Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Here comes the sleeze ... unless it’s true
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, December 19, 2007

It's the National Enquirer for heaven sake, but it is the story which is creating the buzz today in the blogopshere. Here's the link to the story. If you're so inclined check it out.

If you do, however, read Mickey Kaus's take on it as well. He makes an important point about the politics of this and why this is probably not a planted story by the Clinton campaign. When wondering if Clinton operative Ron Burkle is involved, Kaus say:
If it hurt Edwards, the story would potentially devastate Burkle's candidate Hillary, who needs Edwards to beat or dilute Obama in Iowa. That's why it's crazy to suggest that Hillary's camp planted it.
Makes political sense - Obama seems to be the main threat there, not Edwards.

Ed Morrissey says:
The story could be true; the Los Angeles Times supposedly had a scoop on a major candidate involving infidelity that they buried in October. If the sources for that story got frustrated, to whom would they turn? The National Enquirer would make a good option for this kind of tawdry allegation, and the standards of journalism would be sufficiently low to ensure it got published. If the sources were affiliated by powerful friends of the next potential boss, that would definitely make it headline material.
FYI, the story seems to have been pulled from the NE website according to some reports.

Heh ... I think James Joyner best sums up my reaction to it all right now:
As for myself, I’m leaving open the possibility that the story is untrue. It’s probable that Hunter is pregnant but the evidence that Edwards is the father is, as best I can determine, negligible. Sure, the National Enquirer is more believable than the New York Times. But they do get stories wrong every now and again.
Love it.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

Actually, if your plan is to take Obama out, you want to make sure that you are the alternative, not Edwards. So this is not inconsistent with Clinton methods and goals.

At the same time, you don’t want to upstage what you plan to do to Obama. That’s a hit you want to go down like a Jack Tatum tackle. But it makes sense to piss in Edwards soup first.
Written By: Martin McPhillips
The reality or non-reality of the National Enquirer story is definitely eclipsed by the story on the sourcing, whatever that may be.
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
What is interesting though, is that it was immediately assumed to have come from the Campaign Hiliary.
The fact, that this is assumed by so many, shows that the Campaign Hiliary has, rightly or wrongly, damaged itself already.
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
The Clintons wouldn’t leave any traceable fingerprints on this Edwards story.

What I await is the three-eyed Obama love child, rejected and disdained, with perhaps an Asian-American mother who has a glass eye and a prosthetic arm and is on welfare and still smoking crack in the pipe she once shared with Barack.

That will, of course, be coupled with the story that Oprah Winfrey has been through the first round of a sex change, thus killing two birds with one stone.

Actually, I think I’m underestimating how bad the hit on Obama is going to be.

Plus, I don’t think he’s going to be on the list for running mate.
Written By: Martin McPhillips
Oh, don’t worry about the perception that this came from the Clintons. They’ll find a way to make any attack on another candidate an attack on them and find a way to reap a double benefit.

"Here we have a report about Senator Edwards sleeping around and suddenly reporters are saying that’s our fault," either of the Clintons might say. "We deny it’s our fault that Senator Edwards has a love child and we resent this sleazy attack on our campaign. It’s another attempt to smear us, using Senator Edwards’ illigitimate child. How ridiculous is that?"
Written By: Martin McPhillips
And I’m sure there is no truth to the rumor that Bill and Hiliary hung out with Charles Manson during those Berkley days, but don’t remember it because, they, like everyone in their neighborhood, were stoned at least half of the time.
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
You see, the thing about the Clintons is that they made themselves a scandal flood zone, where the waters rose so high that few Americans could take any more of it, such that they now get a pass on everything. Even new news about the Clintons is, by this miracle of positioning, "old news."

Bill can say things that don’t even cause people to raise their eyebrows that if they came from someone else would call for castration that very day on the evening news.

Although I do continue to feel that there is one pure nugget of scandal involving the Clintons, hidden in all the mess, that would instantly do them in.

And I’m not referring to either Bill or Hillary’s homosexuality.
Written By: Martin McPhillips
This isn’t nearly as good as the story about Bill’s love child. That love child was black and the baby-momma was a prostitute.

That’s as good as it gets.
Written By: Pug
URL: http://
The Clintons wouldn’t leave any traceable fingerprints on this Edwards story.
let’s remember that the paper that broke this story is owned by Roger Altman. Take a run over to Wikipedia, and look that name up. At that point, this whole thing will start making a great deal more sense.

Written By: Bithead
Eric writes:
let’s remember that the paper that broke this story is owned by Roger Altman.
Good catch on that one. I’d almost forgotten about Altman buying the Enquirer. I wonder if he bought it with Chinese money.

It’s a perfect set-up for the Clintons, because should someone raise Altman’s ownership of the paper then can do everything from the old pooh-pooh to charging conspiracy theory. Another hidden in plain sight miracle.
Written By: Martin McPhillips
Valery writes:
I think I’m underestimating how bad the hit on Obama is going to be.
If it’s needed. The Clintons have only hit the pre-panic button, not the Panic Button. Yet.

If Obama’s momentum crosses the "golden mean" of Clinton fear, then comes the big shoe.
Written By: Martin McPhillips

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks