Benny's World

Saturday, January 30, 2010

DU Forum Name Change?

Inspired, whom I know from the trails in Iowa, has suggested that the JRE supporters group be renamed the Elizabeth Edwards Supporters group. I actually favor the idea since EE was likely the brains behind the ideas in the last campaign.

I will always feel inspired here though by JRE and I would have not been able to meet his wonderful wife otherwise. I still wish she was POTUS or FL, although I have become a fan of Michelle Obama.

If are a DU'er and want to see that forum's name change, go here.

Labels: , , ,

posted by benny06 at Saturday, January 30, 2010

12 Comments:

  • Many people wish Elizabeth Edwards all the best.

    On a side note, amazon.com has pulled some books (including Andrew Young's) in a dispute over e-book pricing. You can read more in this article.

    I'm not condoning anything John Edwards has done but Young (among others) was obviously willing to do anything and everything for money. I hope he doesn't profit from his facilitation of the affair and participation in the cover up.

    By Blogger indyvoter, at 2:24 PM  

  • I will periodically check the NYTimes bestseller list. "Game Change" is still there and I hope "The Politician" stays off.

    It refreshes once a week, but the link I found only lists the top five books in any category. Is there any place I can find the top ten? Because I don't even want that book to crack the top ten.

    Actually, the success of "Game Change" kind of is a cosmic joke on Young, isn't it? A complete surprise to me, and a real buzz stealer because it's also got Palin and Clinton stuff, which may be even more fascinating than the Edwards stuff.

    And with this new lawsuit from RH... doesn't sound like the poor schmuck is going to see as much money as he was hoping for.

    By Blogger Frances, at 4:48 PM  

  • There are a number of best seller lists, national and regional, that you may be able to find with an internet search. I agree Young won't see the money he was hoping to receive but it's unlikely any amount of money would ever satisfy him. He would be funny if he hadn't helped hurt so many people.

    Young says he knew when Edwards first entered politics that he could hitch his wagon to Edwards as a ticket to the big time. So rather than work for success, he decided to be a parasite. (Likely Edwards saw it, realized Young could be bought and then used him. After all, you can't buy someone who isn't for sale.)

    Young and his wife obviously enjoyed the lavish life they lived at the expense of others. (The videos they showed on 20/20 of "life on the run" didn't show people struggling with a moral dilemma as they claim.) Now they have an extravagant home, far beyond any means they ever had a right to expect, that they cannot finish. Young claims he is unemployable and wants to "clear" his name. Well, that ship has sailed.

    I don't understand what his "defense" is supposed to be.
    -I was "just following orders"?
    -I didn't want to jeopardize my big payday so I discarded all professional ethics?
    -No one was ever to know about what I had done because I had evidence to extort money?
    -I was so greedy that nothing else mattered?

    And what marketable skills does he have? He has a history of legal problems. He has a law degree but never practiced. He was a glorified gofer. He was charged with covering up an affair and that worked out so well. He's demonstrated a lack of morals - until they are a convenient excuse for his actions and then he claims to have been tormented by what he saw even though he continued to willingly participate.

    He thinks prospective employers are going to be lining up to hire him after hearing about this book? (I wouldn't hire him to pick up the yard after my dog.) Perhaps it is time for Young and his wife to take responsibility for their own actions.

    By Blogger indyvoter, at 6:40 AM  

  • I have an idea for a job for Andy. In Elizabeth's book, she mentioned his ("Jim's") wife dropping off McDonalds at their door. In his own book, he writes about waiting in the drive-through at McDonalds. With all that free publicity, maybe they would hire him.

    Of course, they couldn't trust him with money but considering his fondness for getting involved in messes, maybe he could mop the floors or clean off tables.

    By Blogger JeanLouise, at 9:19 AM  

  • LOL
    Andrew "Do you want fries with that?" Young.

    He could dress up like Ronald McDonald. After all, he is a clown.

    By Blogger Anonymous, at 2:08 PM  

  • Young should be the hamburglar stealing from others. Hunter can be Grimace because that's what seeing her makes one do. John is the clown.

    By Blogger JeanLouise, at 4:02 PM  

  • The more I hear of Andrew Young, the more disingenuous and opportunistic he appears. I won't go through everything but one strong example is the "reason" he and his wife cite for their actions. Namely they say John Edwards told them Elizabeth was going to die soon and he didn't want her to know the truth.

    That position is completely illogical since Young helped facilitate the affair from some time in 2006. The return of the cancer didn't occur until March of 2007 and her doctor publicly said while her cancer wasn't curable, it was treatable.

    Young continued to facilitate the affair throughout 2007 and managed the cover up from the end of 2007 until the money ran out in late 2008. He remained silent until he realized he could not extort money from anyone with his story so he decided to sell the story.

    (I suspect he was actually selling information to the tabloid earlier because so many of the details in the tabloid are the same as in Young's book.)

    Young had numerous opportunities to follow a moral, ethical path but instead choose to do whatever he believed would enrich his bank account the most. At his age, it's well past time he learned actions have consequences and he and his wife need to accept those consequences.

    By Blogger indyvoter, at 2:39 PM  

  • Here is a great article revealing the fraud that is Andrew Young and his wife.

    Go Elizabeth!

    By Blogger Anonymous, at 6:13 AM  

  • Just watched Young on Hardball and hope the video will be online for those who missed it. Chris Matthews asks Young how long he continued to work for Edwards once he was working against him. (Answer: one year.) So basically Young admits he was setting up his book, etc. all along. I wish Matthews would have asked him how long after the money stopped flowing he sold his book proposal. Then he asks him how it feels to be a "rat-fink". (No answer only laughter.)

    I'm not always a fan of Matthews but finally, finally an interviewer called Young out instead of fawning all over him.

    By Blogger JeanLouise, at 2:52 PM  

  • I saw the Hardball replay and Young was very passive aggressive. The more he talks, the more his true colors come through and don't make him look good.

    The one question I'm still waiting to hear an interviewer ask is: Why did you spend years helping to facilitate the affair? (He was deeply mired in the situation long before the cover up.)

    They all ask him why he claimed paternity and his answers vary about how much he loved and believed in John to how he wanted to spare Elizabeth any pain.

    Neither of those apply to the unanswered question. It is illogical to believe in Edwards as he claims knowing (or even suspecting) the affair. His involvement began before Elizabeth's cancer returned so that's a bogus excuse, too.

    Matthews was also getting at the point Young has no remorse. That topic would be an interesting avenue for an interviewer to explore: is he too immoral, just delusional, blinded by money, etc. to have any sense of responsibility for his own actions?

    One thing is certain . . . Young is creepy.

    By Blogger Anonymous, at 5:29 PM  

  • I found a transcript of Young's appearance on Hardball. It doesn't capture the priceless looks but here is the great exchange . . .

    Matthews:
    “How long did you work for him [John Edwards] that he thought you were loyal to him but you weren’t?”
    “How long did you convince him you were a loyalist, but you weren’t, you’d already given up on him morally?”
    “How long did you stay with him, after you stopped being loyal to him?”

    Young:
    “Probably a year. Probably a year…”

    Matthews:
    “So a year, you were basically an undercover guy, working for a guy who thought you were loyal to him, but you weren’t.”
    “So how do you feel about that? Being basically a Rat-fink?”

    By Blogger JeanLouise, at 3:07 PM  

  • As of today, "The Politician" is neither on the New York Times top 25, nor the Amazon top 25. Yeeeeessssss!!

    By Blogger Frances, at 5:40 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home