<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: L.A. Times blog ban on damaging, scurrilous rumors doesn&#8217;t extend to celebs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/</link>
	<description>The world’s first, full-service conservative Internet broadcast network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:10:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Why Didn&#8217;t the LA Times&#8217; Ban on Rumor Reporting Extend to Others &#124; The American Pundit</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1299074</link>
		<dc:creator>Why Didn&#8217;t the LA Times&#8217; Ban on Rumor Reporting Extend to Others &#124; The American Pundit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 01:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1299074</guid>
		<description>[...] by unreliable tabloids shouldn&#8217;t be reported when the subject is a Democratic politician, but it&#8217;s just fine to mention allegations by unreliable tabloids against celebrities? The LA Times had no problem repeating an [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] by unreliable tabloids shouldn&#8217;t be reported when the subject is a Democratic politician, but it&#8217;s just fine to mention allegations by unreliable tabloids against celebrities? The LA Times had no problem repeating an [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Wikipedia locks Edwards&#8217;s page to &#8220;protect&#8221; him from rumors</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1267747</link>
		<dc:creator>Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Wikipedia locks Edwards&#8217;s page to &#8220;protect&#8221; him from rumors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 01:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1267747</guid>
		<description>[...] seem to warrant a short section noting at least the facts of the Enquirer story that have been corroborated, secure in the knowledge that if it falls apart the offending material can be blissfully deleted [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] seem to warrant a short section noting at least the facts of the Enquirer story that have been corroborated, secure in the knowledge that if it falls apart the offending material can be blissfully deleted [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gary fouse</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1262622</link>
		<dc:creator>gary fouse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 06:42:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1262622</guid>
		<description>At this point, I think it is appropriate to call a halt to the little game I have been playing dropping &quot;clues&quot; to the Mainstream News Media and &quot;The Missing Story&quot;. Everyone in the news business knows what the story is. Sadly, most of the American public is still unaware of a story that the MSM does not want to print-though eventually, they will have to. This week, I have been astounded at the number of my friends and colleagues, well-educated and well-informed people, who had no idea of what happened this week in Beverly Hills. The story is a result of the investigation by the controversial tabloid, the National Enquirer, a source that many are understandably unwilling to accept. Yet, the story is not based on some anonymous source, but the observations of several Enquirer reporters themselves. Additional details have come out from other sources. This is a story that is clearly legitimate. The subject of the story is former North Carolina Senator, former presidential candidate and vice-presidential candidate, John Edwards. 

First of all, there are a number of reasons why this is a story of legitimate public interest. Edwards is still a public figure and is rumored to be on Barack Obama&#039;s short list for VP candidate. He is also rumored to be under consideration as Attorney General in an Obama administration. The story goes directly to the judgement, veracity and character of a man who would be in such a position.

Last year, while Edwards was running for the presidential nomination, rumors surfaced (by the Enquirer) that he was involved in an affair with a woman named Rielle Hunter and that Hunter was pregnant with Edwards&#039; child. Both Edwards and Hunter denied the story. Later, an Edwards campaign aide named Andrew Young came forth and stated that he (Young-a married man) was the actual father of the baby.

At that point, the story seemed to die. However, the Enquirer continued to believe that there was something to the story.

What follows below is from the Enquirer story published this week, as well as an interview today of Enquirer Editor, David Perel on the John and Ken Radio Show (KFI 640 Los Angeles).

This Monday, while Edwards was in Los Angeles making an appearance with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the Enquirer learned that Hunter and her infant would be staying in the Beverly Hilton Hotel. Further, that two rooms (246-252) had been rented by Hunter&#039;s friend, a certain Bob McGovern. Acting on the belief that Edwards would show up at the hotel, a team of seven reporters set up a surveillance.

According to the Enquirer article, at about 9:45 pm, Edwards was observed being dropped off at a side entrance to the hotel. Edwards reportedly looked around nervously before entering the hotel, avoiding the lobby and proceeding down side stairs to the basement where he took an elevator. Later, reporters observed Edwards and Hunter leave the hotel, then return.

At 240 am, Edwards was observed leaving the hotel through the basement, at which time, he was confronted by reporters. According to the article, reporter Alexander Hitchen asked Edwards why he was visiting Hunter, and if he would admit being the father of her baby. At this point, Edwards, without saying a word, ran up the stairs in the direction of the lobby. Seeing another reporter in front of him, Edwards turned and ran into a restroom where he attempted to barricade the door with his body to prevent the reporters from entering. After about 15 minutes, a hotel security guard arrived on the scene and escorted Edwards out of the hotel. 

According to the Enquirer, several hotel guests observed the incident from a stairwell.

It should also be added here that the Enquirer believes that the Edwards campaign had engineered an elaborate charade to cover up the fact that Edwards is the father of Hunter&#039;s child, and that this cover-up involved having Young come forward as the father of the baby.

The Enquirer is also reporting (and this was also stated by Mr Perel today on the radio) that Young is still married and furthermore, Hunter was a dinner guest at the Youngs after his &quot;admission&quot; became public. According to the Enquirer, Young had brought Hunter to Chapel Hill, North Carolina to live in a nearby gated community. 

On Wednesday of this week, Edwards was making an appearance at a poverty event in Houston when he was asked by a reporter if the incident in Los Angeles would harm his VP chances. Edwards said that he didn&#039;t want to talk about tabloid trash and lies and that he was (in Houston) to help people (I am paraphrasing). Then, on Thursday, in New Orleans, a reporter asked him about the incident and Edwards replied that he had no idea what the reporter was talking about.

Mr Perel also advised the John and Ken Show that the Enquirer was filing a complaint against Hilton Hotel Security for impeding them from doing their jobs.

It was also reported on the above show that KFI had received a leaked memo from LA Times editor, Tony Pierce to the papers bloggers directing them not to discuss the Edwards incident in their blog. The memo was read on the air today.

Finally, Fox News is reporting that they have interviewed the security guard who responded to the incident. He reported that the scene was one of bedlam with Edwards blocking the rest room door from reporters who were shouting questions and trying to enter. The guard described Edwards as &quot;ashen and shaken&quot;. 

So there we are. At this point, what we have is a very detailed story by the National Enquirer outlining the observations of their own reporters. We have Edwards&#039; evasive responses, and we have the Fox News interview of the security guard. As it stands, this story is known all over the news media but reported only by certain outlets and bloggers.

Let us concede for the sake of argument that the Enquirer is a questionable source. Is there now not enough detail for the major news networks and newspapers to launch their own inquiries and report the story? Why are they not reporting this story? Is it because they don&#039;t find it newsworthy since Edwards is no longer a senator or candidate for president? I would refute that since he is still mentioned as a VP candidate or future attorney general.

Let us also remember that when he was running for president, Edwards put his family front and center. He portrayed himself as a family man. He drew criticism from many when he decided to continue his presidential campaign even though his wife was suffering from cancer. He denied being involved in an affair with Ms Hunter. It seems ludicrous for anyone to defend keeping this story under wraps.

The fact of the matter is I can only see two reasons for the MSM to be trying to keep the lid on this story. First and foremost, Edwards is a liberal Democrat. Had he been a Republican, the whole nation would be aware of it by now. Remember not so long ago when the New York Times was trying to develop a story about a John McCain affair? There is clearly a different standard. Tonight, since Fox News has jumped into the investigation, the matter was discussed on Hannity and Colmes. Sure enough, Alan Colmes weakly tried to make the case that Edwards is not really a public figure now and, thus, the story is not important. 

Secondly, could it be that the media is trying to keep this thing from exploding while Obama is on his big trip to the Middle East and Europe? In other words, could it be that the media does not want anything to steal the limelight from Obama?

One thing seems clear to me. If the MSM is hoping this story doesn&#039;t have legs, they are in a state of denial. It is only a matter of a couple of days before the public at large becomes aware of what kind of man John Edwards really is. Then, when that outrage dies down, the public can ask what kind of news media we have in this country that attempts to control what is and isn&#039;t news according to their political agenda. Those that refuse to believe anything from the National Enquirer will have to face a more painful dilemma. 

What are they to think of the LA Times, the NY Times, the Washington Post and all the other news organs that knew this story was out there and tried to bury it.

gary fouse
fousesquawk</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At this point, I think it is appropriate to call a halt to the little game I have been playing dropping &#8220;clues&#8221; to the Mainstream News Media and &#8220;The Missing Story&#8221;. Everyone in the news business knows what the story is. Sadly, most of the American public is still unaware of a story that the MSM does not want to print-though eventually, they will have to. This week, I have been astounded at the number of my friends and colleagues, well-educated and well-informed people, who had no idea of what happened this week in Beverly Hills. The story is a result of the investigation by the controversial tabloid, the National Enquirer, a source that many are understandably unwilling to accept. Yet, the story is not based on some anonymous source, but the observations of several Enquirer reporters themselves. Additional details have come out from other sources. This is a story that is clearly legitimate. The subject of the story is former North Carolina Senator, former presidential candidate and vice-presidential candidate, John Edwards. </p>
<p>First of all, there are a number of reasons why this is a story of legitimate public interest. Edwards is still a public figure and is rumored to be on Barack Obama&#8217;s short list for VP candidate. He is also rumored to be under consideration as Attorney General in an Obama administration. The story goes directly to the judgement, veracity and character of a man who would be in such a position.</p>
<p>Last year, while Edwards was running for the presidential nomination, rumors surfaced (by the Enquirer) that he was involved in an affair with a woman named Rielle Hunter and that Hunter was pregnant with Edwards&#8217; child. Both Edwards and Hunter denied the story. Later, an Edwards campaign aide named Andrew Young came forth and stated that he (Young-a married man) was the actual father of the baby.</p>
<p>At that point, the story seemed to die. However, the Enquirer continued to believe that there was something to the story.</p>
<p>What follows below is from the Enquirer story published this week, as well as an interview today of Enquirer Editor, David Perel on the John and Ken Radio Show (KFI 640 Los Angeles).</p>
<p>This Monday, while Edwards was in Los Angeles making an appearance with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the Enquirer learned that Hunter and her infant would be staying in the Beverly Hilton Hotel. Further, that two rooms (246-252) had been rented by Hunter&#8217;s friend, a certain Bob McGovern. Acting on the belief that Edwards would show up at the hotel, a team of seven reporters set up a surveillance.</p>
<p>According to the Enquirer article, at about 9:45 pm, Edwards was observed being dropped off at a side entrance to the hotel. Edwards reportedly looked around nervously before entering the hotel, avoiding the lobby and proceeding down side stairs to the basement where he took an elevator. Later, reporters observed Edwards and Hunter leave the hotel, then return.</p>
<p>At 240 am, Edwards was observed leaving the hotel through the basement, at which time, he was confronted by reporters. According to the article, reporter Alexander Hitchen asked Edwards why he was visiting Hunter, and if he would admit being the father of her baby. At this point, Edwards, without saying a word, ran up the stairs in the direction of the lobby. Seeing another reporter in front of him, Edwards turned and ran into a restroom where he attempted to barricade the door with his body to prevent the reporters from entering. After about 15 minutes, a hotel security guard arrived on the scene and escorted Edwards out of the hotel. </p>
<p>According to the Enquirer, several hotel guests observed the incident from a stairwell.</p>
<p>It should also be added here that the Enquirer believes that the Edwards campaign had engineered an elaborate charade to cover up the fact that Edwards is the father of Hunter&#8217;s child, and that this cover-up involved having Young come forward as the father of the baby.</p>
<p>The Enquirer is also reporting (and this was also stated by Mr Perel today on the radio) that Young is still married and furthermore, Hunter was a dinner guest at the Youngs after his &#8220;admission&#8221; became public. According to the Enquirer, Young had brought Hunter to Chapel Hill, North Carolina to live in a nearby gated community. </p>
<p>On Wednesday of this week, Edwards was making an appearance at a poverty event in Houston when he was asked by a reporter if the incident in Los Angeles would harm his VP chances. Edwards said that he didn&#8217;t want to talk about tabloid trash and lies and that he was (in Houston) to help people (I am paraphrasing). Then, on Thursday, in New Orleans, a reporter asked him about the incident and Edwards replied that he had no idea what the reporter was talking about.</p>
<p>Mr Perel also advised the John and Ken Show that the Enquirer was filing a complaint against Hilton Hotel Security for impeding them from doing their jobs.</p>
<p>It was also reported on the above show that KFI had received a leaked memo from LA Times editor, Tony Pierce to the papers bloggers directing them not to discuss the Edwards incident in their blog. The memo was read on the air today.</p>
<p>Finally, Fox News is reporting that they have interviewed the security guard who responded to the incident. He reported that the scene was one of bedlam with Edwards blocking the rest room door from reporters who were shouting questions and trying to enter. The guard described Edwards as &#8220;ashen and shaken&#8221;. </p>
<p>So there we are. At this point, what we have is a very detailed story by the National Enquirer outlining the observations of their own reporters. We have Edwards&#8217; evasive responses, and we have the Fox News interview of the security guard. As it stands, this story is known all over the news media but reported only by certain outlets and bloggers.</p>
<p>Let us concede for the sake of argument that the Enquirer is a questionable source. Is there now not enough detail for the major news networks and newspapers to launch their own inquiries and report the story? Why are they not reporting this story? Is it because they don&#8217;t find it newsworthy since Edwards is no longer a senator or candidate for president? I would refute that since he is still mentioned as a VP candidate or future attorney general.</p>
<p>Let us also remember that when he was running for president, Edwards put his family front and center. He portrayed himself as a family man. He drew criticism from many when he decided to continue his presidential campaign even though his wife was suffering from cancer. He denied being involved in an affair with Ms Hunter. It seems ludicrous for anyone to defend keeping this story under wraps.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is I can only see two reasons for the MSM to be trying to keep the lid on this story. First and foremost, Edwards is a liberal Democrat. Had he been a Republican, the whole nation would be aware of it by now. Remember not so long ago when the New York Times was trying to develop a story about a John McCain affair? There is clearly a different standard. Tonight, since Fox News has jumped into the investigation, the matter was discussed on Hannity and Colmes. Sure enough, Alan Colmes weakly tried to make the case that Edwards is not really a public figure now and, thus, the story is not important. </p>
<p>Secondly, could it be that the media is trying to keep this thing from exploding while Obama is on his big trip to the Middle East and Europe? In other words, could it be that the media does not want anything to steal the limelight from Obama?</p>
<p>One thing seems clear to me. If the MSM is hoping this story doesn&#8217;t have legs, they are in a state of denial. It is only a matter of a couple of days before the public at large becomes aware of what kind of man John Edwards really is. Then, when that outrage dies down, the public can ask what kind of news media we have in this country that attempts to control what is and isn&#8217;t news according to their political agenda. Those that refuse to believe anything from the National Enquirer will have to face a more painful dilemma. </p>
<p>What are they to think of the LA Times, the NY Times, the Washington Post and all the other news organs that knew this story was out there and tried to bury it.</p>
<p>gary fouse<br />
fousesquawk</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Travis1</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1262554</link>
		<dc:creator>Travis1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 05:00:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1262554</guid>
		<description>God Bless America!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>God Bless America!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Zank</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1262519</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Zank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 04:30:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1262519</guid>
		<description>Not a &quot;peep&quot; on drudge about the silky affair???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not a &#8220;peep&#8221; on drudge about the silky affair???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Texyank</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1262103</link>
		<dc:creator>Texyank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 01:04:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1262103</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;If he’d won, built up momentum, and then swept to the nomination, the Democrats would be dead in the water right now.&lt;/blockquote&gt;


Not too sure about that. Jennifer &lt;strike&gt;flowers &lt;/strike&gt;Flowers didn’t hurt Clinton When she went public prior to the election.
These libs don’t care about the gutter. They own it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>If he’d won, built up momentum, and then swept to the nomination, the Democrats would be dead in the water right now.</p></blockquote>
<p>Not too sure about that. Jennifer <strike>flowers </strike>Flowers didn’t hurt Clinton When she went public prior to the election.<br />
These libs don’t care about the gutter. They own it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Texyank</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1262092</link>
		<dc:creator>Texyank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 01:00:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1262092</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;If he’d won, built up momentum, and then swept to the nomination, the Democrats would be dead in the water right now.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

  Not too sure about that.  Jennifer flowers Flowers didn&#039;t hurt Clinton  When she went public prior to the election. 
 These libs don&#039;t care about the gutter.  They own it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>If he’d won, built up momentum, and then swept to the nomination, the Democrats would be dead in the water right now.</p></blockquote>
<p>  Not too sure about that.  Jennifer flowers Flowers didn&#8217;t hurt Clinton  When she went public prior to the election.<br />
 These libs don&#8217;t care about the gutter.  They own it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Del Dolemonte</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261980</link>
		<dc:creator>Del Dolemonte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 23:48:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261980</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Oh to be a fly on the wall in the Edwards mansion…

maintenanceman on July 25, 2008 at 3:10 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Only problem is that on the walls of a 30 thousand square foot mansion, the fly would take a month and a half to fly from one room of the house to the other.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Oh to be a fly on the wall in the Edwards mansion…</p>
<p>maintenanceman on July 25, 2008 at 3:10 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Only problem is that on the walls of a 30 thousand square foot mansion, the fly would take a month and a half to fly from one room of the house to the other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Treacher</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261886</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Treacher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261886</guid>
		<description>John Edwards was naughty
The whole country&#039;s talkin&#039;
But it&#039;s not a story
And P.S. Keep rockin&#039;!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John Edwards was naughty<br />
The whole country&#8217;s talkin&#8217;<br />
But it&#8217;s not a story<br />
And P.S. Keep rockin&#8217;!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: volsense</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261841</link>
		<dc:creator>volsense</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:40:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261841</guid>
		<description>Kerry said that choosing Edwards was the biggest mistake he made in his presidential campaign.  That may have been the only true thing Kerry has ever said in his life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kerry said that choosing Edwards was the biggest mistake he made in his presidential campaign.  That may have been the only true thing Kerry has ever said in his life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: crosspatch</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261813</link>
		<dc:creator>crosspatch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:31:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261813</guid>
		<description>I saw this in a Fox story that is, as I type this, the lead story on their front page:

&lt;blockquote&gt;
Edwards did not say anything while he was escorted out, said the guard, adding that at times the reporters on the scene were &quot;rough on him,&quot; &lt;b&gt;sticking a camera in his face&lt;/b&gt; and shouting questions.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

How long before the pictures come out?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw this in a Fox story that is, as I type this, the lead story on their front page:</p>
<blockquote><p>
Edwards did not say anything while he was escorted out, said the guard, adding that at times the reporters on the scene were &#8220;rough on him,&#8221; <b>sticking a camera in his face</b> and shouting questions.
</p></blockquote>
<p>How long before the pictures come out?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ganeshpuri89</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261783</link>
		<dc:creator>ganeshpuri89</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:20:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261783</guid>
		<description>Jonathan Turley has &lt;a href=&quot;http://jonathanturley.org/2008/07/25/la-times-bars-bloggers-from-covering-edwards-affair-story/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;pulled &lt;/a&gt; the photo of Andrew Young and cleaned up his post. But without retraction or apology for such an amateurish blog blunder.

Don&#039;t worry, I saved a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.flickr.com/photos/ganeshpuri89/2702442480/sizes/o/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;screen grab&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan Turley has <a href="http://jonathanturley.org/2008/07/25/la-times-bars-bloggers-from-covering-edwards-affair-story/" rel="nofollow">pulled </a> the photo of Andrew Young and cleaned up his post. But without retraction or apology for such an amateurish blog blunder.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t worry, I saved a <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ganeshpuri89/2702442480/sizes/o/" rel="nofollow">screen grab</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SilverStar830</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261779</link>
		<dc:creator>SilverStar830</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:17:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261779</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gambling911.com/Rielle-Hunter.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;She&#039;s not a very good looking woman with a taste for gaudy jewelry&lt;/a&gt;... and obviously for wealthy liberal politician personal injury lawyers too. But I guess the same can be said for many other adultress home wreckers.

I would think that the multi-millionaire Silky Pony, with his thousand dollars haircut, could do much better if he was going to live in the public eye and risk getting caught cheating on his wife who&#039;s dying of cancer.

I wonder if the kid was born a Centaur. I guess it doesn&#039;t matter really, unless there are cloven hooves... then I&#039;m gonna be scared.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.gambling911.com/Rielle-Hunter.jpg" rel="nofollow">She&#8217;s not a very good looking woman with a taste for gaudy jewelry</a>&#8230; and obviously for wealthy liberal politician personal injury lawyers too. But I guess the same can be said for many other adultress home wreckers.</p>
<p>I would think that the multi-millionaire Silky Pony, with his thousand dollars haircut, could do much better if he was going to live in the public eye and risk getting caught cheating on his wife who&#8217;s dying of cancer.</p>
<p>I wonder if the kid was born a Centaur. I guess it doesn&#8217;t matter really, unless there are cloven hooves&#8230; then I&#8217;m gonna be scared.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: byteshredder</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261730</link>
		<dc:creator>byteshredder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:56:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261730</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;didn’t Huffpo report on this like 2 years ago…that she was on his payroll for web videos, getting paid alot and were never actually used. i.e. a payoff

jp on July 25, 2008 at 2:56 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;


Like Edwards, A. Huffington is just another sleezeball!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>didn’t Huffpo report on this like 2 years ago…that she was on his payroll for web videos, getting paid alot and were never actually used. i.e. a payoff</p>
<p>jp on July 25, 2008 at 2:56 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Like Edwards, A. Huffington is just another sleezeball!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Infidoll</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261712</link>
		<dc:creator>Infidoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:49:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261712</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;If there’s something to them, why would party elders have let him get that far before pushing him out?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I see absolutely no evidence that party grownups, to the extent there are any, are in charge over there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>If there’s something to them, why would party elders have let him get that far before pushing him out?</p></blockquote>
<p>I see absolutely no evidence that party grownups, to the extent there are any, are in charge over there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Limerick</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261621</link>
		<dc:creator>Limerick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261621</guid>
		<description>Wow...weird...

Extra has pulled the Vid(I can&#039;t get it) but the audio is still on line
http://extratv.warnerbros.com/videos/video_player.html?mediaUrl=john0724_dl.mov</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow&#8230;weird&#8230;</p>
<p>Extra has pulled the Vid(I can&#8217;t get it) but the audio is still on line<br />
<a href="http://extratv.warnerbros.com/videos/video_player.html?mediaUrl=john0724_dl.mov" rel="nofollow">http://extratv.warnerbros.com/videos/video_player.html?mediaUrl=john0724_dl.mov</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sensible Mom</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261619</link>
		<dc:creator>Sensible Mom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:14:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261619</guid>
		<description>If this was Mitt Romney and not John Edwards, the press would be all over it and wondering if he was, in fact, a polygamist</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If this was Mitt Romney and not John Edwards, the press would be all over it and wondering if he was, in fact, a polygamist</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Limerick</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261616</link>
		<dc:creator>Limerick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:12:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261616</guid>
		<description>Here is Reille&#039;s Extra-Extra interview

&lt;a href=&quot;http://extratv.warnerbros.com/2008/07/john_edwards_alleged_mistress.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Reille&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is Reille&#8217;s Extra-Extra interview</p>
<p><a href="http://extratv.warnerbros.com/2008/07/john_edwards_alleged_mistress.php" rel="nofollow">Reille</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: a capella</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261606</link>
		<dc:creator>a capella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:05:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261606</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 4:07 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;On target. I hope Silky doesn&#039;t drag Elizabeth up to stand beside him on the podium as he does his public &lt;em&gt;mea culpa &lt;/em&gt;when it gets to that point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 4:07 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>On target. I hope Silky doesn&#8217;t drag Elizabeth up to stand beside him on the podium as he does his public <em>mea culpa </em>when it gets to that point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ganeshpuri89</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261601</link>
		<dc:creator>ganeshpuri89</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:03:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261601</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Is Andrew Young, the former Edwards-for-President campaign worker who claimed to be the father of Rielle’s child, the same Andrew Young who was a civil rights activist in the 60’s, former mayor of Atlanta and former Congressman?

If not, someone has gotten awfully sloppy.

ganeshpuri89 on July 25, 2008 at 3:36 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Just got off the phone with a staffer at Andrew Young&#039;s public relations firm GoodWorks International. She thought the &lt;a href=&quot;http://jonathanturley.org/2008/07/25/la-times-bars-bloggers-from-covering-edwards-affair-story/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;mistaken identity&lt;/a&gt; was funny, but not too funny.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Is Andrew Young, the former Edwards-for-President campaign worker who claimed to be the father of Rielle’s child, the same Andrew Young who was a civil rights activist in the 60’s, former mayor of Atlanta and former Congressman?</p>
<p>If not, someone has gotten awfully sloppy.</p>
<p>ganeshpuri89 on July 25, 2008 at 3:36 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Just got off the phone with a staffer at Andrew Young&#8217;s public relations firm GoodWorks International. She thought the <a href="http://jonathanturley.org/2008/07/25/la-times-bars-bloggers-from-covering-edwards-affair-story/" rel="nofollow">mistaken identity</a> was funny, but not too funny.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wade</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261599</link>
		<dc:creator>Wade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:02:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261599</guid>
		<description>Lets get the girlfriend on Jerry Springer so we can see her and Elizabeth duke it out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lets get the girlfriend on Jerry Springer so we can see her and Elizabeth duke it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: carbon_footprint</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261598</link>
		<dc:creator>carbon_footprint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:02:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261598</guid>
		<description>BREAKING!!!
In a short, impromptu statement today in South Carolina, former Democratic presidential nominee, John Edwards spoke up about the brewing scandal involving a supposed love child and mistress.

&quot;I am not ashamed of any action or actions that I have made outside of my wonderful marriage with my lovely wife, Elizabeth.  My dad worked long and hard at the mill.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BREAKING!!!<br />
In a short, impromptu statement today in South Carolina, former Democratic presidential nominee, John Edwards spoke up about the brewing scandal involving a supposed love child and mistress.</p>
<p>&#8220;I am not ashamed of any action or actions that I have made outside of my wonderful marriage with my lovely wife, Elizabeth.  My dad worked long and hard at the mill.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Missy</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261593</link>
		<dc:creator>Missy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261593</guid>
		<description>IIRC Rosenbaum specifically denied that the LA Times&#039; &quot;super secret sex scandal&quot; was the Edwards story, but his denial wasn&#039;t very believable.

MB4&#039;s comment reminded me of something.  Back at the time of Edwards&#039; press conference to announce the return of Elizabeth&#039;s cancer, I remember reading various pundits commenting that the couple&#039;s body language was very constrained and uncomfortable during the presser.  Remembering that now, I wonder if the Rielle Hunter rumors were already widespread among journalists at that time, and those observations were hints that they knew something we didn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IIRC Rosenbaum specifically denied that the LA Times&#8217; &#8220;super secret sex scandal&#8221; was the Edwards story, but his denial wasn&#8217;t very believable.</p>
<p>MB4&#8242;s comment reminded me of something.  Back at the time of Edwards&#8217; press conference to announce the return of Elizabeth&#8217;s cancer, I remember reading various pundits commenting that the couple&#8217;s body language was very constrained and uncomfortable during the presser.  Remembering that now, I wonder if the Rielle Hunter rumors were already widespread among journalists at that time, and those observations were hints that they knew something we didn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: becki51758</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261555</link>
		<dc:creator>becki51758</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:43:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261555</guid>
		<description>A democrat involved in a sex scandal??  Not a surprise...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A democrat involved in a sex scandal??  Not a surprise&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: faraway</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/comment-page-1/#comment-1261548</link>
		<dc:creator>faraway</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:41:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/25/la-times-blog-ban-on-damaging-scurrilous-rumors-doesnt-extend-to-celebs/#comment-1261548</guid>
		<description>Darn.  I&#039;ll have to throw away my &lt;strong&gt;Phony/Pony 08&lt;/strong&gt; stickers now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Darn.  I&#8217;ll have to throw away my <strong>Phony/Pony 08</strong> stickers now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
