John Edwards Speaks

[babylonsister]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/06/17/edwards_speaks.html

Edwards Speaks


In a 90 minute interview with the Washington Post -- his first extended conversation with a reporter since confirming he had an extramarital affair -- John Edwards refused to talk about his former mistress, her baby's paternity, his wife's memoir, or the investigation in his campaign finance.

However, he did say "that for all the trauma that came of the 2008 campaign, he is not ready to declare that it had been a mistake to run, calling that a 'very complex question.' He believed, he said, that he had pushed Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton in a more progressive direction on issues including health care -- Edwards was the first to propose an individual insurance mandate -- and that the value of his having run will be determined partly by what Obama achieves on these fronts."

Said Edwards: "Did it make sense to run and stay in the race? Time will tell."

Edwards "says he has no plans to make a push to restore his name, along the lines of what former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer has embarked on... But he did not rule out a return to politics. He said it was too early to say what the future held -- though an Al Gore-style advocacy role was more likely than elected office, given the scandal. He thinks 'every day' about what form his future role in activism or public life could take, but 'right now, a lot of that is unanswerable.'"

WaPo article here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/17/AR2009061701844.html

[JuniperLea]

1. STFU JE...

I don't even want to hear his voice. His thoughts and feelings on any matter mean nothing anymore, and he has no one to blame but himself. I for one will not welcome him back into the political arena, regardless of his platform. Stick a fork in me...

Edited to say... please don't take this personally... thanks for posting;) I needed a new flavor of outrage today!

[grannie4peace]

5. i felt that way too

[iconocrastic]

79. Edwards is a disgrace and his supporters are now shown to be ....

fill in the blank

[rvablue]

2. Good luck with that. Until he answers some of those questions I don't think

he even has a shot at and "Al Gore-style advocacy role."

[karynnj]

65. Even if he answers that question, he is no Al Gore

Al Gore championed the cause of dealing with global warming in the 1980s - first in the House of Representatives and then in the Senate. He held the first hearings in a sub-committee he chaired of the Commerce Committee. That hearing called many people who have become the best known scientists on this issue. He also attended and was an important voice at several environmental conferences on this. In addition, he wrote a book in the late 1980s on this.

All of that was before he had the Presidency stolen from him. Had he stopped there, he would still have been someone who had led for decades on this issue, but it was what he did then that made him a advocate. Between his speeches and written pieces, with little fanfare, he became an advocate. His documentary was successful beyond any expectation. His Nobel Prize was well earned.

Edwards in some ways is the anti- Gore. Gore had a golden resume of solid work, but he was disliked by the media which thought he was too wonky and too boring. Edwards had one of the slightest resumes of any one who has run for President, but was blessed by the media as "sunny" and "Bill Clinton without the bimbos". Gore's solidness and real commitment made him the right person to educate America.

Edwards used his media given spot light to push a progressive agenda in 2008 - which did benefit progressives. Edwards' gift in politics was the same gift that made him a very successful trial lawyer. He was an attractive front man for this agenda - and many were willing to believe in him and the ideas he was speaking, likely gaining supporters for the ideas as well as for himself. But, this agenda was not an agenda that Edwards had supported for decades that he had furthered during his Senate career. In fact, in 2004, he blasted Kerry's near universal plan in the last primary debate as "too expensive" - Edwards' plan covered only kids. He voted for the bankruptcy bill.

Back to the differences with Gore. Gore in 2005 was connected to all the people - like James Hansen of NASA - who had appeared before his committee and who had been his advisers on global warming. In addition, Gore was not disgraced and had the status of being a former VP and the man who got the most votes in 2000. Once he finally got people's attention with his movie, he was a person who all but the super partisan Republicans trusted. His history as the solid, serious person he is helped give credibility to what he said. Although Elizabeth Edwards works with Center for American Progress on healthcare, it is not clear that Edwards is still connected to any policy makers. In addition, it was not his policy or legislation expertise that made him valuable to these efforts in 2008, it was his ability to sell the ideas. That ability depended on people trusting him.

[Bushknew]

3. Even Martin Luther King, Jr had an affair...

no one is perfect. John Edwards was my second choice for president, Dennis Kucinich my first &
Obama my third.

[JuniperLea]

7. The affair is the least of it...

Most men in politics have affairs. It's the lying... the wife with cancer... the putting our entire Democratic presidential campaign in jeopardy for uber selfish reasons... need I go on?

[marshall]

11. It's also a child who is obviously his that he won't acknowledge

That is the most heart breaking piece of this wretched puzzle.

And what did he talk about for 90 whole minutes if he didn't talk about the stuff everyone wants to know (those who do in fact want to know anything about him).

[saracat]

71. BS. Where is the proof other than that disgusting womans's word for it?

[marshall]

72. Have you seen the child?

from Huffingtonpost:



Could be just a coincidence, but the child looks more like Edwards than his children with Elizabeth.

[saracat]

73. Soo? The child also looks a lot like its mother! All one has to do it watch Maury to

know looks don't mean anything in paternity cases. And why isn't the mom providing the DNA if she is soo concerned about the baby?
The real facts are, we know nothing! Truthfully, we don't even know if she is the mom! Wasn't she 40 something and a bit long in the tooth for a first baby without some assistance? Though anything is possible. LOL!

[karynnj]

74. Saracat - why question her age - there is no dispute that she is the mother

Whether JRE is the father or not is in dispute. One thing you might consider is that Elizabeth Edwards says she doesn't know. Now, that baby was conceived long after JRE supposedly told her about the affaire, ended it and try to repair their relationship. If that were all true, JRE should have been able to say definitively that the dates make it impossible - so either JRE told her this and she is saying she doesn't believe him on this or the Edwards never discussed that - which is impossible to believe.

[saracat]

75. All is I am saying is that no one really "knows" anything. Perhaps Elizabeth

"knows" something. I am certain Edwards and the woman know more than we do but the general public has nothing to base any assumptions regarding the childs parentage on anything but the words of people who have not been proven to be honest regarding this situation.
I only mentioned the age of the women to illustrate how little we know. We only have her word for it that Edwards is the father and while I don't have any opinion as to whether or not she is the mother, we have no real evidence she is the mother either, except her word. See what I mean. There has been no DNA offered. The baby's appearance counts for nothing either way. Many folks have adopted baby's that look just like them.
I actually don't care either way but it seems there are lots of statements of "fact" based on no real evidence.

[karynnj]

76. You are building excuses that his wife didn't make

I agree that we don't know the baby's father. However, there is no doubt on the mother. Many women have babies at her age - which was 40 or 41. My youngest was born when I was 40 and no one has ever questioned that she was mine. A good friend of mine had a "surprise" baby when she was near 50.

Not to mention if Edwards did not have sex with her in late spring 2007, he would have point blank denied the paternity, giving that as a reason and EE would have repeated that. I agree with you that appearance does not prove parentage, but it is pretty clear that Edwards can not rule it out - or he would do so. (EE's comment that politicians all hold babies that are not there's is cringe worthy. This was NOT holding a baby at a fourth of July parade, with the proud parents beaming as they stand next to the politician - this was a man, with a woman he had an affair with in a hotel room after midnight, who hid from reporters when they caught up with him leaving the building.)

[Bushknew]

17. The affair is the heart of it. As I said, Martin Luther King Jr had affairs so therefore ...

his ideas and efforts should be dismissed?

I think not but I completely understand why a woman would
not vote for him.

[JuniperLea]

25. Misogyny will get you nowhere... and fast

I do not vote with my vagina.

I stand by what I said, and you really should actually read it.

[Bushknew]

30. Martin Luther King Jr put civil rights in jepeordy with his infedilty so therefore..

Martin Luther King Jr was unfit to lead the civil rights movement?

[JuniperLea]

31. No. I never said that. Buy a clue card...

Had Edwards won the nomination, then this crap hit the news, the Dems would be out of the running for the current term in the White House. It was a selfish and stupid thing to do at the worst possible time.

Now, look at your straw man and tell me how it's relevant at all to this discussion.

:eyes:

[Bushknew]

40. European presidents have affairs & Europeans are able to ...

separate policy from infidelity & I think we should too.

[JuniperLea]

44. Good God...

I've said repeatedly, the affair is the least of it. You aren't reading, just arguing your own little circular argument all by yourself.

[iamjoy]

46. I Think Everyone Should Get a Pony

I am aware that European presidents have affairs and their constituents are able to separate their leaders' personal lives from service to country. I agree that we should be like that too.

But we aren't. Anyone with half a brain knows that. So, to deny that what Edwards did was politically dumb or to argue that he wasn't risking the election is naive.

I used to like him...

[leftynyc]

37. WTF are you

babbling about?

[Bushknew]

43. No question that Martin Luther King Jr was a good man. Unfortunately, Martin Luther King Jr

was unfaithful to his wife.

[FrenchieCat]

52. MLK didn't run for President.

IN fact, last I checked, he spent quite a bit of time in prison for the cause.

It's not the same. Sorry.

[karynnj]

66. No he didn't. - it comes down to trust

There was NEVER any doubt of the sincerity and depth of MLK's beliefs nor of the importance of the fights that he so capably led. There was no reason to question whether he could be trusted. In terms of his commitment to civil rights, MLK had risked his life many many times to say and do things that needed to be said and done.

In Edwards' case, trust was needed to support him. Trust that he believed what he was saying in 2008, not something completely different he said in 2004 or the way he voted in the Senate. Everything depended on the ability to believe he was who he said he was - and the cornerstone of who he was was his faithful, equal marriage to Elizabeth.

In MLK's case, you knew he was honest on civil rights.

[Bushknew]

68. Bill Clinton, JFK & Eliot Spitzer all had affairs. While I understand why women ...

find this unforgivable, I am not married to him. I voted for his public polices not
his personal flaws with his wife friends or family. While I know we're not European, I think we should be in this respect.

[karynnj]

70. Read what I said

I think the reason it affected JRE more was that his 2008 persona/candidacy was based on TRUSTING he meant what he said. Everything else was a house of cards atop that trust. For many, that trust was irrevocably shattered.

Bill Clinton, JFK and Spitzer all had public records that matched their public words. Whether you liked those policies or not - you knew what they basically were. As Feingold said, Edwards in 2008 was running on HIS positions. (positions that Edwards very often voted against.)

[Hieronymus]

42. It's unfortunate that you throw that word around so loosely.

[JuniperLea]

45. It's unfortunate that people think women vote with their vaginas...

and that others don't see that for what it is.

[gauguin57]

32. The affair IS the least of it. If he'd gotten the nomination, we'd have President McCain right now.

And vice president Palin. Just think about that.

And John AND Elizabeth Edwards are very smart people. They knew what it would mean if he got the nom and the affair came out. And they wanted power so damned badly (well, I have no idea what Elizabeth wanted. she's got me buffaloed with this book and media tour) that they were willing to risk putting our country into John McCain and Sarah Palin's hands.

He can be forgiven for an affair. He can never be forgiven for the rest of it. And if that kid is his and he's not acknowledging it publicly, well, I don't care about his goddamned ideas. Because that means he has no moral compass and no judgment. Skank.

[LittleClarkie]

59. If only I was sure that John wasn't using his issues

politically.

MLK Jr. had affairs. But I didn't get the feeling that he was only for civil rights as long as it kept him in the public eye and was good for his image.

Does John Edwards give a fuck about the poor when nobody's lookin'?

[Alameda]

20. In the current political climate, and the resources available

what he did was stupid, self centered and careless. I'm very angry with him about it. I donated money to his $#% campaign....and am really pixxed about it. He let us all down at a critical time. I don't want to see his face or even think about him.

[krawhitham]

35. Did MLK run for pres. while having the affair

[Raine]

56. King's wife didn't have terminal cancer

either and he didn't run for president knowing that getting the nomination would blow up in the Democrats face and destroy their chances. :mad:

[cali]

58. it wasn't Mr. Hedge Fund's affair that led me to conclude he was a phony

I knew that long before news of that broke. His Senate record sucked and he was a big war supporter. Nothing liberal about asshole Edwards.

[queenofcups]

78. Hey...you and I are on the same page...and yes, many men

in high places do this. It doesn't make it right, but we have no idea about other esteemed politicians who just haven't gotten busted yet. And to just flush all their political accomplishments down the toilet because of their out-of-control libidos just doesn't make sense to me.

[SidneyCarton]

4. Mr. Edwards, your 15 minutes are up.

Your policy ideas were excellent, and I do actually wish you had recieved the opportunity to run with them, but that would have required you to have had the good judgment not to screw up your personal life in the way you did. The American people will excuse adultery (We proved that with Pres. Clinton) but cheating on your wife who is suffering from cancer? Man, there is simply no way to do that and come off sympathetic.

[rcrush]

8. I guess people really care about whats important

Because infidelity is SUPER FUCKING IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!! OMG!!!! 1112

[JuniperLea]

9. Lying and putting the entire Dem campaign in jeopardy...

Go far and beyond infidelity. I don't think anyone here is fooling themselves.

[Arkansas Granny]

14. The infidelity is between him and his wife. To continue in the campaign, to continue

taking campaign donations from supporters, to risk the possibility of becoming the Democratic nominee and then have his affair come out and throwing the election to McCain/Palin was nothing but his ego.

[Cha]

15. It's more than super fucking infidelity~

John Edwards put the country at risk.. running when he had an affair that would have been exposed in the General.

[SidneyCarton]

19. It's not the infidelity, its the arrogant, insensitive bullshit.

This guy comes on to the scene as a compassionate voice for the underprivleged who will fight to bring back a sense of morality and reform to Washington. And then we find out that he was nailing a blonde while his wife was fighting cancer. Hypocrisy much? And then there is the minor detail that all of this was found out during the election. Imagine him as the nominee... do you suppose Rove & co. would let this lie?

It would have been a mess. Laugh all you want about the morality voters, but he would have lost women because he was an insensitive ass, and just how enthusiastic would you be about working for a guy who screw's around on his dying wife. Sorry, sounds a little Gingrich-esque for my taste.

[Raine]

57. Anyone who thinks that cheating on yout terminally ill

wife is nothing is totally devoid of any human decency plus it literally reeks of rePUKE of "morality".

[LittleClarkie]

60. Not important, eh. Should the Missus get the fuck over it too.

I'm not so concerned with the infidelity so much as I find it to be evidence that John Edwards is a smarmy bastard who can't be trusted and may or may not be sincere when he says he cares about the poor and their issues.

[cali]

61. Forget the fucking around. Big war supporter. Lousy Senate record

working for a sleazy hedge fund to "learn about poverty", etc.

[Bobbie Jo]

6. Well, his lips are moving.....

you know what they say. :eyes:

[masuki bance]

10. refused to talk about his former mistress,baby's paternity,wife's memoir, or campaign investigation

wow, not much left after that.

[Botany]

12. he put the party and the country's future @ risk by running w/ the

Baggage he had .... cheating on his wife as she was sick and knowing that he was the father of child by
a women other than his wife ...... I supported him and gave him money and he let me and many others
down.

screw him he is just a con man

[the other one]

13. hate Hate HATE!!!

Democrats eat their own.

Its fun to see Dems when they get sanctimonious. The GOP have nothing on these guys.

[Arkansas Granny]

16. I don't hate John Edwards, but I am really disappointed in his behavior.

I really thought he was better than that.

[Cha]

18. John Edwards put the country at risk..sorry

(not really)if we love our country more than John Edwards.

[high density]

24. Go ahead and explain to us why Edwards shouldn't be "hated."

I'm a Democrat but that doesn't mean I have to love everybody else with a D after their name.

[the other one]

27. Go ahead and hate whomever you please.

On this site I have seen more hatred spewed towards Nader and Edwards then ever I saw turned towards their conservative counterparts.

When a GOPer is disgraced the party rallies around, when a Dem is disgraced the party faithful line up to get their kicks in. Go figure...

[InvisibleTouch]

48. Now this is true.

The rethugs may well hate each other behind the scenes, but publically they rally to defend one another, no matter how awful the transgression was. Because ultimately they all benefit from presenting a united front. And that shapes the media sound bites and the public perception. Why do you think an adulterous rethug is excused as a guy with human weaknesses who made a mistake, while an adulterous Dem is automatically a pariah? Or imagine how an unwed pregnant teenage daughter of a major Dem politician would go over (as opposed to Puppykiller Palin's daughter, who was all but hailed as a saint). The difference in perception is shaped in the media, and that's influenced by how the rest of the party does or does not come to the perpetrator's defense. We Dems need to do a lot better when it comes to loyalty toward our own - not because we may actually like or approve of the transgressor, but because it benefits us all to have Dems in general perceived in a positive light. A little loyalty for its own sake, plus a little enlightened self-interest. Why is that so difficult?

[karynnj]

67. The Republicans are NOT rallying around Ensign and they didn't rally around Craig

The fact is that obviously if you asked people to choose between who they hated more - Bush, Nader, Edwards, I would be surprised if there was not 100% for Bush. The reason Nader gets negative comments was that had he not run in 2000, Bush would not have won.

I think the anger and dislike of Edwards was that many felt betrayed that he was not what he led people to believe. My disgust comes from his lies about 2004, where he returned being given an opportunity as he did.

[JuniperLea]

26. He screwed the Democrats and put the presidency at risk

We could have lost to the GOP over his stupidity! Had he been the nominee, we would have all be screwed! The infidelity is the least of it... and that is between him and his wife.

Jesus... please people! Think with the BIG head... the one on top of the shoulders...

[the other one]

28. Thats just silly.

Over-react much?

[JuniperLea]

29. Silly how? What is an over-reaction, in your humble opinion? eom

[rvablue]

38. Silly? In what respect, Charlie? n/t

[Cha]

41. Silly? John Edwards was the height of Silly and

desperately missing a sensitivity chip..add arrogance to that too.

[JeffR]

53. Had he been the nominee, that's fair enough.

He never got anywhere close, however, to being the nominee, so retrospective angst about it seems a little misplaced at this point.

I say this as someone who would have been very happy with Edwards as the nominee. There was a lot to like about his policy proposals. Still is. But he had no more chance than Kucinich (my first choice) of getting the nod. That was obvious from the get-go.

Look, I'm not trying to defend Edwards. In fact, I find his behavior inexcusable. But there certainly wasn't much in the way of risk-taking involved. His candidacy was pretty much a sideshow in the great scheme of things. Had it worked differently and he had actually gained serious momentum in the primaries, I'd agree with you 100%. But that's just not how it unfolded. He simply was not a player. That's what happened. All he risked - and lost - was his own credibility. I would pity him, except of course I don't. I pity his wife and the people who believed in him. That's about it.

[Tennessee Gal]

21. As a former Edwards supporter and donor ....

I really don't care what he has to say any more.

I am completely disappointed.

He should just go away.

[Zavulon]

47. I can (and will) say the same thing.

I supported, I donated, and he spat on all of us who did. I have no regard for him anymore and am kicking myself for ever giving the guy money.

[Raine]

55. Same here

I feel totally had by the guy, giving him money and working for him and all he cared about was his own selfish wants.

[grantcart]

69. + 1 wish I could get my money back

[high density]

22. He's an idiot

That seemed obvious in 2004 but I was willing to ignore his ego and everything else for Kerry/Edwards and my disgust at Bush. It was a mistake in every way possible to run in 2008. For one thing he possibly could have -- worst case scenario -- ended up throwing the Democratic party into turmoil and giving us another GOP president when the country needed it the least. The guy just don't know when to give up and I can't believe he's now talking more about himself. I think his affair would've been much more minor news and easier on his family had he stayed out of the 2008 race.

[incapsulated]

23. .... and no one cares n/t

[dionysus]

33. and the smoove johnny rehabilitation mission commences...

:rofl:

[leftynyc]

34. I can't think of one thing

I'm interested in hearing from that man. To remember he could have sabotaged the entire Democratic party with his shit still pisses me off.

[RoadRage]

36. So in other words.. it would have been better if Edwards HAD NOT SPOKEN..

If you're not going to discuss the questions that people actully want to know about (are you the baby daddy).. and you're not going to admit fault for running for president and possibly being a bigger fuckup then what the Repubs would have liked to even paint Clinton as.. then you probably should just stay at home and out of the limelight. Talking for 90 minutes about anything else really doesn't do much when you have lost all credibility.

I do feel sorry for many of my friends who really believed in this guy. I was on the Obama wagon from day 1.. so I didn't feel the main that many did when this came out.. but I know it sucked. To you all - I am sorry.

[jenmito]

39. "Time will tell" if it made sense for him to stay in the race?

:rofl:

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

49. But who's listening?

[Joe Bacon]

50. Bye, John.

I have no confidence in anything that Edwards says.

[struggle4progress]

51. I do wish he'd stayed in the Senate: I'm pretty sure he'd have beaten Burr. But it's too late now

[dsc]

63. I highly doubt he would have

I personally know a bunch of people who voted for him in 98 who never would have done so in 04. He had burnt alot of bridges down here.

[Raine]

54. Go away and don't let the door hit your ass

on the way out. :mad: I hope I never have to see you in the public eye again. You fooled me once, shame on you but you won't ever fool me again! :-(

edit: typo

[ellisonz]

62. Worse than Clinton.

[Joe Bacon]

64. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Wake me when he says he's leaving public life.

[queenofcups]

77. I was so disappointed to hear about his scandalous behavior

especially given the circumstances of his wife's health. But I also think that it's possible to be a decent, if not great, POTUS, even while having personal failings. And if he was serious about the poverty issue, then I would possibly support him in the future.