What is it with politicians and their sex lives that makes them any of my business or yours?
RALEIGH, N.C. – Two weeks before their national convention, some Democrats are calling for former Sen. John Edwards to publicly address National Enquirer stories that he had an affair with a campaign worker and fathered her baby.If you haven't heard the story, the National Enquirer, which is to journalism what a four leaf clover is to hard work, has been following the tales of one Rielle Hunter who allegedly delivered a baby that John Edwards conceived.
Mr. Edwards, as the 2004 vice presidential nominee and a presidential candidate who won delegates this year, ordinarily would be locked in as a convention speaker.
"He absolutely does have to [resolve it]. If it's not true, he has to issue a stronger denial," said Gary Pearce, the Democratic strategist who ran Mr. Edwards' 1998 Senate race.
Mr. Edwards' decision not to take questions about the allegations has allowed doubts to linger and political bloggers to speculate.
Last December, an Edwards' campaign staffer, Andrew Young, who is also married and has children, came forward and admitted to being the father.
You'd think it would have ended right then and there, but it merely lay dormant.
Much of the interest in this story, clearly designed to throw a wrench in the Democratic coronation of Barack Obama as a candidate (and drop Edwards off the short list for VP, which no one took seriously anyway), has been generated by Fox News, the National Enquirer run by the improbably named Dave Pecker, and the usual gang of dust-dry vaginas and Jello-soft penises on the right wing (e.g. Michelle Malkin and FreeRepublic.com).
The rationale? Well, I don't know the extent of toe-nail clipping that has gone on over on the far right, but I imagine there's the whole Clintonian "If it matters at your house, it matters in the White House" nonsense, but since Edwards' is no longer running, that ought to be a non-starter.
An unique excuse is Edwards' marriage to a terminal cancer victim, Elizabeth, thus neatly dovetailing their gloating over her apparently imminent death while torturing her for the last few months she might have left to her.
Edwards' is a private citizen and therefore entitled to a bit more consideration and compassion than these numbnut assholes have chosen to give. Indeed, these self-same "pundits" (more like ersatz samizdats) raked Edwards over the coal for uncloaking his public persona in the face of his wife's illness, to some extent forcing him back into private life.
Let's assume for a moment the story is true, and Edwards is the father: If I was a terminal cancer patient, on chemo and radiation and exhausted and nauseous, I would probably give my blessings to my wife to go out and take care of her needs. The Edwards deserve at least as much privacy in their decisions as some shlub blogger in New York City.
Indeed, was it not Malkin herself who got her cheerleader panties in a twist when some faux-conservative blogger, Jesus' General, published her home address as well as a map of the neighborhood, citing privacy and safety concerns?
Now let's assume it's not true. Which it sure seems to be the case. Then Edwards deserves to be let alone and the two people who actually admit to the child, also private citizens, ought to be let alone. That Edwards hasn't complained loudly and long about their instigation of a horribly ugly episode in American politics is a testament to his loyalty and his belief that privacy is a right at the Constitution.
I agree with Edwards.
UPDATE: Then again, I could just be as naive an idiot as any Obomber.
Posts
