By Peter Gradjansky - 07/31/08 05:53 PM EDT
The July 24 column by Byron York, “The Democratic ticket and the John Edwards affair,” seems to me to be based on nothing other than allegations presented — according to what I could see — only in the National Enquirer, which is known as the lowest of the low in terms of sensationalistic, low-integrity journalism.
Please correct me if there is anything in this column, other than the Enquirer articles, that lends any weight to the worthiness of these allegations for further investigation. The only testimony that comes from another source is the denial and alternative explanation from Edwards’s staff — an explanation that could very well be true, or not. No light is shed, exonerating or implicating Edwards, so the only point I can see to the column is to further disseminate a story for which no corroboration is offered.
In addition, since your article reports nothing specific that Sen. Barack ObamaBarack ObamaObama: 'There's still work to do' for gay community Our most toxic export: American politick State Dept. insists Brexit won't hurt relations with UK, EU MORE (D-Ill.) has as yet said about a role for the former North Carolina senator in his administration if he’s elected president, my mind is boggled by the way in which the unsubstantiated story about Edwards’s supposed love life was morphed into a headline and emphasis about disturbing implications for the Obama campaign and (possibly) administration. Please tell me if I am missing something, but this seems to be gutter journalism at its worst, and not worthy of the reputation of your publication.
By the way, though I am an enthusiastic supporter of Sen. Obama, I am in no way connected to or invested in the fortunes of Mr. Edwards. I simply do not like to see anyone’s name sullied in any way unless there is clear evidence of wrongdoing or poor judgment.
Believes Obama will pick Hillary
From Al Sartor
Regarding Dick Morris’s “Obama’s women problem” column (July 30), I believe Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) will bite the Bill bullet and pick Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) to get older women back in the fold.
As he demonstrated in the primaries, Obama tends to focus on the here-and-now rather than the future.
He solves problems sequentially. Despite the looming presence of a Bill ClintonBill ClintonClinton slams Trump on immigration in Arizona op-ed The Trail 2016: Berning embers Poll: Most say Trump should cut business ties MORE in years ahead, Obama’s priorities are the convention in one month and the election in three months.
His first hurdle is getting women at the convention cheering him ... not jeering him for refusing to give Hillary her due.
I suspect that Bill Clinton — who always has his eye on the prize — is chuckling at the prospect.
Walnut Creek, Calif.