Posted on 03/12/2010 11:27:42 AM PST by soccermom
I have never purchased a tabloid magazine, but I couldn't resist buying and reading Andrew Young's expose of John Edwards. I know this is a vanity post, but I just had to share my observations.
Of course there are the obvious revelations:
1. John Edwards is a charlatan, con artist, liar, cheat, exploiter or the lowest form, probably a criminal and is as sleazy as they come.
2. Rielle Hunter is a flake. God help the love child of this union -- both her parents are narcissists.
What wasn't as obvious to me until I read the book is that:
1. Elizabeth Edwards is an unbelievably hateful, spiteful and unbalanced woman. Now I know this woman has endured incredible hardships from the loss of her son, to her battle with cancer to the indignity of being betrayed by her husband, but there is NO excuse for some of the bizarre and spiteful things she did. If there is anything worse for baby Quinn than having John Edwards and Rielle Hunter as her parents, it is having Elizabeth Edwards as her step monster. I seriously doubt the two will ever come in contact, but God help that child if she does.
Jackie Kennedy endured many painful moments in her public life but, to my knowledge, she was always a gracious person. Thank God we were spared having this woman as our first lady.
2. Young, notwithstanding his countless mea culpas, is approximately 90% as loathsome as Edwards. He was perfectly content to go along with this whole sordid mess until there was no longer anything in it for him. He was completely content to watch John and Elizabeth treat everyone else like garbage as long as he was fine.
What I found particularly galling was his claim that "all politicians do it" when it came to some of the shameless stunts Edwards pulled. I am willing to admit that there are probably a lot of things about the candidates I support that would disappoint me. But, just because he was involved in a sleazy campaign doesn't entitle him to project his sleaze on others, without first hand knowledge.
Finally, while I didn't expect this experience to send him running into the arms of the GOP, his book is peppered with digs at conservatives/republicans as if he were still noble for being on the "right" side. He refers to Cheney as Darth Vader. OK, whatever. Childish dig. He whines about the Swift Boat vets. But when he blatantly lied about the things Ann Coulter said about Edwards (and I think most of you would agree as Freepers go I've been pretty critical of Coulter) , I have to question his credibility on everything else.
The only one even remotely likable in this book is his wife, Cheri. And I think I'd want to shake her a few times, too, but can sort of understand her predicament. I can't blame her for the mess her husband got them into, but I guess when you marry the guy you picked up on a drunken spring break trip, your odds of picking a loser increase.
OK -- there's my book report! Have fun with it!
Elizabeth Edwards is a personal BFF of Hillary Clinton. Which means that what you read about Elizabeth is only the tip of the sordid iceberg.
Edwards should be examined by Jung, not Young...
LOL!
Honestly, despite all the things we’ve heard about Hillary starting the the travel office, to how she treated the secret service and WH staff, etc, she looks like Miss Congeniality compared to Elizabeth.
Edwards should be examined by Jung, not Young...
Is there a dogsh!t archetype?
Elizabeth Edwards is an unbelievably hateful, spiteful and unbalanced woman.You didn't know this before?
She’s every bit the attorney as her hubby.
Exactly.
I’ve read that Elizabeth Edwards has been a regular poster on sites like HuffPo and DU, with opinions that fit right in with their usual hateful posts. Obviously she is entitled to her left-wing wacko opinions, but IMHO posting on those sites is undignified behavior for a wanna-be first lady.
“God help the love child of this union — both her parents are narcissists.”
Yes, very sad indeed as narcissists are INCAPABLE of giving love to a child!!!!
I read the book also. I agree with your assessment. According to my mother, who watches and reads all things anti-Bush, Elizabeth Edwards was interviewed and said that she went to meet Quinn and brought her a Christmas present.????
I too found Andrew Young to be as vile as Edwards and throughout the book he attacks Conservatives, Bush, etc. (as if to make up for writing the book about Edwards for the Democrats). He writes about the “nobility” of the cause.
What I found particularly interesting this little tidbit: John Edwards was for the invasion of Iraq, Young wasn’t, and Edwards told you, ‘You haven’t seen what I’ve seen Andrew’, (speaking about the Intelligence briefings he saw).
Right there that exposes the lefties as disingenuous Edward was for going into Iraq based on the info that others in Congress and the President and Vice President was show.
I came away with disgust for the writer, his boss, and others around them.
Uh huh. It’s modern liberalism.
Edwards won two states in the 2004 presidential primaries. He won no primaries in 2008. Apparently the only people this putrid sack of human garbage could fool was the U.S. news media. Hopefully this sociopath will spend a few years in a cage which is where he always belonged. He should take Andrew Young with him so he'll have something to f*ck while he's in there.
I have the book too. It was a gift. I’ve never even cracked the cover. Thanks for the book report, now I won’t have to read it at all.
Was thinking of getting it, or maybe borrowing from library. The other night the authors were on the overnight show After Midnight (country music, etc.) and in between C&W tunes,
host Blair Garner talked to them about the book, etc.
I could tell Elizabeth Edwards was a sleazebag because of her posts at DU, her statements about her Republican neighbor and her hateful rants about Republicans, her cooperation in setting up Ann Coulter on that talk show. The list goes on and on. I am very skeptical about the severity of her cancer, too.
But in the book and in his recent radio/TV interviews, he appears to confess his sins without reservation. Seems to me that he comes clean 100%. So I feel obliged to give Young the benefit of the doubt unless and until I have persuasive evidence that he isn't sincere about repenting.
And by the way, since when must everybody of whom we approve have a political past that's as pure as the wind-driven snow? Whittaker Chambers, James Burnham and Arthur Koestler were once deeply committed Communists and later repented. Do we condemn them? On the contrary: They are now seen as heroes.
Or what about Ronald Reagan? He once not only was a Democrat, but he was even a trade union president!
I could go on and on. But for the sake of brevity, let me just express the opinion that it's best to cut Andrew Young a good bit of slack, at least for the time being.
Besides, even if Andrew Young should be totally insincere, why interfere when he's attacking not one but two trial lawyers, John-Boy and Elizabeth? After all isn't it still true that, The enemy of our enemy is our friend!
I read some of her posts at DU. She has a potty mouth, too.
You’re missing one crucial distinction. Young hasn’t renounced liberalism at all. Not that I necessarily expect him to. But his book, as you well know if you read it, is filled with digs against conservatives. If he were truly coming clean, why did he distort the Ann Coulter comments? (And, again, if you look at my history here, I’ve been very critical of Coulter, but even I can see that he was smearing her.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.