John Edwards admits the obvious:
For the first time, John Edwards is publicly admitting that he is indeed the father of a 2-year-old daughter conceived with Rielle Hunter, a campaign videographer with whom he had an affair.
The Captain cuts loose:
Well, there are two Americas. There is the one where people acknowledge the obvious immediately, and there is the other where they hire lawyers and lie like crazy about the obvious. In that sense, Edwards became a bridge between the two today.
Taylor Marsh was a Hillary-ite who was blasted by her fellow lefties for bashing Edwards. Today Ms. Marsh is so excited she has abandoned the use of the English language:
The Edwards story a part of why the book “Game Change,” by Halperin and Heileman, who got on background material because people close to campaigns, politicians, but those who know dirt, want to work again in politics, did so through sourcing now being scrutinized and questioned by many. As they talked to people with stories to tell about what the politicians are really like when the gloss is off, but did so providing cover so the people could tell their tales. A lot of criticism being laid at their feet about sourcing, even if, so far, the players in the book who are being portrayed aren’t coming out saying the two reporters are lying. Elizabeth Edwards’s friends even saying it’s all true, same with Harry Reid, while others portrayed are simply staying mum, including the entire hierarchy of the Democratic Party.
Say what? That almost makes me wish the Dems could pass health reform just so we could read her coverage of that.
Well - Edwards was the 2004 version of the good looking, well spoken visionary with no discernible resume and a desire to be President. I imagine there is a general consensus that he would have been a disaster.
Obama was the 2008 version of that candidate. Sadly, Paul Krugman has announced that we aren't the ones we were waiting for. Or something. (Krugman was a Hillary supporter, so the idea that he is now wishing he had backed McCain is far-fetched, but he is clearly not happy with The One.)
Now far be it from me to suggest that from this it follows that the Brown 2012 bandwagon ought to slow down a bit, but I will say that it argues for maybe just a bit more skepticism out there amongst the voting public. Maybe candidates with a track record and a resume are worth keeping around.
WELL, YES: At various points I have articulated the notion that nominating an unknown is a structural requirement of the Dem Party; on that side of the aisle a candidate with a history is a candidate with a history of popping the balloon of one liberal fantasist or another (Kerry managed to sidestep that by spending eighteen years in the Senate doing nothing.) But a blank slate like Barack will always be appealing to Dems.
And for Republicans? Pro-lifers fear the flippers and the Souters. Stealth is out. (And Brown ought to be, by that criteria.)
Matt Yglesias pointed to a similar conclusion from a different direction when contemplating the small number of self-identified liberals versus the large number of self-identified conservatives.
In particular, it tells us that a lot of people look at themselves as conservatives. So a president who says “I look at myself as a conservative, and you should look at me that way too” will still need to do some outreach to build a majority, but he’s working from a strong base. By contrast, a president who says “I look at myself as a liberal, and you should look at me that way too” is going to put himself in some pretty serious trouble.
Consequently, neither Barack Obama nor Bill Clinton nor Jimmy Carter nor LBJ self-identified in this way.
That game is harder to play for a Democratic candidate with a record.
So! Krugman is a racist!
Posted by: peter | January 21, 2010 at 02:09 PM
Are y ou listening to Matt Yglesias who just days ago confidently predicted a Coakley win, TM? LOL
2012 is long way off..and we'll have o see what's up, but I do think it obvious that more voters identify with Palin and Bown than they do with Obama at the moment.
Posted by: clarice | January 21, 2010 at 02:12 PM
For the first time, John Edwards is publicly admitting that he is indeed the father of a 2-year-old daughter conceived with Rielle Hunter, a campaign videographer with whom he had an affair.
One can hardly blame Mr. Edwards for falling in love with someone taking video of him. I'm serious. Have you seen his hair?
Posted by: Terry Gain | January 21, 2010 at 02:17 PM
More identify with Palin and Bown than Obama and Bowing.
Posted by: Terry Gain | January 21, 2010 at 02:19 PM
I look at myself as a libertarian liberal.
Posted by: sbw | January 21, 2010 at 02:44 PM
Per clarice, I assume TM keeps quoting and linking Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein for comedic purposes because any non-troll commenter here has more insight than those two idiots.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 21, 2010 at 02:50 PM
So I was in the car this morning listening to our local radio station. The ABC syndicated news-on-the-hour came on, where the newsreader related John Edward's "shocking announcement." Yes, "shocking". I thought to myself, "You're only surprised if you work for ABC news!"
And the next thing I thought was, "Oh, they are talking about another baby, right? Because everyone know about this one 2 years ago?"
Posted by: cathyf | January 21, 2010 at 02:53 PM
CH -
You sound like an educated elitist.
Posted by: Troll Commenter | January 21, 2010 at 02:53 PM
Pretty savvy move by Edwards, establishing paternity well in advance of the date 15 years from now when he'll start hanging around the kid's slumber parties trying to pick up girls.
Posted by: bgates | January 21, 2010 at 02:58 PM
TC - Really? I don't believe that burning fossil fuels is the main driver of climate change so I think that would eliminate me.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 21, 2010 at 03:02 PM
Bah TM, You are so gullible.
I won't believe Edward's is the father until we have some Newsman look at the Birth Certificate.
After all, if there's 1 thing we've learned this last year, it is that Birth Certificates never lie, and that a facsimile of a Birth Certificate supposedly examined by some unknown and nonpartisan reporter is the only way to determine all the incontrovertible facts about a persons birth and parentage.
So until the night janitor at MSNBC looks at a xeroxed photocopy of a facsimile of a downloaded palimpsest of Quinn''s Birth Certificate, I ain't buying it.
Posted by: daddy | January 21, 2010 at 03:11 PM
UNC. Enough said.
Posted by: MarkO | January 21, 2010 at 03:17 PM
Maybe ol' Edwards got all hot-n-bothered because he'd been watching too much tv.
LUN
"As MTV's president Doug Herzog explained it to Strauss: "The line moves every day, so you got to move with it. You can't put the genie back in the bottle.""
Edwards couldn't put his genie back in his bottle.
As a mother of two teens I'm getting a little tired of the "just turn it off" argument. It is impossible in the times we live in. What's the C.S.Lewis quote...
"We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and then bid the geldings to be fruitful."
Edwards only read the last two words.
Posted by: Janet | January 21, 2010 at 03:20 PM
So until the night janitor at MSNBC looks at a xeroxed photocopy of a facsimile of a downloaded palimpsest of Quinn''s Birth Certificate, I ain't buying it.
Hahahahaha too funny daddy!
Posted by: Janet | January 21, 2010 at 03:23 PM
Speaking of losers...here is audio of Specter telling Michele Bachmann to act like a lady.
LUN
I think she is great.
Posted by: Janet | January 21, 2010 at 03:37 PM
Did anyone ask the kid if she wanted to be linked for life to this character?
Posted by: George Ditter | January 21, 2010 at 03:58 PM
John Edwards reminds me of part of the lyrics to Book of Love's song, You Look Through Me:
http://www.lyricskid.com/lyrics/book-of-love-lyrics/you-look-through-me-lyrics.html
"... Because I was looking for something
and because you were there
I fooled myself into thinking
in thinking you could care
that's when you looked right through me
and I believed all of your lies
when the only part of me that you could love
was your reflection in my eyes ..."
Posted by: fdcol63 | January 21, 2010 at 05:01 PM
So I guess all that needs to happen now, is John Edwards needs to apologize for denial and slander to:
His Wife
His Mistress
His Child
His Former Aide Andy Young
The National Enquirer
FOX News
Rush Limbaugh
The RNC
The Huffington Post
Anne Coulter
Sean Hannity
Glenn Beck
ABC News
NBC News
CBS News
CNN
MSNBC
Oprah
Rupert Murdoch
Karl Rove
Bill O'Reilly
America
Did I leave anybody out?
Posted by: daddy | January 21, 2010 at 05:19 PM
his hairdresser
Posted by: Doug Edwards | January 21, 2010 at 05:40 PM
UNC. Enough said
LOL. Is it true daddy and he sit at the same table at the alumni dinners?
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 21, 2010 at 05:45 PM
Oooooooo Captn, you are so mean!
Posted by: cathyf | January 21, 2010 at 05:53 PM
"his hairdresser"---Hee hee hee!
CH,
Haven't given the bastards a nickel since I left the dump 33 years ago.
And the only saving grace is that the Duke gang of 88 are even worse.
Posted by: daddy | January 21, 2010 at 06:00 PM
so, whose love child is Obama?
Posted by: matt | January 21, 2010 at 06:11 PM
daddy,
I'm sure whatever share of his ill-gotten loot that Silky donates to Chapel Hole is done for the ability to be in the vicinity of hawt coeds. Btw, is this officially Roy's rebuilding year for banner #3 (which will eclipse Saint Deanie)? The ACC really doesn't have a dominant team this year so I'm thinking my Turtles can maybe finish in the upper echelon.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 21, 2010 at 06:22 PM
Posted this on another thread, but it bears repeating.
There are two reasons why this cretin is neither the Vice President nor the Attorney General of the United States: (1) The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (2004), and (2) The National Enquirer (2008). Ponder that one for a while.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2010 at 06:31 PM
The irony is exquisite. The National Enquirer has submitted its work on the Edwards case for a Pulitzer.....
Posted by: matt | January 21, 2010 at 06:31 PM
And let us celebrate this happy datum:
"Another sign of Republican strength from Rasmussen: Republican Pat Toomey now leads incumbent Senator Arlen Specter (D) 49% to 40% in Pennsylvania’s race for the U.S. Senate. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Pennsylvania voters also finds Toomey with a 43% to 35% lead over [Specter's] Democratic challenger [Rep.] Joe Sestak. In the Democratic primary, Specter has built up a 21-point lead over Sestak."
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2010 at 06:32 PM
John Edwards: "I'm sorry."
Okay, prove it by fading from the public eye, forever, and I'm sure you'll find that most people will be happily content never to hear from you again.
Should you come back into the public eye, you will deserve all the scorn and opprobrium you will get. Go further and drag before us your relationship with your wife (someone undeniably wronged by you, but regardless of that a loathsome creature in her own right), and you deserve undying contempt and disdain.
Now scram.
Posted by: PD | January 21, 2010 at 06:49 PM
Great point DoT.
"The National Enquirer has submitted its work on the Edwards case for a Pulitzer....."
Boy I sure hope they have Matt
Captain Hate,
Honestly, haven't followed the boys much at all this year. From the 2 games I've seen so far we are tall but dreadfully slow, so I'm pretty well convinced we stink this season, and all I can do is hope it's a rebuilding year.
Posted by: daddy | January 21, 2010 at 06:52 PM
It's true about the Enquirer. Let's hear what the Pulitzer people have to say about it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2010 at 07:35 PM
hell - the Enquirer is practically the only American media publication that is willing to say anything negative against the dems, or do some actual "reporting" regardless of party. So, while it will never happen, they most certainly deserve the Pulizter. Would have been nice if they did it during the primaries (Hillary would have bought into that!).
How many stories has the MSM buried? We have yet to know the full extent.
Posted by: Flodigarry | January 21, 2010 at 10:02 PM