Haven't really been paying attention to the political scene lately.
But I have to comment on John Edwards. That man is the bottom of the bottom.
What particularly offends me - I guess more than anything else - is the sight of his poor old parents standing there looking as though they could die of shame.
A man who could do that to his parents is a monster. Well, we know he is a monster.
And now I never want to hear his name or see his vile face again.
[Note: I edited the title to provide some context - VtF]
The sleaze factor (The John Edwards trial)
The sleaze factor (The John Edwards trial)
Dig deeper.
-
Voronwë the Faithful
- At the intersection of here and now
- Posts: 46135
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
- Contact:
While I share your disdain for Mr. Edwards, your post doesn't do much for putting the issue in context. To add a bit to that, as most probably have heard, Mr. Edwards has been on trial for compaign finance violations resultings from his efforts to hide his mistress and illegitate child while he was running for president, and his wife was suffering from breast cancer. The jury finally returned a messy verdict in which it acquitted him on one count, and failed to reach a consensus on the other counts, resulting in a mistrial. No word yet as to whether the government plans to waste more time and money retrying him on those counts.
I think the man is despicable, and I have long thought that, even before all this came out. However, I don't think he engaged in illegal campaign finance violations. He's just a pathetic individual with no morals, and an expensive haircut. I agree with vison that the sooner he disappears the better.
On the other hand, some of the ideas that he has purportedly supported are good ideas. He is about the only major party candidate in U.S. presidential politics to focus on poverty as an important issue. I never thought that focus was really genuine, but it is an important issue. I hope that a more worthy individual picks up where Edwards left off on that front.
I think the man is despicable, and I have long thought that, even before all this came out. However, I don't think he engaged in illegal campaign finance violations. He's just a pathetic individual with no morals, and an expensive haircut. I agree with vison that the sooner he disappears the better.
On the other hand, some of the ideas that he has purportedly supported are good ideas. He is about the only major party candidate in U.S. presidential politics to focus on poverty as an important issue. I never thought that focus was really genuine, but it is an important issue. I hope that a more worthy individual picks up where Edwards left off on that front.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
Politicians seem to be able to rehabilitate themselves from embarrassing entanglements and go on to lucrative careers—if not in politics, then in media or in business or as lobbyists.
I hope that Edwards is an exception to the rule. There were aggravating circumstances here that I will never forget—his wife's illness, the misuse of campaign funds, and most of all how smugly entitled he seemed to feel that any act of his should be without consequence because, well, he's John Edwards.
I hope that Edwards is an exception to the rule. There were aggravating circumstances here that I will never forget—his wife's illness, the misuse of campaign funds, and most of all how smugly entitled he seemed to feel that any act of his should be without consequence because, well, he's John Edwards.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
-
Voronwë the Faithful
- At the intersection of here and now
- Posts: 46135
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
- Contact:
vison, I think it is a reasonable subject to have a thread on, and could spark some interesting discussion. I just thought it needed a little bit more focus. Though I understand your need to vent about this vile human being.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
I think it's interesting that people enjoy hating John Edwards so much. He certainly isn't the first politician to be unfaithful to an ill wife, conceive a child out of wedlock or treat capriciously the trust others placed in him. I believe people detested him before any of this came out. I'm not sure why some people are like a lightning rod for other people's contempt and derision. Al Gore is another one that people love to hate and say all sorts of terrible things about.
In this case, the awful things Edwards did -- abuse and trivialize the trust of people who believed in him, betray his marriage vows, cavort behind the back of an ill spouse -- were timed in such a way as to magnify or highlight the nature of the offenses to an extraordinary and perhaps unprecedented degree. I don't consider him eviler than most of his ilk, just unluckier in his timing and exposure.
As to the parents, vison, did you mean you can't forgive him for requiring them (if he did) to stand by him publicly? If not, I have to say in all fairness that I'm sure the last thing he wanted or thought about when embarking on his affair was to put any of his family or himself through such a public humiliation.
If other politicians who've betrayed trust in similar ways can rehabilitate themselves, I think he should be able to, as well, but I don't think he will be able to. People loved scorning him before he erred, and now, having good reason, they will never stop. I feel for his family, who will live or be remembered under the shadow of his misdeeds and ruined reputation for generations to come. It is a tragedy.
In this case, the awful things Edwards did -- abuse and trivialize the trust of people who believed in him, betray his marriage vows, cavort behind the back of an ill spouse -- were timed in such a way as to magnify or highlight the nature of the offenses to an extraordinary and perhaps unprecedented degree. I don't consider him eviler than most of his ilk, just unluckier in his timing and exposure.
As to the parents, vison, did you mean you can't forgive him for requiring them (if he did) to stand by him publicly? If not, I have to say in all fairness that I'm sure the last thing he wanted or thought about when embarking on his affair was to put any of his family or himself through such a public humiliation.
If other politicians who've betrayed trust in similar ways can rehabilitate themselves, I think he should be able to, as well, but I don't think he will be able to. People loved scorning him before he erred, and now, having good reason, they will never stop. I feel for his family, who will live or be remembered under the shadow of his misdeeds and ruined reputation for generations to come. It is a tragedy.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
I had a similar reaction, Cerin. I actually never have much liked John Edwards, personally, ever since he decided to go on with his campaign when his wife was so sick. Yes, I know he had her "permission" (political long-suffering wife that she was), and I know many on this board actually supported his choice then. I just... wasn't one of them.
But if he didn't abuse his campaign funds... and if Voronwë thinks he did not, I trust Voronwë's opinion more than anyone's on such things... then, well, all he did was cheat on his wife, and tried to cover it up.
How is that so different than Clinton's shenanigans? Clinton didn't manage to father a child (thankfully), but really, what's the difference? So many people at the time that Clinton's lies about his affair(s) finally fell apart said "It's only sex", "It's his private business, this is between him and his wife", and "His choices as a politician are all we should be focusing on".
I was horrified, I must say, when I first learned of the blue dress. I think I felt betrayed, because he had been accused before, and I had written it off as people trying to get any dirt on him they could, because and only because he was a powerful politician. And they were on the other side of the political fence, perhaps.
But in retrospect, some of these points might be spot on.
It WAS only sex, for both men... neither Monica L nor John Edward's girlfriend ended up being their soul mates. It IS their private business, and definitely should be between them and their wives.
Shouldn't their choices as a politician be all we are focusing on?
But if he didn't abuse his campaign funds... and if Voronwë thinks he did not, I trust Voronwë's opinion more than anyone's on such things... then, well, all he did was cheat on his wife, and tried to cover it up.
How is that so different than Clinton's shenanigans? Clinton didn't manage to father a child (thankfully), but really, what's the difference? So many people at the time that Clinton's lies about his affair(s) finally fell apart said "It's only sex", "It's his private business, this is between him and his wife", and "His choices as a politician are all we should be focusing on".
I was horrified, I must say, when I first learned of the blue dress. I think I felt betrayed, because he had been accused before, and I had written it off as people trying to get any dirt on him they could, because and only because he was a powerful politician. And they were on the other side of the political fence, perhaps.
But in retrospect, some of these points might be spot on.
It WAS only sex, for both men... neither Monica L nor John Edward's girlfriend ended up being their soul mates. It IS their private business, and definitely should be between them and their wives.
Shouldn't their choices as a politician be all we are focusing on?
"What do you fear, lady?" Aragorn asked.
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
I was never into Edwards, even before the soap-opera plot broke. Didn't hate him, didn't support him. For reasons I can't explain, he just struck me as a light-weight. During 2008, a colleague tried to convince me that if I liked Kucinich I should also like Edwards but for some reason I just couldn't do it.
Feels like a I missed a bullet, honestly.
Feels like a I missed a bullet, honestly.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
Oh, I"m pretty sure he never thought about anyone but himself and his desires and as a sociopath (which I believe he is) he is likely incapable of thinking of others except as conveniences he can use when required. Including his parents and the kid, wherever it is.cerin wrote:As to the parents, vison, did you mean you can't forgive him for requiring them (if he did) to stand by him publicly? If not, I have to say in all fairness that I'm sure the last thing he wanted or thought about when embarking on his affair was to put any of his family or himself through such a public humiliation.
What stuck in my craw beyond the common was his "I guess God isn't through with me yet" comment.
I am absolutely not going to say more about that, beyond saying that if it doesn't prove that he regards himself as the centre of the universe, I don't know what would serve to prove it.
No, I do not believe he can be "rehabiltated" and, furthermore, why would anyone care? He's a toad of the worst sort, a wart on the face of American politics, just like all the other men of his sort. The fact that he isn't alone doesn't make anything "better", it makes it worse. That men of his ilk keep getting into politics and succeeding means only that the system (and not just in the US) fosters such people with no conscience, no morals, only an unbridled sense of their own entitlements and value to the cosmos.
He has none. He is lower than pond scum and if he dries up and blows away it will be not one minute too soon.
Dig deeper.
-
narya
- chocolate bearer
- Posts: 4904
- Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:27 am
- Location: Wishing I could be beachcombing, or hiking, or dragon boating
- Contact:
I would have a hard time trusting anyone who broke vows, hid them, and lied under oath. Would such poor judgement, attraction to power with no limitations, duplicity, and the belief that he was above the law be limited to sex only? I agree with vison that Edward was a sleazeball. Much as I liked Clinton politically, I wouldn't reelect him after he exposed his true nature.anthriel wrote:It WAS only sex, for both men... neither Monica L nor John Edward's girlfriend ended up being their soul mates. It IS their private business, and definitely should be between them and their wives.
Shouldn't their choices as a politician be all we are focusing on?
In the midst of winter, I found there was, within me, an invincible summer. ~ Albert Camus
I think Edwards' offenses are quite common ones (I think it was the context that made them seem extraordinary), and I am hesitant to write off a man's character completely because he can't control himself sexually. In that case, I'd have to write off about ... I don't know, 50% of men as pond scum and that seems extreme.
Maybe it would be useful to use another example. Let's take Elliot Spitzer. I found that my feelings about him changed little if at all after his shenanigans with hookers were exposed. I had respected his intellect and his political priorities in taking on the financial improprieties of the high and mighty, and his fitness for that kind of role seemed unchanged to me after the scandal. I suppose that means I care more about larger issues like financial justice than about people's private sexual behavior.
I think men who have the exceptional qualities to achieve to the extent that they become important people in society or history often have flawed characters, and maybe even more of them than the proportional average are prone to sexual indiscretions. I wouldn't want them as friends or a husband for that reason, but does it mean they aren't fit to contribute in the capacities for which they are gifted? Should we scorn them and their contributions completely? It seems that many men who are suited to political leadership because of certain qualities are prone to this sort of failure.
While I'm not sure I'm willing to write off all men in all respects, who don't manage to handle their sexuality responsibly, I have no hesitation in saying I have enormous respect and admiration for those who do.
Maybe it would be useful to use another example. Let's take Elliot Spitzer. I found that my feelings about him changed little if at all after his shenanigans with hookers were exposed. I had respected his intellect and his political priorities in taking on the financial improprieties of the high and mighty, and his fitness for that kind of role seemed unchanged to me after the scandal. I suppose that means I care more about larger issues like financial justice than about people's private sexual behavior.
I think men who have the exceptional qualities to achieve to the extent that they become important people in society or history often have flawed characters, and maybe even more of them than the proportional average are prone to sexual indiscretions. I wouldn't want them as friends or a husband for that reason, but does it mean they aren't fit to contribute in the capacities for which they are gifted? Should we scorn them and their contributions completely? It seems that many men who are suited to political leadership because of certain qualities are prone to this sort of failure.
While I'm not sure I'm willing to write off all men in all respects, who don't manage to handle their sexuality responsibly, I have no hesitation in saying I have enormous respect and admiration for those who do.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
-
WampusCat
- Creature of the night
- Posts: 8464
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:36 pm
- Location: Where least expected
I hesitate to be perceived as defending John Edwards, but I must disagree somewhat with you, vison.
Yes, he's a lightweight with an underdeveloped conscience and an overgrown ego. What he did to his wife was horrendous. The fact that it all came to light before he achieved higher office is a relief.
But I don't think his saying "God isn't through with me yet" is necessarily a sign of some sort of messiah complex. That's a fairly common phrase in the South, at least among churchgoers. It basically translates to "Even somebody as flawed and deceitful and stupid as I have shown myself to be might still be able to do something good in the world, because God can use imperfect people."
It's part of his apology. Now, whether the apology is sincere is anyone's guess. It's hard to ever believe someone who's been caught lying.
Yes, he's a lightweight with an underdeveloped conscience and an overgrown ego. What he did to his wife was horrendous. The fact that it all came to light before he achieved higher office is a relief.
But I don't think his saying "God isn't through with me yet" is necessarily a sign of some sort of messiah complex. That's a fairly common phrase in the South, at least among churchgoers. It basically translates to "Even somebody as flawed and deceitful and stupid as I have shown myself to be might still be able to do something good in the world, because God can use imperfect people."
It's part of his apology. Now, whether the apology is sincere is anyone's guess. It's hard to ever believe someone who's been caught lying.
Take my hand, my friend. We are here to walk one another home.
Avatar from Fractal_OpenArtGroup
Avatar from Fractal_OpenArtGroup
A marriage vow is an oath. A difficult one for some, but that doesn't make it anything other than what it is. And if someone can't keep that oath, should they be trusted to keep any other? Infidelity is indeed a private matter, but when it's exposed in politicians, it becomes an issue because it's a chink in the integrity of someone who has either taken an oath to serve or is trying to convince a majority of a given population that they deserve to take said oath.
This is why smart people who want to chase some tail on the side make sure they don't get caught. And that brings up another issue with infidelity in politicians. Not only did they violate an oath, but they weren't smart enough to keep it under wraps. So they are both dishonorable AND stupid. Two strikes. All you need is a third.
This is why smart people who want to chase some tail on the side make sure they don't get caught. And that brings up another issue with infidelity in politicians. Not only did they violate an oath, but they weren't smart enough to keep it under wraps. So they are both dishonorable AND stupid. Two strikes. All you need is a third.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
I agree with you about the oaths thing, actually, but I am a Huge Cynic when it comes to politicians in general. Rather than feeling like the fact that they are breaking an oath means that they might be breaking others, I feel like... well, they will break oaths, break rules, rewrite history, make up stories about other people, manipulate fears of others, etc., etc., in the pursuit of power. Successful politicians typcially have to learn to play the game to be successful. Playing the game doesn't always line up with overall ethical behavior. This is just business as usual.
As has been pointed out, many people, even those who are not politicians, have issues with infidelity. These guys are hardly unique in that. Their private life doesn't affect me much, and it really doesn't reflect on their political acumen.
I know most people here think Newt Gingrich is despicable, and I'm not far behind. However, when the guy is on the "other side", there tends to be less forgiveness for wayward behaviors. I've noticed this in my own thinking, btw, I'm sure not pointing fingers.
But Clinton and Edwards are both Democrats, and it just feels like while Edwards is being slammed as a toad for his behavior, I heard an awful lot of people downplaying that same behavior when Clinton was in the hot seat. I know Cerin feels like the timing of Edward's issues was key in its sensationalism, and that is a good point, but Clinton was intervening in Bosnia when his news came to light. Also not a great time for such things.
So why the difference in reaction? Is Clinton just that much more charming? Is Edward's hair just that much more irritating?
As has been pointed out, many people, even those who are not politicians, have issues with infidelity. These guys are hardly unique in that. Their private life doesn't affect me much, and it really doesn't reflect on their political acumen.
I know most people here think Newt Gingrich is despicable, and I'm not far behind. However, when the guy is on the "other side", there tends to be less forgiveness for wayward behaviors. I've noticed this in my own thinking, btw, I'm sure not pointing fingers.
But Clinton and Edwards are both Democrats, and it just feels like while Edwards is being slammed as a toad for his behavior, I heard an awful lot of people downplaying that same behavior when Clinton was in the hot seat. I know Cerin feels like the timing of Edward's issues was key in its sensationalism, and that is a good point, but Clinton was intervening in Bosnia when his news came to light. Also not a great time for such things.
So why the difference in reaction? Is Clinton just that much more charming? Is Edward's hair just that much more irritating?
"What do you fear, lady?" Aragorn asked.
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
I'm not really familiar with this story outside of the general details - guy cheating on sick wife - but I just wanted to clarify something. Are those condemning Edwards saying that any man or woman who cheats on their spouse and lies about it is "lower than pond scum" or is there something special about what Edwards did that makes him qualify for that status?
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists
Well, both Clinton and Edwards broke their vows and were stupid enough to get caught (honestly, I think, at the end of the day, it's the stupidity that outrages people more) but Clinton wasn't sneaking around on a sick wife. Nor did he rope some besotted fool into taking a fall for him (or, if he did, he wasn't caught doing it).
x-posted with yov
x-posted with yov
When you can do nothing what can you do?
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
I have all kinds of emotional reasons for detesting Edwards, but I also have a strong political reason: he felt so entitled to the nomination that he continued to run for it in the knowledge that he'd done something that would cost him, and his party, any chance at the presidency if it came out before the election (as it certainly would have).
In other words, he deserved his chance at glory more than all the voters supporting the Democrats deserved their chance at hope.
In other words, he deserved his chance at glory more than all the voters supporting the Democrats deserved their chance at hope.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
And this really makes it different for you? I'm not challenging you, River, I'm just interested. Is it really these couple of details that make the difference?River wrote:Well, both Clinton and Edwards broke their vows and were stupid enough to get caught (honestly, I think, at the end of the day, it's the stupidity that outrages people more) but Clinton wasn't sneaking around on a sick wife. Nor did he rope some besotted fool into taking a fall for him (or, if he did, he wasn't caught doing it).
FWIW, I think Edward's wife was in remission when he started the affair, actually. And Clinton had an affair with a fairly young intern; that fact has always made my stomach turn. The intern program should feel a bit hands off (sexual interest-wise) to the people who have power over it. Most people don't seem to have a problem with that particular detail, but I always did.
My point is not that Edwards is groovy and Clinton is awful; really, I don't respect either one of them. But as yov asks:
I just don't know why Edward's sins are so heinous compared to, say, Clinton's. Same same, to me.Are those condemning Edwards saying that any man or woman who cheats on their spouse and lies about it is "lower than pond scum" or is there something special about what Edwards did that makes him qualify for that status?
Prim wrote:I have all kinds of emotional reasons for detesting Edwards, but I also have a strong political reason: he felt so entitled to the nomination that he continued to run for it in the knowledge that he'd done something that would cost him, and his party, any chance at the presidency if it came out before the election (as it certainly would have).
In other words, he deserved his chance at glory more than all the voters supporting the Democrats deserved their chance at hope.
I'm fairly certain he never thought he would get caught. Arrogance, or experience? He'd probably gotten away with something before (sexual scandal or some other kind of issue). I'll bet there are "things" with most long-term politicians that they have managed to hide quite well.
As River says, perhaps that is where people will place their trust. Not in someone who has integrity, necessarily, but in someone who at least isn't dumb enough to get caught in their slimy ways.
"What do you fear, lady?" Aragorn asked.
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
Actually, I have no feelings whatsoever towards Edwards. Well, maybe I feel a little vindicated for having that bad feeling about him back in 2008, but, beyond that, nothing. I'm just throwing out hypotheses for the general high feelings. You could try and write up a TV drama based on his character, but the soap might just bubble off the screen. Man cheats. Man gets mistress pregnant and hides her. In the meantime, man's lawful wife gets sick. And then the baby is discovered and the speculation begins. Man's loyal manservanty-dude claims baby is his...but it doesn't take. Cue spectacular fall from grace for everyone involved except the ailing wife, who has, in the midst of everything, died. I'm almost wondering if someone else hasn't told this story before.
Anyway, when the Clinton thing broke, I thought he was a complete and utter frakkin' idiot and I thought anyone who initially bought his denial was also an idiot (yeah, I was cynical and jaded before I was even old enough to vote; that's what happens when you encourage your children to follow the news from an early age). Edwards at least wasn't in office, so, in my book, he gets a downgrade to just plain frakkin' idiot. But I don't hate the man. Don't respect him either; with politicians, my baseline for respect is none and they have to level up from there. Edwards never did.
Prim's right though. Everyone dodged a bullet when he dropped out of the race.
Anyway, when the Clinton thing broke, I thought he was a complete and utter frakkin' idiot and I thought anyone who initially bought his denial was also an idiot (yeah, I was cynical and jaded before I was even old enough to vote; that's what happens when you encourage your children to follow the news from an early age). Edwards at least wasn't in office, so, in my book, he gets a downgrade to just plain frakkin' idiot. But I don't hate the man. Don't respect him either; with politicians, my baseline for respect is none and they have to level up from there. Edwards never did.
Prim's right though. Everyone dodged a bullet when he dropped out of the race.
When you can do nothing what can you do?