Home › Elections › Elections Opinion
John Edwards' legacy damaged by his brush with infidelity
The immoral moralist
ELECTIONS '08
Check out our one stop for all the information and news you need to be ready for to cast your vote.
Election Central »
Elections stories » Star endorsements »
STORY TOOLS
More from Elections Opinion
Here we go again.
Two weeks before the Democratic National Convention, at a most propitious and historical time for Democrats, another salacious story threatens to ruin the progressive strides made by the most improved party.
This latest black mark is making every Democrat nervous, and for good reason. To a nation bereft of ideals and righteous paragons, this news only serves to reinforce its growing distaste and distrust of all politicians.
In his statement acknowledging a loveless sexual affair with a staffer, John Edwards laments, "In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic."
This self-diagnosis, though somewhat correct, is an inadequate depiction of the deep moral lapse he had just fallen into. There are a hundred more suitable adjectives I can think of to describe his behavior. Donald Trump is narcissistic. George Bush is egocentric. John Edwards comes with a different rating.
Edwards' concupiscence is hardly the problem, as the list of erogenous offenders in public service continues to grow by leaps and bounds. We simply roll our eyes and pronounce them human. Far more than the indiscretion, it is his gall, his impudent boldness in deciding to seek the presidency while he was involved with another woman. It is his air of immunity or exemption from attack and his brazen disregard for his party's well-being that we find loathsome.
Even more surprising is Elizabeth Edwards' hasty forgiveness and show of support for a husband who committed adultery while she was, and is, battling terminal cancer. In her statement, she said: "Our family has been through a lot. Some caused by nature, some caused by human weakness, and some most recently caused by the desire for sensationalism and profit without any regard for the human consequences."
What about the consequences of his acts? While I concur that voyeurism has reached an unwholesome level in this country, I have to question her defense of him and her ignorance of the potential fallout from such a discovery. She went along with his decision to seek the presidency right after — or some say during — his affair. She had knowledge of the affair before he announced his run. That, to me, is more reprehensible than all the tactics used by the National Enquirer, a tabloid that will no doubt enjoy a little credibility after this bombshell.
Political wives have been conditioned to accept and forgive (publicly at least) their husbands' infidelities. How very French of them! This characteristic sang-froid is as amazing as it is seriously amiss. I remember Hillary Clinton looking strong and supportive, an inscrutable Mrs. James McGreevey and a confused Mrs. Larry Craig standing by their men. I was riveted by a puffy-eyed Mrs. Eliot Spitzer as her newly defrocked husband took to the podium and casually narrated his sins. I felt total shock. How could they demean themselves with this bizarre show of questionable harmony? What could soften their hearts so quickly after such a betrayal?
John Edwards will recover from this. They all do. Whether they segue into charity work, write a book or dissolve into obscurity, they will outlive their infamy. The Americans are a forgiving lot.
The saddest thing is, like all the fallen leaders who scratched the rim of greatness with their sterling achievements, John Edwards will not be remembered for his moral crusades, but only for his regrettable brush with immorality.
— Maya Teague lives in Camarillo.
Posted by nelsonknows on August 17, 2008 at 1:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Personally, I believe the infidelity matter is between Edwards and his wife. The 2 things that really irks me to no end were the way Elizabeth Edwards was marched out to say some outlandish garbage during her husband's campaign, knowing no one would hold her accountable for what she said because she was suffering from cancer, yet all the while John Edwards was playing slap and tickle with another woman, and the fact that all parties are refusing to take a D.N.A. test to prove who the father of the child is. My point on the former asks, why has no D.N.A. test been conducted to either affirm or deny that Edwards is the father of Rielle Hunter's child? If Edwards IS the father, that would make him a deadbeat dad which is probably the most disgusting thing out of this whole mess.
Posted by rjlebeck on August 17, 2008 at 4:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
nelsonknows:
I was an Edwards supporter. Even contributed some of my own money to support his candidacy. You know what? I agree with you. I think Edwards was seduced and blackmailed by this tart but it doesn't excuse his conduct in the least. I really don't care to find out because the matter really is between him and his wife, Elizabeth, but I have a feeling the no-love child is gonna do just fine.
Posted by RielleHunter on August 17, 2008 at 5:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You do your readers a disservice by perpetuating the myth that John Edwards made a statement "acknowledging a loveless sexual affair".
Lets go to the video again, shall we?
When Bob asks John Edwards "Were you in love with her?"
Edwards responds ONLY about Elizabeth Edwards, and completely ignores the question of whether or not he loved Riley Hunter.
This is almost word for word the "I've been in love with the same woman for 31 years" response he gave to deny this affair in October 2007.
Look through the legal doublespeak at what he actually said.
Posted by susanra on August 17, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We were much better as a country when the accepted rules which governed not reporting about John F. Kennedy's affairs were in place.
I only wish that the same rules which applied to JFK were presently applied to John Edwards.
John Edwards made some considerable mistakes in judgment, but those mistakes do not necessarily preclude him from being a great leader on important progressive issues of the day.
I hope John Edwards will be able to revitalize whatever occupational path he chooses, including public service.
Democrats have forgiven JFK, RFK, LBJ, FDR, and especially Bill Clinton, who made major mistakes but who is still speaking at the Democratic Convention!
Posted by ironwoman on August 17, 2008 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
John Edwards is a cheater and a liar. He deserves all the bad publicity he gets. His wife is dying and he is having an affair...what a guy. WOW, another politician with serious issues. If he can't be loyal to his dying wife, he's pretty much a loser in my book.
Posted by mikeb6804 on August 17, 2008 at 7:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
John Edwards is a skunk, nothing more, nothing less. He has no legacy to leave anyone.
Posted by Scapegoat on August 18, 2008 at 10:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The "hairdo" has set under the dryer too long. His hair is done, as is his career.
Posted by nelsonknows on August 19, 2008 at 1:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm glad that Edwards is "fini", even Democrats deserve better than a smarmy sycophant like John Edwards
Posted by belehrer on August 21, 2008 at 4:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Remove all men capable of being tempted to eat the fruit from the Garden of Eden and you will remain with Bush, Cheney, and heaven forbid, McCain. Bernard.
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.