Edwards on Bill Clinton in 1999: "I think he has shown a remarkable disrespect for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife."
Ken Rudin writes in the Political Junkie:
Edwards' national finance chair in his two runs for the White House, Fred Baron, says he gave Hunter "assistance" to get her out of North Carolina and into a $3 million mansion in Santa Barbara, Calif., so she could escape the hounding of reporters following her. Baron says he never told John Edwards. Edwards said he had no knowledge of any money paid to Hunter. This defies belief. Assuming Edwards was fearful of the affair's becoming public, wouldn't he wonder how she could just find her way from the Tarheel State to a gated community in wealthy Santa Barbara? And he never talked to Baron about this? Puh-leeze.
As if that weren't surreal enough, this week came the statement by Howard Wolfson, the former communications director for the Hillary Clinton campaign, that had the media done their job and exposed Edwards prior to the Iowa caucuses, Clinton — not Obama — would have won the caucuses and gone on to win the nomination. Aside from the dubiousness of that conclusion — I suspect that most Edwards supporters would have gone to Obama before voting for Clinton — the thought of the Clinton camp calling on the media to expose the sexual shenanigans of a candidate defies belief.
Edwards . . . had this to say about Bill Clinton in 1999: "I think this president has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen."
_______________
And from the Associated Press:
Two weeks after a devastating revelation sent her husband into political exile, Elizabeth Edwards isn't getting the steady sympathy usually afforded to a woman scorned.
Instead, she's faced criticism from dedicated Democrats who think she was too willing to keep the affair a secret to help John Edwards' political ambitions, as well as her own.
Edwards' national finance chair in his two runs for the White House, Fred Baron, says he gave Hunter "assistance" to get her out of North Carolina and into a $3 million mansion in Santa Barbara, Calif., so she could escape the hounding of reporters following her. Baron says he never told John Edwards. Edwards said he had no knowledge of any money paid to Hunter. This defies belief. Assuming Edwards was fearful of the affair's becoming public, wouldn't he wonder how she could just find her way from the Tarheel State to a gated community in wealthy Santa Barbara? And he never talked to Baron about this? Puh-leeze.
As if that weren't surreal enough, this week came the statement by Howard Wolfson, the former communications director for the Hillary Clinton campaign, that had the media done their job and exposed Edwards prior to the Iowa caucuses, Clinton — not Obama — would have won the caucuses and gone on to win the nomination. Aside from the dubiousness of that conclusion — I suspect that most Edwards supporters would have gone to Obama before voting for Clinton — the thought of the Clinton camp calling on the media to expose the sexual shenanigans of a candidate defies belief.
Edwards . . . had this to say about Bill Clinton in 1999: "I think this president has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen."
_______________
And from the Associated Press:
Two weeks after a devastating revelation sent her husband into political exile, Elizabeth Edwards isn't getting the steady sympathy usually afforded to a woman scorned.
Instead, she's faced criticism from dedicated Democrats who think she was too willing to keep the affair a secret to help John Edwards' political ambitions, as well as her own.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 6:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home