Tart Juice pretty much captures my feelings on Edwards’ affair.
My first thought when seeing this on the news this morning was I’m so glad he didn’t get the nomination. He could have seriously, unintentionally, screwed things up for the country. I also feel bad for his kids, two of whom are under 10 years old, and for his wife, who now has a deceased child, breast cancer, and a cheating husband under her belt.
A little more disturbing, however, is that this story pushed the apparent Russian invasion of Georgia to the back burner of cable news.
Update Scott Lemieux has a good take on this as well.
But, of course, I’m forgetting the rules: Edwards’s adultery is bad news for Barack Obama, Bill Clinton’s adultery is bad news for Hillary Clinton, but John McCain’s adultery isn’t an issue for John McCain.
I dunno: Is the problem how fresh the story is, or which party they belong to? McCain cheated on his first wife when she was paralyzed and learning to walk again – he’s still a presidential candidate. Gingrich cheated on his wife while she was dying of cancer. It seems to be a weird double standard that Republicans get to be the “morality and family values” candidates yet they’re immune from scandal when they’re immoral.
At this point, they’d kill for a heterosexual scandal.
Depends on when a politician owned up to his behavior, I would think. Standing there and calling the charges something like trailer trash reporting for months with a straight face, isn’t what most voters are looking for in a candidate for much of anything.
Why that is, I don’t know, as I would think we would want an accomplished liar as President in troubled times.
Personally, I have always thought John Edwards was a smarmy, money grubbing, ambulance chaser. So, it’s not surprising that I found this story easy enough to believe all along.
And, while we might like a bald-faced liar as President, we wouldn’t like one as Attorney General, now would we?
Yeah, probably kills his chances at AG. But it is an interesting question — which is better, liar or amnesiac?
When he said he was being “99% truthful, but not good enough”, or however he phrased it, I think he was being generous.
What’s the over/under on the kid being his?
Granted, it shouldn’t impact his ability to lead, etc. If fidelity is a requirement then there would be only one candidate left, etc. But his “confession” is just too pathetic to not comment on.
For future reference, if you’re prominent and get busted, keep the touchy-feely self analysis out of it. Think you’re too narcissistic? Keep it to yourself. Giving the nation commentary about your narcissism is just too, um, narcissistic. Just say it became evident that a liason was possible, you should have said no for a variety or reasons including family, career, etc., and yet you didn’t. And thanks for listening and good day.
Everyone knows the decision tree people go through before they either choose right or wrong in their personal lives. Why bore us with it?
the kid is not his. why would he come out and confess to the affair, but deny being the father and offer to take a paternity test, if he thought the kid was his? that makes no sense.
Certainly it wouldn’t be a rational decision given the situation, but there could be some cognitive dissonance going on with respect to whatever narrative is going on in his own head.
Just to point out the correct order of it – according to his wife, he had the affair and confessed it to her in 2006. She found out about the cancer in March 2007. She’s emphasizing the timeline to make the point that he didn’t “cheat on his wife who was sick from cancer.” He didn’t know about the illness at the time, unlike McCain or Gingrich. Not that it’s any excuse, but people seem to be citing the illness as an aggravating circumstance.
So, in protesting that the kid isn’t his, but that he did have an affair with her, he has now insinuated that Ms. Hunter is both a tramp and a slut (considering the timeline). If that is his belief, then what the f*^$ was he doing at that hotel when caught by the Enquirer???
That guy has very little class.
The thing is, nobody’s perfect. You know it. I know it. We really shouldn’t get all worked up over somebody failing to live up to some higher ideal.
But, what gets some of us all overwrought is that some people seem to think that they are covered in moral teflon, and that they take every opportunity to remind us about it constantly. Happens on the political/religious Right moreso than on the Left. That’s why there have been so many more juicy tidbits coming out in the last year about Conservatives.
Still, after having to listen to what later turns out to be outrageously pompous (and false) statements about someone’s ethics, morals, etc., it should come as no surprise to them when some people call them out over it.
Oh, and Steph, I don’t know about you, but my wife would not be forgiving over an affair carried out when she was perfectly well, over one when she was tragically stricken. If she were perfectly fine at the time, she would be much angrier than had she been quite sick.
For me, former Senator Edwards can now retire to private life and nobody will ever care who he’s relating to ever again.
Oh, come on guys. Why not just come out and say it: “The other guy’s a scumbag because he’s on their team! Our guy’s ok!
I wouldn’t forgive any of these cheating infidels. If they will lie to the person they pledged their livelong fidelity to, you can bet they’ll screw the people over in a heartbeat.
McCain, Edwards, Clinton, Gingrich, JFK- scumbags all.
None of which really tells what the relative effect of their character flaws will be, if any, on the country.
varangianguard – I can’t speak to the forgiving nature or lack thereof of your wife, or even Edward’s wife. I don’t even know if that’s a relevant point. All I know is that Elizabeth Edwards has spoken out against the accusation of “cheated on his sick wife” because she seems to think that’s relevant.
On a relative scale, I’d have to say “cheated on sick wife” is worse than “cheated on healthy wife.” What that means in terms of consequences for a particular relationship or one’s support of a particular candidate is more subjective.
Cheated is cheated. Untrustworthy is untrustworthy. It does reinforce for me that they shouldn’t be legislating morality.
But, relative effects on the nation? Well, if you were an ally nation, and you were aware he’d cheat on his wife, would you trust him to live up to the terms of an international agreement, treaty, or alliance? I wouldn’t. I’d count on some weaseling.
The Edwards affair is a sad thing. He was the one candidate whom I agreed with on all the issues. What really is the final straw for me is him strongly calling for a paternity test to prove he’s not the father,as if that’s the important issue.That’s not his call;it’s up to the mother to take the first action,imo.Then he reacts.
It smacks a little of Senator Craig insisting that he is not gay just because he was caught solliciting gay sex in a men’s bathroom,as is that was the issue.
I would vote for someone who had an affair,gay or straight;it’s not in itself a disqualifier for governing, but Edwards is coming through as such a pompous,self-serving moralist,and my own judgment has been betrayed. I was really one of his fans.
Mike, your concerns from the perspective of a nation negotiating a treaty are well taken, but who are you going to distrust more – someone lying to their wife about an affair or someone lying to their citizens about the need for war?
Glad it’s not a pressing issue because Edwards lost the primary. How many known adulterers did we have in the primary:
Edwards
McCain
Giuliani
Gingrich
Anyone else?
Who would I trust more? Heh. Well! Now we’re back to Square One! I wouldn’t trust any of them. I really don’t shade it. Less untrustworthy? What the hell good is that? The person who will lie about one thing to one important ‘constituent’ (for lack of a better word) will surely lie to another.
I can take someone who comes at an errant conclusion honestly and pursues it as policy. To err is human, and all. I have no patience for someone who deceives intentionally. I don’t want them in charge of anything, because they’re bound to lie about something important at some point, hurting everyone in their path in order to cover for themselves.
I value honesty tremendously. I’ve been reading across the spectrum on this issue and have to conclude I’m in quite a small minority in this regard. Of all the things that disappoint me about American politics, and there are many, this is probably the greatest of all. I’m not talking about being a flawless paragon of virtue. I’m talking about simple honesty, which really is simple policy to implement- so long as looking good isn’t one’s most important principle, as it appears to be.
Edwards’ partisans tend to “un-remember” this choice quote from 1999 (I think), “…breathtaking” for its “remarkable disrespect … for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter”.
That was Senator Edwards talking about President Clinton’s indiscretion while Chief Executive.
According to various studies, somewhere between 15% and 35% of married men have had extramarital affairs. I’m not saying it is acceptable, just that it is fairly common-place. I don’t know if anyone has done a study of men in power positions, but I have a gut feeling the percentage goes up.
Mike Kole says:
Actually, we find affairs more unacceptable than many (most?) people in other countries (at least – we pretend we do). Specifically, I’m referring to affairs by men; there are many cultures who are fine with men having them, but women who have affairs are another story.
What I find really amazing is that people running for high offices don’t think this stuff is going to be found out? What is that if not sheer stupidity?
Ask Gary Hart about that one, Brenda.
ha… allowing incriminating photos to be taken even after throwing his hat into the ring. Stupidity? Gall? Gallish stupidity?
Senatro Hart dared reporters to follow him around. Now, that’s chutzpah!