Patterico's Pontifications

8/20/2008

The National Enquirer Is Going “All In” on John Edwards — I’m Sure Obama Loves the Timing

Filed under: General — WLS @ 1:06 pm



[Posted by WLS]

Take a look at the cover of the next issue — they claim they have the “Mistress’ Story”. Sounds suspicously like its coming from a 3rd party, otherwise they would have been more explicit. Nevertheless, the NYT story last week unraveling the connection between the lawyers for her and the Edwards aide who claimed he was the father, the money paid to them by a deep-pocketed Edwards supporter — as well as paying to relocate both families to Califronia — all seem to be leading to a break in the dam.

I’m sure the money to the mother is conditioned upon her silence, so she’s not going to speak out herself. That doesn’t prevent others from speaking out on her behalf. Edwards going on national TV to deny the length of the affair, and expressly denying paternity, may have been too much for people close to her.

“We’ll be together when Elizabeth is gone” — Wow.

123 Responses to “The National Enquirer Is Going “All In” on John Edwards — I’m Sure Obama Loves the Timing”

  1. The Obama people should see how this is playing out and realize that the cover-up is always worse than the crime. Well, almost always.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  2. I hate John Edwards, but if he really did beg her to keep this child, then my opinion of the man was wrong.

    I don’t believe every marriage can work, and if Edwards’s wife is the type of person why always appeared to be to me (rude and dishonest), then John probably was in a dilemma where he couldn’t get out of the marriage for various reasons. It’s not an excuse for his lying and possibly stealing, just a bit of understanding. If he wanted to let his wife die happy, but couldn’t resist starting his new life a bit early, then his actions make more sense.

    Of course, if that’s what was going on, John has clearly decided it isn’t worth the bad press, and has thrown Rielle under the bus with his own daughter.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  3. Once an ambulance chaser, always an ambulance chaser – the only difference is that this unmitigated piece of cow dung came fairly close to becoming the Dem nominee for President. Nice vetting process by the media, wouldn’t you agree? Say, how are they doing on that pesky vetting of the Messiah? Not so good, eh?

    Dmac (874677)

  4. The story has to be coming from Reille. The pictures of Edwards with his the baby remind me of the shots of Elvis in his coffin; Steve Coz’s book talks about Nat’l Enquirer using a belt-buckle camera to get those.

    The cover shot of Reille and their her baby is another clue. Anyway, the Enquirer often has paid tipsters inside the story. For years Tom Arnold was paid for Roseanne stories, according to his own book.

    My thought is the Enquirer is protecting their source for as long as possible by making the information a little ambiguous. But she is the one with access, the ability to get pictures, and tip off reporters to be at the Hilton and confront Edwards’ buddies.

    Lastly, I have zero sympathy for Edwards; if his marraige wasn’t working, he should get out of it with no problem. He simply wanted it all his way and felt normal standards of decency didn’t apply to him. Elizabeth Edwards need to dump his @$$. I love this story, and hope it goes for awhile.

    TimesDisliker (6fe185)

  5. timesdisliker, of course Edwards doesn’t deserve our sympathy, but if your wife was dying of cancer, would you really leave her? Even if I hated her guts, I would let her die peacefully. Hell, it seems like Elizabeth knew all about the affair and chose to help cover it up and demonize the truth-tellers, so this is a twisted couple.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  6. Juan #5 – Sorry, but was Reille in love with Edwards or not? If she was, then waiting would be acceptable. If she was not, then what was she doing? And if your speculation that Elizabeth knew and decided to play act is correct, then she has no business playing the victim, and the idea of letting her die peacefully doesn’t make sense, as a peaceful death is one of a free conscience.

    I agree with #4 – Reille and Edwards wanted it their way and felt that restraint was unnecessary. No one forced them to take these actions.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  7. You know, we’d dismiss everything that was in the linked Enquirer story, if the Enquirer hadn’t managed to get the story 100% right so far, at least insofar as the “checkables” go. (We aren’t sure about paternity yet, but it’s kind of difficult at this point to give Mr Edwards’ denials the benefit of the doubt.)

    Dana R Pico (556f76)

  8. This is speculative and not advice on how to obstruct justice. Were Edwards to fellate Andrew Young to climax, just minutes before epithelial cells were taken from his mouth, and be sure to not rinse or brush before the swab, it could defeat the DNA test.

    nk (3c7a86)

  9. Juan wrote: If he wanted to let his wife die happy, but couldn’t resist starting his new life a bit early, then his actions make more sense.

    Howzabout starting her funeral “a bit early” too, and digging a six foot ditch and burying her while she’s still breathing?

    Does that make sense to you too, Juan?

    L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5)

  10. Reille’s family had a news blurb that Edwards should take a paternity test. This was at the time that Reille was in the news as ‘not wanting’ one. It may be her family releasing photos and info.

    The most interesting things are her attorney suggesting the test go forward; and that JE didn’t want her to abort. But now he sees fit to disown both daughter and mistress. Must have been some sort of skewed attempt to give Elizabeth some calm in the storm. Juan says Mrs. Edwards is/seems rude and dishonest, which is interesting. She’s never seemed rude (to me), having end-stage cancer and the Enquirer on her doorstep. So this wild story continues to bear fruit…

    Vermont Neighbor (a066ed)

  11. nk – dude, c’mon. Somewhere, somebody’s eating!

    L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5)

  12. it could defeat the DNA test.

    nk needs to write a political mystery. And nobody here steal his idea!

    Vermont Neighbor (a066ed)

  13. Sorry, guys. Just illustrating my disgust with all these lowlifes (Elizabeth still barely discluded).

    nk (3c7a86)

  14. Via Black & Right

    Viral Email Of The Day

    This one’s a doozy.

    The Democrats have suddenly developed a keen sense of morality. John Edwards has been banned from making a speech at the Democratic convention for having an affair and lying about it.

    In his place Bill Clinton will be speaking.

    Ouch.

    daytrader (ea6549)

  15. As much as I detest John Edwards and his messy lies and adulterous behaviour. I still don’t see why you linked it with Obama. What has Obama got to do with it? It’s becoming really ridiculous wls! Try to achieve some level of credibility as a poster. Maybe you should learn more from DRJ.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  16. Edwards diluted Hillary’s “it’s time for a woman president” vote and then endorsed Obama. Does Obama want the endorsement of an adultress?

    nk (3c7a86)

  17. OK OK you guys, I’m not trying to be an apologist for Edwards. I’m just explaining what I think some of his motivations were.

    Of course Rielle is a dirtbag. Of course Edwards was disgusting for moving on from his marriage early. But I can understand not breaking things off with a dying wife, especially as a politician. I can understand lots of things that are morally wrong.

    I don’t think the story really is about whether John Edwards is a good man… he probably killed children via his disgusting and baseless lawsuits that enriched him so well. I don’t think it’s my business if he wants to cheat on his wife when I already know he has no character and would never vote for him. The real story is 1: all the money being shifted around in suspicious ways to placate the destroyed Young family and the mistress and 2: the extremely well illustrated media bias that lied about Mccain’s non-affair, yet hides stories like this and Ayers.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  18. I still don’t see why you linked it with Obama.

    — Yes you do. They both ran in the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary. Obama sought out and received Edwards’s endorsement. Edwards was considered to be on the initial list of VP candidates. Obama’s VP choice is imminent and now the 2004 Democratic VP candidate is involved in a high-profile scandal. The Edwards story detracts from, and diverts some of the media spotlight away from, Obama’s highly anticipated coronation next week in Denver. This, at the same time that McCain — after trouncing Obama at the Saddleback forum — is starting to lead in the polls. Obama doesn’t need even a mildly negative distraction right now; a large distraction could wound him severely.

    Icy Truth (b55029)

  19. #18
    You forgot to add, “JMHO” to your comment Icy. So…
    – Yes you do. They both ran in the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary. Obama sought out and received Edwards’s endorsement. Edwards was considered to be on the initial list of VP candidates. Obama’s VP choice is imminent and now the 2004 Democratic VP candidate is involved in a high-profile scandal. The Edwards story detracts from, and diverts some of the media spotlight away from, Obama’s highly anticipated coronation next week in Denver. This, at the same time that McCain — after trouncing Obama at the Saddleback forum — is starting to lead in the polls. Obama doesn’t need even a mildly negative distraction right now; a large distraction could wound him severely. JMHO
    Yeah I know. Thank me later.

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  20. #18, 19

    Icy posted facts there. All relevant.

    Vermont Neighbor (a066ed)

  21. #19

    You forgot to add something as well.

    Yeah I know I’ve been proven a liar and with this post I give another example of how rude and arrogant I can be.

    You can thank me later.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  22. Comment by love2008 — 8/20/2008 @ 6:06 pm

    Actually he did write it in. Everyone does, as I’ve noticed you do too. Due to the WordPress software the “JMHO” appears on your screen next to the poster’s name as “Comment by” 🙂

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  23. ^ Now, that’s true …

    Vermont Neighbor (a066ed)

  24. #21
    Why do you hate yourself like this? Liar? Arrogant? Rude? Yeah maybe true but you don’t have to beat yourself up like that.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  25. Still waiting for you to find a single instance of me lying in two years of comments here love2008. I can find yours very easily. Do the right thing love2008 and make amends with those you’ve wronged. You won’t build a shred of credibility with anyone here until you do. I’m sure Vermont Neighbor and no one you know can be very understanding as well, along with the others you’ve wronged like Icy Truth and JD. As you said on the other thread, people can be very forgiving. In reality, that’s true… if they are approached sincerely. Can you do that? I guess we’ll see.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  26. Stashiu, I actually thought someone was writing directly to the love bug. Her words truly are projection. Oh yeah – and cleanup in aisle #24.

    Vermont Neighbor (a066ed)

  27. Ego and pride can be difficult for the emotionally-immature to control. It’s my pleasure to assist her gain some measure of stability over her troubles. She’s given me plenty of incentive to help.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  28. Comment by love2008 — 8/20/2008 @ 6:39 pm

    Am very glad you said upthread (#15) that you “detest” John Edwards’ wrong actions. Among the wrong things he did was 1) refusing to admit his wrongdoing, and also, by so doing, 2) in effect calling people who were telling the truth liars.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  29. Comment by no one you know — 8/20/2008 @ 7:12 pm

    love2008, looks like you’ve been hoist with your own petard, again.

    (well done noyk 🙂 )

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  30. Comment by Stashiu3 — 8/20/2008 @ 7:23 pm

    It’s only the truth. Have nothing personal whatever against love2008. And am rather more inclined to hope that his or her original offense on that thread – and perhaps on other threads – began more as carelessness than mendacity. (As have mentioned before it takes an awful lot for me to call someone a liar, esp. since it is one serious insult and not to be tossed lightly. I should add I haven’t seen all of love2008’s statements on other threads either and there is obviously some ‘history’ here.)

    But. When you (best case) make an error and then refuse to admit it, plus then turn around and slander the bearer of embarrassing news, that’s just plain dishonest and wrong.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  31. #30
    Yeah, shake hands and go away!

    love2008 (1b037c)

  32. #30 no one you know:

    It’s only the truth.

    Which is something the poster in question has long had a problem with, antedating Stash’s example by quite some time.

    EW1(SG) (9525a4)

  33. #19 – love2008

    You forgot to add, “JMHO” to your comment Icy.

    — No, I did not. Representing opinion as fact is your province; a territory I would not dare to enter.

    Icy Truth (b55029)

  34. Comment by love2008 — 8/20/2008 @ 7:43 pm

    Sorry, I don’t understand your comment. Shake hands with whom?

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  35. #29, #30 and #32
    Here comes The Truth Squad! I am so scared now. 🙂

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  36. #35

    Well, you have the Captain’s position on the liar’s squad sewn up.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  37. Here comes The Truth Squad! I am so scared now.

    Comment by love2008 — 8/20/2008 @ 8:03 pm

    “member of the Truth Squad” – I like it. Thanks for the compliment. 🙂 Shall we shake hands now? Or did you just want to order me to go away again? 😉

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  38. #34
    Satanshiu666. I don’t like your close associations with him. Just trying to protect you from “evil” company. 🙂
    Yeah, thank me later.

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  39. love2008:

    Satanshiu666

    That’s not an acceptable way to address others here. Apologize or take a time-out.

    DRJ (a5243f)

  40. #38 love2008,

    Fortunately, what you like and don’t like becomes less relevant every day you comment here, largely because people are getting to know the real you. If it’s any comfort (and I know it is), I was thinking of you and your fellow-travelers while writing much of this.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  41. #39
    DRJ is it acceptable for him to call me a liar at every opportunity he gets. Simply because I aired my views?

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  42. As I recall, Stashiu explained why he called you a liar and you can and should defend yourself by demonstrating that is an unfair claim. But how do you expect anyone to defend themselves from a charge that they are Satan?

    DRJ (a5243f)

  43. Yeah! Let luv2H8 call somebody a name, now and then.

    Icy Truth (b55029)

  44. DRJ #42 – how do you expect anyone to defend themselves from a charge that they are Satan?

    It’s the horns. No horns, no Satan.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  45. I am shocked, shocked that love2008 could possibly be considered an insidious hypocrite who plays nice only until you turn your back and he/she can stick the knife in.

    nk (3c7a86)

  46. Simply because I aired my views?

    Nope, that would be wrong and I wouldn’t do it. Airing your views, even if unpopular, are encouraged here and I support it completely. I’ve had many conversations with people that I’ve deeply disagreed with and we could remain respectful. You plainly lied and then called me a liar… after calling me a bigot without cause. There is a big difference and everyone here can see it, even if you refuse to.

    Please note again that I have never called for you to be banned, called you a troll or a plant, or any name that I couldn’t back up with proof (such as your lying about me and others.) In case you haven’t been paying attention, I frequently encouraged you to make amends with those you wronged and begin to build up your credibility again. You have consistently ignored it.

    I will continue with the “tough-love” (an almost unavoidable pun) until you mend your ways. You wanted to make it personal, you succeeded. Make amends, be honest and sincere (even when you disagree with someone), and there is a lot you can contribute here. Keep up the way you’re going and you’ll never be taken seriously.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  47. #42
    Only Satan goes about carrying about records of people’s past. That is why he is called “the Accuser of the Brethren.” Stashiu333 continues to carry posts from previous threads and continues to make the case that I lied. And like you know, calling someone a liar is like calling him a devil. After all, Jesus said the devil is “the father of all liars, ” And That ” He lies from the beginning.” So he in effect has been calling me a devil. So I am just paying him back in his own coin.
    Or, let him provide solid evidence of a lie I told.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  48. Only Satan goes about carrying about records of people’s past.

    Eh?

    Strike “insidious hypocrite” replace with “nutcase”.

    nk (3c7a86)

  49. Only Satan goes about carrying about records of people’s past.

    Don’t you see? The courts, universities, travel agents, banks, the IRS (might have a point there),
    ex-girlfriends – It’s all the work of the Devil!

    Out ye beast! And leave the CD’s and Memory sticks behind!

    Apogee (366e8b)

  50. #44
    It’s the horns. No horns, no Satan.
    Sorry to disappoint you, but the devil does not look anything like that funny image you grew up with. Read the Bible and you will see that he does manifest in the form of a man or woman. He is a spirit being. But can possess a human soul and use the person for his evil work. Or why did Jesus look at Peter and say to him, “Get thee behind Me, Satan!”? Matthew16:23. Was Peter Satan? No. But at that point he was operating and speaking under the influence of the devil. Men are not devils but they can easily be used by the devil, if they are not on guard.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  51. Men are not devils but they can easily be used by the devil, if they are not on guard.

    Case in point, love2008.

    nk (3c7a86)

  52. He/she makes you sin with his/her nonsense.

    nk (3c7a86)

  53. #48
    What or who do you believe in, NK?
    At least you know what I believe. I believe in God. I believe He created the heaven and earth in 6 days and on the seventh, made man in His own image and likeness.
    I believe that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. I also believe that the wages of sin is death. Eternal separation from God.
    I believe that Jesus died for my sins and on the third day, God raised Him up from the dead.
    I believe that Jesus saves.
    I believe He is coming back again, to take His church home.
    What do you believe?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  54. #50 – Men are not devils but they can easily be used by the devil, if they are not on guard.

    The Devil Made Me Do It!

    Apogee (366e8b)

  55. love2008 –

    In your first post to this thread, you wrote:
    As much as I detest John Edwards and his messy lies and adulterous behaviour. I still don’t see why you linked it with Obama. What has Obama got to do with it?
    If only you had stopped with that; but you didn’t:
    It’s becoming really ridiculous wls! Try to achieve some level of credibility as a poster. Maybe you should learn more from DRJ.
    You spent half of your first post attacking wls.

    When I responded to your query, “I still don’t see why you linked it with Obama,” by laying out all of the ways in which it is linked, you completely ignored those points and instead focused on how I started my post with “Yes you do”; limiting your response to: You forgot to add, “JMHO” to your comment. That is both a cop-out on dealing directly with the subject at hand, and an attack on me — of the “you’re not debating the correct way” school.

    Then, Stashiu3 got in your grill about it before I responded myself, and that was it — you were off the reservation for good. You still have not written anything on-topic since your first post; you still have not responded to my substantive response to your one on-topic question.

    Ya know, you complain about being ganged-up on, but — intentionally or not — you invite it.

    Icy Truth (b55029)

  56. Men are not devils but they can easily be used by the devil, if they are not on guard.

    Ok, putting it in your terms… have you been on your guard? Look back and be honest with yourself. As an article of faith, are you immune to error or sin? Look closely at what you’ve said about me and others that I’ve objected to. What was your influence while saying those things? Your faith or something else?

    When you do find someone under evil influence, do you abandon them? Or are you supposed to guide them back to a righteous path? I have urged you many times to make amends. Which of us has resorted to continued lies and name-calling? Open your eyes love2008. If you really believe what you are professing, then be honest with yourself and look back at all that was said. Have you been on your guard?

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  57. #47 – love2008

    Only Satan goes about carrying about records of people’s past. That is why he is called “the Accuser of the Brethren.”

    — And therefore you will refrain from bringing up G. Gordon Liddy again, over in the other thread; correct?

    Icy Truth (b55029)

  58. Wow. Go to bed and miss a buncha stuff.

    Comment by Stashiu3 — 8/20/2008 @ 8:47 pm

    Nice job; right on.

    Comment by love2008 — 8/20/2008 @ 8:17 pm

    love2008,

    Since you’re kind enough to want to “protect” me may I ask another favor? Please go back and carefully reread Stashiu3’s comment # 46 and Icy Truth’s comment # 55 (and if you have time, comment # 56). They’re right, you know, and you do have some amends to make.

    I can see from the tone of those posts that they’d both prefer that you stay on these boards rather than go (and that’s after you called one of them Satan), provided you can express yourself more respectfully in future. That’s a hopeful sign, I’d say, and gives you a perfect opportunity to do the right thing.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  59. I don’t understand. What’s so hard about admitting that you lied about something? You just say “I was wrong. I lied. I will try not to do so in the future.”

    I don’t understand why admitting your own faults is so hard, especially when it’s so easy to find faults in others. Surely you don’t think you are unlike everyone else, do you?

    steve miller (b589d7)

  60. Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

    nk (3c7a86)

  61. Think about it. Is John Edwards so stupid that he’d pitch a gob of baby-batter at this woman’s ovaries? No he would not. Neither would his friend Andrew Young.

    So why would Edwards admit that he had an affair with this woman? Because the truth is even worse.

    Rielle got a hold of a condom and inseminated herself with the contents. The question is, who wears the condom in the Edwards/Young relationship?

    j curtis (c84b9e)

  62. Only Satan goes about carrying about records of people’s past.

    Wha?!

    Rob Crawford (6c262f)

  63. #56, 58, 59
    What I can admit to is that I may have been wrong or not very accurate in some of my arguments. It happens. Sometimes we are wrong. But to say I lied, that is to say intentionally misrepresent the truth and knowingly selling falsehood, I will not. No matter how many of you gang up to beat that drum here. Lying is a very serious charge and it needs to be backed up with proofs. So far, all I hear is “you hurt someone’s feelings, make amends,..” “You lied, make amends..” Point out the comment that I intentionally made, knowing it to be a lie. First, it started with John Edwards’ infidelity. Then I began to say that going really hard on Edwards will hurt John McCain. Because he too has his share of infidelity, which he has also confessed to. Then someone tried to say it didn’t happen, so I posted a quote from somewhere, stating how the whole thing went down. Next I said, He that is without sin let him cast the first stone. Point being, don’t judge another man when you have your own issues before God. I never intentionally said anything that I knew to be a lie. And I have said, show me the very comment I made that was a lie. And each time someone gives me a link to an entire 482 comment, thread. You don’t really expect me to start going over the whole conversation, looking for what. Lift the very comment you said was an intentional lie. And if it is so, I will be the first to apologize. I may be a lot of things you call me, but I am not a liar and I am not proud.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  64. #60
    Dodging the question nk? Read comment #53 and come back when you have something to say.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  65. #55
    And Icy, I agree with you. It really does have a link with Obama. But I don’t see how it’s going to hurt him that much. No body is really that interested in John Edwards right now. He is washed out. Yes the fact that he is yet to admit that the child is his, does continue to keep the issue alive, but everyone already knows he is the Father. I mean why would he continue to see her after the supposed affair was over? Why would he sponsor a trip to an undisclosed location for her and the child, even if he did it through his friends? Why would Hunter herself say the baby was his? Why would she not agree to a test? Even the blind can see the truth here. John Edwards is a big disgrace to himself and to his family. When will these politicians philandering politicians know that people are not as dumb as they are. It is never really about the act of adultery, it is always about the stupid cover-ups.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  66. He was the front-runner for the AG position in the Baracky administration, lovie. He may be washed out now, but he was not prior to this.

    JD (75f5c3)

  67. #66
    Yes JD. Before now everyone thought he could do no wrong. How wrong we were. Obama should thank God this came out now and not after he had either named him his vp or AG.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  68. Out ye beast! And leave the CD’s and Memory sticks behind!

    Comment by Apogee — 8/20/2008 @ 9:07 pm

    I’m not sayin’, I’m just sayin’

    Driver’s license photos of W.Va. religious group shielded
    The Associated Press
    Tucson, Arizona | Published: 08.09.2008

    CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The state on Friday started keeping driver’s license photos out of a computer database for members of a small religious group who believe digital storage is a “mark of the beast” that evokes biblical prophecy.

    carlitos (39ff54)

  69. (DRJ will probably have to fetch this from the spam filter because of all the links)

    #63 love2008

    And I have said, show me the very comment I made that was a lie.

    How about where it was pointed out to you already since most of them quote where you lied, like here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here? That’s just on one thread. That doesn’t count all the times you were schooled on other threads, yet you never seem to learn. Even the smallest error you make usually gets rationalized by you beyond recognition.

    You have been directed by DRJ twice now and have evaded both times, apparently hoping it would be ignored. First, she told you to provide proof of any bigotry or apologize… you never did. You told DRJ you would like to apologize (never that you did apologize), but never spoke even that to anyone else. Second, on this thread she directed you to apologize for the “Satan” slur and you again evaded, ultimately coming back without ever complying. Since this is a pattern for you, you don’t get the benefit of the doubt that it’s accidental.

    You constantly come back to “Show me where I lied” and ignore when someone does. I gave you the same challenge several times… show me one comment I’ve made in two years here that I lied. You have to ignore that challenge, don’t you? Because you can’t find one. Same with anything bigoted… you won’t find any evidence, so you ignored DRJ’s direction to do so or apologize rather than admit you were wrong. What you don’t seem to realize (one of the many things anyway) is that when an error is clearly pointed out to you, continuing to make that error means it is not an error, it’s a lie. Like the “prison” vs “Prisoner-of-War” issue on the other thread. Continuing to say that McCain was “in prison” after having the difference clearly explained to you makes it a lie at that point. Here is where anyone watching can see you lying again. It’s the Michael Moore thread.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  70. Figured that would get caught up in the spam filter. I’ve just replied to you love2008, so check back once DRJ or someone fishes it out of the filter (lots of links for you).

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  71. #63 love2008,

    Lying is a very serious charge and it needs to be backed up with proofs.

    So is calling someone a bigot. Also, when you called me a liar, you deliberately edited my comments and pointed to those as lies. Since you’ve done that more than once (pretend that I’ve called myself a liar) you should understand that others are going to parse your statements with a bit less leniency than they would someone who consistently makes honest comments.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  72. There you go again, dropping links to an entire thread. Cut and paste any specific comment I made there that was a deliberate lie. For the records, I stand by my comments because they are to the best of my knowledge, true. Now concerning the “bigot” word, which was not specifically directed to anyone, which you decided was referring to you, I have already taken it back. I will not apologize for calling you a bigot because I did not. I only apologized for using the word. It’s not enough to go about saying “love2008” is a liar. Not many people on this blog will believe that. Because they know I may be many things, but not a liar. But then, the burden of proof is on you. So far, you haven’t done enough to provide evidence. Quote the specific word or comment. Paste it from my comments and point out the lie. Is that too hard to do?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  73. Comment by love2008 — 8/21/2008 @ 2:49 pm

    love2008,
    Each link IS a link to a specific comment. Just read the first comment at the top of your screen when you follow the link. His first link goes to comment 210, his second link goes to comment 238, etc.

    no one you know (1f5ddb)

  74. I’m sure both Bill Clinton and B. Hussein Obama don’t see themselves as liars either because they truly believe in their bullshit. But if the shoe fits…..

    the moonbats are great at parsing words, criticizing the various topics themselves as being pertinent, telling people to just shut the hell up (free speech for me, but not for thee), endlessly using the same tired canards, deceiving, inveigling and obfuscating. I still have no idea why they think Obama has the least substance at all. Various media types get sexually aroused and that just shows me how deranged they really are.
    So certain trolls here can continue to think obama does no wrong, excuse his associations as being of no concern/ saying McCain’s are worse, etc.
    As you were. We know the lies will continue. Prevarications are what make up the liberal mindset. I do wonder what liberals will do once they lose a third presidential cycle..PEST this time once again? Post election stress therapy combined with MDS? Try some lithium, paxil or prozac.

    madmax333 (0c6cfc)

  75. #72 love2008,

    Not many people on this blog will believe that.

    Almost everyone on this blog believes precisely that.

    Cut and paste any specific comment I made there that was a deliberate lie.

    Ok, right here.

    JD! “You called me a Bigot? One of us is going to get banned today, I swear it!” Guess who said it. Twenty Points for the right answer.
    Comment by love2008 — 8/14/2008 @ 6:37 am

    And now you lie again in comment #72 on this thread with:

    I will not apologize for calling you a bigot because I did not.

    when there is this

    And to Stashiu3, if you are not a bigot, why are you acting like one?

    and this

    Secondly, DRJ, I want to apologize to Stasiu3 for the misunderstanding. He is not a bigot. He is a true American. But I know who the real bigot on this thread really is, Vermont Neighbor.

    where you acknowledge calling me a bigot in error (although only to DRJ, and not really apologizing as I explained earlier), but go on to call Vermont Neighbor a bigot without cause. Or do you stand by that as well? I’ve already explained why any reasonable person would conclude the word “bigot” was directed at least at me, although probably others as well.

    So far, you haven’t done enough to provide evidence.

    It’s never going to be enough for you, I realize that now. You have been proven a liar so many times, on multiple threads, that nearly everyone reading realizes it too. You have zero credibility and will never regain any until you make amends and begin to comment honestly and respectfully. If past behavior is any indication (and it usually is), that’s not going to happen. So be it… since you continue to ignore DRJ’s directive to apologize for the “Satan” references, we’ll see what happens from here I guess.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  76. #73 no one you know,

    Of course love2008 knows that… it just doesn’t matter to her. I replied to her #72 already, but it’s stuck in the filter as well right now (again, spam filter does not like linky-love… understandable when spam has so many crappy links). She can’t be bothered to check research of others, even when she is the one who insisted on it. Why should love2008 bother when she knows it’s only going to prove she is wrong? She already knows it.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  77. Racist bigots.

    JD (5f0e11)

  78. #76 JD

    Nuttin’ but luv for ya bud!! 🙂

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  79. Stash – you would have better luck teaching a brick wall to do quantum physics. You would have better luck trying to get Baracky to commit to even just 3 positions per issue. You would have better luck teaching Levi manners.

    JD (5f0e11)

  80. She can’t be bothered to check research of others, even when she is the one who insisted on it.
    Comment by Stashiu3 — 8/21/2008 @ 3:32 pm

    Have noticed that too in other situations – whether in checking or responding – not polite, to say the least, when he/she does it.

    and speaking of making others work more:

    love2008,
    out of respect for you am trying to keep typing he/she and hers/his when referring to you but it is getting a bit tiresome; sorry. If you don’t want to reveal your gender is it OK w/ you if I just refer to you from now on as one or the other? (in case you didn’t know am female)

    no one you know (1f5ddb)

  81. Love2008 @ 15 — I’m just now seeing your comment about this post.

    As for my “linking” it to Obama, I did no such thing.

    My reference is clearly as to timing — the Enquirer is going all-in with an issue that will hit the supermarket shelves roughly the same time the DNC starts.

    Or are you too obtuse to have understood the import of “I’m sure Obama loves the timing“?

    WLS (26b1e5)

  82. I’m sure Levi “knows” manners, he just doesn’t see the need to use them. He’s pointed that out many times. We’re just ignorant wingnuts that he toys with like a cat with a string-toy. I think he honestly believes that.

    love2008, on the other hand, not so much. By editing my comments and presenting them as if they were copy&pasted, she’s demonstrated that her dishonesty is willful, not accidental. She tries to leave herself “wiggle-room” to parse her way out of the more outlandish whoppers she puts forth, but even then gets caught out in lies.

    She can’t truly believe she has any credibility left, but it suits her to pretend she does and play the victim. I’m still waiting for her to point to a single comment I’ve made in two years here that was a lie or suggests I’m a bigot. It’s far too late for her to claim she never called me either… but she’ll try. Whatever it takes to distract and evade… she’ll try.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  83. noyk – How incredibly sexist misogynistic and matriarchal of you.

    JD (5f0e11)

  84. #79 no one you know,

    She’s a she. No way a male from any culture, even far-left Moonbatvania, would write the way she does for this long. Just look at the difference between how she addresses DRJ and JD when being playful. DRJ is treated as a respected peer, JD is being flirted with. Even an effeminate homosexual male (NTTIAWWT) would not write the way love2008 does.

    The funniest part is, she thinks she’s mysterious. As I said on another thread a while back, I think I know who she is at another site… it’s just not important to me and couldn’t be easily proven, even if it became important. (so don’t bother confirming or denying love2008, I really don’t care either way and don’t feel the need to discuss it with you as I know you don’t really care either except as another possible distraction and evasion.)

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  85. Comment by JD — 8/21/2008 @ 4:02 pm

    *gasps* 🙂

    Comment by Stashiu3 — 8/21/2008 @ 4:14 pm

    The style does seem female to me but have been completely wrong before to my complete embarrassment. Couldn’t matter to me less what gender anyone is here except that grammatical correctness is a core family value for me. 😛

    no one you know (1f5ddb)

  86. Flirts with me?! Where did that come from ?!

    JD (5f0e11)

  87. I vote for transgender.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  88. #84 no one you know,

    No worries about embarrassment in this case. love2008 has gone to great lengths to try and avoid confirming any information about herself, usually a good practice. Again, her purpose is for other reasons… for example, pointedly ignoring someone else’s assumption she was Muslim (which supported her at that time) until it became more convenient to be a Christian, then a devout Christian, then a “nutcase” Christian (her description, not mine). No reason for you to continue with the awkward he/she/hers/his stuff when love2008 fails to clarify after you have respectfully asked several times. It’s clear she wants to pretend that she could be either.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  89. #85 JD

    Flirts with me?! Where did that come from ?!

    Come on bud… you’re kidding, right? She lurves her JD!! 🙂

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  90. Apogee – The correct term is transtesticled.

    Stash – Step away from the bottle. Slowly.

    JD (5f0e11)

  91. Stashiu3…
    I just scratch my head over the fact that you still seek to engage Lovey. It’s just not worth it! Which is why I gave up a couple days ago.

    JD…
    Please settle on one salutation. I thought you had staked out the ground on “Racist”? If so, I would like to use “Bigot”.

    Thank you.

    Another Drew (b53d17)

  92. #72

    Not many people on this blog will believe that [love2008 is a liar].

    Raise your hand if you don’t think this.

    steve miller (b589d7)

  93. AD – Bigot is all yours. Racist.

    JD (5f0e11)

  94. #75
    *sigh*
    Ok. Lets go over it again. The comment in question is #208
    You guys, love’08 and Oriam, still want to defend that??? Nuts. I’m sure as hell not.

    Are you deliberately trying to obsfucate and misread my position on this issue or what? I have said over and again on this subject, John Edwards messed up. No excuse. He has with one single act of foolishness and lust, fueled by pride, destroyed his political legacy. My point is that John McCain did something similar or worst and no one wants to even speak one word of disapproval. Making your judgment biased and lacking in integrity. BTW, who are we to judge any one? I condemn both of them and forgive both of them. Now can we move on?
    Of particular interest to you in your response was this line. My point is that John McCain did something similar or worst and no one wants to even speak one word of disapproval.
    When I used the word “similar”, I meant that they both cheated on their wives. I still stand by that. Even McCain confesses to that too. When I used the word “worst”, I meant while in Edwards’ case, it did not and has not led to divorce, McCain had not yet concluded the divorce proceedings with his wife before getting married to Cindy. In my book, adultery is bad, divorce is worst. But you are free to differ.
    My anger was that people were trying to say that McCain’s infidelity was not the same as Edwards in that, his happened long before he got into politics. To which I strongly opposed by saying it is not a matter of when but what. Conclusion, if you are going to beat up Edwards for his sin, remember McCain. Yes people have made the argument that McCain did not get the woman pregnant nor did he use campaign funds to finance a secret affair. Correct. No argument about that. But you must also give him his own share of the blame. Fair is fair!
    And I am not going to discuss this any further.

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  95. Let’s hope you keep your word on this. It would be a refreshing change.

    steve miller (b589d7)

  96. I can’t help it – #93 When I used the word “worst” and In my book, adultery is bad, divorce is worst.

    My suggestion would be to delay publishing your book until after you send it to a proofreader.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  97. Thanks, JD.

    Bigot!

    Another Drew (b53d17)

  98. How can there be 208 comments on a thread with less than 100 comments?

    As Churchill once said, “The best way to withdraw is — to withdraw.

    steve miller (b589d7)

  99. #93 love2008,

    Ok. Lets go over it again. The comment in question is #208

    No, that is not the comment in question… nice try though. Wait, not really. Also, How do you get this?

    McCain had not yet concluded the divorce proceedings with his wife before getting married to Cindy.

    So now you’re accusing McCain of bigamy? Or is nobody supposed to notice when you put stuff like that in there because it’s buried? In just about any other case, I’d give the benefit of the doubt and call that inadvertent, but you’ve lost that presumption long ago. Myself, I’d call it another lie.

    Now, don’t forget to look for my response to your #72 when it’s retrieved from the spam filter. You’re the one who insisted on copy&paste with links. Also, any time you’d like to point out where I’ve lied here anywhere in the last two years, you’re more than welcome to try. Ignoring the rest of the points (i.e. editing my comments when you copy&paste, McCain being “in prison” as opposed to a POW camp, ignoring DRJ’s direction to apologize for the “Satan” references, etc…) does not make them go away. It’s clear to everyone that you are ignoring them and why.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  100. #97
    You should take some of that advice, yourself. The “208” comment was lifted from another thread. Another indication why it is not good to jump into a matter without first understanding what it is about. Something a lot of people here do.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  101. I think I found your comment, Stashiu3. Is it #76? There have been so many comments caught in the filter it’s hard to keep count.

    DRJ (a5243f)

  102. That’s the one DRJ, thank you. 🙂

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  103. You can helpfully include a link to the other comment so that we are not left guessing.

    That would go miles to help you make your point.

    Another would be to fess up to what Stashiu keeps pointing out to you. In my book, you would get considerable respect for being honest. Because you keep avoiding him, you come across as someone who’s willing to send out darts but it unwilling to take returning fire based upon your actions.

    steve miller (b589d7)

  104. That’s why I don’t like putting the number in front of whatever post you’re referencing. It changes if a post is pulled from the filter. I’m going to reference by the posting time from now on.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  105. Stashiu, that’s probably a better option. I’ll try to do the same thing. (I’m not of course piling on to your issues with love2008. Good luck trying to get that poster to admit fault.)

    steve miller (b589d7)

  106. The “208″ comment was lifted from another thread.

    Irrelevant, as you still authored it, as well as your additional explanation in #93 of this thread.

    Your failure to recognize what I was referring to only reinforces the point made by many commenters here regarding your inability to respond to specifics.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  107. Comment by steve miller — 8/21/2008 @ 5:35 pm

    Lol!! I know it’s unlikely to ever happen and there’s no way to correct everyone you come across on the internet, but the only one here to call me a liar and a bigot is love2008. She wanted to make it personal and thought that I would just get frustrated and give up on her like so many others have. Well, it’s personal… hope she’s happy. Strangely, she still doesn’t realize how easy it would be to recover and instead keeps breaking the first rule of holes.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  108. Yeah, she’s a piece of work. Flashes of lucidity and then acres of ritalin.

    steve miller (b589d7)

  109. You should have known by now, that I don’t really care about how many of you gang up to beat that faded tripe about me on this blog. Your comments are more like…..dust off my shoulder. I will continue to visit this blog and post comments as I deem necessary. I will disagree with what I don’t agree with and the ones I agree with, I will agree with. When I feel like, I will quit this blog. Not because of any of you but because I chose to. Last I checked, this is Patterico’s Blog. That makes us all visitors. But you can continue with your stuff. After all, what else can you do with your time.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  110. Comment by love2008 — 8/21/2008 @ 6:06 pm

    Shorter love2008: “I don’t care if DRJ gives me an ultimatum… she’s not the boss of me!”

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  111. love2008 never learned the first rule of holes.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  112. Love, dear, feel free to stay around and post all you want. Patterico has made that possible.

    I don’t want you to leave or anything. Perhaps you can be salvaged.

    steve miller (b589d7)

  113. #111
    I am sure DRJ knows the game you are playing: trying to get her involved with this. She is smarter than that. She is the most reasonable, respectful, intelligent, charming, warm and aggressively compassionate person I have ever encountered. She makes me want to keep coming back here. She is the reason why I am here and until she tells me to leave, I won’t. She is the Queen of this Blog and she knows I am loyal to her. You can say what you like about love2008. But don’t touch my DRJ!

    love2008 (1b037c)

  114. Comment by steve miller — 8/21/2008 @ 6:18 pm

    Perhaps you can be salvaged.

    I think at this point it’s going to be up to our hosts. Are they going to allow open defiance of a direct ultimatum? DRJ told her to apologize for the “Satan” nonsense and love2008 has refused, then ignored all reminders. Unwise at best, IMO.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  115. Stashiu3. I am sorry for calling you Satan. It was uncalled for and cruel. No excuse for that. You are not a Bigot, neither are you a liar. I am sorry if I said anything to that effect. Forgive me.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  116. Love, I commend you. That took a lot.

    Yours respectfully,

    steve miller (b589d7)

  117. In fact, I shall bookmark your response so that if someone says you don’t apologize, I can offer it as proof that you can.

    steve miller (b589d7)

  118. Comment by love2008 — 8/21/2008 @ 6:21 pm

    I am sure DRJ knows the game you are playing: trying to get her involved with this.

    Not a game love2008, making the observation that you have continued to ignore “your” DRJ. I’m certain DRJ understands exactly where I’m coming from, even if you don’t. Pretending you’re trying to defend her is pathetic after you’ve blown her off to suit yourself. Acting like I would even consider attacking her so that you needed to defend her is even more pathetic.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  119. I think Love2008 has apologized for her calling Stashiu “Satan.”

    steve miller (b589d7)

  120. Comment by love2008 — 8/21/2008 @ 6:30 pm

    Nicely put. I think more of you for apologizing, and think others will too.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  121. Comment by love2008 — 8/21/2008 @ 6:30 pm

    Accepted and will not be brought up by me unless it happens again (barring me lying or saying something bigoted/racist… then call me on it of course). I will still disagree with you on a lot (like the prison/prison camp thing), but as long as you remain honest and respectful you can expect the same from me. Any time you disagree with something I say, I will listen.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  122. So based on this post from August 20, 2008…… should we give credence to reports from The National Enquirer about Palin’s affair?

    Just for the record…… I’m not.

    Oiram (983921)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1054 secs.