Email This to a Friend
How the Media Is Still Screwing Up the Edwards Story
Unbelievably, the mainstream press continues to coddle John Edwards.
The mainstream media didn’t drop the ball on the Rielle Story — they popped it. Then they folded it up, stuck the ungainly mess in their pocket, and hoped that if you noticed it, you’d figure they were just happy to see you.
Rielle Hunter didn’t get half the screwing that news consumers got these last few months. There’s the sniff test — does the story smell right? — and then there’s what I call The Wife Test. If I imagine running an excuse past my wife and she wouldn’t buy it, then I’d better try something else. The Rielle-y Amazing Adventure never came close to passing the wife test, and yet not one MSM editor thought to give it more than a cursory sniff.
LA Times blog honcho Tony Pierce (living evidence that The Peter Principle might prove a pinch Panglossian) told his bloggers to “keep rockin” [sic], but to keep their clams shut about Edwards and Hunter. Pierce’s gag order had the benefit of being loud and clear — but why the utter silence, until just Friday, of the rest of the mainstream media?
It’s understandable when Democrats want to sweep the story under the rug — Mickey Kaus valiantly excepted — but isn’t the MSM in the business of providing news in exchange for money? Not at the New York Times, they aren’t. NYT “Public editor” Clark Hoyt freely admits that his paper “never made a serious effort to investigate the story.” Hoyt goes on to say that he doesn’t think that “liberal bias had anything to do with it.” However, in the very same column he admits that the Times freely reported totally unsubstantiated rumors about an affair involving John McCain. If you treat a Republican one way and a Democrat another and it isn’t liberal bias — then what is it? A Sulzberger family suicide pact?
Michael Kinsley has another theory:
…the MSM told a story about Edwards — they told it often and loud — it was probably one of the best-known and totally accepted stories of the 2008 campaign: John loyally standing by his loyal wife as she deals with cancer. If the story isn’t true, they should run a correction. My god, look at the things they run corrections over — the spelling of people’s names, and so on. Yet they’re leaving this huge story uncorrected, and leaving their readers misinformed. No?
Let’s be glad of one thing: The Edwards story isn’t running on page A18 in the tiny little “Corrections” box: “… Edwards may not be entirely nice, after all. The Washington Post regrets the error.”
Of course, now that the MSM has belatedly deigned to cover the story, they’re double-checking all of Edwards’ statements and denials for accuracy. Well, actually, not so much.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Stephen Green writes, broadcasts, and enjoys the occasional lovely adult beverage at the home he shares with his wife and son in Monument, Colorado.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
51 Comments
1. Cory:There are a number of blogs now speculating that the media didn’t go after this story because they wanted Edwards to take votes from Hillary, giving the nomination to Obama. I’m not big on conspiracies, but it sounds pretty plausible to me!
Aug 11, 2008 - 4:04 am 2. Janet:I am sick of the “So called” Free Press…
Aug 11, 2008 - 4:55 am 3. Vodkapundit » Gleefully Gratuitous Grouchiness:[...] by Stephen Green on 11 Aug 2008 at 06:46 am If this story’s a-rockin’ don’t come a-knockin’ — my latest PJ Media column is [...]
Aug 11, 2008 - 5:49 am 4. Increase Mather:The MSM is Pravda, ca. 1970……they have been lapped by technology yet refuse to abandon liberal dogma……it’s not just Edwards they protect….they had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Clinton/Monica story.
Actually….who cares?…..they are quickly becoming irrelevant.
Aug 11, 2008 - 6:00 am 5. Chris:With all due respect you are wrong.
It was NOT unbelievable that the press would continue to coddle John Edwards.
It was to be expected.
Aug 11, 2008 - 6:03 am 6. cedarford:1. Conservative Bloggers will not tire of this, as the MSM coverup of Edwards to promote Obama over Hillary, keep the adulterous affair from influencing Republican primary choices (Gotta keep Edwards spillover from hurting ex-philanderers McCain and Rudy!!), and just the disparate treatment compared to stories that flew off the presses about Republican sexual pecadillos with Page 1 urgency —-
Form Exhibit A now, on MSM liberal bias. All proven valid, now, in conservatives minds.
2. The kid deserves a name on a birth certificate, given mommy clearly has gotten some major payoffs. If Edwards aide, the happily married Andrew Young is the daddy and ADMITs it, why did he refuse his name on the birth certificate and the obligation to future child support? Why accept a situation where taxpayers will possibly end up supporting the kid instead of a millionaire biodaddy (Andrews or Edwards) if Rielle Hunter’s money dries up?
3. If the money was diverted from the Edwards campaign to his personal use – bimbo hush money – then he defrauded donors and, if he accepted matching funds, the taxpayer.
Not just the “video producer” fees Hunter got from the Edwards campaign after the affair started, but explaining how a women with no steady job lives in a 2 million dollar home now, and refused paternity tests.
4. If Obama flames out, or Mccain shows he is not ready for primetime – much of the political science and historical writing of the 2008 Campaign will be about the MSM – then dying but still powerful – attempting to manipulate the election by:
1. Refusing to vet Obama.
Aug 11, 2008 - 6:14 am 7. The Wizard:2. Concealing the Edwards bombshell to draw white ethnic, working class voters and trial lawyer donor money away from Hillary to help Obama..
3. Insulate McCain and Rudy from effects of their past sex scandals in the midst of what would have been the Edwards collapse had it been reported. If the Edwards adultery became public before Iowa, there is a good chance that no only would Hillary gotten the Dem nomination, but that Republicans in denouncing Edwards sleaze as a way of mitigating all the assiduously reported Republican sex scandals that cost them so dearly in 2006 and likely in 2008 – may have selected the squeaky clean Romney as their nominee.
The books may conclude that the MSM Edwards coverup, or decision of other candidates that knew of it from their dirt-diggers – had a momentous impact on the 2008 candidate selection by deliberately keeping voters misinformed. That one of the core presumptions of a free press – that we have informed voters through their efforts – was subverted by MSM who believed knowledgable voters were DANGEROUS to their liberal agenda..
Is anyone really surprised???? MSM is the sounding board for the Democrats and the left-wingnuts! Again, if it were a Republican, it would have been on Page One for MONTHS!
Disgusting.
Aug 11, 2008 - 6:41 am 8. uburoi:If the child proves to be John Edwards’s, and all indications suggest it is, then will the liberal elite chase him arourd with pointed questions about using contraception? I mean, what kind of example is it for a big birth control leftist who can’t even use a condom himself in a situation that obviously calls for it? Or maybe it is not his child, but he has agreed to pay for it to keep her happy and not talking?
Aug 11, 2008 - 6:49 am 9. Atlanta Media Guy:Once again the MSM is trying to effect an election. This time with their ignoring a story not just trying to make one up like the famed Dan Rather and Mary Mapes did. The MSM keeps digging their grave deeper and deeper. Who can we trust to deliver us the news, just the news without opinion and gross negligence of basic journalism?
Aug 11, 2008 - 6:56 am 10. Karl:TP’s complaint is that Fox News — one outlet out of many — would rather talk about John’s Reille-y Good Time than about Russia’s invasion of Georgia.
In one segment, where PBS’s Bonnie Erbe kept wanting to change the subject from the one she was presumably invited on to discuss.
Meanwhile, anyone care to guess which story currently tops the list of “What’s Popular at the Huffington Post?” (hint: Not Georgia.)
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:07 am 11. Mike G:One small ding to the brave new media: isn’t there any Pajaman who realizes it’s “Rielle,” not “Reille”? It’s not like it hasn’t been spelled right all over the place. Messing up the little stuff won’t help your case.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:10 am 12. Shooty:Well written, Cedarford.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:12 am 13. fkdenny:How do I go about nominating Mickey Kaus for the Pulitzer Prize?
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:29 am 14. Martya:The left-wing media wants this to go away, NOW. If people, even liberals, think too much about the difference between Edward’s public image and the reality of what a lying POS he is, that same process may halo over to Hussein. Obama is a glib empty suit who is hiding a lot.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:33 am 15. ZEITGEIST:Any interested media type who wants to examine Edwards further might proceed on the assumption that Reille was not his first fling. Edwards was no less arrogant five or ten years ago; he knoes it, his wife knows it and many of those around him know. Let’s talk to former campaign workers, legal staff, Senate staff. Some one knows the name of a former girlfriend who is having a hard time and not being gifted with $15,000 a month. If any media type is unsure how to launch/conduct such an investigation, just think about how you’d proceed if you were out to get a Republican.
[...] GREEN: How the Press is Still Screwing Up the Edwards Story. “Reille Hunter didn’t get half the screwing that news consumers got these last few [...]
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:35 am 16. K T Cat:I have not kept rockin. I feel ashamed to admit it, so very, very ashamed.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:40 am 17. Craig A. Zimmerman:Quote from Men in Black’s Agent “Kay” referring to the National Enquirer: “Best investigative reporting on the planet”. No lie, No exaggeration. By the way, for how many years will the “love-child” have no father? Eventually an 18 year old “love child” will probably want to know who Daddy was.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:42 am 18. Joe Buzz:I thought it was funny that the Washington Post spun it as “had an affair”. If silky was in her hotel room within the past month as reported, then I would suggest he is still “having”.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:46 am 19. lb_philly:I am no fan of the Populist With the $400 Haircut, but I really don’t want his wife spending her final months having her nose rubbed in it. Common decency and a quiet aside to Edwards that he is now political toast would seem the better course.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:48 am 20. sherlock:FTA – ”Was it because of a condescending attitude toward a tabloid’s reporting? Bias toward a Democratic candidate? Or sympathy toward Elizabeth Edwards, who is battling an incurable form of cancer?”
Um, Bob, I know you guys want to make sure we know how wonderful you are compared to the National Enquirer, and that Elizabeth Edwards is the most admired woman in the world, and perhaps the galaxy, as you have been reminding us all week, but you know, Bob… I’m just gonna play a hunch and go with door B.
Bob Barker: We have a winnah!!!
Seriously foax, notice how this quote hides the actual dirty motive between two plausible and even possibly laudable motives? Sort of the proverbial feces sandwich, huh?
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:58 am 21. Stephen Green:Mike G –
Yes, one weekend columnist’s spelling error is quite akin to an entire industry willfully ignoring one of the year’s biggest political stories.
Me, I just copped to my mistake. What says the LA Times?
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:00 am 22. Sandra M:I have boycotted the New York Times much of my adult life because its disgraceful non-coverage of the Moscow show trials in the 30’s and Walter Duranty’s suppression of stories such as Stalin’s forced famine in the Ukraine, made all other American reporters’ stories about the evil empire suspect. Then, in the 60′’s, NYT’s Herb Matthews enthusiasm about Fidel Castro as Cuba’s Abe Lincoln resulted in volunteers, weapons and money flooding into Castro’s hands, and a Soviet satellite 90 miles from our shore.
Given my scornful attitude towards the Gray Lady, my world is spinning this morning as I have read not one but two terrific NYT opinion pieces. Bill Kristol’s riveting piece about Russia’s attack on Georgia and why we must support the Georgians as they have supported us in Iraq. And to my great surprise, the most informative and hilarious column I’ve yet read on the Edwards scandal written not by Ann Coulter or Stephen Green, #’s 3 and 2 respectively, but by — I can’t stand it –Maureen Dowd.
My world is spinning. I once wasted money on Dowd’s procrustean Bush book. BUT today both Stephen and Maureen made me laugh out loud. Maureen had the best “dish”. Rielle Hunter is aka Lisa Druck? And Jay McInerney wrote a book about her adventures? Wow! Maureen just gave this story legs, super-model long legs.
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:06 am 23. CosmicConservative:What I find hilarious about this is that in the midst of all the well-deserved accusations about how the press gave Edwards a pass on this story, nobody is asking the rather obvious question: “What is the press ignoring NOW?” To put it rather bluntly, what do you think the likelihood is that six months from now we discover what the press decided not to report about one Barack Obama?
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:07 am 24. Christy:Rehab will come in 9 months when Elizabeth dies and we watch him grieve then turn around in 2 months and marry his baby momma. All will be forgiven.
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:12 am 25. Mabel:It is really Machiavellan what Edwards is doing…he offers to have a paternity test, knowing full well (probably in agreement with Rielle) that she will say “no way.” He saves face and denies his child paternity in hopes of salvaging his political future. What no one is asking is why was he at the Beverly Hills hotel visiting his ex-mistress’ child if he is not the father??? And why were his supporters paying her off wihtout his knowledge???
For those citing McCain and Giuliani’s extramarital affairs, this is not about an unfaithful husband…it is about a politician putting his political career above everything and everyone else (cancer-stricken wife, mistress he does not love, love child, etc, etc). Edwards is really a piece of work and the failure of the MSM to question his judgment is sickening when just a couple of months ago they were ready to crucify McCain over zero eveidence.
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:34 am 26. Kicking Over My Traces: Better Trustworthy Information Than Caged Lobbyists:[...] UPDATE: Stephen Green at Pajamas Media on media bias in the John Edwards story: [...]
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:42 am 27. TomG:Absolutely hilarious, Mr. Green. I was laughing out loud.
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:48 am 28. Rob:cedarford,
Aug 11, 2008 - 8:56 am 29. Annabel:I doubt the MSM was looking to help Guiliani by this, especially considering the bogus story about questionable expenses for his mistress’ protection that was front-page news; after which, he tanked in the polls.
Cedarford, I see one problem with your analysis. I’m not at all sure that covering up the Edwards scandal was a way to take votes from Hillary and ensure an Obama win. Au contraire, as much as you point out that the Edwards scandal would have splattered Giuliani and McCain, how can you overlook what it would have reminded the public about the Clintons??!!!!
Aug 11, 2008 - 9:02 am 30. IloveBarack:Fellow Democrats:
Don’t let them do this to us! Cant you see what the repukes are up to? This is part of their plan to tarnish our Candidate – since they know they can never find anything between the perfect love match of Barack and Michelle.
Here is what we must do:
You know Rielle Hunter must be a republican plant. Im sure this is a big con job. She took advantage of a great man by tempting, tempting, tempting him in his moment of weakness. John Edwards is so full of pain for poor Elizabeth and concern for the world’s poor people that he must be excused if he let his defenses down for just a short time with this Republican hussy. I know since then Rielle has been blackmailing our poor Johnnie and that was why he was at the hotel — to plead with her to stop.
I know if we try hard enough, we can find sometime that she, or her parents, or someone she knows has voted Republican and that will be the smoking gun. Thats all we need to make the world feel sorry for John (besides did you know his poor wife is dying of cancer?). We have to make the world see that this whole thing is all the republicans fault.
In the meantime, please dont let any republican hussies get near Barack.
I have a second idea, if this doesnt work. I read that Rielle is big into New Age, and psychics and such. Luckily there was a psychic named John Edwards who has been on TV for the past few years. Im sure we can use that to confuse all the rubes in fly-over country that this is all a case of mistaken identity.
Come on, Progressives. Its so hard for us to win the Presidency. We cant let them steal it from us again. It rightfully belongs to us!
Aug 11, 2008 - 9:20 am 31. Joe Buzz:IlB, do you not realize that Scarlet Jo is Carl Rove’s loyal love child and never texts without his guidance?
Aug 11, 2008 - 9:35 am 32. Sandra M:Cosmic Conservative asked:
>>“What is the press ignoring NOW?” To put it rather bluntly, what do you think the likelihood is that six months from now we discover what the press decided not to report about one Barack Obama?”
The national press is said to have known about this story 10 months ago and said nothing.
In 1992, the national press covering Bill Clinton in Arkansas knew about the Bimbo eruptions and other scandals and kept quiet for way too long.
Our First Amendment gives the press great power and they have proved themselves irresponsible with respect to the use of that power in several election campaigns now. Boycotting the national press has resulted in great losses for them.
We should praise them when they do something right: Bill Kristol’s superb column on Georgia this morning and Jake Tapper hosting THIS WEEK for ABC yesterday. I wrote to ABC that I’d like to see him host TW permanently, rather than that biased little Demo deeb they have now. Tapper was evenhanded with people on both sides and is highly intelligent, handsome, manly and sometimes hilarious.
I am still replaying in my head his exchange with Donna Brazile a week ago on TW. Brazile was seeing the bogeyman of racism in the use of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, two blondes, on McCain’s Obama Celebrity ad. Why those two blonde women? “Because they’re stupid,” said Tapper and made an instant fan of me.
Aug 11, 2008 - 9:43 am 33. The Monster:“Luckily there was a psychic named John Edwards”.
Actually, his name is “John Edward (McGee, Jr.)”, but he shares with former US Senator Johnny Reid Edwards the alleged ability to communicate with the dead for gullible audiences.
Aug 11, 2008 - 9:47 am 34. david levavi:Reminds me of the NYT’s non-coverage of the Watergate break-in and its aftermath. As the Washington Posts hotly covered the Watergate story, the Times ignored it. Dummied up as to why it wasn’t interested and then made excuses about lack of corroboration.
At dinner with my wife and some friends the evening following the break in, this (then) faithful Times reader insisted that the break-in had to be political. Why would a bunch of Cubans from Florida burglarize Democratic National Headquarters? To steal IBM Selectric typewriters? Hewlett-Packard calculators? Obviously they were after lists and information.
I made a wager that night, less than twenty-four hours after the break in, that a) this was no minor incident and b) that John Mitchell, Nixon’s hardnosed AG serving as GOP Election Chairman would be implicated before the affair was over.
If an ordinary laymen knew this based on the NYT’s original story of burglars arrested at Democratic election headquarters at the Watergate, how could the editors at the Times miss it? For weeks and months.
Simple answer: The Times was still recovering from its roughing up by Nixon’s White House over publishing the Pentagon Papers stolen by Daniel Ellsberg. The Sulzbergers and the Ochsen weren’t ready for another confrontation with the Administration. Cowardice, plain and simple, underlay the NYT hanging back while its competitor, The Washington Post climbed all over the story.
“All the news that’s fit to print” is a motto that would have worked nicely for Pravda under the Soviets. The NYT is unworthy of the constitutional amendments protecting it.
Aug 11, 2008 - 9:52 am 35. J Brown:“Rove, you magnificent Bastard.”
Aug 11, 2008 - 9:53 am 36. edward:Consider this: if the MSM had followed the Edwards story when it erupted in the NE last October, Hillary would now be the Democratic nominee. By sitting on the story until now, the MSM did a great service to their favorite Obama by forcing Clinton to take on Edwards. There are already allegations on the Internet that the Clinton campaign sought to push the press to follow to follow the NE story last year, and they were rebuffed.
Aug 11, 2008 - 10:34 am 37. tanstaafl:I think the real point of this story can get lost in a speculative morass.
Though Bill Keller (NYTimes executive editor) and sundry folks at the LATimes might offer up self-righteous or convoluted explanations, it seems pretty straightforward that these newspapers (and others) avoided the story in order to not throw dirt on the liberal agenda.
Control of the information stream is something we should all be worried about. Although not a completely “new” phenomenon, it seems more extreme now than at any other time in my life.
Newspaper editors, in story selection, are acting as little mini heads of state.
No dictatorship can function without censorship.
In this particular case, we shouldn’t be bamboozled a second time by believing any of the excuses being offered up for the MSM “avoidance” of the Edwards’ story.
Aug 11, 2008 - 11:07 am 38. Dave II:“What is the press ignoring NOW?”
READ THIS TO SEE. The TRUTH will come out!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2059717/posts
Aug 11, 2008 - 11:13 am 39. Virginia Harris:Politicians will be politicians!
This was a year when 7 out of 10 candidates had a known history of cheating on their spouses.
The voters were yawning about it.
But a love child is a whole different kettle of fish!
Betcha don’t know which president had a love child while running for office, and that it actually helped women win the vote.
Most people are totally in the dark about HOW the suffragettes won.
But because they did, women have choices now. They can stay with a cheater like John Edwards, or walk out.
Now you can discover the sexy, shocking truth of how the suffragetts did it, and it’s as easy as opening your e-mail.
“The Privilege of Voting” is a new e-mail series that follows eight great women from 1912 – 1920 to reveal ALL that happened to set the stage for women to win the vote.
Two beautiful and extremely powerful suffragettes — Alice Paul and Emmeline Pankhurst are featured, along with Edith Wharton, Isadora Duncan, Alice Roosevelt and two gorgeous presidential mistresses.
There is a ton of heartache, and a LOT of hot affairs on the rocky road to the ballot box.
Presented in a unique sequential e-mail series — each exciting episode is a about 10 minutes — perfect to enjoy during coffeebreaks, or anytime.
Subscribe free at
http://www.CoffeebreakReaders.com/tpovpage.html
Aug 11, 2008 - 11:50 am 40. Rose:This is really what it’s all about. The people that write the news are pretty much what John Edwards is: lying hypocrits; additionally, they live the same kind of life Edwards does and it’s not of devotion or loyalty and they(MSM) would very much like this to be thought of as normal behavior.
Aug 11, 2008 - 1:12 pm 41. schnargley:I may be bucking the flow of opinion here, but I am not upset at the Edwards scandal. A movie chracater once said to his son, “All men are weak. All men fail.” For years Edwards has been working tirelessly for the poor, women, the disenfranchised, those who are sick with no health insurance, the outcasts in the ‘other America,’ all us little people. Who can blame him if he needs a little comfort, a nice mansion to sleep in, as well as another one for his girlfriend, very luxurious accomodations and vehicles, and a very expensive mistress arrangement? He has been so stressed out by helping all us little folk, that if he makes his dying wife suffer more in her last years, his distraught children angry and bitter, his abandoned mistress scorned by the world, his illigitimate child grow up fatherless, and millions of dollars of campaign funds go to pay for his personal needs and their myriad deletorious consequences, well hell, there have to be a few casualties in his noble crusade for social justice and truth, doesn’t there?
Aug 11, 2008 - 3:08 pm 42. ChrisPer:I can only approve the gloating chorus of MSM-bashing this story has led to, but I want to suggest that the real motive is usually more in line with the cock-up theory of history than any implicit left-wing-biased conspiracy. It’s sad that the NYT is almost as bad as WorldNetDaily, but understanding the way the system works is important.
Think about how people create media stories. Its a sausage machine, with ‘angle’ and ‘framing’ being the gift that (left or right) journalists use to grind out the repetitive approach to every story. If a story doesn’t fit ‘the frame’ that ‘everyone’ is writing from, it might be original but IT DOESN’T RUN. Writers under deadline pressure MUST go with the dominant framing, usually the MSM centre-left party line, to get stories accepted that can run. But this appalling non-coverage happened basically because no-one had the balls to submit a story that went against the ‘Edwards-plus-tragic-wife’ frame that the media had painted up for him. If they had just submitted, editors would have run it some way. The economics of the media machine require it.
Aug 11, 2008 - 6:56 pm 43. A Little Person:For years Edwards has been working tirelessly for the poor, women, the disenfranchised, those who are sick with no health insurance, the outcasts in the ‘other America,’ all us little people. Who can blame him if he needs a little comfort, a nice mansion to sleep in, as well as another one for his girlfriend, very luxurious accomodations and vehicles, and a very expensive mistress arrangement?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:14 pm 44. Javelin:You are wicked and brilliant
Wow, not investigating a sex scandal of a politician cheating on his wife. Of course, this is the most important issue in the world and the bad old MSM isn’t doing its best to folow the lead of tabloids, bloggers and other scandal mongers.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:51 pm 45. ProgMeister:Get a life, Green … you really think who John Edwards is knobbing is worth any ink, much less an ongoing investigation over the next 18 years into the kid’s college trust fund? If you really, really do you should keep in mind that’s there some really fun stories to write about Johnny Mc’s slimy sexual history … and did I mention JM *leaving* HIS wife because she, uh, kind of lost four inches of height and picked up 50 lbs after a horrendous auto accident?? Now THAT’s real character.
Give it up, it’s all boring and there are REAL stories to write.
Aug 11, 2008 - 7:55 pm 46. Mike G:“Mike G – Yes, one weekend columnist’s spelling error is quite akin to an entire industry willfully ignoring one of the year’s biggest political stories. Me, I just copped to my mistake. What says the LA Times?”
Oh, don’t be a whiner about it. I’m (obviously) not saying that, I’m saying Pajamas makes itself look slapdash (and a target for cheap shots) when it not only mistakes simple mistakes but reveals that there aren’t spellcheckers and multiple eyes looking at something who would catch such things. That’s giving the MSM a supposed advantage (no matter how untrue it may actually be in practice).
Also, sniping at commenters who were helpful is poor sportsmanship. A little Olympian detachment has always served the MSM well.
Aug 11, 2008 - 10:12 pm 47. Kenny:Javelin,
How much influence do YOU think Fred Baron would have had over John Edwards had Edwards managed to become President? “Nice reputation you have there, Mr. President — be a real shame if anything was to happen to it.”
There’s a reason we badly want to find the skeletons in the closets of those who aspire to power before they actually have their fingers on the button. Nobody really gives a damn if I get blackmailed; what’s the blackmailer gonna tell me to do? “I want a Fuddrucker’s hamburger before Saturday, or I talk, by God!” But when a sleazy trial lawyer is the guy who knows where the President’s love child is being kept, and he’s the guy who’s “taken care of” the situation and made it possible for you to be President — “Mr. President, I think you should sign that bill.” “Mr. President, I think this gentleman deserves a pardon.” “Well, Fred, you know how much I respect your judgment…”
Aug 11, 2008 - 10:35 pm 48. Marginalized Action Dinosaur » If you treat a Republican one way and a Democrat another and it isn’t liberal bias — then what is it?:[...] – Stephen Green agrees – “If you treat a Republican one way and a Democrat another and it isn’t liberal [...]
Aug 13, 2008 - 4:43 am 49. Pajamas Media » PJM Political 8/12/08: Escape From The Undernews!:[...] guest, Pajamas CEO Roger L. Simon, as they explore the implications for old and new media of the John Edwards scandal. Is the MSM once again admitting that their job these days seems to be blocking the news, not [...]
Aug 13, 2008 - 2:25 pm 50. Pajamas Media » It’s All Coming Down to a Few Key States…:[...] told me they are voting for John McCain. The one who’s not, an erstwhile supporter of John Edwards, is [...]
Oct 3, 2008 - 1:49 am 51. It’s All Coming Down to a Few Key States … | USA TERM LIMITS:[...] email, told me they are voting for John McCain. The one who’s not, an erstwhile supporter of John Edwards, is [...]
Oct 4, 2008 - 9:08 am