Category — John Edwards

Obama sees the AG bite the dust.

The merest hint of impropriety should be sufficient grounds to banish him for high office, according to the most ethical Democrats. 

It’s that tangled web, weaving and deceiving thing again.

The New England Republican’s astute social reporter, M. Hotspur, noticed the foibles of former Prez candidate Hairspray, first.

A murder of crows from the fourth estate descended upon Sen. Craig for his playing footsie with a flatfoot resulting in a misdemeanor plea. The hypocrisy of the episode outraged the MSM. Late night talk shows worked the incident for weeks. A grand crucifixion festooned the front pages of all the papers.

Here trots Elliott Spitzer, Super AG, promoter of righteous behavior and thigh magnets, who chased moneychangers and ill-reputed women. Not much ink wasted here. Talk shows did a perfunctory one-night monologue and moved back to Bush.

[snip] Edwards categorically denied the relationship, stating: “The story is false. It’s completely untrue, ridiculous.” As he rejected the Enquirer’s charges, Edwards was making his wife and their marriage a central component of his campaign. If Edwards had had no affair, he wasn’t a hypocrite, not then and not now.

But if Edwards had an affair and lied about it, shouldn’t he suffer scrutiny akin to that of Craig? At least three-dozen daily newspapers in the United States published the Craig news the day after the Roll Call scoop, according to Nexis, but this morning not a single U.S. daily mentioned the Enquirer piece. [snip]

Well ole Chuckie looked at his calendar and found there is room for another Easter! I can cobble some cruciform shape outa cast off rough boards and I have some rusted bent hails ‘round here, no need to worry ‘bout tetanus.

Get Hairspray out front; let him tell us if he channeled Elizabeth while channeling Rielle Hunter. He convinced a jury he could do that very thing with a fetus.
He denied and the cock crowed.

Forget not, this is probably the Chosen One’s Anointed AG Selectee. We cannot have the MSM mucking around in this slop, can we?
Not much chance of that!

Cologne-soaked sissy-boy John Edwards might be male enough to have a lover and love child, but not man enough to stand by his wife Elizabeth, who still suffers from cancer, without a little strange on the side. 

Hit the link and study the pictures.  Poor kid.  With that gene pool, they’ll have to start him on swing-bridge banjo lessons right away.

Now jump ahead a few weeks…

“I want to thank all of the good folks, in both Americas,  for their cards and letters of support for me during this difficult time.  You’ll understand that I can’t comment on the scurrilous accusations that have been made by the National Enquirer; accusations that completely miss the point of my friendship with Ms, Hunter, and about which I’ll comment when I can. 

My inappropriate friendship and poor judgement in this personal and private matter reflects poorly on my wife, Elizabeth, and the people of North Carolina who put their trust in me.   For now I simply ask the people of both Americas to allow me the privacy and time to set this matter to rest.  Thank you, and God bless both Americas.”

 Heh heh heh…of course, it might all be a mistake.  Yup.

UPDATE:  Concerning the now deleted comment from the syphilitic leftard stalker who claimed that only the Enquirer had this story, his own love site SLATE had commentary as well.  Interesting piece.

US braces for baby boom retirement wave

The first of the vast US baby boom generation goes into retirement in January, setting off a demographic tidal wave with wide-ranging economic, political and social implications. [snip]

The cost for government-funded social security and medical care for the boomers leaves a funding gap of between 40 and 76 trillion dollars for next 75 years, according to various estimates. [snip]

Leonard Steinhorn, an American University professor and author of “The Greater Generation: In Defense of the Baby Boom Legacy,” says the generation often wrongly maligned as latte-sipping Yuppies has transformed most of American society.

They sure fooled the rest of the world, didn’t they? Wasn’t the Bonfire of the Vanities their signature piece?

He wrote that boomers have led or sustained most of “the great citizen movements that have advanced American values and freedoms — the environmental movement, the consumer movement, the women’s movement, the civil rights movement, the diversity movement, the human rights movement, the openness in government movement.”

For the civil rights movement, they cannot have credit. They didn’t do that. As for the enviro and women’s movement they can have these, no one else wants credit for those debacles.

He told AFP he expects this transformation to continue as boomers age. “It’s not going to be a generation that’s going to go off to the golf courses and do nothing.”

Of course not, with tanning salons, fern bars and of course spinning classes, there will be no time for the golf course. Tossing  in the requisite nail wrap and the odd Botox shot gives quite a grueling day. How will they ever cope with that schedule?

He said boomers will push politics to a more progressive bent even though that has not yet happened because the more conservative over-60 generation still carries much weight in the electorate.

“Once younger voters begin to replace them, the socially conservative vote will dwindle,” he said. [snip]

The boomer generation is hardly monolithic. For the left side, Hillary is the guidon, so can you spell passé?

I guess the UK NHS has a problem to solve about issuing fiats.

‘Patients to lose weight before NHS treatment’

Patients could be required to stop smoking, take exercise or lose weight before they can be treated on the National Health Service, Gordon Brown has suggested.

In a New Year message to NHS staff, the Prime Minister indicates people may have to fulfil new “responsibilities” in order to establish their entitlement to care.

Size zero epidemic as hospitals face huge rise in patients with eating disorders

The number of patients needing hospital treatment for eating disorders has soared, it has emerged.

The findings are sure to renew concerns about the effect “size zero” models and celebrities are having on the body image of many youngsters.

I don’t know whether to eat tofu or a bag of high fructose sugar solids, while watching this all play out.

Via JustOneMinute:

Let me see if I understand this - John Edwards and the Krugman Democrats want to negotiate with the Iranians and North Koreans but not the drug companies or health insurers.

Well, as long as we are clear who the bad guys are.

Speaking of Iran, it looks like they almost got more than they bargained for when provoking US Navy warships this weekend (HT: Gateway Pundit):

In what U.S. officials called a serious provocation, Iranian Revolutionary Guard boats harassed and provoked three U.S. Navy ships in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, threatening to explode the American vessels.

U.S. forces were on the verge of firing on the Iranian boats in the early Sunday incident, when the boats turned and moved away, a Pentagon official said. “It is the most serious provocation of this sort that we’ve seen yet,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said: “We urge the Iranians to refrain from such provocative actions that could lead to a dangerous incident in the future.”

…There were no injuries but the official said there could have been, because the Iranian boats turned away “literally at the very moment that U.S. forces were preparing to open fire” in self defense.

The official said he didn’t have the precise transcript of communications that passed between the two forces, but said the Iranians radioed something like “we’re coming at you and you’ll explode in a couple minutes.”

We should have given them an express ticket to meet Allah.

Abra-cadabra, Bibbity-Bobbity-Boo and Presto-Chango too!

Noted at another blog, and not verified for accuracy….the Donk debate at St Anselm’s in Manchester on Saturday tallied this use of the word “change”.

Edwards - 162 times

Clinton - 102 times

Obama - 108 times

Richardson - 31 times

All political oratory, especially of the campaign kind, is a dense aggregation of obtuse and prejudicial expressions and locutions. It isn’t intended to inform; its purpose is to confuse, generalize and to motivate people from the gut rather than the head.

As a conservative, I find lib-speak to be something other than language, a kind of incantation with infinitely flexible forms. “The people”, for instance, is broadly utilitarian to liberals. Used prudently, and in connection with what the people “want” (e.g. universal coverage), we can skirt the fact that “the people” also showed up in Red Square, at Kristallnacht and in Selma. They responded to the same compulsions, flogged along by the same sense of entitlement and deprivation manipulated by the flattering demagogue.

The people are a mighty beast, except, of course, when they respond to the siren song of liberals. Now people want “Change”, which is the boxed-and-released word-zombie in the progressive lexicon, because Change shambles out from time to time when the pheromone of discontent is in the air. Disgruntled? Worried about the future? Here’s your chance to sanctify your discontent. Ideologize your personal concerns and call for virtuous political “change”, not for yourself, but for all “the people”. Rot.

Progressives flutter over the idea of “change”, because they’ve appropriated all the successful social changes of the past 250 years as their own, even though the actors in those long-gone dramas wouldn’t abide the soft, mendacious poltroons who now claim to be their heirs.

Change is simply movement from one state to another; it means nothing by itself, but Hillary can get away with saying: “I’m not running on a promise of change. I’m running on 35 years of change”. There are more conceptual idiocies, lies and conceits per word in those two sentences than should be allowed by law, but leaving that fact alone, the sentences stand as a type of aspiration, a credential, a purple robe. Her husband had the same skill.

For that reason, Hillary Clinton will be the Democrat nominee. She can get away with such crap because the Donk Establishment is hypnotized by its own mumbo-jumbo, and because the guy who might actually CHANGE something, is Obama. They can’t have that. So stasis will become petrification, and the Democrats will lose next November.

BIG NEWS! Whatshisname - the guy with the Chris Dodd wattle - endorses Obama. Now if Obama gets John Mellencamp, Gary Hart, Gary Coleman, Carrot Top and David Soul, he’s packing for Pennsylvania Avenue!

BIGGER NEWS! Kerry found bigger loser than himself, and chose said loser as running mate in 2004. (There’s a management principle that describes this personality disorder.)

According to Michael Crowley of The New Republic, Bob Shrum, Kerry’s campaign manager will report in a forthcoming book that Kerry had qualms about choosing Edwards as his presidential running mate in 2004, and became “even queasier”after Edwards said he was going to share a story with Kerry that he’d never told anyone else. The story was that after Edwards’ son, Wade, had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home and hugged his body, and promised that he would do all he could to make life better for people.

Trouble is, he told Kerry the same story a year or two earlier, with the same preface that he never told anyone the story before.

Anatomy of a political hangover

Listening to the promises made by the candidates, most overstep presidential powers and violate the Constitution. Tax law belongs to the House as does all money bills. Susurrations to the contrary, the President isn’t a King which makes the MSM anointments a futility in progress.

On Clinton–
Rush Limbaugh said last night was the worst night for Hillary since Bill’s second term. Not even close, people, for Communist Hillary, the election of Nixon crushed her ideals. Last night, this Alinsky drone’s pyloric valve seized in the open position, showing her true color.

You will never hear her expound upon her vision for the US. With Clinton, as Yoda said to Luke, “With you, it’s change, always change.” Her idea of change, abolishing the Constitution, doesn’t sound good on the hustings. Afterwards, the loud noise heard off screen was a boomer exploding.

On Edwards–
He wants to make your life better, but not quite the way he made his better. An envious man, he wishes to have more money than the collective you. To accomplish this end, everything will be free on his watch. Wait till you see what that costs. You will be verrucose in short order, waiting in line for universal medical relief. Then again, it would be kinder if he merely sued you. Under current tort laws, at least you keep your dignity.

On Obama–
Same droning sounds as from Silky. Different words used. Obama likes the word hope. We have hope. Hope we can make changes. Change is good for it gives us hope. He has no idea how the real world works. That will never prevent him from lurching into the breech. To give us hope for change, hopefully.

On Huckabee–
Having prodded GOP caucus goers with his RINO horn to get what he wanted, let us see how he dolls up the message for low denomination voters. I do not believe many NH voters place hands on the TV. Anyway, Huckabee is calling the NH primary, the Big Camp Meeting, can I get an AMEN.

On Romney–
Many questions need be asked of the Mitt. Does the U.S. deserve the type of government foisted on MA inmates? Do we need a “Big Dig” in every state? Why is the working population of MA shrinking? Why isn’t the illegal immigration population shrinking?
More to the point, which Mitt is running for office?

On McCain–
He is in the wrong party. That speaks to his good points. There isn’t room for the thought on the dark side.

On Paul–
Collaborating with the Donk moonbat Kucinich, both are investigating the appearance of illegal aliens at Groom Lake aka Area 51, instead of along the border and in meat packing plants. Art Bell is chairman of this primary of two.

On Thompson–
Not running hard while running, this makes one wonder, Wassup! If he keeps dissing the lame stream media, he may become the front-runner rather quickly. More of a Washingtonian politician (person, not place) he says it is about duty, not desire. We’ll see if this reaches fruition.

On the usual perennial weeds–
After signing up for campaign matching funds, they cash the check; spend a minimal amount on electioneering and pocket the rest. This is a common trope for most politicians, usually seen as groveling for power and re-election, and by the older politicians, sex in strange places with alien DNA types. Their attendance is for obfuscating purposes only, this heterophony helps shield the front-runners from real questions.

Edwards shows his lawyerly form when he told this Iowa voter, that if she didn’t vote for him, he would bite off her face.

This is easier than channeling the voters to cast “correct Ballots.”

Just being a politician instantly qualifies you as a fraud, but every now and then, a politician comes along and raises the bar for his fellow solons. This year that man is John Edwards. His vote buying schemes are so outlandish now that nobody could mistake him for a serious candidate. At least Hillary and Obama have to couch their plans while Edwards, who has nothing to lose, is way beyond the concealment phase. He’s throwing everything against the wall desperately hoping something will stick.

And of course, John isn’t shy about telling you who will pay for it:

“I think if we want to fund the things that I think are important to share in prosperity, then people who have done well in this country, including me, have more of a responsibility to give back,” he said. Later, he added: “There are no free meals.”

It’s nice to see that Edwards includes himself amongst those he wants to soak. However, according to his 2003 tax returns, he talks a better game than he plays. He paid $64,179 on $305,836 in adjusted gross income.  So, Edwards’ share of our “responsibility” comes to about 21%. That’s hardly an ennobling sum from a guy who’s supposedly dedicated to eradicating poverty and closing the gap in income inequality.

Just once it’d be refreshing to see a big government lefty writing a bigger check to the Treasury than they had to before they started soaking us. That’d be real leadership. So, hands off my paycheck, Johnny, until you start voluntarily donating more of yours.

Tennessee: Thompson Leads Clinton But Clinton Leads Giuliani, Romney

If former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson is the Republican nominee in 2008, the Volunteer State is likely to cast its Electoral College votes for the home town boy. A Rasmussen Reports statewide survey finds that Thompson leads Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton by fifteen percentage points (54% to 39%). He leads John Edwards by twenty-one points (56% to 35%) and Barack Obama by thirty points (60% to 30%).

However, if the Republican nominee is Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney , Tennessee’s eleven Electoral votes could conceivably end up in the Democratic column. Clinton has a statistically insignificant two-point edge over Giuliani (46% to 44%) and a six-point lead over Romney (46% to 40%). Clinton also has an edge over Republican hopefuls in three other southern states Arkansas, Virginia, and Florida. If any Democrat is able to win Southern states in Election 2008, it will be a long night for the GOP. [snip]

This is good news for the vast right-wing conspiracy. Not so good news for the RINO’s and those sheep who call themselves moderates. The wearers of the old gray flannel suits now have reason to worry about how they appear to the voters. Let us see how they twist their voting records to look different.

By the way, have you seen the Bush helps Clinton stories making the rounds. Searching for the Legacy, it is called. Maybe she’ll give him the W’s back for the computers.

John Edwards says that not only will you be a part of his mandatory health care plan; you will see the doctor on his schedule too:

“If you are going to be in the system, you can’t choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK.”

And who makes treatment decisions now? Just forcing us to see the doctor isn’t enough to “save” us if we refuse treatment. And if we can’t be trusted with the decision to see the doctor, how can we be trusted to make judgments about which drugs, operations, and medical care to take? Taking away our right to make treatment decisions is the next logical step for socialists like John Edwards.

Edwards is a fringe candidate with absolutely zero chance of being president. However, wouldn’t Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama back such a plan if they thought they could get away with it? The “big 3” on the Democratic side really don’t differ much when it comes to adding more socialism to our lives.

A lot of people naturally assume the Democratic Party has the biggest, most ideologically diverse tent. However, an analysis of the parties’ 1^st tier presidential candidates implies otherwise. The Democratic candidates lean so far left they’re practically horizontal. Hillary Clinton’s main governmental “accomplishment” is a failed attempt to socialize our medical system. Barack Obama thinks 5 year olds need sex education. And John Edwards wants to expand the nanny state because he thinks we all live in broken down trailers with a car on cinder blocks in the front yard.

On the other hand, the Republican presidential field is dominated by squishy moderates trying to convince the party faithful they’re conservatives. Rudy Giuliani is a social liberal who supported making New York a “sanctuary city”. Mitt Romney is trying to explain his abortion flip-flop and ran as a centrist in MA. John McCain takes great pleasure in annoying the party’s base on issues like immigration and campaign finance reform.

I’d wager that a socially conservative Democrat could not achieve the front runner status that a socially liberal Giuliani has in the Republican race. Could a Democrat ever be pro-life? Democrats talk about diversity, but they’re all died in the wool liberals.

In a bipartisan spirit, the Vermont Woodchuck unveils another Statement T-Shirt. the first in the line of the Democrat 2008 Campaign T-Shirts.

John Edwards