John Edwards Love Child Scandal - Page 12 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-15-2010, 09:58 PM   #166
Blue Crack Addict
 
MissVelvetDress_75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: basking in my post-concert glow still mesmerized by the orbit of his hips..Also Holding Bono Close as he requested.
Posts: 25,776
Local Time: 06:52 PM
I like how she is upset about these photos and acting like she had no idea these would be used!
__________________

__________________
MissVelvetDress_75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2010, 10:02 PM   #167
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 03:52 PM
she is just a pretty, nice, naive girl
why do people keep taking advantage of her?
__________________

__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 03:23 AM   #168
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
she looks like a "nice girl".


here's another pic



A man's shirt?
Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Edwards has long since gotten out of a small North Carolina town cerca 1983, i.e. the only place and time this woman would seem appealing! With all of the drop dead gorgeous young women in DC and every other hall of power Edwards has been in, he ruins his marriage and career over her??

Not defending adultery in any case, especially when one's spouse is terminally ill, but still, wouldn't he be able to have his pick of women?
__________________
U2387 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 07:09 AM   #169
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,664
Local Time: 05:52 PM
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 10:10 AM   #170
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,978
Local Time: 06:52 PM
I don't think her looks are the point or relevant at all to his cheating. It reminds me of all the comments about Tiger's mistresses (gee his wife is so beautiful and how could he-well she certainly is but that's not the point. Somehow there's an implication that less beautiful wives, well it's more understandable/acceptable) or that woman that Steve Phillips was involved with. As if cheating with a beautiful woman is somehow more understandable and/or acceptable.

Yes I used to think he was attractive-but now, with all that has been revealed about him I don't at all. Actually he's repulsive to me, including physically repulsive. Physical attractiveness is about character too-and to me his is severely lacking/nonexistent.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 10:31 AM   #171
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,978
Local Time: 06:52 PM
The pictures were taken by Mark Seliger-that's why they don't look like other photos of her. Plus airbrushing and all that.

She can't honestly think anyone would believe that she thought they would be headshots and that they somehow tricked her-when she was dressed like that? Why would they have her dressed like that and only show her face? She even posed with her daughter on a bed in one of them, with her stomach all exposed. Ugh.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MissVelvetDress_75 View Post
I like how she is upset about these photos and acting like she had no idea these would be used!
abcnews.com

The claim by John Edwards' mistress Rielle Hunter that she thought sexy, pantless photographs on a bed were going to simply be portraits of her face were met with disbelief today.

"Did she say she thought they would be headshots?" GQ reporter Lisa DePaulo asked incredulously on "Good Morning America."

"Rielle is a smart woman. She knows what she wore and what she was doing in the photo shoot," DePaulo said.

Hunter, a one-time videographer for Edwards' presidential campaign, posed for the pictures wearing only a man's button down white shirt, a string of pearls and panties. In some of the photos she is posed on a bed with stuffed animals piled around her. Her panties are peeking out in one frame.

A teary Hunter told ABC News' Barbara Walters she found the pictures "repulsive" and thought all but one would be headshots, Walters said.

But GQ released a video of the shoot to "GMA" today and at one point the videographer asks Hunter, "You want to take a look at this?"
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 11:56 AM   #172
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,714
Local Time: 03:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
The claim by John Edwards' mistress Rielle Hunter that she thought sexy, pantless photographs on a bed were going to simply be portraits of her face were met with disbelief today.
Translation: Her claims were met with a resounding cry of "bitch, please!"
__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 03:57 PM   #173
Blue Crack Addict
 
kafrun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Upside-down
Posts: 19,644
Local Time: 04:52 PM
Gosh, yeah, I hate it when I pose for sexy, pant-less pictures and they end up getting published I found a way to get around it, though. I don't pose for pant-less pictures
__________________
kafrun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 04:35 PM   #174
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
LyricalDrug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Posts: 3,212
Local Time: 04:52 PM
Amazing how close Edwards came to being Vice President in '04, if you think about it. With all this latest stuff, he makes Bill Clinton look like a choir boy by comparison.
__________________
LyricalDrug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 04:37 PM   #175
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,664
Local Time: 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kafrun View Post
Gosh, yeah, I hate it when I pose for sexy, pant-less pictures and they end up getting published
I hate it when I pose pant-less and they DON'T get published...

Quote:
Originally Posted by kafrun View Post
I found a way to get around it, though. I don't pose for pant-less pictures
Well that's no fun.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 09:12 PM   #176
Blue Crack Addict
 
kafrun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Upside-down
Posts: 19,644
Local Time: 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I hate it when I pose pant-less and they DON'T get published...
When will we see your centerfold?


Quote:
Well that's no fun.
I'm not the "fun" type.
__________________
kafrun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 09:58 PM   #177
Blue Crack Addict
 
MissVelvetDress_75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: basking in my post-concert glow still mesmerized by the orbit of his hips..Also Holding Bono Close as he requested.
Posts: 25,776
Local Time: 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post
Translation: Her claims were met with a resounding cry of "bitch, please!"
__________________
MissVelvetDress_75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 10:50 PM   #178
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
she looks like a "nice girl".


here's another pic


I would
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 11:15 PM   #179
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 476
Local Time: 07:52 PM
Believe it or not, with the little I know about the situation, right now I suspect that she may have been set up by GQ. They want to sell magazines. They are experts at making women look good when they want to. Very good. I think they deliberately made her look bad. Very bad. They know people love to hate her, and I think they thought they could generate some really negative-hating buzz with these "outtake" photos.

I don't completely discount her version of the story as I understand it. I think she believes she was doing a legitimate story where she would come across very differently. It is not impossible that she really did think that the photos would be much more discreet. So why isn't she wearing pants? I don't know. But I do know that many people will do anything a photographer tells them to do. I can envision the photographer telling her that wearing pants won't let her sit the way she needs to, and will mess up the shirt, and that the photos won't depict that part of her body anyway. She may have trusted the professional photographer, but got ambushed later. If that is true, then the photos that she thought were being taken would have shown a rather conservative and matronly woman (wearing pearls, a conservative shirt, sitting among her child's toys).

Or, she might really be that crazy or calculating, and I might be very naiive. I'm going to regret sticking my neck out on this one.
__________________
Knuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2010, 11:22 PM   #180
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,236
Local Time: 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckle View Post
I don't completely discount her version of the story as I understand it. I think she believes she was doing a legitimate story where she would come across very differently. It is not impossible that she really did think that the photos would be much more discreet. So why isn't she wearing pants? I don't know. But I do know that many people will do anything a photographer tells them to do. I can envision the photographer telling her that wearing pants won't let her sit the way she needs to, and will mess up the shirt, and that the photos won't depict that part of her body anyway. She may have trusted the professional photographer, but got ambushed later. If that is true, then the photos that she thought were being taken would have shown a rather conservative and matronly woman (wearing pearls, a conservative shirt, sitting among her child's toys).
Wait, what? She thought she'd be taking chaste, matronly pictures and somehow got conned into taking her pants off?

You're envisioning an awfully gullible (and frankly, not very bright) person, apparently.
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com