I don't bloody want to hear about John Edwards.
John Edwards DID NOT VIOLATE MY TRUST!
John Edwards owes me no apologies.
I am becoming increasingly angry about the never-ending and repetitious media coverage about this tiresome bit of private business!
At this point I wish I had a cat-o-nines whip and the magic ability to whisk myself hundreds, if not thousands of miles through space to instantly appear in television or radio studios to apply the whip sans mercy to the blathering pundits who are having total hysterics over this most recent disclosure from John Edwards.
It is a private matter between John and Elizabeth Edwards, a matter which should be confined to the privacy of their family.
I am sick and tired of this meddling, old-bitch mentality of Americans.
Snoopy goddamned old bitches! That's the current state of American media.
And the public mind of America.
And, most ironically, the cover of the latest Vanity Fair features Carla Bruni (she is also compared to Jackie O, a wee bit of cattiness there?) who proudly proclaims herself a slut who has warmed the bed of Mick Jagger and Eric Clapton, among others, who is currently married to a slut named Nicholas Zarkozy -- and who cares?
Thank God! The French do not!
But, America, Americans, with their faux morality, can gush and twitter over John Edwards and overlook torture, the horrific tragedy of New Orleans as a result of Katrina, America's violation of the Geneva Conventions, America's unwillingness to subject itself to the rules of the International Criminal Court...
One need only refer to the hypocritical remarks of John R. Bolton to the Federalist Society on November 14, 2002:
I’ve been asked to open this 20th anniversary convention of the Federalist Society with some remarks about the pressures of national security on American government. With this in mind, I’d like to address the topic of the International Criminal Court and detail our reasons for opposing it. As I will explain, the problems inherent in the ICC are more than abstract legal issues -- they are matters that touch directly on our national security and our national interests.
For a number of reasons, the United States decided that the ICC had unacceptable consequences for our national sovereignty. Specifically, the ICC is an organization whose precepts go against fundamental American notions of sovereignty, checks and balances, and national independence. It is an agreement that is harmful to the national interests of the United States, and harmful to our presence abroad.
U.S. military forces and civilian personnel and private citizens are currently active in peacekeeping and humanitarian missions in almost 100 countries at any given time. It is essential that we remain steadfast in preserving the independence and flexibility that America needs to defend our national interests around the world. As President Bush said,
The United States cooperates with many other nations to keep the peace, but we will not submit American troops to prosecutors and judges whose jurisdiction we do not accept.... Every person who serves under the American flag will answer to his or her own superiors and to military law, not to the rulings of an unaccountable International Criminal Court.
So in order to protect our citizens, we are in the process of negotiating bilateral agreements with the largest possible number of states, including non-Parties. These Article 98 agreements, as they are called, provide American citizens with essential protection against the Court’s purported jurisdiction claims, and allow us to remain engaged internationally with our friends and allies. To date, 14 countries have signed Article 98 agreements with us. It is a misconception that the United States wants to use these Article 98 agreements to undermine the ICC. To the contrary, we are determined to work with States Parties, utilizing a mechanism prescribed within the Rome Statute itself, to find an acceptable solution to one of the main problems posed by the ICC.
http://www.state.gov/...
And, speaking of John Bolton, as I fondly stroke the cat-o-nines... and piss on John Bolton's, and George W. Bush's, and, damnation, Dick Cheney's faux sense of "national security."