Caring about the John Edwards affair affair
Do you? I don’t.
Care, that is.
Lest you misunderstand, I will say that I think what Edwards did was wrong and I condemn it. But, as with the infidelities of myriad other politicians, I can’t get very worked up about it.
Nor do I think—and this is where I’ll probably get into hot water with some people—that his behavior necessarily reflects on the kind of leader and statesman he would have been had he gotten elected. I think he would have been a lousy one with or without this particular item on his resume, hidden or overt.
All else being equal, I much prefer to vote for a politician who is faithful to his wife (or who is faithful to her husband). There actually are such people—and I happen to believe Barack Obama is one of them, although he could be fooling us all. But all else is never equal, and in the equation as I see it, sexual infidelity vs. faithfulness falls very low on my list of political priorities. Therefore, Barack’s not getting my vote, even against former-adulterer McCain.
In life, it’s different. If I were married to John Edwards (perish the thought—I cannot stomach the man) the issue would be extremely high on my list of priorities. If he were my friend or my relative or my father or my son it would matter a great deal as well. But I truly believe this is mainly between him, his wife, and his immediate family.
No, I don’t think it’s good to have an elective official who lies. And yes, men who cheat on their wives and lie about it are probably more likely to lie about other things as well. I’m not at all sure, however, that politicians who cheat on their wives are more likely to lie about other things as well—politicians are fairly high up on the lying scale to begin with, are they not? If this reflects a certain cynicism about politicians, so be it.
It’s different in cases such as Elliot Spitzer’s, in which the man’s public life was predicated on being squeaky-clean and holier-than-thou, and where the sexual transaction was prostitution.
Is there any parallel here? Not too much. However, although I never followed Edwards’ run all that closely, apparently he featured his marriage in his campaign:
Following his affair, Edwards chose to run for president, using his family as a centerpiece for his campaign. In June of last year, he accepted the Father of the Year Award from Father’s Day/Mother’s Day Council. Shortly afterward, he renewed his vows with his wife and provided pictures to People magazine.
And in December, Katie Couric asked the candidates about the importance of marital fidelity in assessing a presidential candidate. True to form, Edwards said that it was a “fundamental” way to “judge people and human character”—but shouldn’t be a “controlling factor” in choosing a president.
Well, I hate to say it, but I’m with Edwards on that one.
What’s more—if you choose to believe Edwards that this affair ended in 2006, before his most recent run for President—I suppose the renewal of his vows might even have been heartfelt. Stranger things have happened.
Edwards’ wife backs him up on that, and although it’s possible she is doing the typical “stand by your man” routine and/or continues to be deceived, it’s also possible that she is correct. Here is part of her statement on the subject:
John made a terrible mistake in 2006. The fact that it is a mistake that many others have made before him did not make it any easier for me to hear when he told me what he had done. But he did tell me. And we began a long and painful process in 2006, a process oddly made somewhat easier with my diagnosis in March of 2007. This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage as well…But now the truth is out, and the repair work that began in 2006 will continue. I ask that the public, who expressed concern about the harm John’s conduct has done to us, think also about the real harm that the present voyeurism does and give me and my family the privacy we need at this time.
Well, the MSM actually did seem unusually reluctant to get into this mess, whether because it was intent on protecting a fellow-Democrat (my theory) or out of a noble intent to spare Ms. Edwards the very scrutiny she now endures (not my theory). But I, for one, am ready to leave the whole sordid subject and let them be.
DAMN! I read all the way to the end of that long I don’t care note and here’s just how much I don’t care…. and I still don’t know, when it comes to Edwards and Hunter, what they did and when they did it!
More research please!
Personally, I couldn’t care less about Silky Pony and his strumpet/baby mommy but I think the big story is how much dis-interest was/is shown by the major media. If this had been a Republican you can bet they would have all been camped outside the hotel room where he met up with Rielle (btw, what’s up with her name. It used to be Lisa so where did the Rielle come from?)
I care a great deal, because this is all symptomatic of a continuing pattern of repeated and ongoing dishonesty by yet another of the major players of one of the two major political parties in this country. Edwards, as a high profile mover (and pontificator) in the public political domain, who has never hesitated to slander Bush, Cheney and company, now needs to take a publicly visible paternity test, since his history is that of a proven liar; Obi needs to produce a legitimate birth certificate immediately, aren’t there a few honest lawyers out there to push this point? We can’t allow ourselves to fall into the kind of malaise now characterized by Israel with Olmert, when we’ve already been around the block with Bubba… The world is teetering on the edge of disaster, there’s too much at stake, the personal behaviour of critical leaders is intimately related and connected in subtle, as well as direct ways to the nation’s and world’s safety and security.
I basically agree with 100% of what you say.
One misused word, in these numerous “mea culpas,” however is that the person made a “MISTAKE.”
A “mistake” would have been for Edwards to “get Biblical” with a woman who, due to poor lighting, he thought was his wife.
The only “MISTAKES” that Edwards (and others like him) did make was 1) to believe that he wouldn’t get caught,” and that 2) to think that he could “schmooze” his way out of it. He got caught, and most of us see him for the skunk that he is.
What Edwards did was a sin, and was loathesome conduct—especially in light of his wife’s illness and her unwavering support. He has provided me with further proof that he is a narcissist and a rat.
We have all sinned. Even the holiest Rabbis repent on Yom Kippur. We have all probably lied or ignored our sins. None of us is pure.
All that being said, however, what Edwards did WAS NOT A MISTAKE. It was 100% intentional.
I don’t care. Bores me to tears.
My only concerned is for that poor child. If National Review and The Enquirer are to be believed Edwards is indeed the father.
The child will likely grow up with the knowledge that his/her father very publically denied paternity and openly stated that the relationship with the mother was just casual sex.
Grover Cleveland was accused of having a “love child” and admitted to paying child support (although there were several men who could have been the father). Nevertheless he was elected president twice, in non-consecutive terms.
I think We The People can accept such flaws if they indicate human weakness and not colossal arrogance. We can accept keeping them quiet. And paying child support without any court order is an honorable act. But lying and perjury change things mightily.
I have a very poor opinion of John Edwards … but not for this reason.
Regarding John Edwards, this is simply reason #531 why he is the consummate fraud. Anyone who needed this incident to finally label him as a fraud has not been paying attention for the last 4 years. I guess that the Father of the Year award is given for those who have fathered children with as many women as possible.
What annoys me is that when a Republican errs in a sexual manner, the MSM is all over the place, but relatively quiet when a Democrat does so. The explanation given that the MSM does so because Republicans are “hypocrites” and that Democrats are not doesn’t hold in this case, because John Edwards has been the poster child for the “holier than thou” attitude.
I have to say I’ve never really trusted Edwards. He’s always seemed somehow fake to me, sort of Romney-esque, though I think Edwards was a lot more sincere than Romney, neverthless his conversion from relatively conservative Democrat to liberal populist always struck me as a bit disingenuous. However, I do agree that sexual infidelity is one of the least important issues in my book. McCain’s infidelities are well known, and the media rightly ignores them. Kennedy’s infidelities I believe meant nothing, as well. Edwards? Well in today’s political climate it was incredibly stupid of him to have done this. But I agree, in general, I don’t care about politicians sex lives, per se. When sexual infidelity is combined with self-righteousness, on the other hand (as was the case with Spitzer, Larry Craig, and Mark Foley), it does become at least somewhat politically relevant — but in general I agree this is a subject the media should ignore.
He’s so far off my table he’s not even in the house…
except for the fact that his mistress suddenly declines any thought of a paternity test. And the media has absolutely no interest in finding out where the money for her, her current house boy, and the baby has and is continuing to originate from. Lots and lots of money from a man who still has campaign funds, and looks more and more like he still thinks he has a future in politics.
He’s a very poor joke. But then again, we are looking at Obama or McCain for president while Reid and Pelosi are already laughingstocks at their posts.
So maybe Mr. Edwards is simply better equipped to recognize his electorate than I give him credit for.
That’s sad, too, isn’t it?
Mitsu: Kennedy’s infidelities I believe meant nothing, as well.
And I suppose that his drinking meant nothing, as well.
Tell that to Mary Jo Kopechne.
I don’t imagine I’m the only one to suspect that Obama wouldn’t dare to be unfaithful, because if he were, Michelle Obama would enlist Jesse Jackson’s help to be sure that it didn’t happen again.
>Tell that to Mary Jo Kopechne
I was referring to John Kennedy, not Ted.
Mitsu: When JFK was president, he had an affair with Judith Campbell, who was also intimate with mafia capo Sam Giancana. RFK as Attorney General was prosecuting the Mafia, this was a potential security problem, and perhaps an actual one. so yes, JFK’s infidelities meant something.
It’s about judgment, too, not just infidelity. If the Edwards-Hunter affair ended in ’06, why was he skulking around the hotel, unaccompanied, in the wee hours?
The whole thing reminds me of Martha Stewart’ stock deal–the original transgression pales beside the coverup.
It’s interesting in the way any soap opera is interesting. It’s interesting in the way that the Greek gods provided entertainment to the masses who could look and say, “Well, at least my life isn’t that screwed up.”
“I’m going to run for president even though my wife is dying” put a whole lot of people off because he’s not an old man and running for president is crazy-demanding of time and energy. Why not wait for the next time around?
And he’s fun to mock in any case. So why pass it up?
Still, would people care quite so much about this if he hadn’t been putting forward a picture of marital and family perfection?
Anyone who did not realize the Edwards was a phony, even by politician standards, shouldn’t be allowed to cross the street by himself.
i agree that having an affair per se is not a disqualifer for office, nor a predictor of someone’s ability once in office, … but…. anyone running for president who would do this … clearly is high on the hubris scale. i sure dont want anyone in office that ranks this far up on that scale.
To Occam’s Beard,
An excellent, pithy and razor-sharp statement!
😉
The issue here is not J.E.’s private life, lots of people fall out of love, become enmeshed in affairs for reasons more emotionally complex and innocent than just sexual predation, and it should be only their personal business; Except when it is a publicly ambitious lawyer and politician aspiring to power and influence at the most critical levels of government, who is stupid enough to think he can get away with years of serial dishonesty to both his family and constituancy. This is an issue and concept similar in quality and importance, and tantamount to the concept of fiduciary responsibility. It is certainly something of which a lawyer (or a journalist) should have a solemn grasp of recognition. I wouldn’t trust somebody that dumb or dishonest to represent me in a court of law, or anywhere close to the White House. If you will repeatedly (important qualifier) lie to your family and constituency
… sorry keystroke error (again), please finish:
If you will repeatedly (important qualifier) lie to your family and constituency about something like this, what won’t you lie about. The bar should be higher for people like Edwards, he has said so.
Edwards is like the game show host of phony politicians. He was a joke of a man before all this.
And i’m frankly sickened by his silly wife calling sparse reporting on the matter “voyuerism”. I guess she figures as democrats they’re entitled to forgo the incredible amount of mud slinging ANY conservative would have been drug through by this point.
The New York Post has this hilarious headline for today’s Edwards story:
LOVER DENIES JOHN A “POP” QUIZ
I never particularly liked the guy anyway – always came off as a dishonest used car salesman.
So, do I care? Not really, kinda hard to get lower. He isn’t a govt official so I care about as much as if I found out that Bill Clinton had another affair. It’s pretty much ended his political career at this point as if he ever runs (or tries to get appointed) again then it will matter to many. Had it simply been an affair then it wouldn’t have had this effect, it is the extenuating circumstance that killed his political career.
I can’t even say I even get up much about the media cover-up – it pales so much in comparison to everything else they are doing I can’t get worked up over it. It is another case of my approval being so low that things like this do not affect it.
Neo-neocon,
I like your blog alot. However, I disagree with you on this one.
When we assume that all politicians are liars, that is exactly the type of politicians we will have. Once we stop enacting a political punishment for dishonesty, the best of our politicians will be pathological liars. By accepting liars as normal, we actually favor them over the honest politicians since there are always instances when a lie is more expedient than the truth. People get the leaders they deserve.
Edwards has been a slick weasel his whole life, and yet he came very close to becoming our vice president. This man who has never lifted a finger to help sick children, has become immensley wealthy by destroying unfortunate doctors who had the misfortune of delievering babies who had cerebral palsey. Although cerebral palsey is sometimes caused by injuries at deliever, that is often not the case. Often a poor overworked doctor has been destroyed over something which was not in any way his fault.
What I will never understand is why someone running for office would do so with such a skeleton in their closet. If the Lewinski thing taught us anything, it is that it will come out (the affair, not the stain — sorry, couldn’t help it 🙂 )