah Palin walked out of her house, the MSM was there to criticize her for taking the first step with her left foot ... or the following day, taking the first step with her right foot!!

I do hope the MSM and publishers see the reason they are losing subscribers; advertisers; and readers! To this day, the MSM continues to look for reasons not to exclaim why John Edwards is not a lying reprobate! (Know that ABC now feels like they have been had -- and why should we believe them now??????)

Posted by: wheeljc | August 14, 2009 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Shame on all of you who failed to see in an instant that Edwards was a self-serving sociopath. The bogus poverty rhetoric was so transparent it made me retch to see him nominated as VP and come within 70,000 votes in Ohio to the White House. He should be breaking rocks in prison soon.

Posted by: dan1138 | August 14, 2009 11:37 PM | Report abuse

Oops... wasn't there supposed to be a "Bombshell" announcement by now? This may come as a surprise to Ms. Marcus, but the National Enquirer doesn't always print the truth.

Posted by: genegenie | August 15, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

[[John Edwards, and the popularity he engendered among millions of Democrats who voted for him in the primaries, hanging on every one of his "Two Americas" speeches like celebrity crazed teenagers once again validates PT Barnum.

From my perspective, those same idiots went on to worship the current occupant for many of the same reasons --- infatuation with a slickster.]]
++++++++++
I suported Edwards not becasue of his looks, but becasue I liked his populist message. We had had too many years of an administration that couldn't geve two cents about the poor and the middle class. I voted for Obama, not because I am an infaturated "idiot," but Republicans in the WH mucked things up so badly and Sarah Palin is bat sh** crazy.

Posted by: creatia52 | August 15, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

That interpretation of Ruth Marcus was curious. I think just the opposite would be more true. Ann Bier

Posted by: jimsbier | August 15, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

On the "Creepy" meter, Edwards is right up there with Palin. Thank God neither of them is as near the presidency as they could have been. In each case, it was a bullet that missed us.

Posted by: klakey1 | August 15, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

"On the "Creepy" meter, Edwards is right up there with Palin. Thank God neither of them is as near the presidency as they could have been. In each case, it was a bullet that missed us."
+++++++
Oh, I agree. Edwards is a huge disappointment and many of us who thought him a decent guy not only for his message, but for the loving way he seem to treat his wife, feel terribly hoodwinked. If he had been nominated, and he never came close, McCain and Palin would be in the WH, now. But he hasn't held elected office for 5 years, now, so it really isn't a constituent problem what to do with him like Ensign or Sanford.

Posted by: creatia52 | August 15, 2009 6:23 PM | Report abuse

this reminds me of another promising former politician - d.g. martin...lies, lies, lies. i'm so disappointed.

Posted by: d_lawing | August 16, 2009 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, at least he didnt bang his mistress on Father's Day, on the appalachian trail....

Posted by: kreator6996 | August 17, 2009 12:52 AM | Report abuse

Having said that, as an Obama supporter...I never liked Edwards, and cant imagine why anyone would. He always reeked of "weasel",kinda like Mitt Romney

Posted by: kreator6996 | August 17, 2009 12:53 AM | Report abuse

I second zzzzzzzzzzzz's assessment and raise it a "So what?"

Posted by: daphne5 | August 17, 2009 2:28 AM | Report abuse

...so, does this mean Edwards' next run for office will be as a Republican..?

Posted by: wthu | August 17, 2009 3:22 AM | Report abuse

kreator6996 -

How can you compare Mitt Romney to John Edwards? Good Lord, you have Romney, a respected former Govenor, entrepreneur and Olympic organizer (and a squeaky clean Mormon) vs a self promoting greedy lawyer who made his money on the backs of Doctors and Nursing homes (you know, scraping off 40% from his poor, wronged clients), an admitted lier and cheat.

They do both have nice hair though.

Posted by: steveroake | August 17, 2009 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Is this the ENTIRE column??
I know newspapers are cutting back, but....

Posted by: angie12106 | August 17, 2009 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Edwards, the Democrats, and the media pimps were all exposed by the forensics.

Posted by: ekim53 | August 17, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

kreator6996 -

How can you compare Mitt Romney to John Edwards? Good Lord, you have Romney, a respected former Govenor, entrepreneur and Olympic organizer (and a squeaky clean Mormon) vs a self promoting greedy lawyer who made his money on the backs of Doctors and Nursing homes (you know, scraping off 40% from his poor, wronged clients), an admitted lier and cheat.

They do both have nice hair though.

Posted by: steveroake
***************************************

That's a fair question, steveroake...
All I can say is I had the same gut reaction to both...Romeny comes across as a greasy,fake plastic businessman...

Edwards came across as a greasy, fake, plastic lawyer..

Just one of those things, I wouldnt buy a thing from either of them

Posted by: kreator6996 | August 17, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

This notion that somehow a person's personal conduct isn't relevant to their potential as a steward of public power is ludicrous.

Who's "boinking" who and how they go about it is an important indicator to the character of the person involved and the REAL value they place on other people. If someone's own spouse can't trust them, how can I trust them with the launch codes? Give me a break.

In Edward's case, its even more important because he had various staff toadies covering up for him, slush-funds from trial lawyer buddies (all the rats jumped Edwards ship to the grand jury when the bagman himself died of cancer last year), and the like. Can you imagine how many of these miserable people he would've brought with him into public office? Can you imagine a sleazeball like Andrew Young wielding behind-the-scenes power at DOJ with Edwards as AG? This stuff matters, and it is my business for people who seek public office, and the resulting power over me it affords.

Although I voted for B.O., I have become disillusioned with his presidency. But he's a stand-up guy, a guy who is not a sleazeball who screws his own wife and kids over. For White House material, I think that's a prerequisite for any credible candidate.

Posted by: HAL-9000 | August 17, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

What's the purpose of this column - to say all politicians are scumbags so don't vote?

Yes they are scumbags but you still need to vote or we end up like Venzuela or some other banana republic.

Posted by: agapn9 | August 19, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

99% honest? Unfortunately, 99% of the things he's honest about are only important 1% of the time. His commitment to his wife and family was in the 1% dishonest category it seems.

Posted by: Cleareye | August 19, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

The Washington Post has sunk to the level of quoting the National Enquirer now?

Posted by: Cleareye | August 19, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company