He ran an intellectually empty campaign...running away from positions he had sincerely taken in the past, and adopting a populist message that he had no history with.
However, I began to have some sympathy for John and Elizabeth Edwards when her cancer recurred.
No more. Sympathy for her--Yes.
He is a snake.
I don't have any idea how many married American men and women are unfaithful in their marriages. I do know that infidelity is wrong. It is wrong when you're trapped in a nightmare marriage. It is wrong when you're drunk. It is wrong when you're both drunk and in a nighmare marriage and happen to stumble on Ms. Right.
A marriage means committment...to one person. If the marriage has failed and you're done with that commitment--fine. Get out of the marriage. Then move on to another relationship.
But infidelity is wrong. There are no circumstances when it is right. And I know that you know that infidelity is wrong. How so, you ask? It's really very simple...
Because the unfaithful keep their infidelity a secret.
And, in the case of John Edwards, it is wrong when you're running for your party's nomination for President. And it is especially wrong when your wife has a terminal illness.
The guy is a snake.
Ace has gone a bit overboard on every little detail of this (as well as subsequent posts), but he does make a number of good points.
- That Hunter is in love with Edwards and thinks that post-Elizabeth that they'll get married tells me that she's a snake too.
- That Edwards-aide, Andrew Young, is fessing up to paternity tells me that either Hunter can or was passed around the campaign. Not very flattering to any of the parties.
- That Edwards has fat-cats who may be paying off Hunter tells me that this is not just about infidelity and love-out-of-marriage, but also of money. Snakes. (Did I mention that yet?)
But Paul at Powerline makes a good point too...this is none of our business, and especially so considering Elizabeth's illness.
But the larger story here is one of the media. The MSM are so deeply in the tank for whichever candidate the Democrats will nominate that they could not explore Edwards' infidelity when handed the information. It was the National Enquirer which broke this story. It is clear to me that the N.E. is riding this story for all it's worth...they're a for-profit company, after all. They probably paid Hunter for her story and/or the blurred photo of Edwards and the child. Who cares? (I don't.)
But the MSM completely failed the public. Had this been a Republican former Senator and VP candidate, they would have been all over this story months ago. They (deservedly) dug into Larry Craig's restroom misbehavior. They used the Foley scandal over inappropriate emails (but no physical actions), among other Republican failings, into a change of leadership in 2006.
The MSM was maintaining their silence here to keep a scandal centered on a Democrat formerly running for the nomination from hurting all Democrats.