Wednesday, August 13, 2008


I don't really want to comment on John Edwards, except for the fact that I really liked his platform and was sad when he had to drop out of the race. I don't believe his political career is over; he'll find some way someday to get back in the limelight.

I'm sick of these scandals, as I'm sure everyone else in America is. But there's one question I haven't seen addressed:

Why would a woman start a relationship with a married man running for president? And then keep his baby?*

I just don't get it. Seems like you're putting yourself in a terrible situation that's only going to get worse. The only thing you'll get out of it is a large check. But then again, tons of other women have gotten involved with high-profile political married men, caught up in the illicit sexiness of it all.

But why is it so important to tell the truth to the media? Did the world really need to know of his infidelity, especially now? No. All it served to do was to make Elizabeth look even more saintly and for her husband to completely lose his reputation, and for the public to be disgusted at large. He would have been better off if he kept it quiet, dealing with his own problems privately without feeding Entertainment Tonight and People, which are not dying for content. John Edwards does not need our forgiveness; he just needs our attention.

*Assuming the baby is his.


John said...

Supposedly the reason for the affair in the first place was because she wanted to know more about the real John Edwards, and to show that side of him to the world through her film. I can understand the appeal of such a proposition, especially since political campaigns tend to bury and homogenize anything that would have been remotely controversial from a candidate's image. I wonder how much of her film will ever see the light of day, and what kind of reaction it will receive from the public in light of this scandal?

MediaMaven said...

She could have just done her job without having the affair.

John said...

Of course she could have done her job without having an affair. No one has to have an affair, with the possible exception of some professional escorts. It was a stupid, impulsive move for both of them and they are paying the price for it. I was trying to provide some context for their relationship and why they were so close to start with, not to prove that she (or he) was an innocent victim forced into an illicit liaison. Perhaps I should have substituted "reason for" with "circumstances leading up to" in my original comment.