Does she have a right to be angry?

Sara - posted on 03/16/2010 ( 27 moms have responded )

9,313

50

586

Rielle Hunter is said to be upset with several somewhat racy photographs of her that accompany the long interview in the new issue of GQ in which she details her affair with John Edwards, People.com reports.

Speaking on ABC's "The View," co-host Barbara Walters said she had talked to Hunter, 45, on Monday morning, and that Hunter had "cried for two hours" upon seeing the images and deemed them "repulsive."

Hunter trusted the photographer, Mark Seliger, to take classy photos, according to Walters. But several of them show Hunter lounging around in only a collared white dress shirt and no pants. "I went with the flow," Walters quoted Hunter as saying.

(Hmmmm, was she really expecting classy, pantless photos?)

There is one photo in which Hunter is wearing a shirt and sweatpants and holding her and Edwards' daughter, Frances Quinn, 2. Walters said she also asked Hunter about the current state of her relationship with Edwards. Hunter replied: "We are co-parents and have a very loving relationship."



You know, maybe it's just that I hate skanky women who sleep with men who they know are married (sorry all), but that aside, she posed for these pictures, so does she really have a right to be upset that they were published?

Here's a link to the GQ article that she pissed about:

http://www.gq.com/news-politics/politics...

This conversation has been closed to further comments

27 Comments

View replies by

Emma - posted on 05/01/2010

1,590

15

114

LOL
Is this woman serious, she posed for the pictures, would of been made to singe a release form.....
I think if when the photograph said hay why don't you take your pants off you did not have the common sense to say know as that's not something im happy with being shown to the world you may not be equipped to raise a kid as cause and effect is something mom's need to be good at.........

Tah - posted on 03/17/2010

7,412

22

400

ummm ok..well since she put it that way.....it's ok if he tells u he isn't happy...by all means then..spread ur legs to him...have a ball....

Charlene - posted on 03/16/2010

631

29

25

She's got to be a complete airhead if she thinks that people believe she was that upset over pictures that she CONSENTED to pose for. Give me a break.



Also, she puts blame on Mrs. Edwards for John cheating and the marriage ending. REALLY!?

She said that John wasn't happy and that if he hadn't of cheated with her, it would have been someone else and that his wife didn't try to fix the problems. She also said that you can't break up a happy marriage. UM hello!? The woman can't fix things all by herself, especially if her husband never brought up that he was 'unhappy'. She also had CANCER.. I think she has justifiable reasons for being a tad preoccupied.



This woman doesn't want to take any of the blame for being a homewrecker (which she is) and she is trying to shift it elsewhere. Nice try... NOT.

Dana - posted on 03/16/2010

11,264

35

495

Yeah, Boo-hoo. She needs to go away. I'm sick of the whole ordeal. I think they all suck, honestly. I didn't like the interviews I saw his wife do either or the book she put out. It should be kept privately and actually the only one doing it is John Edwards...and just giving him any kind of credit makes me sick. Move on people, we really don't give two shits.

Oh, and she looks like a real idiot in those pictures, who the hell poses half nude with Kermit the frog, Barney, and Dora. If that were a man everyone would be screaming pedophile. Freak.

Jess - posted on 03/16/2010

1,806

3

97

I would just like to take this moment to say how much of a rat bastard John Edwards is..... They are both homewreckers, it was his family and his responsibility to keep it in his pants and protect what he and his wife had built together..... Damm A***Hole !!!

Amie - posted on 03/16/2010

6,596

20

412

LOL! I bet the only ones who would feel sympathy for her are other home wrecking whores. /:) Gimme a break.

Tah - posted on 03/16/2010

7,412

22

400

i don't pity homewreckers and i think their should be a crew of wives that runs around and beats the brakes of these whores in the middle of the night...my neighbors 20 year old daughter only sleeps with married men, she gets a job as a babysitter and then screws the husband....firstly your 20yo big tit having self is not ever going be my babysitter...then she wanted sympathy because one wife chased her down.....reallyyyyy....i would still be running after her..i don't even listen to alicia keys anymore because she slept with her married producer, wife found out, divircem now he's married to her..special place for the riel hunters of the world....

Jess - posted on 03/16/2010

1,806

3

97

Sounds like just desserts to me. However, everyone should have the right to control where these kinds of photo's end up. While I don't agree with anyone making them public without her consent, I also don't have any sympothy for her. People who have affairs just make my blood boil !!! And lets face it, did she really think these photo's would shine her in a good light ??? Where the hell was their daughter as these two were running around like naughty teenagers ? I feel soo bad for his wife, what an awful way to end a marriage.

Sharon - posted on 03/16/2010

11,585

12

1315

skank ass whore is what she is, was and always will be and the pictures prove it.



No, she does not have the right to be angry. MRS. Edwards has the right to be angry.

~Jennifer - posted on 03/16/2010

4,164

61

369

lol - I live 6 miles from Chapel Hill - I'm always on the lookout for John Edwards running around with some skank. If I do see them, I'll take pictures for ya, Sara!.

Jenny - posted on 03/16/2010

4,426

16

129

No sympathy here either. That bimbo shaped her life with her own actions. She has NOONE to blame but herself.

She should be a "Really with Seth and Amy" topic on SNL. You posed for a photographer with no pants on and are complaining because he took pictures of it? I mean REALLY?

Sara - posted on 03/16/2010

9,313

50

586

I would say put your big girl pants on, but....

I would heckle this woman if I saw her in public, I think I really would.

Tah - posted on 03/16/2010

7,412

22

400

o..i feel so bad for her...i mean she slept with a sick womens husband, got pregnant and had that man's baby, helped to break up her home and now wants to be interviewed and photographed.....come here homewrecker..let me give you a hug.....

Krista - posted on 03/16/2010

12,562

16

847

I don't know about any of you, but when I meet someone for the first time, I tend to put some pants on.


Sure, Esther....sure. We believe you.

[deleted account]

Homewrecker skank! Boo-hoo-hoo, and she also claims she is not receiving a dime for her interviews and pictures! She posed, she signed release forms, she's a big girl-now grow a set and face the wrath.

Esther - posted on 03/16/2010

3,513

32

144

What a moron. Also, why would anyone pose in a shirt only when (according to the title of the article) you were introducing yourself to the American public? I don't know about any of you, but when I meet someone for the first time, I tend to put some pants on.

Carolee - posted on 03/16/2010

21,950

17

585

When posing for pictures, one is ALWAYS aware of what clothing one does or does not have on! She chose to not insist on wearing pants (on multiple occasions), so she has to pay the price.

Jocelyn - posted on 03/16/2010

5,165

42

275

Omfg, I have no sympathy for her either; she wasn't forced to take her pants off. She did it all willingly, what was she going to expect would happen with those pictures???

Lindsay - posted on 03/16/2010

3,532

26

267

cry me a river....I have no sympathy for her....she's a big girl and needs to take responsibility for her actions! =)

Krista - posted on 03/16/2010

12,562

16

847

She's a dumbass. She posed for those photos, and now she's wailing that they're being used? I somehow doubt that the GQ photographer pinned her down and forcibly removed her pants.

Isobel - posted on 03/16/2010

9,849

0

286

I'd like to know exactly what a classy picture of a woman with no pants in front of stuffed animals looks like.

Sara - posted on 03/16/2010

9,313

50

586

She took the photos to go along with an article, so I think she knew they'd be published. She's the mistress of an American politican, Suzanne. She had an affair with him while he was trying to run for President. She got pregnant by him and had his baby. It's probably also important to mention here that the politician's wife has terminal breast cancer, and this lady knew that they guy was married.

[deleted account]

Havent got a clue who she is but if she posed for photos serves her own right what is she brain dead? She must be if she thought they would never be published.

Amanda - posted on 03/16/2010

697

15

25

No, like you said she posed for the pictures, how can she be suprised and upset that the photos were used????. not only that, but she also agreed to the interview, i think she's an attention whore among other things, and by saying she is upset over the photos she is attempting to get even more attention.

Sara - posted on 03/16/2010

9,313

50

586

Sorry, but I have zero sympathy for someone who is a home-wrecking fame whore. Might be harsh, but she's the one putting herself out there to profit...that poor baby.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms