Apparently, Elizabeth Edwards: less a fan of Rielle Hunter's than we thought. She's

• Talking to a divorce lawyer,
  
  
• Refuses to sign off on any confessions that her husband fathered Hunter's kid,
  
  
• "Vehemently opposes" a plan to have Hunter move near their family's Wilmington beach house, and
  
  
• Has been commenting on the internet under the commenter name "Cherubim." Maybe she was on here? Who knows?!

One blogger seems to have the goods on this Cerubim business, naturally. Via Daily Intel, look see some comments:

As you all continue to discuss Lisa Druke's lastest pay day story from the National Enquirer. I think you all should remember these important facts: John and Elizabeth Edwards have been married for 31 years. They had four children together, three are living, and one, recently, died. Elizabeth Edwards has stage 4 cancer. Any decent human being would not have inserted herself into their lives, and then sold stories about them to the National Enquirer for monetary gain. Lisa Druke, a.k.a. the Rielle (Real) Hunter fills me with disgust. I hope someday to never hear anything about her again.

More somewhat substantial conspiratorial insanity here. Also, commenteratti: at least you can say there's some royalty amongst you, now.

Oh. And then there's this. Remember former Edwards aide Andrew Young's book proposal we looked at last weekend? There's more.

• Edwards supposedly slept with other women besides Hunter. Obv.
  
  
• Elizabeth made John sleep in the barn after she found out about Hunter. She'd come in the middle of the night and start screaming "accusatory rants" at him.
  
  
• Hunter has a psychic. This psychic's name is Bob. Bob told Hunter how she should handle this thing and, presumably, to move to California.
  
  
• Edwards used to talk a bunch of shit on John Kerry until Kerry brought him on as his running mate. He called Kerry "Richie Rich."
  
  
• And the "best" one: Edwards had to call off a birthday date with Hunter. Now, you don't cancel on someone's birthday, because that's mean. But if you found out that day that your wife's cancer returned, you might tell your mistress to hold off no matter what day it is, because, you know, you need to handle this one. So he did. And "an unsympathetic Hunter screamed at him."

And honestly, I don't even know what to do with this:

Ted Kennedy once told Young about a would-be assassin who managed to get into his Senate office because one of his bodyguards was having a gay liaison with one of his top aides.

So, in conclusion, if this is true: John Edwards is a cooze, hell still definitely hath no fury like a woman scorned by a cooze, Ted Kennedy was almost killed because of a Gay bodyguard doing it on the job, and twenty years down the line, these are going to be the worst family reunions in the history of family reunions.

But really, John Edwards is definitely a cooze, regardless of this one. Reille Hunter's insane and meanspirited. Elizabeth Edwards is upset that the guy she loved and had a family with turned out to be one of the slimiest dirtballs in the history of slime, so she can't really be blamed for anything but being in pain. And Andrew Young's book is going to sell many, many, many copies.

According to O'Reilly, chief executive of Independent News & Media, his company's namesake newspapers, The Independent and Independent on Sunday, are on track to "break even" come 2010.

Despite losing nearly 34% of their advertising revenue in the past year and seeing a revenue decline of about 608 million euros, the company's still doing better than it was last year, when it lost 780.4 million euros in revenue. This, of course, gives O'Reilly a little wiggle room to wag a victorious finger at one of his rivals, The Guardian.

I'd say, and I am going to be really bitchy here, [our losses] could be about one 10th your (The Guardian's) loss this year and, as for getting to break-even, our projection is based on no advertising recovery through 2009 and into 2010.

Now, before you start calling O'Reilly any unnecessary names — or any names that he wouldn't call himself — be aware that he does disavow the "bitchy" description when dismissing rumors that he and his cohorts are looking to sell some of their holdings. The company is, quite simply, better than The Guardian.

The Independent remains an important part of the group and is certainly proving more resilient than most of its competitors – I am not saying it in a bitchy way, but even more so than Guardian Media.

That doesn't mean the Independent crew aren't above selling out: they announced the sale of their interests in South African advertising agency, INM Outdoor. But, you know, that's in South Africa, which is part of Africa. So its negligible: 98 million euros. Sadly, that number means very, very little in the pock-scarred newspaper world.

Did you know that women are less happy these days? And that research didn't even include the fallout from finger-wagging Slate-offshoot Double X. ME-OW!

One of the more salient criticisms to come out of the cat-fighting over who/how/what a feminist is these days came from Jez editrix Anna Holmes f-word laden diatribe: Basically many mainstream media type outlets take higher profile sites like Jezebel and use them as avatars for smaller-niche issues. Say, feminism. This despite those sites having an ostensibly broader agenda. This allows them to make arguments about, say, "the state of feminism", without needing to integrate the likely-overwhelming and argument-splintering fodder the best feminist-focused sites provide.

But, we have the power now! And I rounded up some feminist media peeps peepettes and asked them to weigh in on the new Lady-blog in town:

First up: Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon. She herself has been roasted over the feminist-media fire a few times, does that mean she's sympathetic?

I can understand why the new online magazine Double X wants to distinguish itself from other women's sites like Salon's Broadsheet and Jezebel, but I'm unsure that the way to do it is by publishing a bunch of "contrarian" articles that blame victims instead of rapists for rape and argue that now that women make ¾ of what men do, we're living in a dystopian, man-hating matriarchy. Poor Christina Hoff Summers! If women even got up to 1/3 of seats of federal power, she'd have to steal her male family members away to live in one of the few places on earth where a man can get justice. Perhaps Saudi Arabia?

The problem with the Slate brand is that they're all about trying to push the envelope and shock, but they seem to think the way to do this is by plugging into narratives that are, by any reasonable measure, still the staid conservative beliefs that actual rebels are trying to overturn. Victims of gendered violence have only themselves to blame? That's not a brave thing to say—-that was the internet's consensus on the Chris Brown/Rihanna situation, and sadly, that's what many rape victims face when they enter the justice system. Men need twice as many rights and privileges to feel equal? That's the argument of 95% of popular comedies now, and the prevailing notion in most American households where women still do most of the housework, even if they have full-time jobs.

Double X has a lot of fine writers that don't write this reactionary nonsense, but right now you have to comb through a lot of sexist crap to get the gems. But I can't say that it won't draw the readers—-the only thing conservatives like more than hearing their own baseless beliefs echoed back at them is to pretend that pushing the status quo is rebellious.

Got that, Slate? You are white, male, and boring. (Slate Rebuttal?: "Why white, male, and boring is no longer white, male, or boring!") Next up is Jill Filipovic of Feministe:

DoubleX premiered by attacking women who don't report being raped, urging Michelle Obama to wear pantyhose, and sounding the death knell of feminism — impressive, even for an offshoot of a website that thrives in large part by passing off half-baked traditionalism as intellectual contrarianism. To DoubleX's credit, it has a great editorial staff and some amazing writers to balance out the purely inflammatory ones; less appealing is Slate's arguable ghettoization of women's voices, it's ongoing offensives on women's rights, and the differences in how the two sites cover and categorize stories (both have News & Politics, Arts and Life, but Slate offers Business & Tech while DoubleX lists Kids & Parenting).

No one expected DoubleX to be an exclusively feminist blog and its editors are quick to assert that they're about more than just feminism, but the magazine does seem to be suffering from a crisis of consciousness. If feminism is dead, why the obsession with feminism? If women's lives are so fantastic that men are now the "second sex," why do we need a lady-mag offshoot of a more successful boys site?

Of course, DoubleX exists in part because of the feminist writers who cultivated strong and engaged online communities, and who worked to mainstream feminist thought into online political discourse. The ongoing DoubleX-related conflicts have only gained traction because feminist readers and writers have voiced their discontent, and larger media souces have (wrongly) picked up the story as a cat-fight or an intergenerational battle. The cynical part of me suspects that the inaugural flamethrowing was a ploy for traffic; I can't imagine why else anyone would publish a noted conservative hack like Christina Hoff Summers or recycle a 1998 Time magazine cover. But I'm holding out hope that DoubleX turns out to be a pleasant surprise, and that instead of continuing its embrace of anti-feminism and its finger-wagging at women who drink or forgo nylons, it'll address the seldom-covered issues that actually impact women's lives — even if that makes it one of those "feminist" blogs.

image: via

Aiken, America's favorite gay father who was also the runner-up to Ruben Studdard in Idol's second season, charges his fans $29.95 annually for the "Ultimate Membership" at ClayOnline.com, which is the only way to view his blog posts and cruise around in his chat room or on his message board, but a tipster with access to the site passed this along. Here's how Aiken responded today to a generic "what did you think about the show?" question posed by a fan on the site:

Now that it's all over, and for the record.... I couldn't be happier about the way AI ended this year. I only turn the show on once a season, and only to see what the set looks like each year. This year, I happened to turn it during the minute that Adam Lambert was singing "Ring of Fire" and, at that moment, thought my ears would bleed. Contrived, awful, and slightly frightening! I wasn't really a fan and found myself surprised whenever folks told me that they liked him. Granted, I never saw another performance (and many folks who I trust said that he was great) but I can't imagine I would have enjoyed it. Just not my cup of tea at all. To each his own. I never saw Kris sing on the show, but whether he was good or not is really relative. It's usually a matter of taste, right? But Idol is not always a matter of musical taste only. It's about the person you like. From what little I saw, Kris seemed likable. (That's not to say that Adam isn't just as likable as anyone.. maybe more so... I don't know) When Ruben and I were standing next to each other every night (many years ago) you had two equally talented, equally unlikely, equally unpolished contestants.... so it really was a matter of taste as to who was voted for. While some may argue that one of us was hyped more than the other, I don't feel that was the case. However, this year, there was an obvious bias. Not even having watched the show, I can tell you that I was WELL aware of the bias from the judges as to who should win. In my opinion, that is awfully unattractive. I don't think I am alone

In my opinion, it all often comes down to that last night of voting. Until the finale, folks are voting for the contestant that they want to see continue. But, I believe that on that last night, the dynamic changes. No longer forced to choose one person that they want to see win, the audience can effectively vote AGAINST the person that they don't want to see win. In the case of season two this might have happened. There may have been some folks who voted for myself or Ruben because they didn't like the other of us. I was the nerdy little girly boy who some didn't want to see win, so they may have voted for Ruben. I don't know. .. But again, I feel that Ruben and I were fairly matched. We both had our detractors and negatives, but I feel we were both very worthy of being on that stage in that moment, and either of us would have been worthy of winning. The show was different then, and folks made it in seasons 1-3 because they were "real" people who happened to sing/entertain well. But, somewhere along the way, AI stopped being about real people.

Aiken also elaborated on why he thought Kris Allen won this year's competition:

In a battle between David and Goliath, my money is on David!

I think many voters got sick of being "told who to vote for". I think many were turned off by the blatant favoritism shown towards one contestant. Therefore, on that last night, they used their votes against a contestant that they were tired of hearing about and for the contestant who had been written off. And, at the same time, I think they voted AGAINST an American Idol that has, for four years now, been more about the slick productions and polished contestants than it has been about finding the raw talent that it did in its first three seasons.

Those votes for Kris were also votes to return the show to its roots of finding "real" contestants with undiscovered talent and giving them the chance to grow and shine. They were votes that said "we're tired of seeing contestants who already seem to know it all".

Will American Idol choose to listen to the resounding and clarion call that those voters gave them?.... "Enough with the pretention. More Rubens, more Clays, more Fantasias and Tamyras and Kellys please." My faith has always been in the voters. I think they have gotten it right every year (mine included). It's now up to American Idol to decide if it will finally REALLY listen to the folks that keep it on the air.

Wow. That's some hardcore bitchiness right there! However, we can't help but wonder if it's derived from the fact that Idol producers recently did everything they could to crush Aiken's dream of doing a duet with Lambert. Hmmm, you think?

Instead, look to E!'s Daily 10, which sought the starlet's reaction to mildly critical comments — "Couldn't they at least cast a real actress?'' — attributed last week to original Bonnie Faye Dunaway. Clearly the Oscar-winner has some catching up to do with the glimmering Duff canon, but it's now evident that the young performer doesn't plan to wait around for that enlightenment:

Regarding comments Dunaway made about Duff not being a “real actress” in the new The Story of Bonnie and Clyde, Duff says: “I think that my fans that are going to go see the movie don't even know who she is, so you know…. I think it was a little unnecessary but I might be mad if I looked like that now too."

Whoa, Hilary. The plastic surgery card? Not nice — and quite possibly a self-destructive tactical error for a young lady who has the dirty bomb that is Agent Cody Banks sitting out unprotected for anyone who wants to detonate it. Not that Dunaway will stop there; expect her also to retroactively invoke a use for wire hangers if and/or when she gets the chance. This is war.

• 'Daily 10' [E!]

"There was stuff printed there that was definitely from a time when I was unaware that it was happening," Aniston said. "I felt those details were a little inappropriate to discuss."

Aniston then shook her head in disbelief.

"That stuff about how she couldn’t wait to get to work every day? That was really uncool," Aniston said.

US Weekly also points to a critical juncture in Vogue's interview with Aniston, during which she asked her interviewer to turn off his tape recorder while priming him for their Jolie discussion. Or something: The exchange is lost to history now, a Nixonesque lapse we can only imagine involved an off-the-record call to her publicist to see if "uncool" sounded any more diplomatic than "utterly beneath contempt, Christ I hate her" or perhaps a brief break to extract the "Bust-Up Clippings, Vol. 4" scrapbook for the type of pinpoint accuracy Vogue's factcheckers demand.

• BREAKING NEWS: Jennifer Aniston: What Angelina Jolie Did Was 'Really Uncool' [US Weekly]

The Daily Mail reports that Vogue's December issue features cover girl Aniston posing along with the quote, "What Angelina did was very uncool" — one of the decade's more reserved understatements, no doubt, coming almost four years after Jolie's trysts with her Mr. and Mrs. Smith co-star Brad Pitt led to his and Aniston's divorce. The rest is clan-breeding, burger-photographing history, but an insider says Vogue will do what it can next month to restore Aniston's pride:

The source added: "This certainly raises the bar on celebrity profiles. Jennifer opens up about her sex life, her career, and her feelings about life after her divorce. She must have had a lot on her mind, because she lets go on everything."

MailOnline has learned that Miss Aniston's new Vogue appearance features the actress posing in erotic designer swimsuits and bearing her toned body on the sun-kissed beaches of Malibu.

"This thoroughly re-establishes her credibility as a sex symbol," the source went on, adding: "Her body has never looked tighter or more fit."

Good for her! The issue should spark a run on newsstands when it arrives on shelves this week, but that will be nothing compared to the clever Marley & Me "Pretty Fucking Unhappy Meal" tie-in at McDonald's, which Fox expects to court the key jilted-ex demo that can give this holiday classic —and its heroic star — the legs its deserves.

• 'What Angelina did Was Very Uncool'... [Daily Mail via Cover Awards]

Well ... just look at them! They old!

. . .

Photos via AP/INFGoff

[via Blackbook]

Rambin, post 1:

Frangy, post 2:

Rambin:

Frangy:

Rambin:

Well, at least Rambin is learning to stand up for herself, I guess. Though the whole fight leaves me feeling like the third cat (off to the side) in this video from our tipster, Cajun.

As none other than Defamer first reported back in April of 2006, the newly single Simpson handled her pouty grief by shoving her cleavage in scented cinema revolutionary Brett Ratner's smelly face, to the dismay of rumored Ratner tossaway Lindsay Lohan. After a Simpson hanger-on called Lohan a "bitch," the then-closeted lesbian allegedly lunged towards their table, held back by the heroic hack himself. A year later, entrenched in John Mayer's predatory grip, Jessica was said to have declared war against her own sister Ashlee after Mayer got the two mixed up in old photos. The rivalry ended with Jessica stating to the press that she was "no longer the girl with potential," but a "blessed butterfly" instead. Triumph! And later that year, the NY Post claimed the amnesia-ridden Jessica became furious after hearing engaged Eva Longoria had dared to be "friendly and polite" to then-ex Mayer, and went on a name-calling rant through New York.

Our favorite tale, however, occurred right on the heels of her anti-PETA message tee bomb drop. Some gossips say the shirt had nothing to do with fuzzy wuzzies or pro-fur campaigns, but was meant as a message to Jesus fan and Tony Romo ex, Carrie Underwood. Underwood won the group's infamous Leno-monologue-staple Sexiest Vegetarian title back in 2005, and Simpson has supposedly been jealous of her whipped boyfriend's ex since day one of their ridiculous union. So in the end, Anderson should probably put the venom away and align with Simpson — they're both failed actresses whose only chance of maintaining "celebrity" is shoving their ample cleavage in the faces of hacks who'll give them their precious screen time.

[Photo credits: Getty]

• PAMELA ANDERSON CALLS JESSICA SIMPSON A BITCH AND A WHORE [The Sun]

1. College:
Hearst: attended Sacred Heart University. But did she graduate?
Hilton: did not go to college

2. Television:
Hearst: small role on Gossip Girl.
Hilton: Five seasons of The Simple Life, guest-starred on The O.C..

3. Journalism:
Hearst: monthly Page Six mag column.
Hilton: a 2004 autobiography, Confessions of an Heiress: A Tongue-in-Chic Peek Behind the Pose. (An awesome work of literature—in its own, ghostwritten way.)

4 Fashion/Modeling:
Hearst: ad campaigns for Sephora, Italian Vogue.
Hilton: has appeared in major ad campaigns, including those for her own perfume, as well as countless magazines.

5. "Designing":
Hearst: designed some purses and athletic wear for Puma/Heatherette.
Hilton: designed some purses for Samantha Thavasa, and some jewelry for Amazon.com

Sorry, Lydia, but Paris wins! Paris wins!

After Denise sternly yet comically puts all those husband-stealing rumors to bed, Whoopi Goldberg opens up her patented can of Whoop Ass and grills the Jessica Rabbit understudy on why she would consider dragging her two young daughters through reality trainwreck hell. But Denise is no sissy, and asks her (twice!) if she'd even seen the show. Whoopi assures her she has with a nervous nod and a "Yes, ma'am," but we're not true believers. If she had, wouldn't she have learned by now that Richards is not the kind of guest you actually throw thinking cap type questions at?

• THE VIEW [ABC]

"Next, she said [Kevin] Federline 'makes me sick. His earlobes are stretched out from all the diamonds he stole from Britney Spears. He's a pig and a loser and I want to take him down [...] Dickinson, 53, also dished to us about her menopause. 'I'm taking hormone pills and I mix them up, I'm like falling asleep standing up,' she laughed. 'I'm having night flashes and heat strokes.'" [P6]

"Davis, the attacker in the movie, was supposed only to simulate violence.But as she raised and swung her right foot, encased in a black anklestrapped shoe, she made contact with Crawford's head, gashing her scalp, which needed three stitches, and causing a lump the size of an egg."

Both women survived the shoot, and Davis would even earn an Oscar nomination—which she'd lose to Anne Bancroft. Crawford would of course go on to live in infamy as the subject of Faye Dunaway's kabuki-inspired turn as the dry-cleaning-averse actress in Mommie Dearest. Davis, meanwhile, would too wind up the subject of an unflattering memoir by one of her children, but eventually be better remembered for her timeless advice on the best way an aspiring starlet could get into Hollywood.

• The bitter sexual jealousy that made Bette Davis wage war on Joan Crawford [Daily Mail]

She was crying her eyes out the other night, upset over a fight she had with her girlfriend Sam Ronson, who was deejaying. "They had a full-blown fight”...Lindsay kept wiping her tears.

And who of all people was there to comfort the mink-stealing minx? The very same Hills star seen downing shots of tequila with Lohan just last week...

According to the NY Post, Lindsay was playing the role of groupie to her domestic partner Samantha Ronson during a gig at Crown Bar, but for unknown reasons, things went south and Lindsay left the bar in tears. Misty whiskey-colored memories of the days before rehab, indeed. But in a strange twist, The Hills very wise queen bee Lauren Conrad was there to soothe the sobs. One can only hope that MTV's camera crews were following LC around that night and captured the action. And, after some of her recent issues, Lindsay sure could use the paycheck.

• FEELING LO [NY Post]
• SURVEILLANCE [NYDN]

I think it was the fairly harmless post I wrote on Manolo Blahnik joining the internet revolution that first drew my attention to the posts that were being written about me on Jezebel, part of the Gawker Media empire. (They'd been calling me Laurie Goldstein Crowe for a while...) I hadn't been bullied that badly since Vicki Dembo put my red patent-leather boots with the white platform heels into the trash can in 6th grade.

It kind of stung but the absurd number of mistakes they made — calling me Laurie, saying that I hated the Tom Ford store when in fact I loved it (note to Moe: time to cut back on those uppers!) — lessened the bite. I was advised by my fairy blogfather Felix Salmon not to respond unless I could be funny enough — and I couldn't, so I didn't. Good advice!

...I took solace in the fact that the hated-by-Gawker club included many people I have worked with and consider friends, including "3-olives-a-day" Anne Slowey and Joel Stein, and that the items on me generated very few hits, so the people writing them weren't earning much money off my back.

Apparently, two weren't speaking to the third until literally seconds before they took the stage. Conan didn't name names, and Leno, failing to realize that identifying the Angel serving diva bitchitude would ingratiate him with angry Gays, didn't press him on the matter. After taking in Conan's story, we invite you to revisit the reunion, and decide for yourselves which was the odd-Angel-out. Our bet's on brunettes vs. blonde.

• The Tonight Show