Sunday, August 3, 2008

John Edwards scandal

Gossip blog mogul Ken Layne:
The story has everything a cable-news producer or magazine editor or soap-opera writer could ask for: adultery, political power, a monstrous mansion, betrayal, cash transfers, terrible lies, vanishing evidence, a fall guy, a saintly wife dying of cancer, a late-night hotel rendezvous in Beverly Hills, even a "love child." And it's perfect for the middle of summer, when there's very little real news because the newsmakers are all on vacation. But nobody wants to touch it . . .
Hmmm. Why not?
The Democratic convention is a month away, and while he wasn't anybody's top choice for Obama's running mate, Edwards was expected to give a prime-time speech at the Denver rally.
Bingo. This scandal kind of makes it hard for Edwards to give a convention speech talking about women and children and families, eh? Here's Johnny, with the unconvincing non-denial:

3 comments:

  1. Isn't it great when the tabloids scoop the "real" media? The NYT will print only what suits its agenda. The National Enquirer will print anything that sells.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rielle Hunter of the John Edwards story: The $9,644 judgment and her ex who
    is also an attorney

    http://webofdeception.com/#riellehunter

    ReplyDelete
  3. When we posted this story in Dec. 2007 (and we certainly weren’t the only blog to do so) the article was hit about 6,000 times, leading me to believe that it was absolutely newsworthy with or without Edward’s admission. After all - all the same elements are there. Not much has changed in a half a year.

    The fly in the ointment here though is that is shows pretty plainly how bent the media is. Oh yeah, I know, they’ll cover liberal goofs when they absolutely have to. The cable news networks are forcing them to cover all sorts of things they didn’t want to cover before....

    However the newspapers - like the NY Times will splash an unproven story about an alleged McCain affair all over the front page, while the Edwards story (which has had sources, photos and the woman’s own allegations) was flatly ignored.

    Now the liberal press proports “he’s not running for anything, why does it matter?”

    Well, the story happened when he was running for something - he then was a viable VP candidate and lastly, yes, he is STILL in active in the political process, stumping for Obama (until now anyway).

    To say it’s not a legitimate, serious story is pure nonsense - and since I seriously doubt Edwards is coming clean about the child being his, it will continue to be a story.

    The aggravating thing to me is the simple fact that if one of our soliders messes up on the battlefield, fighting for their lives... the media will run with that story for years and years. Type GITMO into a Google search and major media links appear by the hundreds and probably thousands.

    Let one of their own mess up, lie about it, cover it up.... and it’s page 18 news at the very most.

    Danny Vice
    http://www.theweeklyvice.com

    ReplyDelete