Relevancy: John Edwards

I was going to write a post about why John Edwards' private life, like John McCain's or Bill Richardson's or Bill Clinton's, have nothing to do with our lives or whether they should be elected officials. Instead, I am going to resist the urge to pontificate and will link to this diary posted today by Elizabeth Edwards on Daily Kos.

Speaking for me only

< Death Penalty Proponent Avoids Death Penalty Trial | Timing: John Edwards Affair and His Candidacy >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I hurt for her. (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Teresa on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:00:40 PM EST
    I know she has a long-standing relationship with DKos, but I'm not sure I agree with her decision to post this there. She surely knows about some of the terrible things posted there during this primary. (and today)

    I love it - she just undermined the (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:04:46 PM EST
    hand-wringers who claim to be condemning her husband on her behalf.

    I am sorry that anyone ever has to talk about their private lives publicly - but I will say that if anyone can draw the line in the sand - she can - and she just did - and rightfully so - she has every right to be the sole judge of his actions on this front and she is correct when she says that this was a private affair that should have remained private.


    Yeah, I read it again and it kind of puts some (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Teresa on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:13:13 PM EST
    of the crowd condemning both of them to shame. She is loyal to the core to do that publicly.

    It sort of reminds me when my parents (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:30:09 PM EST
    were in a conflict and I would inject myself into the argument and they both would tell me that it was none of my business especially when I took a side.  I learned from them as well as from others and my own personal relationships that the only people who are really qualified to judge a situation between two people are the people who were in the situation themselves.  The rest of us are working on incomplete information because nobody but the people involved really know all of the details of what has gone on.

    Too bad she decided to post on dkos ... again (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by bridget on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:30:39 PM EST
    Of course, she and her husband know what appalling stuff has been posted there in the last three years  about Hillary Clinton. And how the folks there fawned over both of them they knew, too. So They took advantage of it Big Time. They directed their nasty campaign effort - which incl. plenty negative character attacks - only against Hillary Clinton. Obama, Edward's tag team partner ./. Hillary, was ignored by him.

    I read her statement only to find out WHY John Edwards and Elisabeth, who was a huge part of his campaign, decided to run for the Dem 2008 nomination after all  ... Why? It's unbelievable really the more one thinks of it.

    WHY? She didn't address it. Naturally.

    btw First time I read anything on dkos for months and months. Ah well!


    Why? I believe they both wanted to keep Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by BronxFem on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 12:02:30 PM EST
    from winning the primaries, in my opinion.  Just sayin'.

    she said (none / 0) (#18)
    by Little Fish on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:39:29 PM EST
    in an interview once that she posts under a pseudonym on some blogs and I really hope she goes in and just messes with all the #*$!?heads around the blog. That's what I would do.

    Wonderful--what a wonderful and (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by MKS on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:02:46 PM EST
    strong woman....

    Well (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by rilkefan on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:05:09 PM EST
    "Admitting one's mistakes is a hard thing for anyone to do, and I am proud of the courage John showed by his honesty in the face of shame."

    He might have gotten out in front of this by being honest earlier.  And did they consider the risk when deciding he should run for president?

    "I ask that the public, who expressed concern about the harm John's conduct has done to us"

    What about the harm to the party and the cause?

    "think also about the real harm that the present voyeurism"

    Begs the question.

    "does and give me and my family the privacy we need at this time"

    Ok, no one should knock on their door or otherwise harass them.  But I still get to note that Edwards blasted WJC's behavior in the public sphere and that the decision to run this year while this bomb ticked away was a continuation of the selfish behavior.

    Perhaps he will include (5.00 / 6) (#8)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:12:56 PM EST
    a statement of apology to WJC for passing judgment on his infidelity when he should have done what they now ask - allowed the family the privacy and time to heal.

    John Edwards should have (none / 0) (#28)
    by RalphB on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:50:43 PM EST
    just kept his big mouth shut about it.  No comment would have been a good answer.

    I hurt for her (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by americanincanada on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:05:11 PM EST
    but I am angry that they both decided to enter the race for president anyway, knowing this was there and what it would cause.

    Our nominee might be different right now. I also shudder to think what would have happened had John won the nom.

    After all that we went (1.00 / 0) (#15)
    by MKS on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:37:17 PM EST
    through in the 90s, it really does not seem appropriate to blame the spouse...that's what the Republicans did...

    That's not fair. She did share (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:01:34 PM EST
    in the decision for him to run.

    And it was a bad decision.  Not only politically but also personally, for her and her children.  Without the political decision, of which she was part, this wouldn't be such news now.


    Couldn't the same be said of others (1.00 / 0) (#22)
    by MKS on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:08:19 PM EST
    and in fact, wasn't it said of others....

    It is not fair....From Elizabeth's standpoint, the affair was over.....


    I will refrain (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:11:18 PM EST
    from reading the comments there and commenting on them.

    comments seem ok (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by rilkefan on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:18:03 PM EST
    mostly just pro-EE, some respectfully pointing out that running was a bad idea.

    Political wives are tough cookies. (5.00 / 7) (#10)
    by oldpro on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:13:48 PM EST
    Let's elect the wives.

    All the same, it's nobody's damn business but theirs.

    Elizabeth is a good politician (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by catfish on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:27:53 PM EST
    Even my die-hard Repub uncle likes her. She is a leader, speaks with conviction, and is in league with the Clintons when it comes to off-the-cuff speaking.

    Always thought she was a little more sharp than her husband.

    Wow - just read the diary, what a courageous, direct and powerful diary. She is a leader.

    Elizabeth's husband (5.00 / 4) (#34)
    by sancho on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 09:59:23 PM EST
    likely collaborated with (Harry and Louise) Obama to make sure that the Dem candidate with the weakest health care proposal got nominated. Without Edwards, Obama cannot withdraw from Michigan so successfully. Edwards endorsement certainly helped Obama at a moment he needed it. Indeed, it may be that Edwards' only role in the primary was to make it harder for Hillary to win--since he obviously was unelectable.(What's Iowa look like without honest Edwards running?) Yet, he ran. And she supported him. So she helped make it possible for her so-called key issue to have less chance of being enacted. She may be a good politician but not, I fear, in the sense you mean. She helped unelect Hillary.

    I dont give a damn who her husband sleeps with or how she says she feels about it.

    But I do give a damn about healthcare for the uninsured.

    I wish Obama, Michelle, John, Elizabeth, Nancy, Howard, and Donna did too.


    I am mad at her (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:11:27 PM EST
    and at him.

    They did not think it through.

    What if he was our nominee today and this story broke.

    I could care less about the affair, that is their business.

    I don't want to lose the election.


    my thoughts and prayers (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Little Fish on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:37:18 PM EST
    are with her. It was a wound that didn't need to be re-opened and not in this very public manner. This is a private matter and hopefully people can respect that. (Lol @ myself there its going to be a mediapalooza, but I can hope)

    Over on the "other" site (5.00 / 8) (#17)
    by Jake Left on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:37:35 PM EST
    the threads are full of how brave and good she is. I agree. But the site is also full of threads lambasting Hillary because she didn't leave Bill. Irony is a lost art.

    Having lived in this world 59 years (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by denise on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:57:11 PM EST
    I never assume that ANYONE is faithful to his or her spouse: not my parents, other relatives, closest friends, co-workers and certainly not public figures.

    No matter how people appear on the outside, what goes on between them when they're alone is their secret. And when I do find out about someone's infidelity, I don't pass judgment, because some of the best people I've known in my life have had affairs. We're talking about the deepest of human needs and some of the most powerful emotions people ever feel.

    How I wish we could go back to the days when there was a gentleman's agreement among reporters not to write about these things. For all I know every single president might have had affairs. It's not relevant. I don't want to see us waste our time and energy on it.

    Political Relevance (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Roz on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:16:50 PM EST
    I agree with Jeralyn here. It seems obvious to me.

    I personally believe that his private life is none of my concern or anyone else. However, if I am invested in seeing a Democrat elected to the presidency of the U.S., the whole episode becomes a political concern to me.

    It is indisputable that this disclosure would have had a negative impact on his candidacy, whether for President or Vice President. You can argue it shouldn't, but you can't honestly argue it wouldn't.

    That makes him irresponsible for risking the election, knowing this was out there. It also calls his judgment into question.

    He wasn't running for President of France, after all.

    all true and my guess (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by sancho on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:05:07 PM EST
    is that both Obama and Hillary knew about it long ago--it has been rumored for some time. I'd say Obama likely used this knowledge to his political advantage (if he knew about it, why wouldnt he?) and Hillary made what some would call the more humane decision but missed a political opportunity.  

    And Edwards probably really thought Obama meant whatever offer he made for his endorsement when, likely, Obama knew any promise he made John himself would have to break.


    Thanks, BTD. (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Iphie on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:23:05 PM EST
    There's enough truly scandalous behavior on the part of politicians that actually impacts our lives that we could be focusing our shock and outrage on, let's save our energy for that.

    And as for reasons why John Edwards might decide to run even when he knew that this might come out? How about because he was the only one talking about the problems of poverty and the growing disparities between the poor and the wealthy in this country -- or the need for true universal health care? Who else was talking about the need to curb the overgrown power and influence of the corporate world in our lives and in our government?

    Have we had more diaries (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:34:57 PM EST
    in a day about this than about the FISA vote?

    We'll never know for sure about the coulda, woulda, shoulda.  The dynamics of the race would have been different without Edwards, but it's unknown if it would have changed the outcome of the primary.  Maybe Hillary would have been ahead in Iowa, or maybe Edwards' voters would have been with Obama.

    I was a Hillary supporter, and am NOT an Obama supporter, but politicians are politicians.  Many of them are promiscuous.  Is it the power, the narcissim?

    Time to start thinking forward.  We can't change the past.

    Private lives should be just that, private.

    Can we talk about something else?

    If this was such an ordeal for her (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Jim J on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 09:07:03 PM EST
    then how did she find time and energy to post a diary on a freaking blog?

    Oh, that's right -- because like her husband, she knows a sucker when she sees one.

    I didn't read Elizabeth's note. Their personal (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by WillBFair on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 09:17:02 PM EST
    life is none of my bees wax. And Kos is not educated enough to be worth my attention.
    I'm mostly interested in public policy, although John's boyish good looks are totally kickin'.

    The Arrogance of Power . . . (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by Doc Rock on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:50:18 PM EST
    . . .  seems to deflect the moral compass.

    it will be 24/7 until vacation is over. (none / 0) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:40:52 PM EST
    it makes me want to blow chunks.  I dont think he did a great thing but the media wallowing is really worse.  afaiac.
    odd how people attracted to power seem to sometimes be attracted to living on the edge in ways that put their grip on power in peril.
    what stupid thing to do.
    but really, who cares.

    Not me, that's for sure. (none / 0) (#29)
    by RalphB on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 08:54:18 PM EST
    party (none / 0) (#32)
    by jedimom on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 09:37:58 PM EST
    it seems to be the party who made it relevant saying this to the press yesterday:

    "If there is not an explanation that's satisfactory, acceptable and meets high moral standards, the answer is 'no,' he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address to the convention," said Don Fowler, a former Democratic National Committee chair.."He absolutely does have to (resolve it). If it's not true, he has to issue a stronger denial," said Gary Pearce, the Democratic strategist who ran Edwards' 1998 Senate race. "It's a very damaging thing.


    Elizabeth is speaking to the convention isn't she?

    The media (none / 0) (#33)
    by cawaltz on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 09:45:34 PM EST
    is beyond disgusting. It's bad enough that they are airing the dirty laundry but they continue to add their apologies about it to Elizabeth rather than allowing this family some time to attempt to heal. It's appalling. I had to turn it off. It reminds me of how they did bedside vigil on Terri Schiavo. It's beyond morbid. If they really respected Elizabeth at all they'd have left this a private matter rather than made it into a public spectacle simply because they could.