Feds Probing John Edwards Campaign Contributions

This really should come as no surprise. There were signs that John Edwards was being less than truthful about his relationship with Rielle Hunter and how she came to be paid off. Now, federal investigators are wondering whether Edwards used campaign funds from his failed Presidential bid to pay off Hunter.

They're sifting through the records, and Edwards says that the investigators wont find any improprieties. Given how often Edwards has lied to the public, and to his wife Elizabeth, about his affair, I don't think anyone should take anything he says seriously. It will be difficult to pick apart the financial trail, particularly because nonprofits aren't subject to the same disclosure rules as corporations, but if I were Edwards, I wouldn't be going to bank on exoneration just yet.

There's also speculation that Elizabeth knew that John was using campaign funds to keep Rielle quiet.

That's bad news for the Edwards clan. Then again, so is gaming the so-called campaign finance laws that have investigators so suspicious:

Laws prohibit candidates from spending campaign money on personal expenses they would have incurred had they not been running for office. But nonprofits created to support a candidate or his message have different requirements.

The Alliance for a New America, the group that received Mellon's millions, was kept at arm's length from Edwards, a requirement of campaign finance law. Nonprofits known as 527 groups primarily pay for media messages that closely align with a candidate's stance.

The alliance was launched by Nick Baldick, Edwards' campaign manager in 2004. At least one donor, San Francisco attorney Jim Finberg, said he was advised the money would pay for ads in Iowa supporting universal health care. He knew the group was linked to Edwards; by law, however, Edwards couldn't be involved in the group's activities.

According to Federal Election Commission filings, the alliance in 2008 paid $3.3 million in “political consulting” costs to a limited liability corporation called AFNA. That LLC was registered in Virginia in 2004 and dissolved in 2008. Efforts to reach anyone associated with the company failed. Baldick could not be reached.

Edwards partly funded his unofficial launch into the Democratic primary race with funds from a different nonprofit he started in 2005.

The Center for Promise and Opportunity, a nonprofit organization allowed to shield donors' identity but still make political expenditures, paid for much of Edwards' early groundwork in New Hampshire and Iowa.

The organization's statement of purpose, filed with its tax disclosures, never mentioned Edwards, even though Edwards was the center's honorary chairman, according to 2006 media reports.

“They play this charade. Refrain from saying they are a candidate, so they don't have to follow the rules,” said Paul Ryan of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan group. “They're gaming the system. If they play carefully enough, they can avoid running afoul of the law.”

In 2006, Edwards traveled the nation, walking picket lines and talking to crowds about poverty and his regret in voting to fund the war in Iraq, travel paid for by the Center for Promise and Opportunity.

The center also paid for Edwards' trips abroad, where he met with foreign leaders and visited developing nations plagued by squalor. Rielle Hunter was at his side filming.

UPDATE:
Hot Air also notices the investigations.

The Lies Continue

So, what version of events in L'affair Edwards are we up to? Number 2? Well, no one is buying this version either because the time line doesn't work either.

John Edwards said that he broke off his relationship with Rielle Hunter in 2006, but the National Enquirer says that's a load of nonsense. They note that the two renewed their affair even John told Elizabeth about the initial affair.

So, what's the proof? Well, that's not entirely clear, but there are time line issues that Edwards still can't quite account for:

But the National Enquirer is reporting today that Edwards restarted the affair after coming clean to Elizabeth, and that Hunter, now 44, got pregnant shortly afterward.

Meanwhile, Hunter's sister said yesterday that the mistress' 6-month-old love child unmistakably "looks like John Edwards. She's got his eyes and jaw line and lips.

"The most shocking thing was watching him on TV [last week] giving these half truths, these half-baked answers. I wish for everyone involved that he'd have come clean," Hunter's sis, Roxanne Druck, told "Entertainment Tonight."

Despite recent denials in an ABC News interview, Edwards knows he's the father of Hunter's daughter, Frances Quinn, the Enquirer is reporting.

Sources have also told the weekly paper Edwards and Hunter orchestrated her public rebuffing of his offer of a paternity test.

Well, given how Rielle's family was demanding that Edwards take a paternity test and Elizabeth said nothing about a paternity test to exonerate her husband, it certainly does seem odd that Rielle herself would say that she doesn't want a paternity test.

Collusion between Rielle and John does make sense. She's getting $15,000 a month from Edwards top money man, Fred Baron (who incidentally must be the best friend a guy could ever hope to have for throwing around serious money to keep things under the radar for as long as he had). That too would explain her sudden silence on the paternity issue. She wants the money to keep coming, and making demands on paternity could jeopardize the cashflow.

UPDATE:
The National Enquirer reports that Edwards and Hunter met at the Beverly Hilton not once, but three times this year. How did the Enquirer confirm this? Records? Dumpster diving? Someone at the hotel giving them the details? Inquiring minds want to know.

And Edwards' lies and ongoing deception isn't winning him any friends either.

Small Lies and Big Lies, Part 2

The Edwards affair saga continues to get 24/7 media coverage now that everyone is openly talking about it following ABC News confirming what the National Enquirer had been reporting for months.

John Edwards apparently lied about when he started having his affair with Rielle Hunter, which once again throws off his carefully crafted timeline. Friends of Rielle say that the affair started well before the Edwards campaign hired her. I still don't get how Elizabeth can stand to be in the same room with him, but she's busy crafting lies of her own.

USA Today says that we deserve the 100% truth and they don't accept Edwards' current spin on his affair with Hunter.

As lies and half truths tend to do, Edwards' words, and these circumstances, beg follow-up questions too numerous to list here.

Edwards had dismissed the Enquirer stories as "tabloid trash," but his denials ended Friday, when he issued his mea culpa in an interview with ABC News and a written statement. It was timed — coincidentally, we're sure — to coincide with the opening of the Beijing Olympics. Edwards said that he told his wife, Elizabeth, about what he says was a brief affair in 2006, and that the timing of the pregnancy meant he was not the father. Yet Elizabeth, who is battling an incurable form of cancer, was apparently unaware of Edwards' recent visit to Hunter, an incident detailed in the Enquirer. The latest twist — that Hunter won't submit the child to a paternity test — won't help put this story to rest. Maury Povich's show couldn't top this.

Politicians having affairs and thinking they are untouchable is nothing new, of course. A sinners gallery includes former presidents John Kennedy and Bill Clinton, Louisiana congressman Bob Livingston, presidential candidate Gary Hart, former New York governor Eliot Spitzer. To name just a few.

Yet Edwards' transgression — indeed, his excuse — would test the patience of his most ardent supporter: I did it, but only while my wife's cancer was in remission. This suggests that the one-time rising star of the Democratic Party has not yet made contact with human reality and believes he can dissemble his way out of this, à la Bill Clinton.

The decent option is to tell the public the whole truth, without lawyerly equivocations. Then he has the difficult task of healing his family. He should recall his own wisdom in 1999, when with great clarity he described Clinton's affair as "breathtaking" for its "remarkable disrespect … for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter."

That's what makes Edwards seem so smarmy here. It's not that he had an affair - lots of politicians have done that. Presidents have had them.

It's the circumstances behind the affair and what he claims happened that has his lies tied into knots. He wants people to believe that he had an affair, but only while Elizabeth's cancer was in remission. The moment it came back, he broke things off with Rielle.

Once again, it makes no sense why he would claim that he broke it off, admitted the affair to Elizabeth, and then had to slink into the Beverly Hilton on apparently two occasions to see Rielle and ostensibly her (their?) baby.

The moment he admits that he was continuing his affair with Rielle while Elizabeth's cancer was no longer in remission will destroy every last scintilla of respect anyone has for the guy and would make him radioactive politically. There are some places that even politicians wont go.

That's why he's pushing this meme that he broke off the affair specifically before Elizabeth's cancer came back. He wants to maintain the possibility of salvaging a political future. What I don't get is why Elizabeth would go along with this. Her statement on John's affair doesn't push for him to get a paternity test to clear his name.

It's a most curious omission from her defense of her husband, which when taken with the fact that Rielle's lawyer refused to state that the reason she wouldn't call for a paternity test was because she knew the father to be Edwards' former staffer, Andrew Young.

And if you think that the media coverage of the Edwards affair wasn't news or didn't have an effect on the Democratic party nomination process, know that if the media had done its due diligence and discovered that Edwards was cheating on his wife when her cancer returned, it would have killed his campaign, and given Hillary a serious boost to the point that we'd be talking not about Obama's ascendancy, but about Hillary's historic nomination.

Small Lies and Big Lies

It wasn't entirely surprising that the story of John Edwards admission of an affair with Rielle Hunter broke on a Friday night. It's part of a long history of Friday night news dumps where bad stories are leaked on a Friday to avoid major news coverage. That strategy doesn't exactly work out as planned, and it didn't work out here, partially because ABC News made it public earlier than Edwards had hoped. In fact, Edwards was pissed that ABC News ran the story as early in the day on Friday as they did.

I called it on Friday that this was purposefully leaked on Friday, particularly as news of war in Georgia and South Ossetia broke out along with the Olympics opening ceremony would serve to bury the story somewhat. Still, Edwards wanted the story to break even later on Friday because the media managed to start a feeding frenzy in time for the evening news. He wanted to manage every aspect of the story, even as the National Enquirer had let everyone know the basics months ago.

The media is still coming to grips with its stunning failure to pursue the story.

Yesterday, I reported that Rielle's sister was demanding that Edwards come forward and take a paternity test yesterday. Rielle isn't too keen on that, but I think there's a strategy behind this. It puts additional pressure on Edwards to admit fatherhood and keeps the story alive as suspicions swirl about what exactly Edwards had been doing behind Elizabeth's back all these months.

Huffington Post also puts a dent into the Edwards timeline of when and where he first met Rielle. Well, if Edwards is making the big lies, the small lies are easy. And Elizabeth's actions are also being questioned by those on the left.

I suspect that the media will take a much closer look at Edwards' travel itineraries and compare them with those of Hunter to see if there were other rendezvous. Watch for more dumpster diving as well.

Deceiver has a few questions, including what happened to Rielle's website. Far more interesting is the money trail - why was Edwards paying Rielle in 2007 even though she was out of his employ in 2006.

Overlawyered has a more important question of Fred Baron, whose money appears to have been spread a cone of silence. Did he violate federal campaign finance laws? And why has no one asked Edwards why he would have met Rielle in the dead of night at the Beverly Hilton if he sought to keep this story quiet. There are far more laid back and secluded places to meet.

Edwards Affair Redux

Now, the media wants you to believe that it was difficult for the media to prove that John Edwards had an affair with Rielle Hunter. Right. How difficult was it to send reporters to track down Edwards at the Beverly Hilton? That's what the National Enquirer did.

The Los Angeles Times sent an intern to do reporting on the story.

It's further amazing that once the dam burst yesterday after Edwards admitted to the affair that the nation's reporters all of a sudden found their voice collectively and began reporting the story as though they'd been all over it from day one.

The only folks who can claim that they've been following the story with any sense of urgency from the outset were Mickey Kaus, the National Enquirer, and some bloggers including DBKP.

Yet, even though Edwards admits to the affair, he claims that he did not father the baby. That makes sense given the revulsion that would ripple throughout the nation if we learned that he was off having sexual encounters with his mistress just weeks after his wife Elizabeth learned that her cancer had returned. The timeline makes it clear that if the baby is indeed his, it would mean that he had sex with Hunter just days after learning his wife's cancer had returned.

DBKP parses Edwards' official statement and notes that it is full of weasel words and that he attempts to trash the one media outlet that got most of the facts right from the outset, the Enquirer. Indeed, ABC News notes that the Enquirer got 95-96% of the story right. Since the Enquirer claims that Edwards is the baby's father, perhaps it might help if either ABC News or the Enquirer could pursue that angle further, though it would require that Edwards take a paternity test. Anthony Young already claims that he's the father, but there is no evidence to substantiate his claims.

Note also that Edwards now claims that he's being honest, when he was claiming that he was honest in 2007 when he denied ever having an affair with Hunter - and that comes at a time after John told Elizabeth about the affair. She knew about the affair at that point, but still stood by. Will she stand by now, even after learning that Edwards may have continued seeing Hunter even after her cancer returned?

So, what does Elizabeth do? She apparently penned a piece on Daily Kos. I find it curious that she's concerned about the steady stream of reporters and news helicopters over their home. Maybe that might have something to do with the fact that John was the VP candidate in 2004, and had ambitions to be President in 2008 but was likely to settle for a post in an Obama administration?

John has spoken in a long on-camera interview I hope you watch. Admitting one’s mistakes is a hard thing for anyone to do, and I am proud of the courage John showed by his honesty in the face of shame. The toll on our family of news helicopters over our house and reporters in our driveway is yet unknown. But now the truth is out, and the repair work that began in 2006 will continue. I ask that the public, who expressed concern about the harm John’s conduct has done to us, think also about the real harm that the present voyeurism does and give me and my family the privacy we need at this time.

She's rallying behind her husband, which is her prerogative. If she truly means that her family needs time to heal, then John's political career should be toast. Ed Morrissey wonders if that will actually be the case.

I think his career is over because it goes to character and fitness to lead. Can anyone ever trust anything he says? While we need politicians to lie and prevaricate, the appearance of lying and prevarication tends to turn people off. Just ask Gary Hart.

It appears that neither Edwards will attend the convention in Denver. That's for the best for all concerned, especially the Edwards family.

I do feel sorry for her and her kids. She trusted him, and he burned her - first in 2006 after admitting to the affair, and again now. If he indeed fathered Rielle's child, then that burning sensation is more like a bonfire.

Others blogging: Macranger has no sympathy for Elizabeth and calls her a liar.

Paul at Powerline weighs in and comments on human frailties and notes that he will post no further on the subject. I agree that Edwards is a phony and his abilities to manipulate a jury (and the public) are astonishing, but he could feel remorse as well. However, mitigating that is the fact that he's indeed lied about his relationship with Rielle to his wife, and it appears that he never broke it off with Rielle.

The Moderate Voice notes the suffering of the family. Indeed.

See memeorandum for the feeding frenzy.

UPDATE:
Doug Ross has put together a handy dandy timeline of events, complete with noting that John received a father of the year award and renewed his vows with Elizabeth even as he was in the midst of his affair with Rielle.

UPDATE:
Edwards truly has a problem because he's pissed off Rielle's family, which is now demanding he take a paternity test. Whoa nelly!

Edwards Admits Affair With Hunter But Not Paternity

Well, I guess the Los Angeles Times will have to run a story on the subject now. ABC News sat down with John Edwards and Edwards finally admitted that he indeed had an affair with Rielle Hunter, but that he didn't love her. Elizabeth found out about this in 2006.

In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 42-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter’s baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.

Edwards said he knew he was not the father based on timing of the baby’s birth on February 27, 2008. He said his affair ended too soon for him to have been the father.

Oh, like it makes a difference that John didn't love Rielle? He broke his marriage vows to Elizabeth, and it makes him look like a shameless huckster to try and carry off as though he was the family man even as his family knew he strayed.

Edwards touted himself as the family values candidate, but it now looks like he had twice the family values of anyone else - his official family plus Rielle. Edwards also admitted that the National Enquirer was correct in its reporting that he was at the Beverly Hilton to meet with Rielle, though he claims that he isn't the father of Rielle's child. A paternity test is not in the cards, and one of Edwards' advisers, Andrew Young, claims to be the father.

I wonder about the timing of the announcement though. I'm going to call this a Friday night news dump given that he happened to drop this news on a day when most folks are focusing on the Olympic opening ceremony or the start of war between Russia and Georgia.

UPDATE:
Parts of Edwards' story don't fit - namely why would he be slinking around to avoid being seen with Rielle at the Beverly Hilton this past month. If Elizabeth already knew about the affair in 2006, then why hide it? Why stretch things out and not simply admit the affair to the Enquirer then and there? Hot Air has much more.

That Edwards would claim that he didn't love Rielle is clearly designed to protect Elizabeth from further pain, but that too falls flat given that he was running around and trying to keep from being seen meeting up with at the Beverly Hilton.

And what of the $15,000 per month. Hush money? If Edwards is paying it out and he's not the father, then what exactly is he paying for? Covering for his buddy Andrew Young? That's being beyond a good friend.

UPDATE:
As Instapundit notes, the real question is why the media covered for him for so long. Only the Enquirer pursued this story, and it appears now that ABC News' Brian Ross got on the case and that's what broke things open. The Los Angeles Times sat on its hands and refused to report on it, despite the fact that the story really broke in its backyard. Patterico skewers the LAT.

Others blogging: Jammie, Michelle Malkin, Don Surber, Macranger, Ace, Sister Toldjah, Gawker, QandO, Wizbang (who also notes that National Enquirer 1 - LAT 0), and Stephen Spruiell, who questions Edwards' timeline.

UPDATE:
A big shout out should go to Mickey Kaus who has been on this story from the get-go and has gamed various aspects of the response and how Edwards and the media have handled things. The one scenario he didn't plan for is the one that is now evolving - the media is going to attack Edwards for lying to them about his affair. Let's just ignore the fact that the media ignored this story even as the Enquirer was busy nailing things down.

UPDATE:
The New York Times! posts a story about how the reticence of the mainstream media is now a story.

Really. I know. Blow me over.

The Paper of Record had no trouble running stories about McCain that were poorly sourced, were never fact checked, and were little more than innuendo and rumor, but the paper refused to act on the Edwards' story until it broke wide open after he admitted to the affair.

Edwards Love Child Photos?

The National Enquirer has been saying that they've had the goods on John Edwards for some time now.

Well, they've released a photo showing Edwards holding a baby, who they claim is Edwards' love child with Rielle Hunter. As the Enquirer notes, the location can be confirmed as the Beverly Hilton hotel based on the drapes in the background of the photo and further confirms the Enquirer's story about their encounter with Edwards that ended when Edwards ducked into a men's room to avoid further questions about why he was at the hotel.

The photo also appears to show that the baby has a Caucasian complexion, which tends to undermine the claims by the Edwards flack Andrew Young that the baby is his.

Will the Los Angeles Times now deem the story newsworthy? Or, will they, like other big media outlets, continue to embargo the story because they've decided that it isn't worth our time to read about Edwards conduct and marital infidelities?

My thoughts and prayers go out to Elizabeth Edwards and her children. She's done nothing but support Edwards at every turn, even as she was experiencing a recurrence of cancer. May she take John for every last penny.

HT: Gateway Pundit.

UPDATE:
So far there's nothing from the Los Angeles Times, which previously determined that the paper would say nothing on the subject of Edwards' trip to the Beverly Hilton. The News and Observer has nothing either.

However, bloggers are reporting on this, and it further underscores the fact that the public can and will continue to rely more on alternative news sources because they have had it with the media elites who determine what stories should fly and which ones get buried.

Outside the Beltway and DBKP also weighs in.

UPDATE:
Apologies to Andrew Young. Confused the Young involved in this case, with the Andrew Young who was a former Mayor of Atlanta and civil rights leader (ht: anonymous emailer). The Andrew Young involved here is a former member of Edwards' presidential campaign efforts.

UPDATE:
Hot Air wonders whether the Enquirer cooked up the photo to sex up their already confirmed reporting that Edwards was at the Beverly Hilton. Specifically, how exactly did they get the camera in the room with Edwards and the baby?

Gotcha!

I guess the Los Angeles Times will have to report on this story after all. Their self imposed blackout on the news that John Edwards might have had a love child with a mistress was blacked out by the Times editorial board.

Now, a criminal complaint has been filed by two National Enquirer reporters against the Beverly Hills Hilton over their treatment while trying to question John Edwards over his affair and relationship with Rielle Hunter.

NATIONAL ENQUIRER reporters Alan Butterfield and Alexander Hitchen filed a criminal complaint with the Beverly Hills Police Department on Thursday, July 24, charging that hotel security acted unlawfully while the reporters were trying to question the former senator.

Edwards now could be contacted by police to give an eyewitness account of what occurred.

Hotel security tried to stop the reporters from questioning Edwards in the basement of the hotel at approximately 2:40 a.m. Tuesday, July 22 after Edwards came off an elevator and appeared to be attempting to leave the hotel unseen.

The National Enquirer has pursued this story even though no one else in the media thought that there was anything there. An incurious media ignored this story, and one would have to wonder whether they would have done so if the politician involved was a Republican.

There is one person I feel sorry for in this whole mess - Elizabeth Edwards - the better half of that family relationship. And I've always felt that she was the more qualified of the two to run for President.

UPDATE:
FoxNews does what the Los Angeles Times refused to do - hunt down whether Edwards was present at the hotel at the time the Enquirer says he was.

Pandering For Votes

Pandering for votes is a politician's staple, but this shows just how foolish John Edwards truly is. He thinks that Americans will go for his latest proposal to bring home virtually all the US troops in Iraq just before the 2008 election.

The number of troops needed or necessary in Iraq to fight al Qaeda and continue to support the Iraqi government - the key missions in Iraq at present - is determined by the military commanders in Iraq and General Petraeus has hit upon a winning strategy in defeating al Qaeda and squashing the insurgency with using additional troops and concentrating efforts to reduce the area in which the insurgents and al Qaeda operate. With more Iraqi forces stepping up, US troops can and are being reduced, but to put a purely political spin on how and when to bring those troops home, it shows critical misjudgment on foreign policy, national security, and how and when to use US force to bolster and support our allies and thwart our enemies in the Middle East.

In one of his most detailed discussions to date about how he would handle Iraq as president, Mr. Edwards staked out a position that would lead to a more rapid and complete troop withdrawal than his principal rivals, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, who have indicated they are open to keeping American trainers and counterterrorism units in Iraq.

Elizabeth Edwards, his wife and political partner, who listened in on the interview from a seat across the aisle, intervened at the end of the session to underscore that Mr. Edwards did not intend to stop all training and was prepared to train Iraqi forces outside of the country. Mr. Edwards continued the theme while acknowledging that the benefits of such training would be limited.

Mr. Edwards’s plan, like that of many of his Democratic opponents, is at odds with the strategy developed by American military commanders, who have said the situation is still too fragile to set a timetable for such extensive troop withdrawals and a curtailment of the training effort in Iraq.

Mr. Edwards’s plan calls for immediately withdrawing 40,000 to 50,000 troops. Nearly all of the remaining American troops would be removed within 9 or 10 months. The only force that would remain would be a 3,500-to-5,000-strong contingent that would protect the American Embassy and possibly humanitarian workers.

Even his wife, Elizabeth, realized that John was going too far and tried to spin the situation for him. I've said it before, and it's worth repeating, but Elizabeth has shown herself to be the more credible of the two Edwards' running.

Is Elizabeth Edwards Running For President?

You know, it's interesting that Elizabeth Edwards gets far more press than her husband. She just came out opposing the MoveOn.org ad smearing General David Petraeus. It's the right call, but is it surprising that John Edwards didn't make that statement himself? This is a pattern over the past several months.

You'd have to wonder which one of them is actually running for President the way things are going. I suspect it's intentional since Johnny boy doesn't exactly inspire a whole lot of confidence in anything more than his hair care regime. Either that, or John Edwards actually supports the MoveOn.org position vis-a-vis the claims that Gen. Petraeus was cooking the books to support the Administration's policy on Iraq.

The thing is that so many Democrats are beholden to MoveOn.org and the money and grassroots organizing that flows from that relationship. If they burn bridges with MoveOn, they may lose a significant vocal minority that holds sway among Democrats who are key during primary season - the ones who actually vote.

Walking the Walk

While we get nonsensical ravings from Elizabeth Edwards over how she'll give up buying tangerines to save the environment, or listen to Al Gore pontificate on carbon emissions as he's caught stepping off a Gulfstream IV private jet that pumps out more emissions on a single flight than most people do in a year, I'm undertaking a far more comprehensive move to go green.

I've bought a house in Radburn, New Jersey. I know what you're thinking. How is buying a house a green step?

Well, the first step is knowing where Radburn is and what makes it a pretty special community. It was one of the first planned communities in the US and it was specifically designed to minimize the need for driving cars. Indeed, the layout is conducive to walking, not driving. You could go from your house to the community pool and school without ever having to cross a street. Everything is designed to minimize the need to drive, and indeed the streets in the development are narrower than you'll find in most suburban communities because cars are not emphasized in the plan.

Cars are almost an afterthought in the community, and the area's motto is "A Town For the Motor Age." That compact design means that it emphasizes a communal feeling and you can actually walk to most basic services. Driving is not required.

We were attracted to the area because of its close proximity to New York City, while maintaining a bit of a suburban feel.

I will be able to walk to the train which is just over a quarter mile away. Previously, I had to drive two miles, park in a commuter lot, and then walk 10 minutes to the station. Not having to drive and find parking is a big improvement and will also mean I'm not driving as much - big bonus there.

As for the house itself, it has a brand new oil burner, which means that it's about as efficient as one can get for that kind of heating system.


The house needs a new roof, and I'll pick one of the lightest colors available so that it reflects back most of the sun's heat and energy instead of absorbing it - reducing energy needs during the summer. That's a decision that will last 20-30 years, so you will see an ongoing energy savings with a simple color choice. If you have to install a new roof, choosing the lightest color available is an energy saver and a no-brainer.

A new insulated garage door will also make the house airtight. Right now, there are beautiful wooden carriage doors on the house, but they're not exactly airtight and are probably original to the house. Replacing those doors with a two inch insulated door with weatherstripping will cut down on energy bills. Replacing other doors at some point will further improve the look of the house and improve our home's comfort.

Another simple and cheap solution is to install CFLs around the house. I've been using CFLs around our apartment, and we'll be using them a whole lot more in the house. I'll be putting them in as necessary. I also intend to get an energy audit by PSE&G to further improve the house. Automatic thermostats are going in and my carbon footprint will go down considerably.

I'll be checking all the plumbing fixtures and putting in low-flow shower heads - which will reduce the water consumption and hot water heating costs. A new water heater will be needed at some point, and while I've considered a tankless system, which would save a considerable amount of energy costs because you don't have to keep the tank of water warm until it's needed, I think we'll go with a high efficiency standard water heater with the 15 year warranty since they provide a good balance between efficiency and cost.

All these things, excepting the roof, are relatively cheap to do, and will save a boat load of money and reduce emissions considerably.

Can you say the same about Edwards or Gore? I doubt it. They'll continue jetting around the country and emitting COx in far greater quantities than I could do in several years. They could do us all a favor by ceasing their campaigning and pontifications - just do it for the environment.

Spouses Making Impact On 2008 Elections

I can't say that I've seen anything quite like this before. We've been increasingly seeing the spouses of prospective candidates for President entering the fray and issuing statements of making statements to the press slamming other candidates with increasing fury and vigor.

All in the name of soundbites.

I've said it before that I believed that Elizabeth Edwards was behaving far more like a candidate than her husband John Edwards, but Michelle Obama taking on the Clintons over Hillary's inability to deal with Bill's indiscretions strikes me as being just wrong.

Some people might think that such attacks are fair game considering that we should know as much about candidates, their personal backgrounds, and missteps as possible. However, who exactly are we electing?

Are we electing the person on the ballot or the spouse? Should that really play a role? No doubt that it does play a role, but that the spouses are getting deeply involved is in contrast to prior elections, where the spouses stayed on the sidelines to avoid becoming the story.

Here, it would seem that the spouses are going out of their way to become the story.

Elizabeth Edwards: Race Baiter

John Edwards' wife Elizbeth seems to think that President Bush rushed to the campus of Virginia Tech faster than he did to Louisiana and New Orleans because the people on the college campus were prettier.

Right.

At Virginia Tech, the mass murder was over in a matter of minutes and the horror revealed itself over a span of hours.

The situation in New Orleans was anything but secured within hours. The flooding of New Orleans occurred hours after the hurricane actually made landfall and the full extent wasn't felt for several days as the city was cut off from the outside world for all intents and purposes by the flooding and damage to roads leading in and out of the city plus damage to the airport and rail links. Having the President show up too soon meant taking away resources that were devoted to rescue and relief operations, when it was clearly apparent that there were thousands of people unaccounted for over an area of 90,000 square miles - and hit not just Louisiana, but Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Georgia, and points inland.

President Bush went to New Orleans on September 15, which was about two weeks following the landfall. The city was still largely without power and local law enforcement was struggling even with infusions of state and federal assistance plus the assistance of law enforcement from around the country.

Edwards complains that President Bush waited too long to go to tour the devastation done by Hurricane Katrina and now they’re complaining he went to Virginia Tech too soon. To these people, President Bush can do nothing right. Ankle biters.

Elizabeth Edwards's Cancer Has Spread

While the Edwards family put on a brave face last week and noted that their doctors believed that they caught the bone cancer in its early stages, it appears that the cancer had already spread from one of her ribs to her hips when it was discovered in the course of treating a cracked rib.

Mrs. Edwards and her husband said they would continue campaigning.

The interview, on “60 Minutes” on CBS, appeared three days after Mr. Edwards announced that his wife’s cancer, first diagnosed late in his 2004 campaign for the White House, had come back in an incurable form that had spread to her ribs.

When asked if the cancer had spread to any other part of her body, Mrs. Edwards said, “There are a couple of hot spots, on the bone scan, in my right hip, for example.” She did not mention any other areas having been affected.

Sitting with her husband, Mrs. Edwards, 57, said she wondered if treating her hip with radiation would cause it to weaken and be more susceptible to breaking. But she said the doctors she had consulted had told her that “it was too small an area for that to be a risk.”

Mrs. Edwards’s health has been a prime topic of discussion for the past few days among Americans debating whether Mr. Edwards, who is seeking the Democratic nomination, should continue to pursue his political ambitions. Some critics have suggested that he might try to exploit her condition to win votes.

Bone cancer is an extremely aggressive and she's going to need all of her strength to cope with the treatment and the debilitating effects. I admire her stoicism in the face of such a prognosis, though I wonder whether the stress of the campaign will exascerbate her condition or that the campaign will give her something else to focus on to in order to get through this difficult ordeal. I'm hoping that it is the latter, though the former is certainly possible.

Major Announcement Expected From John Edwards

This doesn't sound good for Elizabeth Edwards given the way the media is running with the story. She had battled breast cancer a while back and the expected announcement may relate to the fact that Edwards may be forced to reconsider his run for the Presidency.

WASHINGTON, March 21 — John Edwards, the North Carolina Democrat making a second bid for the presidency, announced late Wednesday night that he would hold a news conference Thursday, a day after he and his wife, Elizabeth, visited Mrs. Edwards’ doctor to assess her health following her recovery from breast cancer.

Mrs. Edwards, in a brief interview from her home in Chapel Hill, said she and Mr. Edwards would discuss her health at the news conference, but she declined to elaborate.

“I’m still here,” she said.

Jennifer Palmieri, communications director for the Edwards campaign, said that she would not provide any details in advance of the press conference, which will be held in Chapel Hill, N.C.

The Edwards campaign announced the news conference at the end of a day when Mr. Edwards canceled a campaign appearance to join his wife at a visit to her doctor. Mrs. Edwards was diagnosed with cancer in 2004, almost on the day that Mr. Edwards, running for vice president on the Democratic ticket with Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, lost to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Mrs. Edwards subsequently wrote “Saving Graces,” a memoir that recounted her battle. On the campaign trail, when talking about health care, Mr. Edwards has frequently talked about his wife’s battle with cancer, and the treatments she underwent.

Mr. Edwards had waited until he and Mrs. Edwards’ doctors were confident about her recovery before announcing that he was making a second bid for the presidency. Since then, he had established himself as a contender in a race that has included Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois. A decision by Mr. Edwards to withdraw, should he decide to do that, could have thus have a profound impact on the dynamics of this Democratic contest.

I wish Elizabeth and the rest of the Edwards family well. This is not news anyone should have to hear.

If Edwards does withdraw, this certainly will change the dynamics of the Democrat party race as both Obama and Clinton will rush to fill the void and try to pick up Edwards' support. Frankly, I'm not sure how much that support is worth - considering that he was a one term Senator with no foreign policy experience, but as a trial lawyer, he's connected to lots of money and that will be what the other Democrat candidates are looking at.

UPDATE:
Edwards is going to be suspending his campaign in light of the recurrence of Elizabeth's breast cancer.

UPDATE:
All the early prognostications have proven false that Edwards would quit or suspend the race. Edwards is not quitting the race and will continue despite the fact that Elizabeth has bone cancer that was discovered after she had a bone scan following cracking a rib. She will continue to work with the campaign and receive treatment as needed.

UPDATE:
Politico has issued a retraction/apology for getting its story wrong. They relied upon a single source and that proved fatal to their reporting that Edwards would quit/suspend the campaign.