Gibson radio show executive producer: Edwards "whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick"
On the August 3 edition of Fox News host John Gibson's nationally syndicated radio program, the show's executive producer, who goes by the name "Angry Rich" on the program, claimed Democratic presidential candidate former Sen. John Edwards (NC) "whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick." He also went on to call him "a fraud" and "a pansy." Gibson referred to Edwards as "the Breck Girl," "Silky," and "the biggest fraud running for president." Gibson and "Angry Rich" were attacking Edwards for saying that Democratic candidates should give back campaign contributions from News Corp., the parent company of Fox News Channel, while accepting advance and expense money from HarperCollins, another News Corp. division that had published a book written by Edwards; Gibson played an audio clip of Edwards stating that money was donated to charity. They also attacked Edwards for his refusal earlier this year to participate in a debate co-sponsored by Fox News.
From the August 3 edition of Fox News Radio's The John Gibson Show:
GIBSON: Fraud alert. Fraud alert. This is Angry Rich's favorite subject, and it's getting to be mine as well.
AUDIO CLIP: Fraud alert.
GIBSON: Our John Gibson program fraud alert today focuses on the biggest fraud running for president, and that takes some doing. We're talking about the Breck Girl, Silky, the former senator from North Carolina, the baron of a 28,000-square-foot manse, the protector of the poor while ensconced on a pillow of 100 million dollars.
ANGRY RICH: A man who whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick.
GIBSON: John Edwards today was going after other Democratic candidates, and by other he meant Hillary Clinton, for taking money as political contributions from Rupert Murdoch or from certain employees or executives of either the Fox News Channel or News Corporation, which owns the Fox News Channel. Edwards has a real kind of problem about Fox. He just -- well, actually he doesn't have a problem about Fox. He realizes there are a whole bunch of really far-lefters who hate Fox and he's busy sucking up to them.
[...]
EDWARDS [audio clip from August 3 edition of CNN's The Situation Room]: Well, I had a book called Home that HarperCollins published --
ANGRY RICH: That sucked.
EDWARDS [audio clip]: There was an advance from HarperCollins. Every dime of they money they gave to me has gone to charity, which I committed to do, and I met my commitment. It's gone to things like Habitat for Humanity, helping low-income kids go to college, the International Rescue Committee, so the money is all gone. Not to me, but to important charitable causes. But that's not the point, Wolf. The point of this is that I don't want to see Rupert Murdoch, or anybody else for that matter, owning every newspaper in America. What we've seen with the consolidation of the media is not healthy for this country.
GIBSON: Give me a break. Oh my God.
ANGRY RICH: What a fraud.
GIBSON: Unbelievable. All right, if you're not going to give back the money because it went for charity, how about giving back the money you got on your tax breaks for filing for those charitable contributions? You know, when you hand over a half a million dollars to a charity, you get a quite healthy tax break. Fraud alert. Fraud alert. Fraud alert.
[...]
[audio clip from March 13 edition of The Situation Room]
WOLF BLITZER (host): The Democratic Party in the state of Nevada was going to host the debate together with the Fox News Channel, but you've pulled out, they subsequently canceled that whole debate. Why did you decide to pull out, given the fact that over the years you have appeared as a guest on Fox many, many times?
EDWARDS: Well, first of all, we've got a whole series of debates planned in this --
GIBSON: Bull.
EDWARDS: -- presidential campaigns. Debates, forums --
GIBSON: Bull!
EDWARDS (SOUND CLIP): -- I've been through this before, as you know, Wolf --
GIBSON: Bull!
EDWARDS (SOUND CLIP): -- and I think we had 35 or 40 of these debates and forums in the last --
GIBSON: Bull!
EDWARDS (SOUND CLIP): -- presidential campaign, and we have a bunch of debates in Nevada, not just in general --
GIBSON How --
EDWARDS: -- and I didn't see any reason --
GIBSON: How on earth?
EDWARDS: -- under the circumstances to give Fox a special forum.
GIBSON: How on earth did he --
EDWARDS: I think they have a long history in how they deal with Democrats --
GIBSON: What?
EDWARDS: -- and how they talk about Democrats, and I saw no reason to give them a specialized forum.
BLITZER: So, are you still going to be a guest on their various programs?
EDWARDS: I'll make that judgment as the campaign goes on as the occasion arises, but on this particular case, I thought it was important for me to say I'm not going to be there.
[end audio clip]
GIBSON: Bull, bull --
AUDIO CLIP [from the movie My Cousin Vinny]: Everything that guy just said is bull(bleep).
GIBSON: -- bull, bull, bull. I mean, first of all, he won't come on Fox.
ANGRY RICH: Because he's a pansy.
GIBSON: Because he's afraid. He's afraid of a question. He's afraid of the questions that might be asked of him, like, "Say, Senator, about your poverty program, which would raise the minimum wage to nine dollars and 50 cents an hour, what exactly would that do to small businesses? Say, Senator, how come half of your contributors are lawyers? Would you be in the pocket of trial lawyers who rape the economy?"
How disgusting. Regardless of how anyone feels about John Edwards I find anything regarding her cancer to be extremely sensitive, and Gibson should fire this "producer" Shame on you Gibson.
Casey I gotta disagree with you on this one.
Saying Edwards "whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick" sounds awful, but I don't think it's too far off the mark.
As far as John Edwards goes, I just think the guy is a phony. And that was confirmed for me when he called a friggin press conference to announce Elizabeth's cancer had returned but he'd be staying in the race. That, IMO, could have just as easily been accomplished by releasing a statement to the press.
But no not John-Boy, he had to turn it into a free PR event....using his wife's sickness for his own political ambitions.
Sorry, but to me the guy is a wuss, a wimp, and a phony
Jeter you are allowed as anyone is an opinion on John Edwards, but to say he is using his wifes cancer is hurtful to not only her im sure , but the Edwards family. Its personal and sensitive.
Casey,
The way it was expressed by these guys was disgusting. And maybe even if one feels Edwards is guilty, one should keep that opinion to themselves.
As I said, I think Edwards is a phony & that he'd use just about anyone or anything to his political advantage.
That's my opinion, but I don't have a TV or radio forum to say it publicly.
Jeter I agree with you that John Edwards is a phony but to bring his cancer stricken wife into the context is wrong. It would be wrong if John Edwards were a Republican it does not matter what party it is.
SueEld,
As I wrote, it is disgusting to hear someone say this out loud...even if there is a ring of truth to it. Sometimes opinions that can be hurtful should not be expressed over the air.
i think the press conference was to announce he was staying in the race news of her cancer was already out
J,
You have taken an inordinate amount of heat for your opinion on this topic, called numerous slurs, and been generally trashed and attacked personally, simply for your opinion. Even though you admitted you don't care for Edwards, and your opinions may reflect that dislike.
I don't agree that he "whored" it out, but I do agree with you that his political ambition is a top priority for him - how his wife's illness affected that is between them, and their family.
As usual, unlike many who have thrown their patented insults your way, you handled yourself with class, as always.
Your opinions are appreciated, thanks.
So let me understand your line of thinking Tommy.... Jeter can call John Edwards a "wuss", "wimp", "phony" and accuse him of using his wife's illness for a nefarious purpose and that's valid commentary, but people responding in an equally callous manner is some how wrong?
MHK,
I believe what Tommy meant is that I refrained from attacking posters.
As you know, name-calling directed at political/public figures is the norm here.
But some of us do try not to make personal attacks towards other posters.
J, That is exactly what I meant. I have never seen you attack another poster unless you are seriously provoked, and they deserve it based on what they said to you.
You could have made your point without being so offensive. The man's wife has cancer, something that brings up strong emotions in many of the people that read this site for obvious reasons. How would you feel is someone that didn't know you personally stated that you used your family members cancer for personal gain? I understand, you can't stand John Edwards, but your comments were callous to the point of being inappropriate. Very out of character. Most of the people on this site hold your opinion in high regard (myself included) It's nice to hear what a reasonable conservative thinks about issues in the media. Up to today I've never found myself actually being disgusted by what you wrote.
I questioned Tommy on his defense of your comments because IMO he loses creditability, when he comes running to your defense without acknowledging that your comments were over the top. "Handled yourself with class" isn't a term I would use for someone that is accusing a man of using his wife's illness for personal gain. I'm not buying the personal attacks = "off limits" and attacks on politicians = "in bounds". Politics are very personal as most of us investing our political hopes and dreams into a particular candidate.
I understand that you 2 have to stick together or the big bad liberals are going to gang up on you, but you got an equally impassioned response to your opinion on Edwards.
let's just look at the actual statement made by jeter in his first post on this subject: "saying edwards 'whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick sounds awful', but i don't think it's too far off the mark." if that's not agreeing with the statement, i don't know how else one could categorize it. that kind of language invites a response, and that response, in spite of how tommy portrays it, was rather restrained for the most part.
let me do the quote precisely: "saying edwards 'whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick' sounds awful, but i don't think it's too far off the mark." i had one quote mark off.
Jeter you are correct and you are a class act. You did not step in the gutter and held to your convictions. Name calling and personal attacks are something i have experienced the past few days on here, I can learn from someone like you. Thank you
so it's "correct" to say that it's "not too far off the mark" that edwards whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick?
I gues we just don't know what class act means.
If it's classy to agree that a candidate is basically a pimp, but that it should just be said in kinder, gentler terms, then I know I don't want to be any part of that kind of a class act.
Thank you Tommy.
Your support & backing is, as always, appreciated:-)
actually Jetter (and I'm still searching for documentation on this), but the media had news of Elizabeth's cancer returning before he made his announcement. I also believe that on a few shows (Meet the Press? maybe, still checking) they were talking about Edwards dropping out of the race.
So I don't think he did it for PR, just to announce that after talking to his wife, they decided he should still run.
I'll post more if I find it.
I do recall some months ago this very discussion being blogged ad infinitum and that Mrs Edwards had urged her husband to continue running for president. Gibson and company just ran out of contemporary news to present. and fill the 24/7 time slot.
And I believe that I speak for a lot of people her, Jeter2, when I say that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
As usual.
Hey Jeter!
This is a classic "he is damned if he does or damned if he doesn't".
P.S. There is only one Jeter.
P.S. There is only one Jeter.
THANK GOD!!!!!!! :-)
And if they HADN"T come forward in an honest, forthright way, the so-called "Liberal Media" would have crucified him for attempting to deceive the American public by "hiding" her true condition.
JScott,
I disagree. As I wrote: That, IMO, could have just as easily been accomplished by releasing a statement to the press.
A press release explaining the situation honestly would have been, IMO more appropriate & could have accomplished exactly the same thing.
So what are you now, the decorum police? OK, you have an opinion, but it is not widely shared. Only the most cynical and intellectually impaired would feel the way Gibson and his sidekick Idiot Rich claim to feel. Or is it all just more of the same old right-wing carpet-bombing smear campaign? Just throw a bunch of s**t at the wall and see how much sticks.
I thought you were talking about Edwards not Romney. How you feel about Edwards is how I feel about Romney. I believe Edwards is sincere and even if he isn't if he can bring attention to issues I feel needs attention, I'm OK with that too. I guess that's how RINO feels about Romney, I'll have to let up on him for supporting flip flopping, orange make-up wearing, phony.
Lynn,
Edwards rubs me the wrong way. I can't stand the guy. And everything he says or does just seals that opinion.
BTW, I think Romney is a phony too.
Jeter, I Still do not know what your feelings on Edwards have to do with how Gibson and his "Staff Member" said what I feel is one of the most insensitve and hateful things I have heard in along time. Maybe because I have seen Cancers horrible effects is why this is so sensitive to me. There seems to be no decency with Gibson. None
I don't approve of how these guys expressed the opinion that Edwards was "whoring" his wife's illness...I lost my Dad to cancer 3 years ago. So I'm not immune to how painful this can be.
But that doesn't change my opinion that Edwards will use anyone or anything if he thinks it might help him politically.
So yes it was beneath contempt to express it the way these guys did...even if it had a ring of truth to it.
I can't explain it any better than that.
Nonsense. It's a horrible personal attack and deserves no creedance at all.
Try this on for size and see if it deserves any consideration...even if it rings a little true:
You, Jeter, are a smug little east coast conservative brat and you have the moral grounding of cat in heat.
See, there is nothing at all in that attack that deserves one iota of acknowledgement.
Roundhouse,
I know you're having a bad day, so I'll excuse you for not reading my other posts more carefully before going ballistic on me here ;-)
Again, I find Angry Rich's description of Edwards "whoring" his wife's illness a disgusting way of saying Edwards used her illness for political traction when he called a Press Conference instead of accomplishing the same thing with a Press release.
The Press release could have informed the media & public of Elizabeth's illness, & that he planned to stay in the race. Instead Edwards staged an event to gain attention. I believe he did so for political reasons.
Now, as for your description of me: "You, Jeter, are a smug little east coast conservative brat and you have the moral grounding of cat in heat.."
Well one just naturally gets a tad smug living among the Moonbat elite here in Massachusetts. So I plead guilty.
A Brat? Well ok I can be.
The moral grounding of cat in heat? Well more so in my younger years. But I've been known to still have my moments...meowwww ;-)
I read your posts just fine. You obviously do not think what they said was disgusting, you agree with them. You just wish they would have been nicer in hoew they said it.
Just man up, Jeter and accept that you don't think this segment was entirely inappropriate. I know I would have more respect for if you were not trying to backpedal out of your agreement with these thugs.
Jeter,
I do understand your position though. You've seen that I grew up in the midwest - My grandpa died of cancer, my dad was killed by a drunk driver. My two most favorite uncle's died of cancer. It really does hurt to lose the ones you think are showing you the way. Why are they always the 1st to go?
Snoop,
I'm sorry for your losses.
There's no rhyme or reason to how things go in this life sometimes.
I've lost family & friends too soon & too young.
My Dad was 82. He'd retired at 62. That gave him 20 years to just enjoy his life & relax. He & my Mom spent the Winters in Florida playing golf. They traveled overseas. They enjoyed their grandchildren. My Dad had a full & wonderful life. But to watch this strong, kind & good man suffer as he did at the end still haunts me.
i think even if he had a press release it still would have had the same reaction people on the right would have been asking why he couldnt be dignified in silence .
Jeter, you're way out in left field on this one.
Nobody "whores out their wife's cancer." Just when you think these losers can't lower the bar any more ... they come through.
I too lost my fiancee to cancer, and I'm involved in all kinds of charity stuff in her name ... guess that would be "whoring her out" too in this idiots' eyes?
Since you agree with the sentiment, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate just what Edwards is doing to make you agree.
And I agree with the Romney sentiments ... the guy is as phony as a four-dollar bill. He's not going to go anywhere; when the chips are down, he'll melt down just like his dad did, and the knuckle-dragging base will never vote for a Mormon anyway.
Umm Jeter you didn't just 'whore' out your Dad's cancer death in an attempt to engender sympathy from the posters at this site did you?
It sure looked that way since I can't think of another reason for you to bother informing us about it.
So you're at least admitting that nothing Edwards does or says will ever be seen in a positive light by you, because you are intensely biased against anything that he's attached with. Admitting you have a problem is a first step, at least.
The women in my family have suffered from breast cancer for generations, and I fully expect to deal with it myself before I reach old age. I resent the idea that if I were to get breast cancer, that (1) I should shut up about it, (2) My family should shut up about it, and (3) That I or my family should suddenly stop everything, ignore any goals we'd previously had, and drop it all to sit around and mope about my disease. The Edwards had made the decision not only to battle through the cancer on the campaign trail, but to also include the children on the trail to allow them two exceptionally beneficial things: More time with their dying mother, and exposure to the inner workings of the American Democratic process.
This family has decided to work through the pain and to unify their family in the process, and you so-called "Family Friendly" conservatives (and at this point, I'm using that word lightly) can do nothing but criticize, and you should be ashamed of yourselves for it. Jeter, I don't like calling you out on this because I am well aware that you're a very intelligent and thoughtful person, but on this issue I believe you have your head up your rear.
Jeter,
I am calling BS on you. It's not an issue for me that you don't agree with Edward. To say he is whoring his wifes' situation? BS. Big time. Cancer is a far bigger issue than Bush's little colonoscopy, yet we need details on how long and how far under he is without politics? This is the 1st time ever I am calling hypocracy on you, Jeter. Justify your stance.
Snoop,
I've explained my opinion ad nauseam already.
But once more with feeling:
Edwards could have alerted the media & public with a sincere, honest & informative press release.
Instead he called a Press conference to announce that Elizabeth's cancer had returned & he'd be staying in the race.
Totally unnecessary IMO. Reeked of a political PR moment.
No BS here Snoop. Just my honest opinion.
I can understand opinion, Jeter, but you didn't really answer the question. How is it that Edwards is whoring his wife's illness? How is Edwards being "more" of a whore than say guilianni's front page "kiss" with - what - wife #2?
Snoop,
Whoring was this guy Angry Rich's description of Edwards holding a Press Conference to announce Elizabeth's illness, and his plans to stay in the Presidential race.
I believe this sort of description was uncalled for. And I would not use that word myself. Do I think Edwards used the situation for some political traction. Yes I do.
I agree with others that your dislike for Edwards is clouding your better judgement.
Even if one accepts that Edwards is a political opportunist, to connect this incident to that relies on the idea that the press conference was out of the norm somehow.
Come on, really? Is it really not understandable that someone would find that important enough to call a press conference over? If you were in his position, would it not be sort of a big deal to you?
You could know someone who is greedy, but if they sued someone for negligence that caused them serious personal injury (with legitimate basis), would your reaction be "they're only suing because they're greedy"? The character judgement might have the ring of truth, but if it's a situation where many people would do the same thing then it's unfair to link it to that conclusion.
Don't you think so?
This post is for Casey, SueEld, McCain, Lynn, Roundhouse, Snoop, SportsGuy, Brabantio, Mescal & Julia.
I'm willing to admit that my dislike of Edwards may indeed cloud my judgment on this particular subject. That dislike stems from what I perceive as a man who, like many politicians, never puts one foot in front of the other without at least first weighing the political gain or loss of such an action.
So yes it may be through that prism that I judge Edwards.
Isn't that similar to the way most of us [including myself] judge George Bush?
No matter what he says or does, because the man is so roundly disliked, we assume it is being done or said for purely political purposes. We think, the guy is a liar, a phony, an idiot.
Even if Bush ever did anything in a truly generous, sincere manner, would any of you give him the benefit of the doubt? Or would you continue to accuse him of insincerity, phoniness? I wonder. Actually I don't...
I see John Edwards as a calculating phony. An opportunist. A man who would do or say just about anything to rescue his lackluster campaign.
Would George Bush use Laura or would John Edwards use Elizabeth if they thought it was politically expedient? I for one believe they would. I make this assumption based on the character flaws I've seen in both men.
On closing, I apologize to anyone I've offended by offering my honest opinion.
Again, I admit my opinion on this topic may well be clouded by my strong dislike of John Edwards.
No, I don't see Bush that way. I judge him on his behavior. I don't irrationally hate him, and have a knee-jerk reaction to his every move.
That's been one of the major differences I've seen between those on the left and those on the right. Those on the right do have knee-jerk reactions to the people in the opposition. People on the left don't do that typically. I don't hate Republicans like those on the right hate Democrats. There's not an equivalency.
While I didn't really see John Edwards press conference as political opportunism, as opposed to issuing a press release as you suggested, I absolutely think it was the wrong choice for Edwards to continue with the campaign.
His wifes cancer is treatable but not curable. Anyone who is familiar with cancer knows how to read between the lines in that situation. How can a man focus on the Presidency of the United States with his wife in that condition? It is too much of a burden for one man. He should have withdrawn and concentrated on Elizabeth.
I am surprised by these comments from you...they are out of character. Who are you to pronounce what is in the best interest of Elizabeth edwards and her family. I believe the woman herself has spoken, very eloquently I might add, about how this is what she wants to do. This is important to her. Do you think she should go crawl into bed and have her husband hover as they awaite the "end". Give me a break people live with this desease every day. Heck there are a million and one things that could end your life before the cancer does...do you give up your dreams and your families dreams so you can waite for the "end" to arrive. This is such ridiculous drivel. I suppose you think Romney should drop out too since his wife has MS? And maybe Hillary should too after all her husband has a serious heart condition perhaps she should be home seeing to his needs too. Sorry if this comes off a little abrupt but delving into this subject really rubs me raw.
Welcome back Lost.
I agree with everything you wrote.
At a time like this, some people decide to live each day as if it was their last. They don't give up, but dig in. Goals can still be achieved and life lived to the fullest. I commend both John & Elizabeth Edwards.
Obviously the Edwards' agree with you. And that's really all that matters. I don't expect the majority to agree with me. But it's easy to sit here and judge my opinion as being wrong while Elizabeth is still active and feeling well.
And I'm certainly not advocating that they crawl in a hole and wait for her end. I'm simply suggesting that he should not run for the Presidency of the United States. There are a million and one things they could do as an alternative.
There are a million and one things they could do as an alternative.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
But Bruce this might be the most important thing to do for Elizabeth and that's her choice. By the way it is my understanding that women with metastatic breast cancer that is limited to bone involvement have a higher quality of health for a longer time than women who have mets involving internal organs. As of last report Elizabeth Edwards' metastasis is limited to the bones of her rib cage. She looks very very well and healthy. BTW, what do you think of Tony Snow's choice to remain in his job? I believe he has young children as well. I think they should both continue to live their lives as long as they are healthy enough as though a cure for cancer is just around the corner. But of course each person has to make their own decision as to the appropriate path to take under those to put it mildly challenging circumstances.
Sorry Lynn, I couldn't read your response.
But Bruce this might be the most important thing to do for Elizabeth and that's her choice. By the way it is my understanding that women with metastatic breast cancer that is limited to bone involvement have a higher quality of health for a longer time than women who have mets involving internal organs. As of last report Elizabeth Edwards' metastasis is limited to bone/s in her rib cage. She looks very very well and healthy. BTW, what do you think of Tony Snow's choice to remain in his job? I believe he has young children as well. I think they should both continue to live their lives as long as they are healthy enough as though a cure for cancer is just around the corner. But of course each person has to make their own decision as to the appropriate path to take under those to put it mildly challenging circumstances
Right, well that's true. You know, people make choices all the time that I don't agree with. I make choices that seem like good ones on the front end but in hindsight I realize, well, it wasn't a good choice. So that's all I'm saying.
If Elizabeth remains strong and healthy then obviously they will have done the right thing. If she starts to go downhill and John is forced to choose between staying with her and campaigning, then that won't be a choice he will want to make. I'm just looking at it from the perspective of how precious time is and how stressful and time consuming it must be to focus hard on campaigning, while at the same time worrying about your wifes health.
Tony Snow is doing what most people do, I guess, which is to continue to live his life and do his job. I never advocated dropping out of life, I just think running for President under these circumstances is a bit extreme.
But, I could be wrong.
There are jobs and there are jobs. To think that a preson could run the country undistractedly while their spouse has cancer flies a bit in the face of reason doesn't it?
That said it doesn't matter because Edwards is unelectable.
Lance Armstrong stated that he thinks the Edwardses made the right choice. His opinion on the matter means far, far more than yours.
It may be your "honest opinion", Jeter, but it is also both a loathsome & foolish one.
To say that the announcement of the return of Elizabeth Edwards' cancer... & her decision to remain with the campaign... could have been handled by a press release is clearly an opinion that you haven't thought through. Do you think that the press would simply read it, shrug their shoulders, & let it go? Really? You don't think that that wouldn't have ratcheted up the levels of interest & wild speculation among the MSM? You think that they wouldn't have demanded to know why Elizabeth Edwards hadn't come forward with her husband, & wasn't this proof that her cancer is much farther along than the Edwards were admitting? Sooner rather than later, they were going to HAVE to hold a joint press conference in order to deal with the speculation that would then be running rampant.
I think its clear that your admitted desestation of all things Edwards have led you to make an unjustifiable & rather classless charge against them. And I say them because obviously Elizabeth Edwards was not exactly dragged unwillingly to that press conference. While its true that you don't have a nationally syndicated radio show, still you have seconded Angry Bitch's vile character assassination of Edwards, & I think most of this find this rather out of character for you.
Think about it.
Press releases never look "sincere" or "honest." They smell of PR flackery. The speculation that she was not on board with his continued run at the presidency would not have quieted down. Given that we live in an image-driven age, Edwards' only real option was to appear in person with his wife, thus allowing her, by her presence and availability to reporters for questioning, to assure the assembled reporters that she was, indeed, standing by her husband as he stood by her in this time.
Jeter sounds like he just crawled out of John Gibson's ass.
If anyone is a pansy it's Gibson. Give me five minutes alone with him, I could have him crying and recanting everything he ever said.
Clearly Edwards did not use his wife's cancer for PR. You are obviously off the mark and you have attempted to create a false narrative about the events concerning Elizabeth Edwards. It is dishonest work, but I guess someone has to do it.
There is no evidence at all that Edwards used his wife's cancer as a PR stunt. Your claim is false. Couch it however you want, it is still a false claim.
Sorry Jeter but I've got to disagree.
The media had the story and were going to report the recurrence of Mrs. Edwards cancer.
John Edwards could have released a press statement but decided to face the press and answer their questions. I think he handled himself very well as did Elizabeth.
I don't think anyone who hasn't been through this with a spouse has the right to criticize. No one knows how they would handle a situation like this unless they've been there themselves.
Jeter, did you write this????
http://www.thestate.com/editorial-columns/story/139273.html
Haha, nope but I wish I had ;-)
Thanks for that link Bruce.
Edwards is a phony.
I rest my case.
Edwards is not a phony, but you are a farce. And probably a pansy too.
No, Edwards is not a phony, and only someone with a bias against Edwards could possibly see that article as proving anything!
it's really great how some people can decide someone else is a "phony", based on the obviously biased opinion of one person.
Jeter2- you've got problems
Of course you have your right to your opinion on John Edwards candidacy for President, however to pimp the shameful and hurtful line that he "used" Elizabeth Edwards cancer as a political ply is beyond slimy.
God forbid you ever be in a public position and have to disclose a very private matter. Anyone who has fol owed the Edwards over the years knows that Elizabeth Edwards speaks for herself. SHE decided to be forthcoming and announce that the cancer had returned. They both ( John and Elizabeth) handled this with dig dignity and grace.
Had they followed your "suggestion", Elizabeth and John would have been "hounded" endlessly on the campaign trail on Elizabeth's status. I believe they were courageous in coming forward with the details of Elizabeth's heath situation.
John Edwards DOES NOT use his wife's cancer on the stump to further his views and policies for Americans.
How cruel of you to put motives other than honesty and care for one another on the Edwards. As for Gibson's producer he is just as tasteless and mindless as you.
Attacking John Edwards for the way he "looks" also shows a breathtaking immaturity. Where's the commentary on any substance of waht his vies are and how you disagree? Really... Pathetic...
Enough said.
Jeter, I think you make some good points but using the word "Whore" with Elizabeth's cancer is over the top. Sure Edwards is a phony but he's not a contender and never will be. There's plenty there to attack without bringing his wife into the picture.
Casey,
Disgusting was the first word that popped in my mind. That is just so far over the line of decency it isn't even funny. I think Elizabeth Edwards coming forth with her cancer is inspiring to many people particularly people who have had or are living with cancer and other chronic diseases that may shorten life expectancy. I think having the experience of coming that close with your mortality makes you more passionate about the things that are important in your life, it gives you such perspective. I think this is why Mrs. Edwards is playing such a prominent role in her husband’s candidacy. She believes in him and the issues that he puts forth and she’s working hard for it. Now Gibson and the gang may disagree with the Edwards on issues but Elizabeth doesn’t strike me as a person that would allow herself to be used in anyway that she didn’t want to be.Exactly Lynn, Elizabeth Edwards is to me such an inspirational person and I for once never will believe she made her self to be used. Gibson and his staffer are disgusting. I am glad that these FOXIES have radio shows, at least we get to really know how they feel when they are not hosting "News Programs"
Lynn, I totally agree with you. Admittedly, I can understand those who aren’t fond of Edwards, and perceive him to be a phony, but Gibson’s executive producer was way out of line for taking such a disgusting, cheap shot at a woman that's suffering from cancer. This is sickening, and it just proves how some pundits will do or say anything to discredit a politician they either fear or hate. (I’ve said before if there's one Democratic candidate the Republican Noise Machine fear the most it is John Edwards.)
Though I respect Jeter and consider him to be one of the most intelligent, fair-minded conservative/centrist posters at Media Matters, I have to respectfully disagree with him when he says that though he think the language Gibson's sidekick used was horrible, he agreed with the overall premise that Edwards uses his wife as a puppet to win votes. I just don't think John Edwards is that calculating or twisted to use his cancer-stricken wife to get sympathy votes to win the nomination. I've heard Mrs. Edwards many times in interviews saying that regardless of her illness, she's going to participate in the campaign trail to support her husband. She said it was HER decision to do so, not John Edwards, and I take her word for it. I don’t think she has any reason to lie and say it was HER decision to help her husband’s campaign. Now, I’m a very cynical person myself, and I don’t trust politicians—Democrat, Republican, conservative, leftist, liberal, traditionalist, etc.—as far as I can throw them, but in this respect we have to give Mr. and Mrs. Edwards the benefit of the doubt.
Unbelievable. All right, if you're not going to give back the money because it went for charity, how about giving back the money you got on your tax breaks for filing for those charitable contributions? Gibson makes a very valid point there. It'll also be interesting to see when the "poverty champion" decided to become charitable? Was it after his Newscorp "contributions" became public or before?
The tax savings are his money. Why should he give it to the government?
My money is my money. Why should Edwards and big governement take it from me?
The answer to your question is obvious. Edwards is a champion for the poor and Edwards is fighting against the "two-americas." Those stands are fine(for him) but then he should put his money where his mouth is.
You must be outraged at the trillions of dollars of YOUR money that the Bush administration has lied you into spending in Iraq.
Wow they really hate Edwards don't they?Imagine bringing up his wifes Cancer in such a repulsively accusatory way.In retrospect, Don Imus really had NOTHING on these predatory vultures.The Daily Kos? Are you kidding me?These slimes grovel on a level beyond the most infantile imaginings of even the most vitriolic brand of teenage angst likely to rear its pimply visage online.These are the acts of grown men willing to stoop lower than dirt to keep their precious leaders in power,Liberals OUT and brown people DOWN.Will we ever be rid of these loathsome creatures?
I'm positive O'Reilly will be scolding Gibson for hosting a "hate" show, 'cuz Fox is so "real journalism-fair-n-balanced" and all, and it's not about ideology-not a bit. Any day now it's gonna happen....
Oh yeah, and what makes this really laughable is Gibson has all but licked the shoe leather clean off of Bush's boots, even though Bush-at every opportunity-has whored the 9/11 tragedy, riding on the backs of the victims to this very day, to justify practically anything. From using 9/11 as a re-election tool, to exploiting it for illegal, warrantless wiretapping, to invading Iraq.
But you won't hear a peep from Gibson.
And nothing frustrates the lying, hypocritical right-wingnut as much as people like Elizabeth Edwards, the 9/11 widows, John Murtha, or Max Cleland. The wingnuts get very angry at having anything stand in the way of their unbridled hate of anyone with the audacity to challenge George Bush. Not that it stops them however.
So now "half his contributors are lawyers", huh? That's a figure I'd like to see backed up with some documentation. Hey Faux News, got any documentation? You DO know what documentation is, don't you? (crickets chirping)
John Gibson is a smarmy little prick! Did you hear that Billdo?
Ah, the classy Fix News and their band of rude dogs ride again. Jeter, you are so far out on this one, I just can't date ya anymore, even though you are handsomely vain.
Or is that vainly handsome?
Gibson: LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT....
America doesn't need scum like you. The right-wing nut-ball machine does nothing to contribute to this country. They only talk to hear their own head rattle.
If they can't participate like good citizens they should pack it up and leave, as they suggested during the '70s.
That eejit they call Angry Rich
Has a brain with a moribund glitch
Gibby and the Fix News
Only fit for a snooze
Two guys funny as a jock itch
This is as low as you can go. It is not only uncalled for but pathetic. I do not agree at all with John Edwards, but to attack his wife who is suffering from Cancer is as low as anyone in the media has gone. It is as bad as Ann Coulter attacking 9-11 Widows. What is wrong with American Media.
Sueeld
You may be right, this does remind me of Ann Coutlers 9/11 Widow remark.
The difference being that Ann Coulter is a hired thug who fades back under her rock.
Gibson is a moronic slug who has a daily platform on both TV and radio from which he (apologies to Frank Zappa) oozes his slime.
Trial lawyers as economy rapers? Here we have another example of how Republicans cannot think beyond the scope of money. They would rather side with some conceptualized model of the economy over actual people who have suffered at the hand of the powerful.
As for paying a living wage, John, businesses may have to accept the reality of lower profits. Saavy entrpreneurs cope without slavery and child labor, if they are competent they can cope without below poverty level wages.
Besides living wages boost morale and productivity of workers. This in turn saves on the costs of recruitment and training.
And Elizabeth's cancer? Well who keeps reiterating that sad fact?
It ain't the Edwards'. They made the statement and moved on. Why on earth won't these meatheads move on?
If anyone is offended, my apologies for the rhetorical questions, I have been admonished today that rhetorical questions make me an intellectual snob.
No, actually you make a great point, Roundhouse.
Its these right wing thugs like Gibson & Angry Bitch that seek to achieve an advantage in the polls over Elizabeth Edwards cancer. They're the ones exploiting her illness, all the while falsely condemning her husband for their sins.
Say what you will about right wingers, they do love to project.
Mitt Romney's presidential campaign web site:
"In 1998, Mrs. Romney was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis."
I know Gibson would have said something about how Romney is "whoring" his wife's MS on his campaign site, but he just forgot.
If "Angry Rich" gets what he deserves he will be fired for that comment. It's completely uncalled for to make such a comment and it only exposes "Angry Rich" to be the intellectual infant that he must be.
I agree, at the very least a retraction is in immediate order. Uncalled for, vicious, and clearly over the top.
What a scumbag.
Emerson said "your actions speak so loudly I can't hear a word you're saying."
Instead of judging Edwards by some vague gut feeling, notice that he has worked to help the working class all his adult life. The policies that he advocates for reflect this too. A phony is someone who says one thing and does another.
Edwards and his wife have conducted themselves with dignity and courage in the face of her illness.
Gibson and his producer should feel shame if that is possible for them.
Exactly Mary. That fact that Edwards is NOT a fraud is the very reason that he is hated by many on the right. They know that if he was President, that he would do exactly what he claims he's gonna do.
There is no basis for the fraud claim. Edwards has never claimed to be something that he is not.
John Gibson's statement that presidential candidate former Sen. John Edwards (NC) "whored his wife's cancer as a fundraising gimmick" was a low down dirty comment on par with the comment made by Imus that caused such an uproar. This comment is inappropriate as it attacks a person who is suffering with a dreadful disease. If this is an example of the quality of broadcast given by the Fox network I can understand all the negative comments I have been hearing about this network.
Apparently the Idiot Rich could use the same treatment that Imus and his Idiot producer (Bernard) received. Immediate condemnation, say from the American Cancer Society. Even if the ACS was to protest I doubt that Fox would fire Gibson to get at the Idiot.
I wonder if the “Liberal MSM” is going to take this and run with it as in the universal condemnation of CBS and Imus. Seems the central word in that issue was whore also, though the slang word was used by Bernard and Imus. Same thing in my mind.
Since I don't listen to Gibson does anyone know which sponsors I can protest to.
These comments are as bad as Imus. Gibson and his team should be fired. To joke about Cancer is not funny.
Since Imus and Bernard were fired for their callous joke, lets see if FOX will do the same. I doubt it, not enough of a cause célèbre and will not likley be taken up by CNN, MSNBC, although this is right up KO alley, ABC, CBS, NBC and surely not Faux Noise Crap.
Anyone heard anything other than what MMFA has put on today?
Sportsguydave I have read the comments and waited trying to find a way to express exactly what you did:
Nobody "whores out their wife's cancer." Just when you think these losers can't lower the bar any more ... they come through.
I am a breast cancer survivor. I was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 25 with a 6 week old, 4 and 7 year old children. The only thing my husband and thought of was living, living as normal of a life as we could provide for our children. I had two surgeries, ovary and breast removal and could not hold my 6 week old for almost a year (radical surgery at that time). There are many thing that go through your mind during this time but "whoring out your wife" is not one of them. I don't know John or Elizabeth personally but I cannot imagine that they would make the decision to go forward lightly. When faced with death, living becomes important. The things you want out of this life and the things you want to accomplish become very important when faced with a possible date with death. They don't strike me as calculating kind of people. I'm blessed, my 6 week old is 48 and that's how long I've been cancer free. I can only hope for the same result for Elizabeth Edwards.
For Gibson, there is an saying "what you put out into the world you get back". Gibson should live each day in fear from the bs he spews.
Your comments really put this all in perspective, Pearline. Beautifully written.
Thank you.
Sorry... my bad. Make that Pearlene.
Beautiful post though.
Hey Pearl, No wonder you are one of the posters here that I've developed such a spiritual connection to. I am a seven year breast cancer survivor myself. I detected it on a self breast exam and I was fortunate my cancer was caught very early in stage that is typically curable. I had the lumpectomy, short course of prophylactic chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. It's scary stuff but it definitely makes you examine what's important in your life, changes priorities and makes you very grateful for the people you love and the good things in life. You examine your life and measure your impact on the world. I understand now that everyone is not destined to do big stuff, but that quiet small stuff is important too… living a good productive life, raising caring and compassionate children that bring something positive to this earth, and working for causes-issues you believe will have a positive impact. I don’t know for certain if I’m correct about everything as some of my fellow posters seem to know about themselves, but I do know my intentions are good.
Lynn and Pearle
Bless both of you, its so good to read beautiful stories like yours. thank you.
Lynn I could not have said it better myself. To all cancer survivors I wish a long and healthy life.
For all who think they can imagine what a date with death is, you can't imagine. You can say all the things you can and will do do but until it happens you can't know.
Lynn is so right, life it too short to waste your time on things you have no control over. You realize what is important and what is an absolute waste of your precious time. When I wad diagnosed with breast cancer the year was 1959. I had a very radical surgery and radiation that left me with burn marks. The point is live today like it's your last cause it just may be. Tomorrow is not promised to any of us.
Pearlene, congratulations for being a 48 year survivor. That is absolutely amazing!
Adding my thanks to Lynn and Pearle for sharing their stories.
Facing a life threatening illness as you two have can offer all of us a reality check.
The Edwards campaign did</> issue a press release concerning Mrs. Edwards illness and then answered questions later. How do you think we found out? Maybe Karl Rove ordered Alberto Gonzales to tap the Edwards phones and read their email (all without a warrant of course) huh?
For jeter2 to say Edwards should have handled it this way when he did just shows how misinformed he is by the right wing media.
To think in this time of Paris and Lindsey and Brittney that the Edwards could have issued a press release then refused to answer questions while conducting a viable presidential campaign is just ridiculous.
Mrs. Edwards cancer is certainly an issue of concern to the campaign and hence newsworthy. The story was going to come out and be discussed whether the Edwards took part in that discussion or not. The best the Edwards could do was join the discussion and hope their side of the story was covered accurately which is certainly wasn't by Gibson.
So Gibson believes Edwards should pay taxes on the Harper Collins advance he donated to charity?
A Republican believes charitable donations should be taxable?
I believe this is worthy of a headline in the first edition of The Wall Street Journal Gibson's boss, Rupert Murdoch, publishes.
He's got my vote. I really want to know why people want another Clinton in office!? Edwards and Obama would be a change and we need that!
Only someone who had a set-in-stone opinion about Edwards would think something like this.
The only appropriate thing to do when his wife's cancer reappeared was to hold a press conference, letting everyone know that his wife was fully involved in this decision and was fully on board with the campaign continuing. They are a couple that is joined at the hip. They were college sweethearts who had their relationship strengthened when they weathered the loss of their son. If Edwards were to be elected, his wife would be an integral part of his executive team.
This press conference was the way to go. It's only cynical, hypocritical people on the right who would see anything wrong with this. Apparently people like Angry Rich and Gibson would use their spouse's illness as a PR stunt or fundraising tool. THere's no evidence that Edwards did that.
He did not use it as a PR stunt. He is a very public figure running for president. His wife's cancer returned, the public already knew it. The question was with the cancer returned was he going to continue running. He did the only thing he could have being in the limelight.
His wife and he discussed it and decided he should keep on. It was a joint decision between them. Edwards announced their decision. How is that whoring?
My daughter of 18 died from liver cancer, it was horrible and very painful for her. Diagnosed the day after Xmas and less than a month later she died. My heart goes out to the Edwards, I do know the pain. I know that it is better to keep on going, to see your plans to fruition. Anything! too keep on going.
Gibson and everyone involved with that broadcast should be castigated for even suggestion that it was "whoring".
Condolences for the loss of your daughter. And bless you for sharing.
If you want to email the producer directly, his email is richard.carbery@foxnews.com
Here is my email:
Good afternoon, Mr. Carbery,
You are likely well aware that your rant about the Edwardses would touch a nerve with many of us in the community, and I am writing to voice my displeasure and urge Fox Radio to request that you recant your statement about John Edwards and his wife, and to issue an apology for such a viscerally disgusting comment. To plainly state that Edwards is "whoring out" his wife's cancer is beyond brutal and, even worse, is completely disingenuous. Is there so little that you can reasonably criticize Edwards and his campaign on that you're willing to attack Edwards' family, as well? Mrs. Edwards will die as a result of this incurable form of the cancer she's battled for years, and the Edwardses as Husband and Wife made the decision not only to press on with the campaign, but to also include their children on the campaign to allow them more quality time as a family while their mother still lives.
I can't imagine you live without the pain of having known someone who has wasted away over the course of months or years to terminal cancer, but perhaps you have been spared that grief. Either way, your attacks on a family for their decision NOT to hide in the shadows in light of this deadly disease are not only unwarranted, but they are disgusting and unwelcome. You owe an apology - not only to the Edwards family, but to those of us who have watched cancer destroy the lives of those we love, and to those in your audience who yet survive this disease. I urge you to gather your self-respect and humanity and to make this apology in full recognition that Shock Jock Politics radio does not obligate you to lower the public discourse to the point where you denigrate the dying.
I think Gibson showed no class. It is a very jaded and cynical view.
From experience, I do know that when one is confronted with such trumatic news, one does feel the need to disseminate the information to those who care. My guess is that being in the public eye, the Edwards felt it was important to express themselves and their plan the best way they knew how.
My heart goes out to Mrs. Edwards and their whole family. Even though the course of action they are taking would not have been my choice, it is not for me to decide. I hope and pray that Mrs. Edwards has a complete recovery.
As for the newscasters/pundits they need to drop it. They look like sanctimonious twits by bringing it up.
If Gibson wants to see what a "pansy" looks like, he should confront a mirror after I'm done with him. Ten seconds, Gibson. That's all I'll need with you. Bring Idiot Rich along too.
Just one brief observation:
What these right-wing hatemongers so angry is not that he is "hypocritical." This is really just a euphemism for "class traitor," someone who has personal wealth but dares to try to help the poor, something they will indeed never forgive.
So has anyone got a list of this clown's sponsors? He's pathetic.
The show's executive producer exhibits the very behaviour that makes thinking people discount the value of Fox News. What an immature boor. Mr. Gibson certainly looks like he spends quality time with his hair-do so it is strange that he should assign a nickname like "Silky" or "Pansy" to Mr. Edwards instead of the man in the mirror. We used to say "it takes one to know one".
Edwards is honest, not a phony and a true patriot, running for president under the extremely trying circumstances. His wife has cancer, and she is probably dying from it. He is subject to vicious hatred and smears on a daily basis. The personal attacks on him are horrendous, both from the entrenched right and the entrenched DINO's.
Why?
Because Edwards could possibly become the greatest president since FDR.
He is someone beholden to none, he is a true leader, an intelligent, hard working man who came from nothing to a position of great prominence through his intellect, his hard work, and because he has the support of a truly wonderful woman.
And some very powerful people on both sides of the aisle hate him for it.
John Edwards is for real. And I hope and pray he is elected President of the US.