I think we are close to proving the National Enquirer's conservative bias with their publication of this accusation against John Edwards. If you look closely at their headlines, more aliens have been held at Area 51 under Democratic presidents than Republican ones.

I strongly believe the story. Edwards has no business speaking in primetime in Denver.

I believe it too. Stories like these are rarely completely baseless, even if exaggerated. I imagine if it were a completely false story, we would have heard more from him about it by now.

He certainly was ballsy running for pres. knowing this story was out there. Could you imagine if he were the nominee?

Interesting, though, how the MSM has been completely silent about it.

I have no doubt the story is true. If it were not, Edwards could come out and issue a full-throated denial with Elizabeth at his side and then agree to a DNA test. But he won't, because it's almost surely true.

To think this guy could have won the nomination (if he had won in Iowa, which he came close to doing, it might have been possible) and then hand the election to McCain because of this! Unbelievable.

Let's hope he stays 1000 miles away from Denver.

Wait-  We're talking about the story that he is having Barack Obama's gay love child, right?   I knew he was starting to show!

I still believe that there's gotta be some truth to the story, but I did check out the "photos." That baby does not look like a newborn, plus that's not how one would hold a newborn.

What rozenson said. But it gets a bit more complicated.

According to my analysis, >70% of the aliens held at Area 51 favor offshore drilling, think the Surge is a complete success, and aren't comfortable working with computers.

At the time of each of the last three alien sightings, in fact, Dick Cheney has disappeared for a few days. Coincidence?

However, the story currently making the rounds that Edwards arranged to have his young accuser involuntarily hose an alien facehugger's spawn and that she's about to have a C-section from the inside out is almost certainly not true.

Sad.

If this is really true, it's profoundly dissappointing.  They seem truly in love and committed to each other.  I feel horrible for Elizabeth and their children for having to deal with this, regardless of its ultimate truth.

I'm not afraid or ashamed to post a link to the National Enquirer, they certainly have more credibility than Fox news/propaganda, and as the record will attest, have broken more stories than Fox as well.

THE PHOTOS EVERYONE'S BEEN WAITING FOR!

www.nationalenquirer.com/.../65258

And scire, this little girl would be six month old, not a newborn.

Many on the hyper-left, or those who pretend to be leftist, have been pushing John Edwards for VP, I wonder if they will continue this tactic.  If so then I submit that they are working against Obama and the Democrats.  Maybe they're not real leftists at all, but just corporate shills, or easily manipulated fools, who are actually working to promote corporate America's agenda, which at this point is to put John McCain in the White House, after their girl Hillary and her third-rate team couldn't get the job done and got their asses handed to them on a platter.

Just imagine what the Republicans would do with this if Edwards had been the Democratic nominee, or if Obama had chosen him for his vice president. We would be the ones about to get trounced in a landslide in November, or at the very least likely to lose by a slim margin, instead of that senile dribbling old codger, John McCain.

Of course Edwards can clear this up today, all he has to do is take a paternity/DNA test, and the story dies a fast death tomorrow if he's not the father.  So how about it John, why don't you shut them all up?

aaronbrown: I know she'd be six months old now, but isn't the picture supposed to be from the hospital? After all, the person's in scrubs.

Sobering. Yes, I admit, we could have done _much_ worse than our current nominee.

fwiw it didn't take long for me to conclude Edwards was a turkey when I met him at a private fund-raiser last fall. Dodged a bullet on _that_ one, didn't we?

Aaron, you're a photographer, no? Curious to hear your thoughts on Enquirer's record re authenticity of photos, how it relates to this one, maybe also why they've been hoarding their photo stash on this story. thanks, t

scire

According to the article, it's from the hotel room that he recently visited, though I don't think it's above the people who work for the Inquirer to Photoshop and fabricate a picture, but I don't think they would be hitting the story this hard if the editorial staff wasn't convinced that Edwards at least might have fathered this child.

teplukhin2you

I'm no professional photographer, I just know how to use a camera. And I nor anyone else can really do any kind of in-depth evaluation of photos authenticity without the high resolution originals, which I don't think we are likely to get anytime soon. The pictures could certainly be faked, but that doesn't mean Edwards isn't the father.

Well, this all explains why the Secret Service's code name for Edwards was "Eagleton."

Also shows what BS the whole "vetted" argument is on behalf of any candidate. If John Edwards can have this still lurking out there _after_ two presidential primary campaigns and one general-election campaign for VP, then it's just meaningless to say that any candidate is more or less "vetted" than any other on the basis of the quantity of previous press attention.

Otherwise, what tep said. Guy needs to watch the Democratic Convention at home.

Hey John, if you are going to cheat on your terminally ill wife and run for President the least you can do is get a vasectomy. Hell, most men should get them once they hit their mid-forties anyway. At least Bill Clinton had the good sense not to knock up Chelsea Lewinsky. That would have been a real mess. On the other hand, if he did he probably would have been impeached and Al Gore would be President now.

Now I'll have to consult my Talmud to find the ethical distinction between linking and simply informing the reader of the name of the website.  Or maybe it's Maimonides who said something about it...

Actually, Rhube, as much as people here may hate to hear it, Mickey Kaus already "vetted" Edwards and found this story, what, half a year ago?

Obviously, the media are spiking it, but it's been tubing along the innernets now for many months. The problem is blinders, not visibility.

Chelsea? You surprise me, Blackie.

tep, Mickey Kaus is possibly the least factually reliable person on the Internet writing under his own name. Mickey Kaus "vets" lots of Democrats and always finds a ton of reasons not to vote for them, and most of the time it's not true.

But even granting Kaus as someone anyone should pay attention to, you make my point: This was a relatively easy story for any reporter to break. Edwards is a public figure with a high profile; just follow him. The fact that few reporters outside NatEnq are willing to do the legwork to catch politicians doing their most embarrassing things -- whether it's fathering a child with a mistress, or molesting boys, or having gay sex in airports -- proves that the idea that a candidate is more or less "vetted" because of previous media attention is bogus.

OK, I see your point. I confess the vetting process is a black box to me. I don't know how they could have failed to see this one, hidden in plain sight, but hey, que scais-je?

First, Edwards was never going to be the VP nominee -- only an idiot would've put him on the ticket being that he co-lost the '04 election. Second, even though I voted for Edwards in the primary, if he's guilty of this, then he's a grade-A scumbag. Third, Republicans will lambaste Edwards over this yet still turn a willing blind eye to Bush & Co. lying this country into Iraq.

Bash Kaus all you like but it's pretty disturbing that he alone is analyzing this story and, again, all alone, is giving the public a window into the deliberations and thought process of the media regarding their spiking of one of the most explosive stories of the campaign. If Kaus had not tirelessly raised this, it's entirely possible that the story could have hit during the convention, before or after a speech by hte man who would have been Attorney General. Or even VP. Give Kaus his due on this.

chelsea? shit, I meant Monica. slip of the keyboard, I did put Lewinsky

regarding journalists not seeing stories under their noses, what about the ten years and $80,000 in prostitutes by Eliot Spitzer? Why'd it take that long for him to get caught when he was spending such large sums -- you'd think somebody would have come forward sooner.

It's a wonder that these stories don't get caught sooner and more often by the press. I dated a political consultant for awhile, and one of the main perceptions I came away with re: politicians (and their henchmen) --  is that illicit sex of one sort or another is very very common among them, and if it involves a sexy young beautiful woman, it may even be flaunted as proof of alpha maleness.  I think that many people who go into politics are risk-taking sorts to begin with (you gotta be to be willing to put up with the constant possibility of public humiliation and the lack of job security). Some of them become risk junkies.

So it's no surprise Edwards didn't use birth control or get a vasectomy (same goes for that Republican Staten Island politician), nor is it a surprise Spitzer didn't make more effort to hide his expenditures  -- committing the sin wouldn't possess the same thrill if the risk were calculatedly minimized.

(Boy will I regret this pop- psychoanalysis if Edwards is innocent.)

I've always thought Edwards was kind of icky, that big newscaster smile, the too-tight jeans.  Jimmy Carter-lite.  And man, that's saying sthg.  Oh John.  If only you'd learned to lust.  In your heart...

scire, cheating on your terminally ill wife while running for President isn't enough? And what is the deal with her? She never heard of an IUD or pill?

I hope he isn't guilty because it would really cram it down Kaus's pie hole. He has been beating this for too long, Edwards has been nowhere for a long time and presumably Obama knows of the Nat. Enq. so Kaus is just being a bit of a dick.

And the notion that no one is aware of what the Nat. Enq. is kind of silly. Most normal people (the ones who shop in grocery stores) are far more likely to know about Edwards from that than reading any trolling by Kaus.

of course it's horrible if true, blackton. All I'm cynically saying is this stuff doesn't surprise me. 'Cause a lot of those guys have it in them to be this sleazy.

And my mother always said she had this feeling he was really shitty to his wife. She couldn't quite put her finger on where she got this impression from, but , , ,

scire - Edwards isn't so much a risk-taker as a serial fabulist. I think the risk-takers tend to be outsized personalities who dominate a room, alpha male types. Edwards is just a weenie who's perfected the art of telling tall tales.  

I can agree with that tep. But all cheaters are consummate liars, whether they're risk takers or not.

Not that I'd ever defend Edwards, since he's a wealthy trial lawyer and should be able to defend himself if it were to come to that.  But I personally couldn't care less what he does in his personal life as long as the opponent is George Bush, Jon McCain, George Allen, or whatever bought and paid for stooge the GOP shoves in my face.  How many here honestly thought there wasn't a grain of truth to the many allegations of womanizing and harrassment during Clinton's run in '92?  It wasn't near an issue for me then and it wasn't an issue for a clear majority of Americans during Clinton's two terms of relative prosperity who clearly indicated thru polling that Republicans went way too far trying to force Clinton out of office over a blow-job.  

For all anybody here knows about it, Edwards' wife might have known about it the whole time and never had a problem with it.  If it's not a problem with them, why should it be a problem for anybody else?  I don't know how many folks here have ever been in their Rep's or Senator's offices in D.C., but if your all deeming Edwards as unworthy over something that the NE of all rags is pushing, then you need to write off over 90% of the other politicians including those that try for The White House.  Disregarding FISA laws is insulting.  Attempting to rig elections with easily hacked electronic voting machines pisses me off.  Looting the treasury is something to rip a guy for.  Edwards possibly having a relationship with someone besides Elizabeth?  Ask yourself if you would have rather had Thomas Dewey or Herbert Hoover over FDR during WWII or the depression or perhaps Nixon over Kennedy while the Cuban Missile Crisis was going on.  

Sorry, but if the alternative is the Republicans, I could care less if Edwards got the freak on with Linsay Lohan and Britney at the same time and posted it on YouTube for good measure.  It's pretty much historical fact that even some of the most effective leaders wanted or needed to get laid.  The guy wasn't running for Sainthood or even the Pope.  Come to think of it, he wouldn't want to, or he'd probably been chasing Catholic grade school boys.  Of course, maybe the NE is saving that one for if Edwards is at the convention.  Let it go people.  There's way worse being done everyday by politicians than what Edwards did-if in fact he even did anything to begin with.

I agree -- I find the casual use of "cheating" by a lot of posters a bit odd, as it assumes that what he did (if he did anything) had to be covert and kept secret from his wife.  That's not always the case, in these things.

My overriding feeling is that this is not our business, especially now that he's out of the race. Is it our business because he might speak at the convention? Like it's going to lose the election for Obama? Please. I refuse to care and you can't make me. If they raised JFK from the dead, would you let him speak at the convention? He was worse than anyone, apparently. I don't like cheating, but I refuse to care about this like it's an impeachable offense. It's not. Perjury maybe, but not activity between consenting adults.

I am amazed that anyone would take the National Enquirer seriously, and I am dismayed that people I respect would so easily accept such charges.  The reason these allegations appear only in crap publications like The NY Post and The National Enquirer is not because the rest of the media are wearing blinders - it is simply irresponsible to trade in ugly rumors and to participate in character assassination.  

I don't believe these allegations against Edwards.

Neil

I knew a Chelsea Edwards in high school...she...and my friends said...love child...more than one, including an alien-abducted psycho-paranormalist, if that's possible...