3 Key Questions

The story, or at least John Edwards' version of it, simply makes no sense.

His statement to the Press on Friday raises more questions than it answers. But he ended his remarks by saying that after giving the statement he would say nothing more about the matter.

How convenient.

Here are 3 key questions for Senator Edwards:

1. Now that we know Rielle Hunter, your supposed 'ex' mistress, will refuse to participate in a paternity test for her child, doesn't that make your offer of 'taking any test to prove you are not the father' just a tad disingenuous, particularly if you knew in advance she would refuse to participate, making your offer a moot point?

2. If Rielle is indeed your 'ex' mistress and the child is not yours, then what were you doing with them in her hotel room in Beverly Hills on the night of July 21, from roughly 10 PM until roughly 3 AM?

3. If you know beyond any shadow of a doubt that you are not the father of the child, then why didn't you go ahead and have the paternity test in advance, making the results known to reporters and the world when you made your 'confession' on Friday? If such a test would prove you are not the father, then having the results available as soon as you finally admitted to the sordid mess would certainly have put an immediate stop to the speculation.

Until John Edwards answers these 3 key questions, then we can only assume he has more to hide--much more to hide.

The National Enquirer insists that it has more information and more pictures, including video footage.

And contrary to the notion that such things are 'private' and have no business being reported in the news, such things are vital to the public interest. The voters have a right to know about the character of the person they are considering supporting, right?

After all, this is the common mantra of the media and liberals every time a conservative or Republican is caught in a sex scandal.

Edwards has always held out his family and marriage as stellar examples of his character. Now we know of the hypocrisy of that tactic. He has not been who he says he is, and THAT is news.

My hunch is that Edwards threw the Press a bone to chew on in order to try to squelch the story and move on without telling the whole story. In that sense he is still lying, and there is much more to this story than the small part Edwards made public.

If the National Enquirer is telling the truth, then what Edwards stated on Friday is only the tip of the iceberg.