<p>
</p>
<p>LOL! Funny! :D</p>
<p>She FORGOT her pants? Isn’t she in some lawsuit trying to get her naked video back? If you are having an ongoing fight against overexposure, wouldn’t you think twice before taking off again? Whether the matter is related or not?</p>
<p>As quoted in an earlier post, Rielle Hunter on the Andrew Young sham:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m somewhat curious about those “belief systems.” Here’s another of her spiritual musings:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Loopy.</p>
<p>[Edwards</a> mistress: ‘We love each other very much’ :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Nation](<a href=“http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/2102993,edwards-mistress-hunter-president-031510.article]Edwards”>http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/2102993,edwards-mistress-hunter-president-031510.article)</p>
<p>Everyone talks about how Johnny has fallen from grace,” Rielle Hunter told GQ magazine in an interview released Monday. “In reality, he’s fallen to grace.”</p>
<p>I saw that. That quote made me gag.
Cause ya know marriage vows and responsibility to your family mean diddly.</p>
<p>If they end up together and there’s a pretty young woman around named Grace, she may find she really is psychic.</p>
<p>" Saying your two-timing husband was a good man, save that mistake, takes a lot of love and wide perspective on life in general. " (post 39)</p>
<p>That is certainly one explanation. But if she dumps him we’ll know she was just lying to do damage control, and has now changed her mind.</p>
<p>Another explanation is that she is a negotiator, a dealmaker, much like Hillary Clinton- willing to take the bad-even very bad, in exchange for the benefits. That doesn’t make her strong or honorable; it means she is willing to compromise her beliefs in exchange for more practical concerns.</p>
<p>How about these lines?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>She’s imagining SHE’S married to him.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or we’ll know that she was in a bad, complicated situation not of her own making, and tried to figure out how to make the best of it. Just like a lot of other women.</p>
<p>Younghoss, I’m not convinced we have enough information to make that judgment about Elizabeth or Hillary. It may have been less to do with damage control and more to do with matters of the heart. Suppose for all of us, practical concerns are not to be overlooked. It is possible, in my mind, to have such strong love (and history) that I’d be prepared to work through an affair, to compromise for various reasons–family, children AND for love. --Just not sure I could get beyond the betrayal. </p>
<p>Elizabeth’s interview with Oprah left me feeling strong respect for her.</p>
<p>Did anyone read Game Change the John Heilemann and Mark Halperin book about the 2008 presidential election? They paint a rather non flattering picture of EE.</p>
<p>[Cultural</a> Studies - Elizabeth Edwards, Once Considered Sainted, Is Recast as a Bully - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/17/fashion/17elizabeth.html?ref=fashion]Cultural”>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/17/fashion/17elizabeth.html?ref=fashion)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How can anyone predict one’s death?
My mother who was healthy her whole life,died of cancer at age 55 of pancreatic cancer, six months after diagnosis.
My aunt, who was also battling recurrent cancer at the time, outlived my mother by 15 years.
EE probably knows she has more time than rumored. What was she doing spending months away from her children campaigning for her husband and later promoting her book?</p>
<p>Rielle Hunter is nuts. She willingly took photos without pants on for a magazine, but she’s blaming the magazine for the “repulsive” photos? She and John Edwards hopped into bed together the night they met, but somehow it’s his wife’s fault? She thinks the “love” she and “Johnny” share will last forever – but not the love that Edwards shared with his wife of 30 years? And she says she knows Edwards loves her, despite the fact that he denied their relationship and their child until the sordid mess was outed by the National Enquirer – and he announced to the entire nation that Elizabeth Edwards is the only woman he has ever loved?</p>
<p>Obviously both Hunter and John Edwards are experienced liars, so why should anyone believe anything either of them say, especially about Elizabeth? Both are disgusting. I hope they and this whole mess quickly vanish off the public radar and out of Elizabeth Edwards’ life. Eventually Elizabeth will see that she and her children are much better off without John’s painful presence in their daily lives.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You tell me. I was always stunned that anyone believed anything John “Breck Girl” Edwards ever said. I don’t need to know about his pantless baby mama mistress to know that he was always an oily snake oil salesman. Haven’t people read his closing arguments to juries in his ambulance-chasing product liability trials? The ones where he channeled the voices of dead children for the juries. Good grief.</p>
<p>I think that difficult situations are where we can really show what we are made of- but truthfully marriage and parenthood are challenging enough for me.</p>
<p>Having a " life partner" who is also a public figure ( the Edwards’ will always be connected because of their history, inc their children), experiencing the death of a child, dealing with a terminal illness, let alone having your partner publicly flaunt their midlife crisis with someone who is so addlebrained that they make public statements and show us literally more than we need to see- is thankfully much more than most of us will have to cope with and I don’t think we can really predict to what level we would rise &/or sink to.</p>
<p>I am married to someone that I may not have married had I been older/wiser. He won’t admit to the same thing, but I suspect he feels the same. ( But not often)</p>
<p>However, in retrospect, I would not be the same person had I made different choices, as painful as some of it has been & I love him very much. </p>
<p>I suspect the same is true of women whose husbands have shown just how true it is that the frontal lobe of some men switches off when they get a whiff of a new field to be plowed, but they hope that like other obstacles in life, that can be overcome.
( but for the record- that wasn’t my H’s problem-)</p>
<p>It is not the 1840’s,or the 1940’s Women are not financially and physically dependent on men to survive- and those who have degrees and careers of their own certainly are not.
I expect that couples who have chosen to stay together despite what the world and the media think they should do, have their own private reasons- one may be that they love each other.</p>
<p>We are all human- but I like a quote I find to be all purpose from * The African Queen* ,
;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, I agree with this statement. John Edwards has been living a lie (not only about the affair, but probably also about the state of his marriage) and covering up his affair and paternity. With his “outing,” he is given a chance to start living the truth. Too bad that he didn’t take the opportunity to own up to the whole truth for some time. </p>
<p>He may indeed love his former mistress, but I think he has wised up enough to see that actually marrying her or living with her full time would be a disaster. She’s a kooky loose cannon.<br>
Photo shoots in the boudoir (especially ones sans pants) are probably not going to give people an impression of you as a “good girl.” Why she agreed to them are a mystery only if you assume that she didn’t want to give people the impression that she was a saucy wench, tasty enough that someone would jeopardize his political career for her.</p>
<p>Of the three photos I saw online–I have the following comments:</p>
<p>Of the photo where she is sitting on the bed with the stuffed animals–please tell me that you were wearing panties.</p>
<p>Of the photo where she is getting into bed–agree with the poster who said that this photo looked like there might be some money left on the nightstand. LOL.</p>
<p>Of the photo of her and her kid–I feel for her kid.</p>
<p>Last thought for now–she has been very, very quiet about the whole mess, considering that Edwards, Mrs. Edwards, Andrew Young, etc. have been gabbing away and selling books like crazy. She had shown remarkable restraint–uncharacteristic restraint, it seemed to me–I wonder if she is running into money issues…</p>
<p>*With his “outing,” he is given a chance to start living the truth. Too bad that he didn’t take the opportunity to own up to the whole truth for some time. *</p>
<p>I would disagree and agree.
On the one hand, he has had many chances to be honest- and it is too bad that he hasn’t been. However, I would also say that while he is now admitting to what is obvious and impossible to disprove which is the sad state of his marriage and his responsibility to his youngest child, but he is also a politician and for many politicians " truth" seems to be a relative term- and I doubt that his current life of " openness" is really all that.</p>
<p>True, EK4–and you could probably replace the word politician with human and still have a true statement…</p>
<p>It’s becoming abundantly clear that Rielle and Johnny deserve each other. </p>
<p>Yuck.</p>
<p>^^^^^</p>
<p>Agree.</p>
<p>I hate to admit this, but I’ve just “read” Andrew Young’s book, The Politician. I saw that it was available for download from our library, so I listened to it on my cell phone while doing laundry and other housework. I am a political junkie and couldn’t resist, but at least I did not pay for it.</p>
<p>The book was fascinating, and very well written (there must have been a ghost writer). Much of it had the ring of truth, and Young has voicemails and emails to back up some of his claims. Of course the story is told from Young’s point of view, and hearing it this way made his actions, as he became more and more enmeshed with John Edwards, more understandable. Even if only half of what he claims is true, it is clear that Edwards is a very disturbed man. But I guess we don’t need Young’s book to see that.</p>