How Much Stress Can She Take?

I suppose ignorance is bliss. I have no idea what (or who) this thread is about. None.

But, I agree with you, O.Bill, as regards BillRM and that other creep.

If you figure it out, Andrew, could you let me know?

What on earth are these people talking about?

John Edwards was the Democratic vice presidential candidate in 2004 (with John Kerry, who was the presidential candidate), and was a serious contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008. For quite a while there, he and Hillary Clinton were seen as the top two, before Barack Obama emerged as a real threat to both of them.

When John Edwards was campaigning for the presidency, he had already had an affair with a woman named Rielle Hunter, which John Edwards' wife Elizabeth knew. They went ahead with the candidacy.

Some things that are coming out now (true or not? who knows) include that there was a Edwards-Hunter sex tape in existence, that was held by a top aide of Edwards' named Andrew Young.

What we DO know -- after a whole lot of denials from the Edwards camp -- is that John Edwards fathered a child with Rielle Hunter and that Andrew Young agreed to step in and claim that HE was the father (not Edwards).

Meanwhile there were ugly payoffs here and there.

Sordid sordid sordid.

Meanwhile #2, Elizabeth Edwards is a cancer survivor and right around when John Edwards was fathering a baby with Ms. Hunter, Elizabeth's cancer came back and is incurable. At the time it looked like she would die soon. As of now she is at least minimally OK.

However the sympathy she garners for that and for being cheated upon is mitigated somewhat by the fact (?) that she apparently was absolutely horrible to John for a long time, belittling him in front of people, calling him a dumb hick, etc., etc. And generally seems to be a far less-nice person than previously thought (selfish, power-hungry, etc.)

So.

Aren't you glad you asked?

No wonder I had no idea what y'all were on about. My subscription to the "National Enquirer" and other supermarket tabloids expired quite a while ago. People actuallly follow this drivel? And discuss it?

Sadly this nonsense is cover in major papers and on the so call TV news shows not just the tabloids.

Oh for the good old days when the news was the news of some important.

Good point, Merry. You've got more important diversions to concern yourself with, right?

I guess you've also given up your subscription to the NYT. It's not as if this has only been carried by fringe media. Perhaps it shouldn't be covered by major U.S. media but it is, and if you've missed it entirely, you haven't been reading newspapers or watching any mainstream t.v. I think even NPR hit on it (as they reviewed the Heilemann book a lot of this is coming from).

Have you guys taken note that NPR have sadly becoming more conforming to the idea of what pass as news nowsdays?

I think it is worthwhile talking about. Given the penchant of the US population to go off all hysteric about non-issue related information, the lack of tent folding (in the face of this background) by the Edwards camp was a big fat gamble with the democratic party's chances, given the wonderful-family tone of the Edwards campaign.

To me the larger lesson is that the campaigns should have close to nothing to do with families. (Maybe if they are all thieves serving time... I'd listen.) But given the pumping up of purient interest, as if no one ever heard of human nature, it is hard for me to imagine campaigns and media all stepping back from the stupidly built abyss.

Thank you very much for taking the time to explain all that, soz. All is clear now!