Les Jones

Australia set to test Internet censorship

Sunday, November 16th, 2008 | Politics, Tech | Permalink | No Comments |

Herald Sun - Australian web filter to block 10,000 internet sites:

“It is unclear how ACMA will scale up their blacklist to 10,000 websites and what will go on the list,” he said. Conroy said the list would contain illegal and unwanted content but we still have to see what would end up on that list.

“Under the current mandate that includes adult material, which would mean most material that could be rated R and, in some circumstances, material rated MA15+.”

Holy [CENSORED IN AUSTRALIA]! Rated R material could be banned from the Internet Down Under.

So could MA15+, which is roughly the equivalent of the PG13 rating in the U.S. “The “MA15+” rating is restricted to those 15 and over meaning those under 15 cannot legally view the film without being accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. It may contain strong bloody violence if justified by context, strong implication of sexual activity, and strong impact coarse language (though ‘very coarse language’ should be infrequent), and ’strong themes’.”

Oddly, the same material might be played on Australian broadcast TV after 9:00 PM.

Both are not suitable for people under 15, but this is not legally restricted as TV is a broadcast medium. MA15+ rated material can be shown between 9:00pm and 5:00am. The AV15+ rating signifies that the program contains significant violence, and may only be shown between 9:30pm and 5:00am. If it is being viewed in a cinema, an adult must accompany a child if it is under 15.

Note: R18+ rated material is sometimes shown on broadcast television in Australia such as Eyes Wide Shut, Basic Instinct, Pulp Fiction, The Godfather and Kill Bill. However, such films are usually edited to make the films more appropriate for an M, MA15+ or AV15+ audience. Incidentally, Australian broadcast television is considerably more relaxed about sex and coarse language than the American networks.

I suppose it’s the height of foolishness to expect logic or consistency in censorship laws, but these seem to be pretty random.

Word of the Day: Rich (or, why I don’t look forward to paying taxes under Obama)

Wednesday, November 5th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 6 Comments |

Rich - Under an Obama administration, 49% of the the wealthiest people. If we’re lucky. If we aren’t lucky he might define rich as 75% of the wealthiest people.

Congratulations to Obama for his historic win, but I don’t believe his promise that 95% of taxpayers will get a tax cut. I expect to pay more taxes under an Obama administration.

I was one of the people who benefited from the Bush tax cuts, which contrary to popular opinion mostly benefited the less well-off and the average person. So when I say I was one of the people who benefited from those tax cuts, what I really mean is that I was part of the great majority of Americans rich and poor who benefited from those tax cuts.

Here are some aspects of the Bush tax cuts that benefited my family and millions of others:

• Reduced the bottom rate on everyone’s first dollars earned each year from 15% to 10%
• The cuts doubled the child tax credit from $1,000 per child to $2,000 per child
• Reduced the marriage penalty (about which most people have completely forgotten)
• Made more charitable contributions deductible for people who don’t itemize

Altogether, the Bush tax cuts saved my family hundreds of dollars per month. They’re set to expire January 1, 2011, and I have no reason to believe Barack Obama and a Democratically-controlled Congress will renew them or offer their equivalent for my family.

See also Ten Myths About the Bush Tax Cuts.

Maybe she’ll refinance her mausoleum, too

Monday, November 3rd, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

The Feds are stimulating the economy by giving money to corpses.

Robert Heinlein on wealth and poverty

Saturday, November 1st, 2008 | Economics, Politics, Quotes | Permalink | 1 Comment |

“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as ‘bad luck.’”
 – Robert Heinlein

Hat tip to Instapundit.

Zogby: McCain ahead of Obama 48% to 47% in Friday’s poll

Saturday, November 1st, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

Zogby:

Pollster John Zogby: “Is McCain making a move? The three-day average holds steady, but McCain outpolled Obama today, 48% to 47%. He is beginning to cut into Obama’s lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all. “Obama’s lead among women declined, and it looks like it is occurring because McCain is solidifying the support of conservative women, which is something we saw last time McCain picked up in the polls. If McCain has a good day tomorrow, we will eliminate Obama’s good day three days ago, and we could really see some tightening in this rolling average. But for now, hold on.”

This election is still winnable.

Australia headed down the oppressive government rabbit hole

Thursday, October 30th, 2008 | Guns, Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

“Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns; why should we let them have ideas?”
– Joseph Stalin

Herald-sun - Australia to implement mandatory internet censorship:

AUSTRALIA will join China in implementing mandatory censoring of the internet under plans put forward by the Federal Government.

The revelations emerge as US tech giants Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, and a coalition of human rights and other groups unveiled a code of conduct aimed at safeguarding online freedom of speech and privacy.

The government has declared it will not let internet users opt out of the proposed national internet filter.

The plan was first created as a way to combat child pronography and adult content, but could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia.

Euthenasia and anorexia now, and who knows what later? Put a politician and his minions in charge of a system like that and the list of censored topics will only grow.

Years ago Australia began limiting gun ownershop and confiscating guns. Once the government decides you can’t be trusted with guns it’s usually only a short time before they decide you can’t be trusted with other rights and powers.

Obama 2001 interview: courts not redistributive enough

Monday, October 27th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 2 Comments |

Barack Obama, from a 2001 interview with Chicago Public Radio, via HotAir:

If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.

To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that. …

I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know, the institution just isn’t structured that way.

Wow.

Find all the mistakes in the NYT’s endorsement of Obama

Friday, October 24th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

Hey, here’s one:

Mr. Obama is clear that the nation’s tax structure must be changed to make it fairer. That means the well-off Americans who have benefited disproportionately from Mr. Bush’s tax cuts will have to pay some more.

Well-off Americans have not benefited disproportionately from the Bush tax cuts. In fact, the opposite happened. Lower-income voters paid less in income taxes, in many cases to receiving more in refunds than they paid in, while the richest Americans’ share of the tax burden increased. From the Heritage Foundation:

Consequently, from 2000 to 2004, the share of all individual income taxes paid by the bottom 40 per­cent dropped from zero percent to –4 percent, mean­ing that the average family in those quintiles received a subsidy from the IRS. (See Chart 6.) By contrast, the share paid by the top quintile of households (by income) increased from 81 percent to 85 percent.

Expanding the data to include all federal taxes, the share paid by the top quintile edged up from 66.6 percent in 2000 to 67.1 percent in 2004, while the bottom 40 percent’s share dipped from 5.9 per­cent to 5.4 percent. Clearly, the tax cuts have led to the rich shouldering more of the income tax burden and the poor shouldering less.

It’s amazing to me that the New York Times either doesn’t know this, or assumes other people don’t know it.

And people act like Palin is the airhead veep candidate

Thursday, October 23rd, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 1 Comment |

You’ve probably heard about Joe Biden’s “gird your loins” address:

ABC News’ Matthew Jaffe Reports: Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., on Sunday guaranteed that if elected, Sen. Barack Obama., D-Ill., will be tested by an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions.

“Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

“I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you - not financially to help him - we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”

“Gird your loins,” Biden told the crowd. “We’re gonna win with your help, God willing, we’re gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It’s like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy.”

Thing is, that isn’t even the dumbest thing Biden has said in relation to Obama. This one didn’t get much play, but it came right after Biden was picked for veep and must have induced some buyer’s remorse from Obama.

Speaking at rally in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Mr Biden said: “Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice-president of the United States of America. Let’s get that straight.”

He continued: “She’s a truly close personal friend…quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me. But she’s first rate, I mean that sincerely, she’s first rate.”

If McCain wins it won’t be because of his initiative

Wednesday, October 15th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

He’s behind in the polls. He’s at the last debate. He thinks he can win by being a nice guy who’s behind. If McCain loses this election it will be because he’s unwilling to go negative and go on the attack.

Here are the points of attack McCain could have used:

- Obama is tied into ACORN, which is a corrupt, voter-fraud-supporting organization.
- Obama is the most liberal Senator in Congress.
- Obama is the most wildly pro-abortion person in Congress.
- Obama has ties to admitted terrorist bomber Bill Ayers.
- Obama fundamentally believes in re-distributing wealth (the Joe the Plumber story).
- Obama is anti-gun.
- Obama is the second-biggest recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

Instead of making these points McCain decided to be Mr. Nice Guy and smirk a bunch. If McCain wins it won’t be because he fought his hardest. It will be because McCain assumed someone else would do his fighting for him.

FactCheck.org debunks Palin attacks

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 1 Comment |

“Now let me correct you on a couple of things here. Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of Buddhism is not ‘every man for himself,’ and the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up.”
– A Fish Called Wanda

FactCheck.org clears Palin of a laundry list of false allegations. This makes it all the more ridiculous when someone like Slate’s Dahlia Lithwich repeats the book-banning falsehood.

Sarah Palin didn’t slash funding to teen moms

Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 3 Comments |

A WaPo blogger screams that Palin slashed funding for aid to teen mothers. Except that what she slashed was a funding increase. Instead of quadrupling the funding from $1.2 million to $5 million she only tripled it to $3.9 million.

A Salon blogger who fell for it still hasn’t corrected the mistake, and Salon ran it on their front page today.

In other fake Sarah Palin news, the video of Todd Palin having a David Hasselhoff-style meltdown while Bristol videotapes it is fake and so is the picture of Sarah Palin in a stars and stripes bikini holding a BB rifle. Also the source of the “Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party” story has backed off his claim.

Best piece I’ve read on Palin

Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

At The (UK) Sun.

My only quibble is this line: “The former Miss Alaska runner-up is deeply religious and supports the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in schools.” I discussed that here.

Mark Steyn on Sarah Palin

Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008 | Politics, Quotes | Permalink | No Comments |

“What other country in the developed world produces beauty queens who hunt caribou and serve up a terrific moose stew? As an immigrant, I’m not saying I came to the United States purely to meet chicks like that, but it was certainly high on my list of priorities. And for the gun-totin’ Miss Wasilla then to go on to become Governor while having five kids makes it an even more uniquely American story. Next to her resume, a guy who’s done nothing but serve in the phony-baloney job of “community organizer” and write multiple autobiographies looks like just another creepily self-absorbed lifelong member of the full-time political class that infests every advanced democracy.”
– Mary Steyn

The NY Times published a Palin op-ed in January

Monday, September 1st, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 5 Comments |

Before Sarah Palin was on most people’s radar the New York Times published her op-ed against the decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species. I can’t help but think that this gives her more intellectual cachet than her opponents would like.

Via Hit and Run.

I don’t get the “Sarah Palin has no foreign policy experience” argument

Saturday, August 30th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 2 Comments |

Governors don’t have foreign policy experience. Carter didn’t. Reagan didn’t. Clinton didn’t. Bush 2 didn’t. Noting a lack of foreign policy experience is a mighty weak attack against a governor.

Meanwhile Palin - a two-term mayor and Alaskan governor for the past two years - has more executive experience than McCain, Obama, or Biden.

Voters haven’t elected a Senator to be president since JFK in 1960, yet the Obama-Biden ticket has two of them. The pattern for the past 30 years is that Americans vote for the ticket with a governor and a Senator, though it’s usually the governor for the presidential slot and the Senator for the veep slot. In that sense McCain has set up the classic winning ticket that voters like.

McCain chose well.

UPDATE: I’ll be honest and say that I’d prefer a veep candidate with more experience. The bar keeps going lower (Dan Quayle) and lower (John Edwards).

That said, I’ll take Palin’s resume over Obama’s, which consisted of a couple years of low-level state stuff and two years in the Senate spent running for president. And then there’s the obvious point that Palin’s running for vice-president while Obama is running for president.

Is Palin a strategic pick based on the fact that she’s a woman? Absolutely. She wouldn’t have been picked otherwise. But that’s the election we’re in right now. Obama wouldn’t have been nominated for president if he hadn’t had black skin. Many of Hillary’s supporters wouldn’t have gotten behind her if she weren’t a woman. 2008 is the year of identity politics and McCain is adapting to the election his opponents have created.

John Edwards, The Musical!

Wednesday, August 20th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 1 Comment |

From the fine folks at McSweeney’s. It’s probably wrong that I think this is the funniest part:

(DAVID PEREL learns that JOHN EDWARDS is visiting RIELLE HUNTER at the Beverly Hills Hilton and sets up an ambush in the hotel. When JOHN EDWARDS sees them, he flees to the bathroom.)

REPORTER
Mr. Edwards, come out.
We live in a democracy.
Information is the tonic
That corrects hypocrisy.

JOHN EDWARDS
Oh, of course, yes. I agree—uh,
It’s just that I have diarrhea.

Edwards tidbits

Thursday, August 14th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

OR,

John Edwards is our mouse, kittens

An unmuzzled LA Times blogger profiles Lee Stranahan and manages to make Kos look like even more of a douche. Keep rockin’, dude.

Overlawyered examines alleged baby daddy Andrew Young’s totally incredible real estate success.

The National Enquirer is promising more revelations.

Scoble blogs about being on the plane with Edwards and Rielle Hunter.

“Some young lazy slut has charmed away my brains”

Thursday, August 14th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

I’m thinking John Edwards now understands what Dylan meant in this song.

I’m flat out spent, this woman been drivin’ me to tears
I’m flat out spent, this woman she been drivin’ me to tears
This woman so crazy, I swear I ain’t gonna touch another one for years

Well, the warm weather’s comin’ and the buds are on the vine
The warm weather’s comin’, the buds are on the vine
Ain’t nothing more depressing than trying to satisfy this woman of mine

Victor David Hansen is sayin’ what I been bloggin’

Tuesday, August 12th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 1 Comment |

From The Corner (emphasis mine):

I think most Americans, especially given the winning personality of Mrs. Edwards, would rather let John Edwards solve his own problems and not hear about them. But the rub comes from what we might call his trademark preachy mode, transmogrified from the jury summation to the national pulpit. In that sense, Edwards is a sort of a secular version of Jim Baker/Jimmy Swaggert/Ted Haggard—and people long ago tired of him.

Yep. Edwards has always acted like a TV preacher.

Live and let live is our national creed, but Edwards had to lecture us instead about the intimacies of his wife’s medical condition in such a way to highlight his own character, often in the context and in the pursuit of his own ambition. In the same manner, we all didn’t much care whether he wanted to build a 30,000 sq. ft. monstrosity, replete with a self-indulgent playroom: his money, he earned it through litigation, and he was welcome to spend it as he liked.

BUT, when one juxtaposed his tastes for the lavish with his sermons to supposedly uncaring Americans about their heartless unconcern about the poor and homeless, then the contrast between word and deed became, well, sort of insulting.

Yep, as it is here. The most heinous quote there, coming from a guy with a 28,000 square foot house (and a mistress, as it was later revealed), is “I think that Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs. I think he would be appalled, actually.” Gee, if only Jesus had offered some guidance about adultery and whether or not it was appalling.

Lots of people had Edwards’s number long before his mistress made an appearance. Having a mistress while making a big show of being a family man and supportive husband is another example of his hypocrisy. It isn’t the only one.

Previously:
- John Edwards, TV Preacher
- John Edwards, TV Preacher, Part 2
- John Edwards, TV Preacher, Part 3
- John Edwards Helps Himself to Poverty Funds
- Preacherman Talkin’ on the TV, He’s a-puttin’ Down the SUV

They oughta ask for that “Father of the Year” trophy* back

Monday, August 11th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 1 Comment |

WorldNetDaily - John Edwards awarded ‘Father of the Year’:

Where was John Edwards around the time his alleged “love child” Frances Quinn Hunter was conceived? The senator was in New York – receiving his Father of the Year Award.

Edwards accepted his June 27, 2007, honor from the Father’s Day/Mother’s Day Council exactly eight months before the child was born Feb. 27, 2008, according to a birth certificate obtained by the Charlotte Observer.

* I’m assuming it was a trophy and not a coffee mug like I got last Father’s Day for being “World’s Greatest Dad.” Hat tip to NY Post.

Is a Politician’s Personal Life Relevant? According to John Edwards It Is

Saturday, August 9th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 1 Comment |

“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.”
 – John Edwards February 12, 1999

“I think every single candidate for president, Republican and Democratic have lives, personal lives, that indicate something about what kind of human being they are. And I think it is a fair evaluation for America to engage in, to look at, what kind of human beings each of us are, and what kind of president we’d make.”
 – John Edwards March 27, 2007

In light of Edwards admitting yesterday to having an affair in 2006 with Rielle Hunter, some people are asking if we should even care. If it isn’t just a personal matter for the Edwards family. Even his wife has asked for privacy.

Edwards had an affair. I don’t even fault him so much for that. Some women are attracted to powerful men, even when the men are as ugly as Lyndon Johnson or Richard Nixon. For a man like Edwards who had the trifecta of wealth, power, and good looks there would have been a lot of temptation. I don’t think many men would have been able to resist it. As I’ve said before, if you’re ready to vote for a politician the fact that he’s had an affair in the past probably won’t stop you, and maybe it shouldn’t.

Where it’s fair to fault Edwards is in his cheating on the one hand and on the other holding up his personal life to explain why people should vote for him. His career political accomplishments are few. He was a one term Senator with a lousy attendance record and a losing vice presidential candidate who failed to carry his home state. At some point he must have decided that his marriage and family life were the only assets he had to run on.

Public knowledge of his affair with Rielle Hunter would have poisoned those assets, which is why Edwards and his wife had to conspire to hide the truth from the public if they had any hope to gain the White House. To do that they had to lie, and those lies hurt other people. As Lee Stranahan has said those lies necessarily accused the people who were telling the truth about the affairs of being the liars.

Hunter would become pregnant. Edwards denies the child is his, but has not taken a paternity test. Instead, a campaign worker, Andrew Young, claimed the child as his, though afterwards the child was born and Young did not sign the paperwork to be listed as the father on the child’s birth certificate. Young is married and has his own children. Presumably he was only willing to go so far to help the Edwardses in their charade.

Most grownups doubt that Young is the father. Assuming he is not, the Young family’s prestige and reputation have been tarnished in order to protect Edwards’ infidelity and the lies that John and Elizabeth have been telling. That would mean the Edwardses pulled another family into their scandal, which makes it increasingly difficult to consider this a private family matter. UDPATE: in light of revelations about Young’s tax liens and criminal history, it’s more equally that Young supported Edwards because of payoffs than because of ideology.

Meanwhile, Edwards treatment of Rielle Hunter is horrific. Depending on which story you believe, Edwards either passed his mistress on to his friend Andrew Young after he was through enjoying her, or the Young story is a lie and Edwards just doesn’t want to claim the daughter he fathered with Hunter.

In his confession yesterday Edwards said he didn’t love Hunter, which means he just announced to the world that he used her for sex and now he’s done with her. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, and now Hunter’s family is challenging Edwards to take a paternity test. I don’t think we’ve heard the last of Rielle Hunter. I also don’t think we’ve heard the last of John Edwards’s confessions.

Lee Stranahan Discovers the Democrat Null Zone

Friday, August 8th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

Lee Stranahan via Kaus:

[I]f you’re an Edwards supporter, let me put this bluntly; if you gave John and Elizabeth Edwards time, money, support, or goodwill, they played you. They made a conscious decision to make their relationship a focus throughout the campaign. That emotional goodwill you feel for them? They not only let you feel, they took actions and made statements specifically so you would feel it.

Then when the rumors first surfaced, they made the worst decision of all; they decided to lie about it and to keep lying about it for months. They lied in a way that made the people who were telling the truth look like the real liars. They lied in a way that turned their supporters into attack dogs. They only started to tell the truth when John Edwards was caught at the Beverly Hills Hilton and even now both John and Elizabeth Edward are callin[g] the people who caught him the liars …

Lee Stranahan knows that of which he speaks. A Democrat who wasn’t sufficiently drunk on the Kool-Aid loyal, he was banished from Daily Kos for not toeing the party line.

Crooked Politician Caught Red-handed With His Filthy Mitt in the Cookie Jar

Tuesday, July 29th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | No Comments |

allegedly:

Veteran Republican U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens was charged on Tuesday with concealing more than $250,000 of gifts, including renovation of his house, from an Alaska oil services company, the Justice Department said.

The Alaska politician, who has served 40 years in the senate, was charged in a federal grand jury indictment with seven counts of making false statements on his Senate financial disclosure forms from 2001 to 2006, the department said. The six-term senator is accused of receiving substantial improvements to property he owns in Alaska, new vehicles in exchange for older ones worth far less, and household goods, the Justice Department said in a statement.

Fans of Name That Party will note that Reuters worked the Senator’s Republican party affiliation in the second word of the story, but wait! Just for funsies I searched for William Jefferson on Reuters site. Surprisingly, they put his party affiliation in the first sentence of all three stories about his indictment I perused, in one case making it the very first word. Good on Reuters for getting their act together on party citation.

TV Preacher Caught in Affair Slash Love-child Scandal

Friday, July 25th, 2008 | Politics | Permalink | 7 Comments |

(I thought I had set this to post this morning, but I goofed it. Here it is with some updates that came across the news today.)

The National Enquirer - SEN. JOHN EDWARDS CAUGHT WITH MISTRESS AND LOVE CHILD!:

Senior NATIONAL ENQUIRER Reporter Alexander Hitchen asked Edwards why he was visiting Rielle and whether he was ready to confirm that he was the father of her baby.

Shocked to see a reporter, and without saying anything, Edwards ran up the stairs leading from the hotel basement to the lobby. But, spotting a photographer, he doubled back into the basement. As he emerged from the stairwell, reporter Butterfield questioned him about his hookup with Rielle.

Edwards did not answer and then ran into a nearby restroom. He stayed inside for about 15 minutes, refusing to answer questions from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER about what he was doing in the hotel. A group of hotel security men eventually escorted him from the men’s room, while preventing the NATIONAL ENQUIRER reporters from following him out of the hotel.

Followup here.

Mickey Kaus wants to know why the mainstream media hasn’t touched this story.

LATER: Hotel security guard confirms it was Edwards he escorted from the building.

ALSO, Criminal complaint filed Here’s the best part. It’s not Edwards filing the complaint, it’s the Enquirer. They claim hotel security violated the law by excluding them from the public restroom where Edwards was hiding despite the fact that they were registered guests of the hotel and Edwards wasn’t. Now Edwards could be questioned by the police or even subpoenaed to testify if the case were to go to trial.

Previously:
- John Edwards, TV Preacher
- John Edwards, TV Preacher, Part 2
- John Edwards, TV Preacher, Part 3
- John Edwards Helps Himself to Poverty Funds
- Preacherman Talkin’ on the TV, He’s a-puttin’ Down the SUV