I'll be the first to say that adultery should not be an issue in presidential politics. It has nothing to do with conduct in office and should be totally irrelevant. But regardless of how any of us feel it IS an issue and a big one at that to the media and most Americans. Knowing this, John Edwards chose to engage in a pattern of irresponsible and stupid behavior which could have cost us a chance of winning back the White House.
The reason this is so damaging is because John Edwards' actions said to all of his supporters that he did not give a da*n about any of us and was willing to sacrifice all of our hopes and dreams in order to selfishly pursue his blind ambition.
Now let me say that I counted myself as an Edwards supporter in 2004 and for much of 2008. Even though I voted for Barack Obama, I still retained a considerable degree of respect for John Edwards for serving as the conscience of the Democratic party during the 2008 primaries. The problem with political candidates is that we can never really get to know them and must rely on public impressions, which means that we often can get things wrong.
In light of his recently revealed irresponsible conduct, a number of his previous actions appear to me in a new and very unflattering light. One of the constant charges against Edwards was that he was a phony who did not really care about the issues he championed. Unfortunately, some of Edwards' actions reinforced those charges, but many of us who believed in Edwards brushed those aside as unfortunate mishaps on his part. But given the utter contempt and disregard Edwards has revealed for those who supported him by risking the 2008 election for his own ego, I find it hard to give him the benefit of the doubt any longer.
1. The hedge fund: working at a hedge fund was absolutely stupid for someone who intended to highlight the abuses of Wall Street and the scourge of poverty on millions of Americans. Maybe John Edwards thought he was so special that he could do it without having to worry about the political consequences.
2. The big new house: as stupid as it is, he had to know he'd get tons of crap from the media over building a palatial house while running a campaign focused on poverty (even though he was talking about ending poverty, not promoting it as a lifestyle). For the sake of his campaign, you'd have thought he'd settle for something a bit more modest (Obama and Clinton have pretty nice homes and they don't get grilled for it) for the sake of his campaign. But no, he just HAD to build that house.
3. The $400 haircut: another stupid non-issue, but one of those things politicians should know how to avoid. But not a problem for John Edwards, who has to be silky smooth while talking about ending poverty. Again, rules don't apply to him. And it's not as if other politicians look shabby by not getting $400 haircuts.
4. Fake liberalism: The biggest piece of the "phony Edwards" line was how he moved from being a Bill Clinton DLC Democrat in the Senate and the 2004 campaign to a barn burning populist Democrat in 2008. Many people applauded him for his unapologetic rhetoric against the excesses of Wall Street and Republicanism. But he told his hedge fund buddies a different story according to Matt Stoller:
"I never liked John Edwards, I ignored him for most of the primary because he sucked at organizing and messaging, and because I heard of several cases where he was in rooms with hedge fund guys and told them he would turn to the center in the general."
--http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7412
So John, were you really just BSing us the entire time? Laughing with your hedge fund buddies at the gullible liberals who were supporting you knowing that you'd pull the rug out from under them once you had the nomination.
5. Ending the "College for Everyone" program: John Edwards' College for Everyone program was intended to show that there were millions of young people who wanted to go to college but did not have a chance. Edwards' program sent 190 people to college during the 3 years it was operating. Yet coincidentally, he decides that he will not extend it past the year he stops running for president. If he were the nominee, what are the chances he'd end the program before he could tout it to Congress? Zero.
Taken together, Edwards' actions paint us a picture of a complete narcissist who did not care one bit for any important issues or the people who supported him. And then comes the affair. No it's not any of our business, but that's not how the media and most of the public feel. What was he planning on doing if he were the Democratic presidential nominee? What if Barack Obama had asked him to be vice president? How long did he think that could remain secret? Still unexplained is what on earth Edwards was doing for several hours with Ms. Hunter at the Beverly Hilton. If the affair is over and the child is not his, why was he there?
Then comes the moralizing. The politicians who hold themselves up as paragons of virtue fall the hardest. Edwards touted himself as a trusty family man who was not tarnished the way the Clintons were. Here's a sample:
Interview with Katie Couric: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
COURIC: Harry Truman said, "A man not honorable in his marital relations is not usually honorable in any other." Some people don't feel comfortable supporting a candidate who has not remained faithful to his or her spouse. Can you understand their position?
EDWARDS: Of course. I mean, for a lot of Americans-- including the family that I grew up with, I mean, it's-- it's fundamental to-- how you judge people and human character-- whether you keep your word, whether you keep what is your ultimate word, which is that-- you love-- your spouse, and you'll stay with them.
......
COURIC: So you think it's-- an appropriate way to judge a candidate?
EDWARDS: Yeah.
Here he is moralizing about the Clenis:
"I think this President has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen." -- John Edwards, Feb. 12, 1999
What we often forget is that these elections are not about the candidates themselves, but about the ideas they stand for. It is critically important that we elect a Democratic president to the White House to restore the rule of law to the United States, end the failed experiment of conservative do-nothing government, end the Iraq War, enact universal health care, and move the country in a more progressive direction. John Edwards promised to be our champion in this fight. But instead, we find that he cared so little about those important fights for our country and so much about his own ego that he ran for president knowing that if he won the nomination, we would hand the presidency to another Republican Bush clone for 4 more years. Given his breathtakingly stupid conduct, it is not surprising that he engaged in more trivial indiscretions during the campaign which made his liberal stands and crusade against poverty to appear to be a joke. The phrase "Two Americas" used to be a poignant reminder of the stark disparities that exist in the United States; now it will only be remembered as the punchline of a joke. At this point, from a former supporter, all I can say is please don't ever come back on the public stage again.