Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Elizabeth Edwards Tore Off Shirt, Collapsed Over Affair

John Edwards Trial: Testimony Reveals Elizabeth Edwards' Dramatic Confrontation With Husband Over Affair

05/2/12

GREENSBORO, N.C. — A former adviser to John Edwards recounted Wednesday how the former presidential candidate's now-deceased wife indignantly confronted her husband, baring her chest in front of staff members the day after a tabloid reported that he was cheating on her.

During a session at Edwards' corruption trial that saw his 30-year-old daughter flee the courtroom in tears, Christina Reynolds described how a very upset Elizabeth Edwards stormed away from her husband in October 2007, then collapsed in a ball on the pavement outside a private airplane hangar. Reynolds and another woman guided the anguished wife into a nearby ladies room to compose herself, but she soon returned to the private hangar to again confront her husband.

In front of several staff members, the woman who had endured grueling treatments for breast cancer took off her shirt and bra, exposing her chest.

"'You don't see me anymore,'" Reynolds quoted Elizabeth Edwards as screaming. "He didn't have much of a reaction."

As staffers scrambled to cover up Edwards' wife and huddle her into a car, Reynolds heard the Democratic candidate use a cell phone to call his wife's doctor to ask for help.

Edwards then boarded a waiting jet and took off for his scheduled appearance in South Carolina, Reynolds said.

She testified that Elizabeth Edwards had known about her husband's affair with Rielle Hunter before The National Enquirer made it public. Hers was the most stirring testimony of the day at Edwards' trial on corruption charges, as prosecutors worked to build a timeline of the affair and efforts to cover it up.

Shortly before Reynolds began her account of what happened that day at the Raleigh airport, Edwards turned to his daughter Cate, a lawyer who has been seated in the front row for much of her father's trial.

"I don't know what's coming," Edwards was heard saying. "Do you want to leave?"

She responded to him in a whisper, grabbed her purse and walked out, wiping away tears. Edwards was heard saying, "Cate, Cate" as she left. She returned to court about a half hour later, after a brief recess.

Shortly before her testimony about the airport argument, Reynolds recounted that Elizabeth Edwards asked her over to the couple's gated estate near Chapel Hill in the summer of 2007 to tell her that her husband had confessed to an affair the prior year.

"I was very surprised by what she told me and I didn't want it to ever become public so the kids wouldn't have to know about it," the former aide said.

Reynolds, now 37, had worked on John Edwards' successful U.S. senate campaign in 1998 and had quickly bonded with his wife. Both women grew up in military families and had moved around a lot as children. Reynolds worked as the research director and a senior communications adviser to the 2008 presidential campaign and recently joined the board of the educational foundation named for Elizabeth Edwards, who died in December of 2010.

Edwards has pleaded not guilty to six counts related to campaign-finance violations. He faces up to 30 years in prison and $1.5 million in fines if convicted on all counts.

At issue are payments from wealthy donors used to help keep his pregnant mistress out of public view. Edwards' attorneys have said he didn't know about the money.

by Anonymousreply 31003/08/2015

He really made her last years,hell,didn't he?

by Anonymousreply 105/03/2012

Yes, he,did,R, 1.

by Anonymousreply 205/03/2012

#4!!!

by Anonymousreply 405/03/2012

R3 = Rielle Hunter

by Anonymousreply 505/03/2012

A cute former assistant to John Edwards, named Josh Brumberger, also testified today.

by Anonymousreply 705/03/2012

Easily the stupidest logic I've ever read, R3.

Have you ever actually been in a serious relationship? Who the fuck cares if other people do it? If the person you've spent your life with cheated on you, it doesn't matter if "John Smith in Tacoma" cheated on his wife, too.

Lots of people also die, but I'm guessing if someone you love died, it wouldn't affect me in the same way as if someone I loved died.

by Anonymousreply 805/03/2012

Brumberger's testimony about how awful Hunter was with video (as the campaign's videographer) was pretty funny.

[quote]Edwards also ordered Brumberger to make sure the PAC paid for Hunter's health insurance, unheard-of for a consultant not on the full-time staff. Concerns were also raised among senior staff that Hunter didn't appear to know much about shooting video. Tapes filmed by Hunter played for the jury showed shaky camera work where those speaking were sometimes not in focus or not in the frame at all. "It was shoddy and unprofessional," Brumberger said.

Oh yeah, and he makes Edwards sound like the sleaze of the decade.

Cate Edwards reportedly ran out of the courtroom crying after not knowing what was about to rain down upon her. I feel so sorry for her. She's a Harvard Law grad and a newlywed suspending her life to deal/support her father and eventually abdicate all her dreams and goals to take care of two pre-teens. This is a tragedy. I just hope she knows when to say enough is enough.

Soon after, the wealthy heiress made the first in a series of substantial donations to Edwards' political committees and his anti-poverty foundation that would eventually total more than $6 million.

by Anonymousreply 1105/03/2012

Gee sh seems so stable I wonder why he cheated

by Anonymousreply 1205/03/2012

R10, but having it happening to others doesn't make the pain easier. Each experience is unique. Don't forget they also lost a child together. They've gone through things together that are personal to them, so to be betrayed by that person is devastating.

by Anonymousreply 1305/03/2012

Sorry, my copy and paste didn't quite work out at R11.

by Anonymousreply 1405/03/2012

Photo of Josh Brumberger:

by Anonymousreply 1505/03/2012

r3/r8......are you a woman?

by Anonymousreply 1705/03/2012

R10, yes many people get cheated on, but what Elizabeth Edwards went through was much worse than the average affair.

She was DYING OF CANCER. Were you dying of cancer when your husband cheated?

And did it play out on National television in front of the whole country?

by Anonymousreply 1805/03/2012

Elizabeth Edwards was not dying at the time of the affair.

Her cancer was in remission.

by Anonymousreply 1905/03/2012

There are fraus on this thread!!!!!!!!

by Anonymousreply 2005/03/2012

R19, someone (maybe you?) posted that on another Edwards thread recently.

As was pointed out by other posters, you DON'T KNOW THAT.

You were not there nor are you an expert on her medical condition at the time.

by Anonymousreply 2105/03/2012

Brumberger did not like what he found.

“Specifically, there was a lot of sex, drugs and rock and roll and a lot of astrology,” he said.

“I’m pretty certain I told Mr. Edwards that Ms. Hunter looked a little nutty. I believe he agreed.”

by Anonymousreply 2205/03/2012

R21, it has been quite easy to follow all the details pertaining to Elizabeth Edwards (and John Edwards), as the saga unfolded and afterwards.

Just because you do not read newspapers and articles, it doesn't mean all of us remain in the dark as you do.

by Anonymousreply 2305/03/2012

You're an idiot, R23. And wrong. And patronizing.

Her cancer was not in remission, nor does it make a difference whether or not it was. She ended up dying of cancer.

by Anonymousreply 2405/03/2012

Why are you on a gay website frau at r23 etc?

by Anonymousreply 2505/03/2012

Women should never marry men who are prettier than they are. It never ends well.

by Anonymousreply 2605/03/2012

"Concerns were also raised among senior staff that Hunter didn't appear to know much about shooting video. Tapes filmed by Hunter played for the jury showed shaky camera work where those speaking were sometimes not in focus or not in the frame at all. "It was shoddy and unprofessional," Brumberger said."

She learned by watching this show I was producing.

by Anonymousreply 2705/03/2012

Liz was pretty when hey married:

by Anonymousreply 2805/03/2012

And when I looked for their wedding pic, I came across their daughter's wedding pic (sans the groom).

Will this style ever go the fuck away? And what is it with big girls thinking they can pull it off? Their arms inevitably look like two pork roasts.

by Anonymousreply 2905/03/2012

How did the daughter get so heavy?

by Anonymousreply 3005/03/2012

" Elizabeth Edwards Tore Off Shirt, Collapsed Over Affair"

Mary!

by Anonymousreply 3105/03/2012

r19 is clearly a sociopath,or Rielle Hunter herself,or worse still,both!

by Anonymousreply 3205/03/2012

R19? The woman's dead. She was clearly NEVER OK.

by Anonymousreply 3305/03/2012

Cate had to take care of both parents when her brother died. They were both bedridden/housebound. I'd imagine the weight is from stress.

by Anonymousreply 3405/03/2012

She exposed her breasts to staff members? Rather dramatic, isn't it? Even as a result of finding out that yo're husband is cheating, this is a bit extreme. It seems to me that it would embarrass Elizabeth more than John.

by Anonymousreply 3505/03/2012

That is some nose on Cate's husband.

He has a late 18th/early 19th Century American painting face.

by Anonymousreply 3605/03/2012

R34, Wade Edwards (Kate's brother) died in 1996!!

Cate was thin for a long time. You probably do not remember her being very slim and lovely standing on the stage when John Edwards accepted the vice-presidential nomination. It was said she looked like Jackie Kennedy - with a retro sheath dress, slim, with a somewhat Jackie inspired hair-do.

by Anonymousreply 3705/03/2012

I was about to write a similar post, R37.

I recall her on stage when JE got the VP nom. She was a beautiful, thin girl.

by Anonymousreply 3805/03/2012

R35, actually, if you read some of the comments at The Huffington Post, most of the women there are sympathetic and completely relate to what she did. They say her actions were a raw, honest and emotional reaction in which she demonstrated to John what she was going through and what it had done to her body and how he had betrayed her.

It's the kind of scene you could picture an actress winning an Oscar, for. Very powerful.

by Anonymousreply 3905/03/2012

Yes, Cate Edwards was beautiful and slim for a long time.

She gave up being a lawyer a year or so ago (soon after graduationg from law school) saying she wanted to devote her time to running and continuing her mother's foundation.

by Anonymousreply 4005/03/2012

hump

by Anonymousreply 4105/03/2012

Some women mistakenly come to think that their husband is 'family' and that they are owed their husband's love because he is 'family'.

But in reality, a husband is not 'family'. He is only with the woman as long as he wants to be. He is not family and can leave the woman at any time.

by Anonymousreply 4205/03/2012

graduating from law school

by Anonymousreply 4305/03/2012

Shock and temporary insanity upon hearing of the betrayal led to boob exposure.

by Anonymousreply 4405/03/2012

[quote]It's the kind of scene you could picture an actress winning an Oscar, for. Very powerful.

R39. I agree with your statement that exposing your breasts is an Oscar-winning move. However, it hardly seems like something anyone would do in real life. I still say it's a rather dramatic--or should I say, melodramatic--move.

by Anonymousreply 4505/03/2012

[quote]It's the kind of scene you could picture an actress winning an Oscar, for. Very powerful.

Aaron Sorkin is writing it as we type!! Viola will play my maid!!!

by Anonymousreply 4605/03/2012

r42=bitter frau

by Anonymousreply 4705/03/2012

How was this soap opera testimony relevant to what ever Edwards is being charged with?

by Anonymousreply 4805/03/2012

R46. You one funny bitch! Sitting here laughing my ass off reading your post.

by Anonymousreply 4905/03/2012

The fact that Edwards is being tried is so damn strange. What the hell has happened to this country??? I don't condone the way he treated his wife. He sounds like a dog. But I am not so stupid that I can't separate this affair crap from the serious and bogus charges he's facing.

The problem is, a lot of people on that jury are going to convict him because he's a good-looking Democrat who fucked around on his cancer-stricken wife. That man is going to prison for nothing. For NOTHING.

Americans should be truly scared if Edwards is convicted. It can happen to anyone.

by Anonymousreply 5005/03/2012

Is this a "Show Trial"?

Sorry, but as a non-American, this is the first time I've read about this and it really strikes me as something out of stalinist Russia.

by Anonymousreply 5105/03/2012

R42,43,etc Just because you were okay with your husband cheating on you and leaving doesn't mean every other woman should be okay with it. I say this as a woman - please take your frau 1950s housewife crap elsewhere.

by Anonymousreply 5205/03/2012

[quote]What the hell has happened to this country???

I agree. He's completely reprehensible but in the general scheme of things, it's a non-issue.

How about bringing to justice a few people that should have been convicted for war crimes?

by Anonymousreply 5305/03/2012

Cummon people. You can't give people millions of dollars in what is supposed to be campaign funds to cover up your mistress/baby. If you give away more than eleven grand to anyone for any reason the IRS needs to know about it.

This is financial malfeasance regardless of the drama.

by Anonymousreply 5405/03/2012

[quote]. If you give away more than eleven grand to anyone for any reason the IRS needs to know about it.

$13,000 nowadays!

by Anonymousreply 5505/03/2012

Honey @ R52, YOU are the frau. Thinking a woman owns a man, body and soul, just because he made some antiquated vow 20 years ago. People change, they fall out of love. It isn't a crime. It just is. Happens every day.

You can't get mad at someone for not wanting you, for losing "that loving feeling." A person can not will themselves to have feelings for a person they are no longer attracted to. A mature, rational woman knows this and, though hurt, will move on with her own life and find happiness with someone else who DOES want her. She doesn't go all around the country making an embarrassing public spectacle of herself, weeping and wailing and yanking off her shirt. Liz was ridiculous and pathetic with her never ending melodramatic temper tantrums.

by Anonymousreply 5805/03/2012

Not a frau here but come on. She lost her shit because it wasn't just the sloppy infidelity, it was the dying of cancer. Remission my ass, she was dying and she knew it, and he had abandoned her. And the pain and stress of what John did probably worsened what was left of Elizabeth's immune system.

by Anonymousreply 6005/03/2012

This isn't about an affair. It's about allegedly giving campaign funds to his mistress.

He also put this country at great risk by running for President knowing full well that this scandal could implode at any moment. What if the public groundswell had happened for him and not Obama? What if he had managed to win the election with all of this being kept under wraps? It would have been Clinton times ten, and we'd have been tied up with impeachment bullshit again while the country went further into the shitter.

The guy is a selfish sleazebag. And he's no better than Gingrich.

by Anonymousreply 6105/03/2012

Lots of fra on the loose here.

That said, I've detested the piece of human feces Edwards for a long time. Hope he's found guilty and if not, I hope it breaks him. Then he'll actually have a reason to go on and on about being "a po' ol southUn boy from noth care'lina.."

Fuckin diuche.

by Anonymousreply 6205/03/2012

R57 please take your tantrums elsewhere. You're despicable and your husband is cheating on your harridan ass as we speak.

by Anonymousreply 6305/03/2012

The poster who said this reminded him of a show trial is right. Edwards is a disgusting man, but he isn't guilty of what he's been charged with. He's been charged with misusing campaign funds. Period. Why he misused them is not relevant. All the rest is just spectacle.

The sham trial allows testimony from his former aide who was granted immunity, after stealing more than $1.2 Million to build his own house.Then his wife performs on the witness stand, "breaking down in tears"? Please.

If I'm not mistaken, Elizabeth Edwards was showing her scars, not her boobs. They were gone. Yes, it was definitely an over the top moment, but in my opinion, it seems she was filled with uncontrollable rage, because the tabloids ran the story.

Also, since she did it in front of all their staffers, she was in a sense confirming the tabloid version for those who might not have known the details or who might have disbelieved the tabloids.

This was an affair she was aware of for almost a year. So her anger was about the exposure. She felt she'd sacrificed too much to have their lives and his candidacy reduced to a tabloid headline.

I hope his daughter Cate reconsiders her decision to devote her life to her mother's foundation. She needs a clean break from all this sordid stuff.

Maybe after law school she felt she couldn't establish herself in a career because of the notariety of her parents. But she's married, so it's time she moved away from Edwards and his messes.

by Anonymousreply 6405/03/2012

Say goodbye to these!

by Anonymousreply 6505/03/2012

If the donors gave money towards the campaign and he funneled that money inappropriately (whether to buy a yacht, a Bentley or a girl,) than he is guilty and should be charged. Contributions are supposed to be tax except and not using it for campaign expenses is fraud - clear and simple. Our prisons are filled with white collar criminals who have done less and it all boils down to obtaining money illegally. However, it would seem that all of this could have been found out simply - did the donors make a check out to the campaign and then file it in their own records as a tax-deductible contribution. If so, then Edwards is a typical narcissistic idiot who thinks nothing will ever happen to him and should have settled and not gone to trial. If there are no records, then there is no case. I don't know enough about the background of this scandal to know whether or not records were presented other than the testimony of the aide, who was clearly guilty as well. However, the aide could not have taken that money without others in the campaign knowing about it.

Once thing is clear - I will never give money to another campaign. These people live a life when they are running for office that is corrupt in and of itself.

by Anonymousreply 6605/03/2012

[quote]It's the kind of scene you could picture an actress winning an Oscar, for. Very powerful.

As R6 pointed out early in this thread, Richardson in Damage had a similar scene. Though it didn't win her an Oscar, just a nomination (I think).

by Anonymousreply 6705/03/2012

I don't comprehend what Elizabeth's shirt ripping drama has to do with with John's guilt or innocence.

by Anonymousreply 6805/03/2012

R66, from your reply, it sounds as though you are saying that contributions to political campaigns are tax-exempt. That's not true, is it - or is that what you're saying??

by Anonymousreply 7105/03/2012

"ELIZ" Edwards was a nasty drama queen. Not to say her husband didn't fuck her over emotionally, but she was no saint, no angel and she knew well how fucking crooked and dishonents her husband was.

by Anonymousreply 7205/03/2012

Yes, [R29] I agree- the strappless wedding gown look needs to go away. kate Middleton is a genius for bring sleeved wedding gowns into style....

by Anonymousreply 7305/03/2012

The problem with asserting Edwards misused campaign funds is that they weren't campaign funds and both donors knew the money wasn't for the campaign.

And the money was carefully kept out of campaign accounts.

There is plenty of sleaze and perhaps some minor problems with the way things were handled, but this is clearly a witch hunt/show trial, and we have seen many, many politicians and other public figures get away with far worse behavior.

Dick Cheney's war crimes and pay offs from Halliburton among them, perhaps?

And btw, I don't understand why R3 thinks it would be so much better to have the cheating husband stick around.

I don't blame Elizabeth for her dramatic behavior, but she might have done better to have filed for divorce taken every penny she was legally entitled to.

If she wanted to hurt and humiliate him the way he had hurt and humiliated her, it would have been far more effective for her to have blown up his campaign in his face and walked away with a hundred million or so.

At least then she could have left enough money to her children that Cate wouldn't feel obligated to stand by her slime-ball father's side while this is playing out in public.

Because that's the only reason she is going to court at all, imo. If she wasn't concerned with her inheritance, why would she stick up for the asshole who treated her mother so poorly?

by Anonymousreply 7405/03/2012

I've never been in a serious relationship, but I can certainly understand how she must have felt emotionally abandoned and betrayed by him during an extraordinarily difficult time in her life. She had every right to be devastated, even if she expressed it in a rather dramatic manner.

by Anonymousreply 7505/03/2012

I'm pretty sure R70 is taking the piss. I surely hope so.

by Anonymousreply 7605/03/2012

I can understand Elizabeth's anger, outrage, etc. But tearing off her clothes in public, in an airplane hanger in front of the campaign staff and the airport personnel was excessive.

Especially give the fact that first, she knew about the affair for almost a year, and second, she knew about the tabloid coverage well before she got to the airplane hangar.

IMO, she was performing. As a seasoned political wife and a public figure in her own right, Elizabeth Edwards had been thru a lot of moments where she had to hold it together. I believe she was truly upset, but I also believe she channeled her anger into an scene. She became completely irrational.

If I had been in a similar position, I would have left the airport and gone home, called a really good lawyer, and had the locks changed.

If Elizabeth acted like this in a public setting, I can't even imagine the hellish, hysterical behavior those poor kids experienced at home with them. That is definitely a form of emotional abuse for the kids.

I think John Edwards is a monster. But as R74 appropriately pointed out,the funds were kept away from the campaign accounts, the two donors knew this was not for his campaign.

It's interesting, one writer, I think in the HuffPo, characterized Andrew Young as more like an angry, disaffected lover, than a disgruntled Campaign aide. Young obviously broke the law by taking money meant for one purpose and using it for another. Did he declare to the IRS?How could this happen in federal court? It is federal court?

by Anonymousreply 7705/03/2012

As far as I am concerned, anyone who is seriously sick can have as many meltdowns as they want to have.

You queens are shitting your pants because some old lady pays with a check. Now THAT'S melodramatic.

by Anonymousreply 7805/03/2012

"I'm still team John Edwards. Elizabeth allowed herself to become a mess. She knew that she had to make certain sacrifices to keep a hung, hot piece like John Edwards."

If you're "still team John Edwards" then you must a retard of epic proportions. The guy is slime personified. And he was never nearly as "hot" as some people have made him out to be. He always had an incredibly smarmy look to him, always grinning with those big teeth, always looking so full of himself. As for his being "hung"...well, how the hell would you know THAT? Unless the sex tape becomes public nobody can really comment on the size of his dick.

by Anonymousreply 7905/03/2012

LOL. Love you, R78.

by Anonymousreply 8005/03/2012

John Edwards will always be the villain here, but that Elizabeth does come off as seriously damaged. Anyone who met her through her husband's campaigns only has awful things to say about what a rude, domineering bitch she was. Sad all around. I'd never speak to my father again if he pulled this shit, but then again, my father is poor.

by Anonymousreply 8105/03/2012

"Elizabeth Edwards was not dying at the time of the affair.

Her cancer was in remission."

Oh, so her cancer was in REMISSION. Well, that certainly makes it ok then. NOT!

Her cancer may have been in remission, but it was terminal and Edwards knew that. He is lower than dirt, a douchebag par excellence.

by Anonymousreply 8205/03/2012

This shirt ripping booby extravaganza happened once the fuckery went public yes? She already knew, if I am understanding the sequence of events correctly, it was only when the Enquirer put it out there that the shit hit the fan. I've noticed with a lot of suburbanite middle class through well-to-do women that it's the public embarrassment that seems to really send them over the edge. Often they seem able to deal with the affair itself so long as it is kept secret and private. I find it interesting and telling that women make these kinds of 'deals' with men. I have no knowledge with regard to whether this is the case with Edwards debacle but it certainly appears to be another of those instances where the public humiliation of being exposed as less than utopian was more egregious to the relationship than the actual extra-relational shenanigans that started it all.

by Anonymousreply 8305/03/2012

Maybe she was on some powerful cancer drugs that were fucking with her brain. She sounds batshit.

by Anonymousreply 8405/03/2012

"She doesn't go all around the country making an embarrassing public spectacle of herself, weeping and wailing and yanking off her shirt. Liz was ridiculous and pathetic with her never ending melodramatic temper tantrums."

She DIDN'T "go all around the country making an embarrassing public spectacle of herself, weeping and wailing and yanking off her shirt", you stupid cunt. It was an isolated incident. And if she occasionally lost it, well, see how well YOU handle the sudden death of a beloved child, terminal breast cancer and a sleazy husband who knocks up his equally sleazy mistress.

You don't sound like a "rational, mature female." You sound like a dumb cunt. Or a gay man pretending to be a "rational, mature female" but sounding like a dumb cunt.

by Anonymousreply 8505/03/2012

Him making a douche-bag does not preclude the possibility that she was unpleasant. It slays me that people must persist in painting one party as completely good while the other is necessary totally evil. Can we quit with the fairy-tales yet? How can we not have yet learned that life and people are much more complex, multi-dimensional and interesting than that?

by Anonymousreply 8605/03/2012

I am shocked she would bare her chest in front of other people, that is crazy. Even if you are really upset you would still be in the right mind to know you don't show your tits to the staff. Sounds like Liz was a drama queen.

by Anonymousreply 8705/03/2012

The size of Edwards cock has been discussed at great length on this board and others. He's good looking and hung and rich. A triple threat.

by Anonymousreply 8805/03/2012

It should mentioned that during this Elizabeth went on all the cable news shows saying her husband would be better dealing with women's issues than Hillary.

by Anonymousreply 8905/03/2012

I hope Edwards goes to prison, is scalped of his lovely locks, and fucked up the ass with a meat cleaver.

PS I am not some frau.

by Anonymousreply 9005/03/2012

Amen R86. None of us can really know what their relationship was. After reading Elizabeth's book about her early life and her difficulty coping with the death of her son, I wondered how the marriage could still be working. It's a very complicated, sad story all the way around. They both seem to have great gifts and great flaws.

by Anonymousreply 9105/03/2012

Maybe I'm missing something here. Why are people saying Elizabeth Edwards exposed her breasts? She wasnt the kind of person who could do that.

by Anonymousreply 9205/03/2012

It's pathetic that all this tabloid show is part of a trail that merely needs to know the source of the money and if it was or wasn't added to a campaign fund. That's the ONLY thing that should count.

This is nothing more than a Rethuglican soap opera. The only thing it needs now is for Newt Gingrich to sit in the visitors' gallery to applaud the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. Newt is no longer a slut like John Edwards because he's now a Catholic, happily married to the Catholic Callista.

by Anonymousreply 9305/03/2012

I remember finding it strange that Elizabeth wrote a book and went on a book tour during the middle of the scandal. When asked about Rielle, she basically claimed the woman and child didn't exist in her life and that she wouldn't allow the woman to mess up her life in anyway. I think the issue was that Elizabeth felt betrayed by John not just because he had cheated but also because they had built a life, family, fortune together and now they were on the verge of becoming President and first Lady. Elizabeth saw her entire life shattered. She didn't want to give up the chance to be first lady, nor did she want to give up the family life for her children. Hell, she also didn't want to believe she was dying either. She wanted him to stop the affair and come home at night to their kids and continue what they had started in the political world.

Honestly, I don't blame her. Her entire world and ambition was centered around him. Giving up him meant giving up all her dreams for herself and her children. She was willing to forgive him for the cheating if it meant she wouldn't have to give up her life as she knew it. But when it all became public, she could not longer do that and she lost it and went nuts.

It is sad. There are many claims that she was a bitch and difficult to be around. I can see how a hot, young woman who appears easy and without baggage could be appealing, but Edwards should have done things more discreet. He could have kept his family intact and satisfied his desires privately.

Yet, I also suspect that Rielle wasn't happy being in the background. She saw $$$ and opportunity and pounced on it, thus got pregnant. She, too, had ambition but John Edwards didn't realize it till it was too late.

Are they still together?

by Anonymousreply 9405/03/2012

He is a major jerk, idiot, arrogant- etc. He stepped out on his wife. On the other hand, according to those close their campaign- ANYONE would have stepped out on a wife like that. She was not well liked to put it mildly. His most important transgression in my book was covering up- having Young claim the child was his, and Hunter live with the Young family, and traveling in private planes etc using political contributions. THAT is the real mess.

The Edwards sad unravling marriage- his narcisism and her haridianism are a story as common as dirt. But the cover up and the degree to which Edwards went to do so, implicating a loyal aid and family in the whole mess is astounding.

When I found out my boyfriend had cheated on me, had an affair, when I was 22, I did not pull my pants down in front of our friends screaming at him about what he did not want or notice anymore. Elizabeth Edwards sounds like a very sad woman, not just the metastatic breast cancer. Can you imagine Hillary doing anything like that? Jacqueline Onassis? Nope.

Very messy and sad story. Oh how public relations can cover up truth.

by Anonymousreply 9505/03/2012

I can't wait for the poster upthread who thinks marriages should last as long as the relationship is good, to get old. And "old" I mean over 60.

It is rare that both partners in a marriage will look gorgeous and sexy at that age. Maybe plastic surgery will help, but it still won't bring back the youthful freshness that most 30 year old's have effortlessly.

If that poster is female and married or is dating a successful man who is also in his 60's, he will be around youthful women all day who look up to him. Consequently, he knows a younger woman with a lot of vitality will have more stamina in the bedroom and knows he can attract her because of his money. He then cheats because he can and figures his marriage isn't working anymore. Adios, old wife.

What if one of them becomes disabled and the healthy partner has to take care of his less fortunate spouse? How can the relationship be good and fulfilling especially to the healthy partner. Time to leave, would be the answer, eh?

Married people become a family and are "committed" to each other in sickness and in health. No relationship is good ALL of the time. Good luck down the road in your self-centered little world.

by Anonymousreply 9605/03/2012

Gay man here and I was an early Edwards supporter.

I totally agree with him being tried. I am sorry, this sort of behavior in politics -- using campaign donations for private use, regardless of party, sucks.

The more I hear of how he used his staff and ruined their lives to cover his actions, make me feel he deserves to be on trial.

Hearing what he did to his wife, makes me sense he has no soul and probably is a psychopath.

How sad he's fooled that once thin daughter.

by Anonymousreply 9705/03/2012

[quote] Plenty of married women endure infidelity and divorce.

Not while they are dying of cancer. The husband usually waits until his wife is dead before knocking up other women.

He knew his wife was terminal. He could have waited.

by Anonymousreply 9805/03/2012

Poor Elizabeth went nuts after her son died -- the kid's memory was the reason she prodded her husband into a political career, the reason for the fertility treatments that allowed two more children to be born, and the reason she got cancer (from the constant hormone shots.)

The death of a child often drives one spouse nuts and couples apart, emotionally if not formally. I don't condone John Edwards' cheating, but if you read Elizabeth's first book about the death of her son and how she carried on about it (again, no one blames her, but her reaction was extreme) it is no surprise JE chose the blandishments of Reielle over the high pressure/constant grieving that his marriage to Elizabeth became.

by Anonymousreply 9905/03/2012

"I've noticed with a lot of suburbanite middle class through well-to-do women that it's the public embarrassment that seems to really send them over the edge."

Most people, including self-regarding gay and straight men, do not respond well to public humiliation. Ms Edwards' reaction was extreme and shocking, but in fairness her mental state was probably pretty shaky by that point.

This whole story is sadly tawdry. I am not having the best day today, but thank God I am not John Edwards.

by Anonymousreply 10005/03/2012

I was going to post that,r39. Susan Sarandon get get another Oscar easily for that scene-a dying woman exposing her cancer ravaged breast to her staff after learning of her politician husband's affair...

by Anonymousreply 10105/03/2012

[quote]She DIDN'T "go all around the country making an embarrassing public spectacle of herself

Uh, hysterical frau @ R85, yes, Liz absolutely DID go around the country on the "woah is me tour." She appeared on endless talk shows and gave interviews to every frau magazine about "how he done me wrong" years after the news cycle for her soap opera story became stale as week old bread. She was a bitter, self important bore who couldn't let it go.

by Anonymousreply 10205/03/2012

Only because of her money R10. She was the rich one.

by Anonymousreply 10305/03/2012

Edwards was so stupid to get involved with Rielle Hunter, she has always wanted the spotlight. He would have been better off picking a woman less aggressive and obviously using birth control.

by Anonymousreply 10405/03/2012

Josh Brumberger, gay? Did he also have a crush on Edwards?

by Anonymousreply 10505/03/2012

[quote]Honestly, I don't blame her. Her entire world and ambition was centered around him. Giving up him meant giving up all her dreams for herself and her children.

Who are these fraus invading DL? Are you kidding, Cinderella? These are childish, fairy tale ambitions. Why would any woman in 2012 still think prince charming is going to come along and hand them a life of "happily every after."

by Anonymousreply 10605/03/2012

[quote]Gee -- I don't think you guys condoned this kind of behavior when Newt Gingrich was doing it.

"Gee--" No one gave a shit about that fat pig's personal life until he opened his mouth about "family values." It's been over 20 fucking years and you've been told countless times why Newt is ridiculed for what he did to his wives, so are you unaware of Newt's political history or are you just an ignorant douchebag by choice?

[quote]Just sayin'...

Something stupid.

by Anonymousreply 10705/03/2012

So what's the solution, R96? Chain people together with leg irons who can't stand each other? Why would you eve WANT someone who doesn't want you? Move on.

by Anonymousreply 10805/03/2012

She should have gone all Victoria Grayson on his as$. All steely stares.

by Anonymousreply 10905/03/2012

Does anyone know how to have a difference of opinion anymore without continually calling other posters "fraus"? This place has gone to shit.

by Anonymousreply 11005/03/2012

You can't make someone love and care about you. Melodramatic displays only make people resent and pity you even more.

by Anonymousreply 11105/03/2012

Mommyfication of culture writ large. Men are ALWAYS wrong, mommyfraus are always right.

When Liz died you would have thought Mother Fucking Theresa had passed from the OTT news coverage.

This is old news. Didn't The New Yorker cover La Meltdown de Tarmac years ago, complete with (hillarious) illustrations? By their account she was a turbo cunt. Of course by the time Frau News Inc was finished she was Saint Elizabeth.

by Anonymousreply 11205/03/2012

Nobody has said she was a Saint. However, it is ridiculous to argue that she shouldn't have felt betrayed and upset or that he had every right to do what he did because he no longer was attracted to her.

If he was unhappy, he should have left the marriage before he ran for office. He was careless, reckless and mishandled nearly everything about this affair.

by Anonymousreply 11305/03/2012

John Edwards is a cipher. If you "supported" John Edwards during his presidential campaign chances are you were actually supporting ideas and answers that came from Elizabeth. One striking example is that when John Edwards was asked what his favorite movie was he answered, "Dr. Strangelove". It's a great answer, but it turns out he'd never even seen the movie. Elizabeth told him to answer that way. A lot of straight men, not just politicians, owe their careers to their wives-- even now.

by Anonymousreply 11405/03/2012

Everything he did was wrong in regard to his wife and mistress but NONE of that should matter in this specific trial.

The ONLY thing that should matter are the reasons the checks were written and if they were or were not considered to be a campaign contribution.

by Anonymousreply 11505/03/2012

Unfortunately the marriage seemed based on the usual grotesque superficialities. Money, looks, status, privilege and plans. Real talk. It was a sado-masochistic duel not fueled by mutual affection but instead powered by the addiction to status, money and their co-joined pursuit of political power and prestige. Feh. The guy RADIATED douchebag energy, even from the wedding photos. He's craven, seedy, vain, and looks disturbingly like Burt Ward, Robin, from the old Batman tv series. Although the wife was clearly frau'ing around (yes, it is now a verb) on the afternoon fraumedia, punishing him, I think he did drive her to her grave. Just stop dickin' around, Robin! His poor daughter. I'd probably cut Dad down to a single hot toddy over Christmas, and ignore his calls the rest of the year. If anything, Americans should learn from this trial that most politicians (male and female) are predatory narcissists. Watch where you sling that pussy, rich girls...

by Anonymousreply 11605/03/2012

She kind of reminds me of socialite Betty Broderick, that woman who killed her ex-husband, a prominent attorney, and his new wife. She was scorned because she stood by him during the lean years, had four children with him and then he dumped her for a younger, hotter woman. She couldn't handle the fact that she lost her lifestyle as "Mrs. Broderick" and went insane.

The movie was pretty good starring Meredith Baxter.

by Anonymousreply 11705/03/2012

Except Rielle was not hot at all R117.

by Anonymousreply 11805/03/2012

The checks from Bunny Mellon were not made out to the campaign. They were given to a decorator friend who then wrote checks to Andrew Young's wife in her maiden name.

Edwards said he covered up the affair to prevent Elizabeth from finding out about it. However, if it can be shown that Elizabeth already knew at the time Mellon sent the money, then it is reasonable to assume he was trying to hide the affair from the voters.

If his intention was to mislead the voters, then the money regardless of how he got it was being used for campaign purposes and is therefore a campaign contribution.

At least that is the prosecutions contention.

by Anonymousreply 11905/03/2012

1) Don't his lawyers know what a relevance objection is? There's nothing in that airport story remotely relevant to the charges pending, including his character. That shit was all about Elizabeth.

2) this is not a criminal issue--at best, it's a tax problem. I can't believe the judge didn't throw this out. Bunny Mellon, by all accounts, gave him the money to do whatever the fuck he wanted to do with it.

3). Rielle Hunter is a fucking dog. She must have the tightest vadge in America, because she's neither bright nor attractive.

This is like Al Capone being convicted for tax evasion, except even Capone was guilty of that. Edwards is going to be convicted for being a horrible person rather than a criminal.

by Anonymousreply 12005/03/2012

She was hot to him, r118. "New" plus "different" equals "hot" to many men. That's all it takes.

by Anonymousreply 12105/03/2012

[quote]She must have the tightest vadge in America

Not after 'Big' John was done with it.

by Anonymousreply 12205/03/2012

I agree with those who think the trial should center around the misuse of campaign funds. I also think that Edwards is somewhat culpable for the assistant misusing funds. He was the "CEO" of his campaign. The assistant should not have been let off so easily and should have fried as well.

That said, the focus of the board is on Elizabeth's actions. I am not a Frau. I just want to get that out there because I can sympathize with her actions. She was more than a politicians wife. She drank the Kool Aid and really believed that he could change the world and that she would be by his side as a partner -- both as a wife and activist. Her professional and personal mirror shattered with the revelation of his affair.

On the personal side. She gave up a lot for him. The younger kids were born when she was a much older woman. This kind of pregnancy requires a lot of medical assistance -- so much so that it takes a toll on ones body.

To her it probably wasn't just an affair. To her it was probably viewed as rejection and most likely played into the insecurities of having breasts removed and the feelings of inadequacy and ugliness that for many women come with this surgery.

Imagine standing-by someone and actually being a major force behind his ambitions and having him cheat with a someone who can destroy your dream as well. Oh, and her case, the person he has cheated with is younger and doesn't bear the scars of breast cancer.

by Anonymousreply 12305/03/2012

[quote]"Plenty of married women endure infidelity and divorce." ---Not while they are dying of cancer. The husband usually waits until his wife is dead before knocking up other women. He knew his wife was terminal. He could have waited.

False, R98. Many men cheat when their wive's are seriously ill. It's actually quite common. Even if they love their wives, many cheat just to get a respite from all the sickness, upheaval, anxiety and depression at home.

by Anonymousreply 12405/03/2012

Whatever the reasons the forensic analysis of the unraveling of their marriage, and the psychological trauma they both experienced and then visited upon one another, that was between John & Elizabeth. What I do not understand at this particular moment is those of you who are castigating him for the way he used/treated his staff. At the level of a national presidential campaign you don't hire amateurs. These people were professionals who had to know at some point that Edwards had no chance of winning and that his conduct would destroy anything resembling a shot at the White House. So they allowed themselves to be "used." They rationalize and justify their behavior now, even the fact that Young stole $1.2 million! They ran all over the country, they intrigued, plotted schemed and blackmailed Edwards about a sex tape. They get no free pass from me. I am not that stupid as to feel like Edwards was the lone bad guy here and everyone else was a victim.

Many married men cheat and father out of wedlock children. Their wives often get very angry, and scream, and yell, and go nuts on them. This is not new.

Bit with this soap opera, the drama was played out on a national stage with all the minor players grabbing for a piece of the spotlight. These campaign aides were despicable people, IMO.

If I was a suspicious or cynical person, I'd bet they were eyeing the $$$ they could make from tell alls, once it was over.

Some of you need to open your eyes. It was Andrew Young who "found" the sex tape and exploited it's existence. Edwards is slime it is true, but he's not the first terrible huband to wrong a sick wife.

What makes this situation unique to me, is the feeding frenzy that starts with the campaign aides. The kind of people who would participate, then slime him for "making " them participate.

Every single one of them had the option of quitting. Only one did to my knowledge. Elizabeth Edwards wasn't the only betrayed lover, nor was she the angriest or most vengeful.

by Anonymousreply 12505/03/2012

The aides were certainly despicable and had none of them agreed to go along with the cheating, lying, cover-ups, it wouldn't have happened. There is no debate that he had help in all of what he did. But ultimately, he gave the orders and he should take responsibility for all of the finances.

I would also point out that it appears that the aides were young and probably not nearly as experienced as they should have been for someone running for President. People who surround themselves in the workplace with a lot of young, inexperienced staff often are ridiculously controlling and many times hiding something. Edwards didn't want anyone smarter or more savvy than himself around, which should have been a red flag that he would not have made a good Chief Executive.

by Anonymousreply 12705/03/2012

R106 Where do you live? Because where I live (in suburban, soccer-mom, mortgage poor hell)people are raising their girls to think EXACTLY THAT. It is not a personal failing - it's a socialization process. We need to stop raising our girls to think that their futures and their dreams and aspirations must be lived through men. Women are entitled to have their own fucking aspirations that have sweet FA to do with dudes. That was what I meant when I noted the middle-upper class phenomenon I noted above and pondered as interesting. As someone later said on this thread - it appears that Elizabeth lived her dreams through John - I find that a very astute observation. And I further think we socialize men to carry the burden of those dreams - there own and their female partners - and many men, including evidently John Edwards - are just not up for that. If you want women to be different, then we need to start raising them different.

by Anonymousreply 12805/03/2012

Oh dear, Mary R126. Unless you want me to rap you on the knuckles with my ruler, next time kindly capitalize the "r" when referring to another post, and please refrain from starting sentences with "and."

by Anonymousreply 12905/03/2012

Young sounds like a scumbag, too

by Anonymousreply 13005/03/2012

r115 -- With due respect to your comment --it's basically true what you stated --but really, the ONLY thing that matters is that a scumbag like Edwards actually CHOSE to run for President in the first place and, certainly, that he actually thought he COULD GET BY WITH IT all during the period before the scandal 'broke'. That's the saddest aspect of the whole thing. That anyone -- Dem or Repub-- who know they are weak, flawed, have skeletons in the closet-- would actually run for President! Yet those types do it all the time.

by Anonymousreply 13105/03/2012

Edwards is being prosecuted because he is a high-profile Democrat, end of story.

by Anonymousreply 13205/03/2012

No, he's being prosecuted for misuse of campaign funds.

The fact that he pissed off a lot of his NC constituents (by frequently failing to show up to work for a position he was elected to) hasn't helped him.

by Anonymousreply 13305/03/2012

You have to be a megalomaniac or a narcissist to want to run for president, R131. And John Edwards is both in spades.

by Anonymousreply 13405/03/2012

And this is why I'm gay.

by Anonymousreply 13505/03/2012

R68, so true - Elizabeth's shirt removing incident has absolutely nothing to do with the campaign money charges against John Edwards.

It definitely appears that the proscecution is deliberately trying to sway the jury against John Edwards by bringing in emotionally charged material that is unrelated.

And those in this thread who say you hope John is found guilty of these bogus charges which have been brought against no other politician, you are very pathetic in your misguided hatred.

The money consisted of gifts from Fred Baron and Bunny Melon who gave the money as gifts, not as campaign contributions to the campaign.

by Anonymousreply 13605/03/2012

R117, Betty Broderick is a perfect example of a misguided woman who thinks her husband and the world owes her a psychological and financial position in life for her whole life and that the position can never be taken away from her - she feels it is her due.

by Anonymousreply 13705/03/2012

Let'sbe honest and I'm saying this as a straight woman, EE committed that great crime in our society of letting herself go. I'm not talking about because of the cancer. I read a magazine article about the Edwards in 1999, and it was all, look at how down to earth his wife is. Which really means, you expected something different didn't you, an Anne Romney or Jackie O type. Not that it would have kept him from cheating but it seems to be the underlying implication always with her. Everyone implying, what did she expect?

by Anonymousreply 13805/03/2012

Bunny Mellon - who contributed most of this money to John Edwards - had some kind of an odd attraction to him. She has said publicly that her donations were personal and not for his campaign. She's a very old lady but incredibly wealthy. But frankly I believe she found him hot.

She was also a very good friend of Jackie Kennedy. It was to her esate that Jackie spents months at a time, for years, after JFK's death. The estate in Middleburg is so large that Jackie could ride her horses as much as she wanted - in privacy.

by Anonymousreply 13905/03/2012

R133 The money in question was not in anyway a campaign contribution.

by Anonymousreply 14005/03/2012

I believe the shirt removal was some kind of an emotional exposure regarding her double mascectomy.

by Anonymousreply 14105/03/2012

Saving Graces: Finding Solace and Strength From Friends and Strangers by Elizabeth Edwards (Broadway Books, 340 pages, $24.95)

YOU REMEMBER ELIZABETH EDWARDS. She ran for Second Lady in 2004 and may run for First Lady in 2008 if her husband, former Sen. John Edwards, is nominated by the Democrats. Whether or not he becomes president is purely academic because Elizabeth has what it takes to become America's First Lady on her own. She doesn't need the White House; her memoir of bereavement and invalidism pulsates with so much lugubrious hysteria that she's a shoo-in to become the Great White Oprah.

She had the best possible training for political wifehood. She was a Navy brat, accustomed to moving here and there and everywhere, meeting loads of people, and then moving again and meeting loads more. Her girlhood was dominated by the dreaded "Fitness Report," which all officers get when they come up for promotion. The conduct of a man's family could make or break him. "Everything we did was watched and recorded," she writes; "nobody talked about it, but everyone knew it. We all had as our first allegiance the professional reputations of our fathers." A wife who drank, or a pregnant daughter "meant a ruined career, a shortened tour of duty, a life spoiled by an indiscretion."

She met John Edwards while they were both law students at the University of North Carolina and married him in 1977 when she was 28 and he was 24. Settling down in Raleigh, they had two children, Wade born in 1980 and Cate in 1982. In 1996, while en route to meet up with his parents at their beach house, Wade was killed in a weather-related auto accident and Elizabeth fell apart.

Her morbid excesses began with the sign she posted on the door of her son's room ordering the cleaning woman not to vacuum or change the sheets: "I wanted the room to smell like Wade as long as it would." The wake had hardly begun before her brother came with a video camera and interviewed the assembled neighbors and classmates about the dead boy. For months afterwards, TV and music were banned from the Edwards home as they gathered with friends each evening in the dark, quiet family room to talk about Wade.

It sounds as if all of Raleigh was involved in the grieving process, including perfect strangers that Elizabeth drafted into service: "If, in a restaurant, I felt Wade about to overtake me, I would go to the restroom and take out his picture. If someone, anyone, was there, I showed them the picture and told them about my boy." Sometimes she drew a whole crowd of sympathizers. One day at the supermarket she happened to see a display of Wade's favorite soft drink and fell into what sounds like a fit: "...he came crashing in on me, and I was literally thrown to the floor. I sat sprawled in the soda aisle at the grocery store and cried uncontrollably... flattened by Cherry Coke."

She even roped in the gravediggers, giving the cemetery grounds staff presents on Wade's birthday. She visited his grave every day and read the Bible aloud "to the place on the ground." She also read him the letters that his friends had written about him, and when his SAT scores arrived posthumously she read him those, too. She enjoyed tending his grave because it reminded her of cleaning up his room, but it wasn't enough, so she started tending other graves of children who had died years and decades earlier, talking to them all the while, because they had no mothers to clean for them. One day she washed some dead child's muddy cross.

by Anonymousreply 14205/03/2012

Isn't all this affair stuff beign revisited because the defense wants to show the money was to hide the affair from his wife, not the voters?

That would make it something else than a violation of campaign fund laws. So it's John Edwards' lawyers bringing it up.

by Anonymousreply 14305/03/2012

She went what can only be called berserk the day Wade's grave was violated. The site contained a huge metal angel, and someone had tried unsuccessfully to drag it away. She began screaming and called the police, demanding that they come out and dust the angel for fingerprints. As she waited, it began to rain, so she fetched umbrellas and old quilts from her trunk to cover the angel to preserve the prints. When the police got there, they told her that prints could not be lifted from the statue's surface. She was inconsolable: "He was in my every thought, in my empty arms, in my weary, beaten heart."

He was also in her computer. The only modern touch in this neo-Victorian threnody is the enormous correspondence she conducted with other bereaved parents at various grief.com sites. She is the consummate online junkie who Googles every subject that pops into her head, so this may be where she read up on how to get pregnant at the age of 48.

Mirabile dictu, it worked. She had not only one baby, but two, becoming the Fertility Queen of the 2004 election, the 55-year-old mother of six-year-old Emma Claire and four-year-old Jack. How did she do it?Do not look for the answer in this book. Considering how garrulous she is on the subject of bereavement, I expected an Ovariad on the subject of fertility treatments, but all she says is: "Tests, appointments, procedures, failures. It was not until the week of Wade's eighteenth birthday [January 1998] that the shots and medications and good fortune were translated into a pregnancy."

Then she makes a mistake no lawyer should make, the bane of the witness under cross-examination: qui s'excuse s'accuse. She turns defensive and starts to overexplain: "I speak less of this not because it was unimportant," she avers, but for the sake of those women still undergoing fertility treatments, "women who had tried and failed to get pregnant, or women who had gotten pregnant but were unable to carry the pregnancy to term.... False hope is a bitter poison... I could not encourage it."

She must have Googled her husband's Wikipedia entry that claims she used surrogate mothers for both births. I disregarded this in view of Wikipedia's way with errors, but the Slate article by Suz Redfearn claiming that she used donor eggs is carefully researched and well-reasoned. One thing is certain: the questions are not going to stop. If the Democrats hope to lure voters away from the Religious Right they will insist on knowing if Edwards has any leftover embryonic stem cells in his closet.

Presuming they conceived in the good old-fashioned way, another question arises: How did they manage with their daughter sleeping in their bedroom? When her brother was killed, 14-year-old Cate lapsed into a frightening regressive state and refused to be alone in her room. The author is vague on dates, but she says that Cate slept with them for two years -- the same time span of the two conceptions. Even more intriguing is how John, who was representing the bereaved parents whose daughter was swallowed by a swimming pool drain, managed to get into begetting mode while caught up in the family man's garden of voluptuous delights: coaching soccer, playing Santa Claus, running charities, volunteering at Cate's school, and performing community service. Mentor me, baby. Gimme some P...T...A!

INASMUCH AS ANY PART OF THIS BOOK could be called a fun read, it's the section on Campaign 2004. Elizabeth the outgoing Navy brat was in her element, but continental Teresa Heinz Kerry most definitely was not. It's obvious that the two women couldn't stand each other, and small wonder: they were Mata Hari and Mary Poppins; Garbo and Charo. They also have very different views of children, being Martinet and Permissive; Elizabeth's tortuous assurance that she didn't mind it a bit when Teresa yanked little Jack's thumb out of his mouth is one of the most determinedly agreeable passages ever penned.

by Anonymousreply 14405/03/2012

Two weeks before the end of the campaign, she found a lump in her breast that turned out to be malignant. Whether it was caused by the massive doses of female hormones she took is not known, and she wouldn't admit it if it were, but some of her passing comments betray a desperate need to convince herself that there is no connection between her fertility treatments and her cancer. What she hates about wearing a lymph-node drain: "the children had to keep more distance than they were used to." Why she created a special outfit for her radiation treatments so she doesn't need to don a lab gown: "the changing time might eat into my get-back-to-the-children time." Her law career: "My main job for years to come will be -- until I am nearly too old for it -- raising children."

She also gives herself away by denying in advance what she doesn't want people to think, thereby planting the forbidden idea in their heads, as when she brings up Pat Conroy's novel, The Great Santini. They're not all like that, she insists. Her father was "as far from Bull Meecham as any military man can be. Oh, sometimes he would wake us up with a bugle -- because he thought it was funny. Sometimes he would 'inspect' our rooms -- but I never remember anything awful happening."

FITNESS REPORT: This book is a maudlin, lachrymose orgy of sentiment by an author who makes Niobe look like Betty Hutton. Recommendation: Bust her father to cabin boy.

by Anonymousreply 14505/03/2012

[quote]Elizabeth's shirt removing incident has absolutely nothing to do with the campaign money charges against John Edwards.

It goes to answering what did she know and when did she know it. That is a central question in determining why Edwards tried to hide the affair.

He says he was hiding the affair from Elizabeth. But if she already knew, then he must must have been hiding it for another reason.

by Anonymousreply 14605/03/2012

Why was she wearing a bra if she had no breasts?

by Anonymousreply 14705/03/2012

"Nobody has said she was a Saint."

Hahaha, oh my sides. You must have been living under a rock when the story first broke of the affair and when she died. She was treated as a living saint in the media.

by Anonymousreply 14805/03/2012

LOL!

by Anonymousreply 14905/03/2012

Interesting trashing of her book. When she wrote and promoted that book, despite all that had happened to her, that was the point at which I thought she was nuts. And of course I had no interest in reading it. Seemed to me she was shining a light on just what she should be putting behind herself. But that seemed to be her problem.

From the beginning, when he was VP candidate, I always felt something was off about her. Her doudiness had an edge of craziness to it- madness- no need to look that bad, hair stringy and tangled, no makeup, overweight. Just did not make sense. Even Hillary, who clearly does not care about her appearance- makes an effort- I love her, but her taste is awful.

I did not know of her troubles after her son's death- I wondered why she did not go back to work in fact- or most important seek therapy.

Anyway, no one here knows how difficult their marriage was. Clearly it was troubled- would have to be. And John is a very good looking guy, successful etc. and he jumped the shark as well in another direction- his wife implodes as he explodes.

It's just a big sad mess. And yeah, if Bunny Mellon's money were personal gifts- well that is not campaign money. If they establish that-then this case is toast. Lord knows the Reagans got millions in "personal gifts" from their hyper wealthy CA friends (Annebergs et al.)

by Anonymousreply 15005/03/2012

Is Edwards still with that snatch Rielle "Alison Poole" Hunter? She is a disgusting excuse for a human being. They belong together.

by Anonymousreply 15105/03/2012

For God's sake, you think Mellon and the other person that shoveled over tons of money didn't know it must have been for solving something personal! I bet they knew about the affair. They knew they couldn't legally give that much as a campaign contribution so what did they think the money was for. They knew the Edwards and that they were not poor people so wouldn't they want to know why they wanted the money for any personal reasons. Too easy to say they were idiots enamored with "handsome" Johnny. They are scurrilous people willing to participate in duping the public and should also be punished in some way.

by Anonymousreply 15205/03/2012

No one's reputation is going to survive this debacle.

by Anonymousreply 15305/03/2012

R152, Fred Baron, the wealthy donor who gave the money, died several years ago from cancer.

Bunny Melon, who also gave the money, is 101 years old and very frail.

I can see you know the details of the case.

by Anonymousreply 15505/03/2012

Calm down R154. Elizabeth Edwards was a multiple millionaire when she lost her child. I am 58 years old and know several couples who have lost children. Often it breaks up the marriage, but in no case do I know of anyone going off the rail quite like Elizabeth did. She is also a smart woman and she knew the risks of taking high dose hormones. This family had a tragedy that turned into a fiasco-a family with many blessings.

You should also know that many gay men have endured far more hardship than this family (I lost half of all my friends, some very dear friends within a 5 year period), and also ended a relationship. Ever wonder how that might feel? It was surreal. I am sure others have had their problems too.

Calm down. Fact is, the Edwards, including Elizabeth, were and are hot messes. We are lucky they did not make it to the White House.

by Anonymousreply 15605/03/2012

Thank you honey @R42 ! Tell it like it is !

by Anonymousreply 15705/03/2012

"I can see how a hot, young woman who appears easy and without baggage could be appealing"

Rielle is not hot. She is ugly.

by Anonymousreply 15805/03/2012

"in no case do I know of anyone going off the rail quite like Elizabeth did"

Probably because none of the women you know had a husband who was running for President and whose personal life was exposed to the entire world.

by Anonymousreply 15905/03/2012

r3 is a complete idiot who ignores THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECTS of Edwards' affair:

ELIZABETH'S ILLNESS and THE BABY.

by Anonymousreply 16005/03/2012

R139, John Edwards probably reminded Bunny Mellon of JFK, who afterall is the man John Edwards thought he was too.

by Anonymousreply 16105/03/2012

Rielle is not ugly at all.

She is very slim and attractive, and the baby (now age 4 years) is gorgeous.

by Anonymousreply 16205/03/2012

r20, that's "Frauen" to you.

r3/r10, he "nursed her"??! Oh, right---when JRE wasn't skulking off at 2:00 a.m. to a hotel to see Rielle and Quinn.

HE LITERALLY SICKENED Elizabeth by reneging on his promise that, before Elizabeth died, he would end the affair.

Instead, EE had to endure the humiliation of the National Enquirer's story about THE BABY.

Now TELL US HOW YOUE SITUATION BECAME NATIONAL NEWS, R3.

by Anonymousreply 16305/03/2012

Rielle is the epitome of equine-faced.

by Anonymousreply 16405/03/2012

"Josh Brumberger, gay?"

No, apparently not. I posted a photo of him earlier on this thread because I think he is kind of cute and one of the only decent people in this story. He tried to tell Edwards to stop the affair before it got out of hand, but Edwards refused to listen and he quit.

I think he is now married and expecting a child. I believe he now works for the Democratic Party in New York.

by Anonymousreply 16505/03/2012

R160, you also need to add that Edwards was running for PRESIDENT and that this whole scandal was exposed in front of the whole world.

R3 doesn't seem to realize that the average member of the public who is cheated on doesn't have the affair become public knowledge and discussed all over the news.

by Anonymousreply 16605/03/2012

R158, she was blonde and thin and slutty. That passes for hot with men of Edwards' ilk.

by Anonymousreply 16705/03/2012

r42, you are eiter insane or not of this culture. "Family" includes spouses.

BTW: A woman can leave a man, too, just so ya know.

by Anonymousreply 16805/03/2012

r58, you DO know that JRE did not attempt to leave EE? That he was NOT honest and above-board about his having "lost that loving feling"? That, in point of fact, he was a liar and an adulterer who not only denied his baby's paternity but had his friend claim it, thereby making the other wife into a public fool?

You have a serious problem recognizing that the facts of this situation do not parallel those of your life.

by Anonymousreply 16905/03/2012

Hillary and Jackie weren't dying, r70.

Some women just have higher levels of tolerance for personal humiiation.

by Anonymousreply 17005/03/2012

This thread should be retitled,"The He-Man Woman Hater's Club"

by Anonymousreply 17105/03/2012

R161, John Edwards patterned himself more after Robert F. Kennedy than after JFK.

John Edwards took on poverty as a main issue, as did Robert F. Kennedy. And John Edwards did a visit of poverty stricken people and areas in Appalachia as Robert F. Kennedy did.

But people have said that Bunny Melon saw John Edwards in the JFK tradition and sense of hope.

by Anonymousreply 17205/03/2012

R163, believe and interpret as you want, but John Edwards was by Elizabeth's side the whole time in her last months.

And John wanted to continue to live with Elizabeth during her last year or two, but Elizabeth wanted him out of the house toward the end.

by Anonymousreply 17305/03/2012

R168, the point is that although a husband is part of the family, he is not a blood relative like other relatives and children are, and the husband can reject the wife and leave at any time and at whim.

So in reality this makes husbands a tenuous and often unreliable part of the family.

50 percent of all marriages end in divorce.

by Anonymousreply 17405/03/2012

R74 You do realize that children can also divorce their parents right?

Spouses are family even though they are not related by blood just like adopted children become family.

by Anonymousreply 17505/03/2012

R172, the problem now is that people don't know whether Edwards genuinely cared about poverty or whether he was just doing it for political gain.

That's the problem he has now caused.

by Anonymousreply 17605/03/2012

What I don't understand is the ease at which all these people decided to have Eddie run for President. If they were all comfortable this mess would be protected from exposure then just think what other messes out there exist with no exposure, yet.

by Anonymousreply 17705/03/2012

R175, you miss the point.

R175, some women make the mistake of thinking their husband will always love them, no matter what.

And that the husband's love is a life-long given that is assured and owed to the wife.

In reality, there is no assurance the husband will continue to love the wife and the husband's love is certainly not owed to the woman in the mind of many men.

by Anonymousreply 17805/03/2012

R177, the campaign was in full gear way before the affair occurred.

The affair occurred in the middle of the campaign.

The long four years between the 2004 campaign of the John Kerry/John Edwards ticket and the 2008 campaign took a toll on John Edwards in terms of very tedious waiting and filling the long four years.

I believe the affair in late 2006 and early 2007 took place partially because of the intense tedium of waiting on the part of John Edwards for the 2008 campaign to get in full swing.

I think John Edwards was very bored waiting for the full campaign to begin and fell prey to Rielle during this lull.

by Anonymousreply 17905/03/2012

But the affair continued during 2008, R179. And eventually resulted in the birth of a child.

People like Josh Brumberger begged John Edwards to stop before it got out of hand and told him that Rielle was unstable. He refused to listen.

by Anonymousreply 18005/03/2012

The mundane problems of multi-millionaires hold little interest for me.

by Anonymousreply 18105/03/2012

Very self destructive behavior on John's part.

by Anonymousreply 18205/03/2012

Here is a timeline of the affair.

We don't know that the affair continued in 2008 - the baby was born in February 2008.

John visited the baby at the Beverly Hilton in July 2008 - one can understand John wanting to see and be with the baby a bit.

I doubt the actual affair continued in 2008 as it was too risky at that point.

by Anonymousreply 18305/03/2012

Boy, this Rielle character must cast quite a spell to turn John Edwards into a lovelorn swain -- and a father too.

by Anonymousreply 18405/03/2012

Again, it comes down to the fact that Edwards ran for President with all of this going on and with the full knowledge and awareness that this could implode had his campaign ran all the way to the White House.

Coming on the heels of the worst President this country has ever been dealt with, Edwards could have truly put not only the country, but the democratic party in serious jeopardy. I'm trying to think how someone who would truly care for the citizens of this country could rationalize making the decision he did, but I can think of a damn reason other than pure selfishness.

Those of you blaming Elizabeth or shedding tears for John are looking to give the man respect that he clearly never gave any of you. But by all means continue to feel sorry for the guy.

by Anonymousreply 18505/03/2012

R178 Marriage is supposed to last until death claims one of them, marriage vows state that clearly and also in sickness and in health, the love is expected and owed regardless of gender, if people fall out of love then they should be honest with their spouse and get a divorce, lots of people get married for the wrong reasons and expect the honeymoon phase to last forever. Honestly I think some people have no idea what love and commitment mean.

by Anonymousreply 18605/03/2012

Correct, R185.

Presidential Adviser David Gergen has said that John Edwards put the chances of the entire Democratic Party at risk in 2008.

by Anonymousreply 18705/03/2012

[quote]Those of you blaming Elizabeth or shedding tears for John

I'm saying the John was too cooperative with Elizabeth (sympathetic to her overwhelming grief) when he should have been more sensitive to her long term mental health and insisted they get counseling instead of giving in to her mad desires that soon overwhelmed and alienated him.

She went nuts, he proved weak, and now there's a mess.

by Anonymousreply 18805/03/2012

What does it say about Edwards' judge of character that he didn't listen to aides like Josh Brumberger who warned him how unstable and crazy Rielle was?

by Anonymousreply 18905/03/2012

I think John Edwards would have ended having anything to do with Rielle if she had not gotten pregnant.

The fact that she got pregnant forced Rielle to continue to be an obstacle and forced her presence upon John.

by Anonymousreply 19005/03/2012

R186, the marriage vows may say that love for a life-time is owed to the spouse, but the 50 percent of all marriages ending in divorce statistic belies this notion and shows it is meaningless in over half of all marriages.

by Anonymousreply 19105/03/2012

Why was he not using birth control?

by Anonymousreply 19205/03/2012

Maybe Rielle told John that she was taking the birth control pill or using birth control patches or birth control injection shots.

by Anonymousreply 19305/03/2012

R193, it's always foolish for a man to believe that. He should have been using condoms.

by Anonymousreply 19405/03/2012

R191 Si then what's your point here? Statistics have nothing to do with the meaning of marriage vows, people get married for love, sometimes it doesn't last. I already stated that before but it still doesn't change the fact that spouses owe one another love and respect, every single person deserves nothing less from their husband, wife or partner, if you cannot comprehend this then I feel sorry for you.

by Anonymousreply 19505/03/2012

Is he still friendly with Rielle?

by Anonymousreply 19605/03/2012

Let's not forget the sex tape in all of this.

Whose idea was that and why did Edwards participate in something so foolish?

It's bad enough to have an affair when you are running for President and get your mistress getting pregnant. But making a SEX TAPE?

by Anonymousreply 19705/03/2012

I bet it was Rielle's idea.

by Anonymousreply 19805/03/2012

R195, go away. You are stretching your point to absurdity.

There are all kinds of situations where love becomes dead and continuation of the marriage becomes impossible -

incompatibility

emotional abuse

physical abuse

personality disorders and mental problems

personality problems making living with the person extremely difficult

the list could go on.

Yes, you are presently an ideal. We'll concede to your ideal to shut you up.

by Anonymousreply 19905/03/2012

R199, I think what R195 is getting at is that while many marriages do not work out, that is no reason to so viciously betray someone you made a commitment to.

And in this case, it wasn't a 'normal' affair. It was an affair conducted while the wife was dying of cancer, in which a child was born to the mistress, and was conducted in the middle of a Presidential election and resulted in a huge scandal which the whole world found out about.

by Anonymousreply 20005/03/2012

presenting, not presently

by Anonymousreply 20105/03/2012

[quote]Marriage is supposed to last until death claims one of them, marriage vows state that clearly and also in sickness and in health, the love is expected and owed regardless of gender,

It's all b.s. from the Bible. Marriage should simply be a partnership contract between two people with NO involvement from religion - its the job of the state and takes place at the courthouse. When they want to end the marriage, they go to the courthouse for the divorce. Churches should be removed from the marrige business.

by Anonymousreply 20205/03/2012

When anyone wants out of a marriage, it is a betrayal.

Everyone who is divorced lived thru a betrayal.

I just don't buy that the betrayal in the Edwards' marriage is all that different, R200, even though you describe it in the most maudlin, over-reaching, absurdist, overly dramatic, exaggerated way.

by Anonymousreply 20305/03/2012

R199 My point point was not absurd but factual, you are the one blathering on here about how spouses; women in particular are not owed love by their spouses, now that is absurd.

I will once again state this since you have reading comprehension problems: If you fall out of love with your spouse get a divorce, don't lie to them and string them along. And yes spouses are owed love and respect.

by Anonymousreply 20405/03/2012

R202 Who cares where it originated what matters is that it's a lifelong commitment between two people who love each other, gay straight whatever, if you commit to another it should be during good and bad times.

by Anonymousreply 20505/03/2012

r174, your definition of "family" is bizarre. END OF STORY.

"In reality, there is no assurance the husband will continue to love the wife and the husband's love is certainly not owed to the woman in the mind of many men."

Seriously, r178, what is your native culture? Are you at all aware that wives can stop loving husbands? That wives have been known to leave husbands? That men physically sire children as opposed to parthenogenesis? That the love of a woman for a man has no guarantees?

Because if you think differently, you don't know women.

by Anonymousreply 20605/03/2012

R203, I don't care what you 'buy'. What I described was not my opinion, but a series of facts :

1. Elizabeth was dying of cancer

2. John fathered a child with his mistress

3. John was running for President of the United States

4. The scandal became public knowledge to the entire world

5. John even made a sex tape with Rielle

If you want to pretend that those FACTS are common in every case of adultery, that is your delusion to enjoy.

by Anonymousreply 20705/03/2012

R202, who said anything about religion, the Bible or the Church?

What most people, straight or gay, are saying is that you're not supposed to betray the person you are in a relationship with.

That's all.

by Anonymousreply 20805/03/2012

r202, you are beyond the topic's scope, and therefore irrelevant.

by Anonymousreply 20905/03/2012

Birth control pills, shots, patches, whatever, aren't 100% effective. Men should always take responsibility for themselves and wear condoms.

r199, who's "We"? Please learn to speak for yourself. Not everyone agrees with the point you are trying to make.

by Anonymousreply 21005/03/2012

R207, the point is that the end result is the same no matter what the offending circumstances are -

the end result is the fracture of the marriage occurs.

And the fracture of the marriage often leading to divorce is the important part.

by Anonymousreply 21105/03/2012

[quote]it's a lifelong commitment between two people

ONLY because the Bible-thumpers make that claim with their revisions. Yet there are Bible stories about great men with many wives.

Why is it that the church used to permit same-sex marriage?

Why is it that the church used to bless a trial marriage for a year and a day?

Why is it that the church used to allow clergy to marry?

by Anonymousreply 21205/03/2012

R212 those are valid questions to ask, but they are outside the scope of this thread.

by Anonymousreply 21305/03/2012

The affair was probably as simple as EE was fat and yappy and Rielle was skinny and would do anal and had a bald pussy with no gunt overhang.

by Anonymousreply 21405/03/2012

agreed, r214, but I think oral was probably the clincher.

by Anonymousreply 21505/03/2012

Was her name "MARY Elizabeth Edwards"?

by Anonymousreply 21605/03/2012

Rielle claimed that they never used birth control. That she didn't think she could get pregnant.

by Anonymousreply 21705/03/2012

How could 2 middle-aged adults think that, R217?

It's one thing for a couple of teenagers to be that stupid, but I don't understand it here.

by Anonymousreply 21805/03/2012

She thought she was too old to get pregnant....

by Anonymousreply 21905/03/2012

Josh Brumberger was right about Rielle, R219. She IS crazy.

by Anonymousreply 22005/03/2012

I agree, but that is what she claimed. Personally, I think she told him she was sterile and then purposefully trapped him. She was a 43 year old woman with no money and no man. There was no way in hell she was going to walk away from Edwards without a payday. Also, from the moment they began their affair, she was given $5000 into an account for expenses. This was before she was pregnant. She was being taken care of and shown a life that she could never have dreamed of before she met Edwards.

by Anonymousreply 22105/03/2012

Rielle was 42 or 43, but she and John, of course, should have used birth control.

I honestly think John had not cheated before Rielle and that he was not sophisticated about thinking about birth control methods. (childish, I know)

Or maybe he sub-consciously (or consciously) and psychologically wanted another child, so he wasn't careful about birth control because he wouldn't mind if another child was produced.

Francis Quinn, age 4, has the most beautiful blue eyes inherited from John Edwardes.

by Anonymousreply 22205/03/2012

And Rielle had had plural abortions in her wild NYC days, according to Jay McInerney's novel.

by Anonymousreply 22305/03/2012

I never heard about $5000 being put into an account for her before she was pregnant. Where did you hear this?

Perhaps th $5000 was partial payment for being the Edwards campaign videographer.

by Anonymousreply 22405/03/2012

R224, I think it was during Josh Brumberger's testimony that he talked about how early on in Rielle's role as videographer, and long before the pregnancy, she was being given medical insurance coverage, the right to travel on the candidate's plane, her own spending account etc.

Brumberger found it odd that a basic level employee was being given so many benefits and privileges that the average Edwards employee didn't receive.

by Anonymousreply 22505/03/2012

Rielle stated this herself in the GQ article that she gave. That was her first public interview. She also contradicted herself and said that "Johnny" never asked her to have an abortion, yet she said later that he wasn't too happy about her being pregnant and asked her if there was anything he could say to change her mind about having the child.

by Anonymousreply 22605/03/2012

I know a couple whose young teenage son was killed in a traffic accident. It drove her deeper into religion & drove him into atheism. But aside from creating that difference between them, the tragedy became a bond that brought them closer than ever (& they'd been together since junior high). They trust each other so deeply now, I think that discovery of adultery would seem even more of a betrayal than it is for most couples.

Elizabeth Edwards may have felt that way -- not only "how could he do this to me after we've gone through cancer together?", which is bad enough -- but also "how could he do this to me after we've gone through our son's death together?". A person doesn't have to be nuts to react like that (though it does sound as if her son's death may have driven her 'round the bend & she never fully recovered from it).

by Anonymousreply 22705/03/2012

frau running amock in this thread!! r3 and many others

by Anonymousreply 22805/04/2012

Elizabeth Edwards may have been unbalanced by the loss of her son, the terminal cancer and her husband's cheating, but John Edwards is clinically insane.

You do not fuck the wacko videographer and get her pregnant while you are running for president/vice president if the United States. Not after Clinton. The republicans have moles in democratic campaigns. It's a long GOP tradition at least since Nixon (Lucianne Goldberg anyone?) If you thinkthis affair wouldn't have been exactly what the GOP is looking for and exactly what would torpedo a presidential campaign, then you're crazy. And it wouldn't matter if Edwards was running for president or for veep. If Obama had picked Edwards as his VP, John McCain would be president today (and Sarah Palin would be VP).

If Edwards' affair had been exposed during the presidential campaign it would have been twice as toxic because his wife was dying of cancer and because he'd made a sex tape.

The man is a psychopath to think he could have this kind of affair in the midst of a presidential campaign and while his wife was very publicly battling cancer. Pure psycho to think it was ok and to think he wouldn't be caught.

by Anonymousreply 22905/04/2012

Whores shouldn't get married.

by Anonymousreply 23005/04/2012

What a drama mama. Does she really expect a man as handsome as Edwards to stick around with someone who is less than a woman?

If I got my front teeth knocked out, do you think my man would make out with me? No way. It'd be gross.

by Anonymousreply 23105/04/2012

Read r229, you complete a--hole at r231.

by Anonymousreply 23205/04/2012

R229 is exactly right. I feel for his daughter having to endure yet another humiliation at the hands of her father. Rielle Hunter looks like a fucking ferret. What is her government name again?

by Anonymousreply 23305/04/2012

whoa - I did not know that Elizabeth Edwards was that upset and intense about the death of her son, Wade. What an awful thing to endure - this is a full scale tragedy- and then the determination to get pregnant in later life ? a presidential run seems like something this family did not need (even w/o the affair)...

by Anonymousreply 23405/04/2012

The Edwards' political ambitions engulfed everything else in their lives; nothing else mattered. As long as they pursued their common goal, Eliz. was willing to overlook John's "failings". His betrayal(affair) not only reflected on their marriage, and all that it meant to Elizabeth, it threatened to jeopardize the successful accomplishment of that goal.

by Anonymousreply 23505/04/2012

I guess Edwards is turned on my crazy women. Both seem quite unstable, and Rielle just about as nuts as they come. And she is not attractive.

This was not his first time getting sex outside of marriage. Edwards has been named in a prostitution ring in NYC. Small article in the Time the other day- not getting much notice.

by Anonymousreply 23605/04/2012

Many, many women mistakenly believe that they can't easily get pregnant after age 40 or so. Because they turn out to be wrong doesn't mean that they were attempting to "purposefully trap" someone.

by Anonymousreply 23705/04/2012

This is heading to Lifetime Movie territory. Let the casting begin! Elizabeth is such a juicy role. Off the top of my head, Stockard Channing?

by Anonymousreply 23805/04/2012

Julianne Moore--seriously--would be perfect.

by Anonymousreply 23905/04/2012

Stockard is too old. This has Kathleen Turner written all over it (she's have to lose a little weight). Tom Cruise would be perfect for Edwards- plastic, grinning, clueless naturally- but too young, hmmmm.

by Anonymousreply 24005/04/2012

"Without My Breasts: The Elizabeth Edwards Story" A Lifetime Original Movie for Women and Gay Men

by Anonymousreply 24105/04/2012

Let's get it started, R241!

by Anonymousreply 24205/04/2012

[quote]Many, many women mistakenly believe that they can't easily get pregnant after age 40 or so.

I seriously doubt that's true. Many if not most 40-year-old women have not begun menopause, and there's absolutely no reason to believe age alone prevents conception. There are too many women that age who have had babies for that belief to be prevalent.

I could see women believing they can't get pregnant after they've begun menopause, but a simple google search or a visit to their gynecologist would resolve that issue.

by Anonymousreply 24305/04/2012

[quote]"Without My Breasts: The Elizabeth Edwards Story" A Lifetime Original Movie for Women and Gay Men

Starring Caroline Rhea as Elizabeth Edwards, Punxatawny Phil as Rielle Hunter...I'm stuck on John Edwards.

by Anonymousreply 24405/04/2012

How about Jerry O'Connell for John Edwards?

by Anonymousreply 24505/04/2012

Kathleen Turner as Elizabeth Edwards? She is too much of a tough broad w/the deep, deep voice, to play Elizabeth. Stockard Channing would be perfect. Rielle could be played by Blythe Danner....

by Anonymousreply 24605/04/2012

Are Hunter and Edwards still together? Answer me bitches!

by Anonymousreply 24705/04/2012

I wonder if he ever thought about having Rielle killed. I'm not kidding.

by Anonymousreply 24805/04/2012

[quote] there's absolutely no reason to believe age alone prevents conception.

No

No reason at all

Except for medical research.

"Every woman s fertility declines with age. Getting older means it will take longer to conceive and you may need help from a fertility doctor (Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility Specialist). A woman s fertility begins to decline gradually beginning in her late 20 s and continues this decline until age 34. At age 35 fertility begins to drop more rapidly. As a general rule, women have their best chance of getting pregnant before age 35. Once a woman is in her late 30 s, conception becomes more difficult and 50% of women in this age group will seek fertility treatment. By age 40 the ability to get pregnant drops further still. After 40 years of age, fertility is severely compromised. By age 42, only about 2% of women have children. "

But why pay attention to accepted fertility research when anyone on Datalounge can tell you whatever they believe to be the truth?

by Anonymousreply 24905/04/2012

That hangar scene is your Emmy reel right there.

by Anonymousreply 25005/04/2012

[quote] Many if not most 40-year-old women have not begun menopause,

Most 40 year old women are perimenopausal. But you don't know what perimenopause is, do you?

by Anonymousreply 25105/04/2012

R248, I have to believe he thought about it. A LOT.

by Anonymousreply 25205/04/2012

Blythe Danner? She's 70 y/o. No way.

Charlie is spot on with the recommendation of Tom Cruise for John Edwards. That fake smile of his is PERFECT.

Okay let's see, for EE I would say Kristie Alley. For Rielle, I'll go with kooky Meg Ryan.

by Anonymousreply 25305/04/2012

How about chipmunk faced Melissa Gilbert for EE? She can fling her shit bra at Johnny on the tarmac.

by Anonymousreply 25405/04/2012

bump to stop the paranoia

by Anonymousreply 25505/05/2012

Lord knows at least it was there

But this thread's still here

by Anonymousreply 25605/05/2012

bump to baffle the posters on the " Why in the world was the very interesting thread on Elizabeth Edwards DELETED?" thread

by Anonymousreply 25705/06/2012

another baffle bump

by Anonymousreply 25805/06/2012

ghost thread bump

by Anonymousreply 25905/07/2012

phantom bump

by Anonymousreply 26005/08/2012

spooky bump

by Anonymousreply 26105/09/2012

Late bump

by Anonymousreply 26205/10/2012

morning bump

by Anonymousreply 26305/11/2012

saturday bump

by Anonymousreply 26405/12/2012

sunday breast bump

by Anonymousreply 26505/13/2012

bumpitty titty bump

by Anonymousreply 26605/13/2012

spectral bump

by Anonymousreply 26705/15/2012

hump bump

by Anonymousreply 26805/16/2012

weekend bump

by Anonymousreply 26905/19/2012

reminder bump

by Anonymousreply 27005/27/2012

memorial day bump

by Anonymousreply 27105/28/2012

never say die bump

by Anonymousreply 27205/29/2012

late May bump

by Anonymousreply 27305/31/2012

junebug bump

by Anonymousreply 27406/02/2012

sunday bump

by Anonymousreply 27506/03/2012

weekend bump

by Anonymousreply 27606/09/2012

mid june bump

by Anonymousreply 27706/16/2012

July bump

by Anonymousreply 27807/01/2012

independence bump

by Anonymousreply 27907/04/2012

sunday bump

by Anonymousreply 28007/29/2012

august bump

by Anonymousreply 28108/05/2012

labor day bump

by Anonymousreply 28209/01/2012

autumnal bump

by Anonymousreply 28309/30/2012

Post election bump

by Anonymousreply 28411/10/2012

one who knows bump

by Anonymousreply 28511/11/2012

Turkey lurkey weekend bump

by Anonymousreply 28611/25/2012

2013 bump

by Anonymousreply 28701/01/2013

spring bump

by Anonymousreply 28804/13/2013

mid august bump

by Anonymousreply 28908/17/2013

Dylan bump

by Anonymousreply 29002/08/2014

late june bump

by Anonymousreply 29106/27/2014

mint julep bump

by Anonymousreply 29206/29/2014

fertility bump

by Anonymousreply 29306/30/2014

joan rivers bump

by Anonymousreply 29409/09/2014

fall season bump

by Anonymousreply 29509/17/2014

bumpbumpbump

by Anonymousreply 29609/25/2014

Texas sheet cake bump

by Anonymousreply 29709/28/2014

fall foliage bump

by Anonymousreply 29810/05/2014

stephen collins bump

by Anonymousreply 29910/08/2014

fall foliage bump

by Anonymousreply 30010/11/2014

ebola bump

by Anonymousreply 30110/18/2014

All saints day bump

by Anonymousreply 30211/01/2014

snow bump

by Anonymousreply 30311/16/2014

black friday bump

by Anonymousreply 30411/28/2014

sony email leak bump

by Anonymousreply 30512/14/2014

winter solstice bump

by Anonymousreply 30612/21/2014

2015 bump

by Anonymousreply 30701/01/2015

french terror bump

by Anonymousreply 30801/10/2015

super bowl weekend bump

by Anonymousreply 30901/31/2015

DST bump

by Anonymousreply 31003/08/2015
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.