Elizabeth Edwards: Tragic Heroine or Enabling Conspirator?
America is disgusted by the behavior of John Edwards — but the jury is still out on his wife.
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
At this point, we’ve come to a rare national consensus — not on the Russo-Georgian war, or gas prices, or even Michael Phelps, but on former presidential candidate John Edwards.
Whether you believed that he was the one who could heal the rift between the Two Americas or you thought all along that his great passion was his hair, whether you feel that what happens in a marriage has no bearing on public life or you’re convinced that a person’s behavior in private life is a crucial indicator of character, by now you concur with the conventional wisdom: John Edwards is a putz.
John may have begun digging his own grave when he was introduced to Rielle Hunter in the bar of the Regency Hotel in 2006. He certainly shoveled himself deeper when he met up with her last month in the middle of the night at the Beverly Hilton. But there’s no question that his now-infamous Friday night confessional sent him hurtling down to rock bottom.
Even if we put aside the ironic narcissism of John’s admission that he was narcissistic and therefore he sinned, it now seems quite evident that the tale he’s been peddling is far from the whole story (even the mainstream media are finally on to it). Given that John revealed the extent of his affair to his own wife “in installments,” as People magazine puts it, it seems apparent that he’s not through with the rest of us. From gossip bloggers, to Republican senators, to his own former campaign manager, the general consensus is that he’s still lying and his political goose is cooked.
But what about his wife?
On Elizabeth Edwards, we have no such consensus. In fact, we seem to be developing two distinct schools of thought: Elizabeth as tragic/heroic victim and Elizabeth as down-in-the-mud-with-her-husband villainess. Bluebeard’s wife versus Lady Macbeth, as it were.
Predictably, People has taken the lead on Elizabeth as tragic heroine. In a fairly skimpy article, various friends and relatives are quoted on her anguish and her dedication to her children. She’s being strong in the face of hardship, the argument goes, because she’s that kind of gal.
Another such argument goes that, just like any other loving wife, in fact just like you and me, she loved him and wanted to believe him, and then there’s the kids. Women who have long idolized the plainspoken, unglamorous politician’s wife with a mind of her own, are chiming in with their paeans to Elizabeth as victim and heroine.
But there are those who find plenty of blame to place right on her. Nobody is suggesting that Elizabeth told John to go out and find himself a bimbo (”Honey, now that my cancer’s in remission, you could use a little reward for being so supportive during all that chemo…”), though Rush Limbaugh, in classic form, argued that she drove him to it.
Rebecca Steinitz is a writer, editor, and consultant in Arlington, Massachusetts.
| Comment |  Digg This |
 del.icio.us |
 |
 |
 PJM Home |
36 Comments
1. aunt ralph:That we should rush to interpret Elizabeth in the face of her own silence is no surprise. This is the celebrity-gossip-meets-everybody’s-opinion era, when doctors and psychologists are quoted in the pages of gossip magazines with definitive opinions on people and events they know nothing about, and the rest of us are making our voices heard all over the blogosphere
No, dear, some of ‘the rest of us’ are keeping a respectful silence for people whose lives have taken tragic turns. Trifecta, indeed !
Aug 18, 2008 - 4:13 am 2. CR:I had previously decided that John Edwards is a putz at best so these stories have zero impact on my opinion. I don’t even know what the story is, since I have zero interest in his personal life. I just see it as more gossip for folks who like that kind of thing. Heck, it’s surely better than reality TV or is it? I wouldn’t know since I don’t like that kind of thing.
Aug 18, 2008 - 5:25 am 3. Jill:I didn’t think that that I could still be surprised by the useless stories that are written about trivial people. Why is Edwards news worthy? And better still his wife?
Aug 18, 2008 - 5:51 am 4. Tess:It’s true that she’s had plenty of tragedy to deal with…but it’s equally true that she’s been a willing partner of his, all along, in attempting to wring political advantage from their son’s death and her cancer. I also believe that she’s helping him as he tries to remain politically viable even after the recent revelations. The quest for political power, for some (the Clintons come to mind) is simply the most important thing in life.
Aug 18, 2008 - 5:55 am 5. Harry Schell:Elizabeth knew Johnny was messing around when he launched his Presidential bid, and sat around listening to the moral scold perjure himself.
Selective indignation indeed.
The two share unabated hypocrisy. Sorry, I feel sorry for her illness as one human to another, but it stops there. She failed to act when John broke the most precious vows a person can make.
Aug 18, 2008 - 6:40 am 6. Audrey:Why do we need to analyze it in the first place? Simply because someone is a public figure, does that mean that we have to sit in judgement. Edwards made his error. I think we should leave his wife out of it until she decides she has something else to say. Then we can decide if we wish to listen. How many women have husbands who have cheated on them? I seem to hear about it all around me. Who doesn’t have problems in their marriage from time to time? And who wants to go out and air that to the public? Would we all think so much more of Elizabeth Edwards if she came out and said her husband was a horrible man and a cheater? Maybe they have made amends. It disgusts me that people think of this as some quest for power thing. Maybe it is simply the wish to avoid being embarrassed when someone does something that hurts you to the core. Maybe she is being as dignified as she possibly can under a great deal of hurt and sideways glances.
What really peeves me is the point that some people make this a political item rather than a personal one. I think there is enough of this kind of tragedy across the aisles to stay away from that one.
Aug 18, 2008 - 7:43 am 7. Paul From Hamburg:I have no sympathy for Elizabeth Edwards. Like Silda Spitzer, she willingly went along for the ride while her husband abused the legal system to ruin other peoples lives. Elizabeth’s life of luxury was paid for by higher insurance premiums, doctors driven away from OB/GYN practice and the thousands of women who have had unnecessary Ceasarean sections.
Aug 18, 2008 - 8:02 am 8. Sue:I have great empathy for her as a fellow human, but as the wife, I have absolutely no sympathy. Read some of her “hate” rants on the Huffpo and others sites to understand that she will forever support her co-dependent hubby!! She is the typical leftist female who in reality hates men but, alas, also has to have one.
Aug 18, 2008 - 8:26 am 9. Dark Helmet:Many people stay in abusive relationships. Look wht hillary put up with, but it paid off for her. No chance in hell she would of gotten anywere without bill.
It looks just a little like it’s already been done……. but who knows. Big $ makes a person become who they truly are.
Aug 18, 2008 - 8:37 am 10. HeatherRadish:What really peeves me is the point that some people make this a political item
Huh? It IS a political item. Edwards was supporting his mistress with PAC donations.
Aug 18, 2008 - 8:57 am 11. Dave:How can people believe that, because it was personal sexual behavior, it has no political implication? The Senator (and quite possibly Elizabeth) spent a lot of time lying to/misleading the voters. Do we not have reasonable expectation that this behavior portends a lot more lying about national spending/security issues in the future? Oh, yes… all politicians lie so he and she are absolved. Geeez!
Aug 18, 2008 - 9:41 am 12. BobNC:Edwards was very successful in a profession where a practitioner does and says ANYTHING to make his point. He carried that view into politics. Elizabeth, also a sleazy lawyer, knew what Edwards was and is. In My view, Edwards has always been a liar. He built a persona in 2004 that the media bought without question and we have accepted it.
Aug 18, 2008 - 9:58 am 13. Akatsukami:Several things: I’d like to see proof that Elizabeth actually had cancer. Yep, that’s cold. But, as sleazy as Edwards is, I see no problem for him and his wife fabricating the story. Same thing with the relapse. And, if he runs for something again, she’ll have another relapse.
Second, I don’t believe the fling with Reille was his first. My bet is that he’s been hustling honeys for years and that Elizabeth knew about most; she knew, after all, what she was getting at the start.
Edwards probably combined the two points with a line that went something like, “Of course I love you but I can’t marry you while Elizabeth…”
John Edwards is scum, pure and simple. Elizabeth Edwards is somewhere between scum and a brain trannsplant candidate. And neither of them will ever be in the White House unless they buy tickets for the guided tour.
As long as we remember those facts, and don’t allow the progressives to pull a Duranty, it’s time to MoveOn™. The Silky Pony self-destructed from arrogant stupidity (or stupid arrogance, takes your pick). Instead of kicking the smouldering corpse, let us direct that energy at a still-dangerous target.
Aug 18, 2008 - 10:01 am 14. ZEITGEIST:[...] here. And, of course, Mickey Kaus is still on the [...]
Aug 18, 2008 - 12:06 pm 15. Mabel:I think criticism of Elizabeth are unnecessary and speculative at best. I am appalled Rush thinks she drove John to cheating…typical sexist reasoning…why? because she is dying of cancer and can be a wife anymore? Poor little John!!! Let’s cut this lady some slack. Who knows what she knew. He probably gave her a very limited version of the affair and told her it was over. What was she supposed to do? Hired her own PIs? Create a media scandal by denouncing him? He probably told her he would confess it un due time if his candidacy got far enough…the real monsters here are John and Rielle, who have continued their relationship because they know it’s a matter of time until he’s free again…let’s have some compassion!
Aug 18, 2008 - 12:47 pm 16. Javelin:Wow, what petty little trash hit piece, and this has nothing to do with politics, but garbage like this is E! or Entertainment Tonight level tabloid dreck. Sorry, but I just can’t take this rubbish or the hack who produces it, as well as the geeks who manage this site seriously. We are talking about a freaking affair of a has-been while major events are occuring right now around the world. You people are putzes!
Aug 18, 2008 - 1:15 pm 17. ApplePie:Most people seem to discount how overwhelmed and tired one gets when fighting a chronic or acute illness. When one finally enters remission it is with great relief mixed with anxiety AND exhaustion. While Elizabeth was trying to stay alive and see her husband and children another day - John was busy picking fruit from the ugly tree. Putz?? - you bet!!
Perhaps his final “installments” came to her when they were already in the midst of the Dem. Nominee election?? –leaving her no real choice but to continue??
Likely Elizabeth will not become a canonized saint but she is a far cry from the opposite.
Aug 18, 2008 - 1:28 pm 18. Layla Elizabeth Gonzalez:Sadly you sound cold, indifferent and as hard as a boiled egg. Just like your paeans.
A little love and compassion in our world would go a long way whether or not she knew. Trying to know if she knew or did not makes no difference. Cancer or not - no woman or man deserves to be treated this way. We are all human beings and deserve better.
Take that thought provoking thought to your paeans too. And BTW-according to our PJM Network contract we are not to attack others in the network. But I figured since you chose to refer to my sentiments as with that of other “paeans” - you get what you give.
Get a life and grow some compassion you cold hearted kool-aid drinker!
Aug 18, 2008 - 1:46 pm 19. Fen:I think we should leave his wife out of it until she decides she has something else to say
She already has. She was complicit in John’s coverup. She conspired with him to lie to stafff and supporters who deserved the know the truth so they could choose whether to invest their time, money and energy in a more viable candidate. I’m sorry she has cancer, but that doesn’t shield her from behaving like a putz.
Aug 18, 2008 - 1:52 pm 20. doustoi:Mabel:
Aug 18, 2008 - 2:14 pm 21. RAH:Elizabeth conspired with him to mislead the media (easy job when you are a Dem) and the party (no tears from me on this)when she should have told him to come clean at the outset. If the baby IS his, and she knows that as well, and if she knows about the hush money, she is a co-conspiritor in a whopping fraud. No way a woman with her education is dumb enough to have been in the dark about the whole mess - or the implications.
When he was running and the cancer came back supposedly Elizabeth was the one that wanted him to continue running. Since she already knew about his adultery she was the force behind his push for the presidency.So had already made her decision and decided to shove it under the rug for political reasons.
Rarely does a wife want to demolish their spouses political career by announcing his adultery.
Aug 18, 2008 - 2:27 pm 22. DavidN:The difficulty here is that any criticism of Elizabeth Edwards comes off as cold, heartless, unsympathetic, because she has cancer and is, presumably dying. So the fact that she lied to the public, at least by omission, repeatedly, campaigned for a husband who had just admitted to cheating on her, watched as he hypocritically made a point, during his campaign, of how faithful he was to her, and so forth…all that fades away because she’s dying. The whole thing has gotten silly.
Aug 18, 2008 - 2:45 pm 23. wayne:With every bit of info I have read about the Edwards saga, I am convinced that not only did Elizabeth know about Reille, but she approved of his conduct. I ahve never seen anything that indicated Liz was particularly upset with John.
Look at the time line. Edwards said that he told Liz that he was playing hide-the-sausage with Reille in 2006. She gets hired on AND IS STILL EMPLOYED BY HIS CAMPAIGN. She still spends time with him and his campaign even after Liz goes out with her “pity me…I have cancer” bit. There is even a kid involved.
Instead of using the best “I’ll bury you with the lawyers and the public if you don’t ditch the b*tch” argument anyone ever had, Liz calmly allows Reille to stick around and John to be off spending his evenings continuing his sausage placement operations (the Enquirer reporters wrote that the hotel lights were off for about 5 hours before John snuck out of Reille’s hotel room at around 2:30 in the morning). If anyone thinks John was just trying not to disturb the baby I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you!!
Does Liz pitch a fit (other than being annoyed over John being followed)? No. She has done nothing but play “happy family” thru the whole situation. She’s so calm you’d think they were from that Texas Mormon sect.
Nope, I’m convinced that sex-kitten Reille is a spouse-approved concubine.
Who knows, maybe Liz even vetted Reille before hand.
“Wanted: Vivascious, energetic, creative, sex-partner for powerful political figure. To take performance stress off of uninterested spouse while not threatening family economic situation. Pretup contract required. Position includes membership in campaign staff, travel, with commeasurate salary and benefits. Fertility a plus. Contact Liz at XXXXX@gmail.com“
Aug 18, 2008 - 2:57 pm 24. Akatsukami:“We are talking about a freaking affair of a has-been”
And it is because of that affair that he is a has-been.
Aug 18, 2008 - 3:09 pm 25. ddc:The reason why this is such a story is that he and she were not simply nobody Americans like the rest of us who, had we done the same our friends and family would no doubt judge us as is natural. But that’s pretty much as far as it goes. The Edwards’ were poised to be President and First Lady of our country.
He stepped into the limelight a cheat and a liar. She stepped in as an accomplice to the lie. If she forgave him that’s her business. It becomes our business when a candidate asks the American people for his trust and we see the true nature of his character. If she didn’t get that then shame on her.
Aug 18, 2008 - 7:11 pm 26. chicago:Elizabeth Edwards is no different from Hillary Clinton…both know full well that their husbands “leave the reservation” at the sight of a nice skirt.
While it’s unfortunate that she has cancer, it’s stupid to believe that she had no knowledge of her husbands infidelity. As Hillary Clinton simply accepted the fact that good ‘ol Bill is a pervert, Elizabeth surely accepted the fact the John Edwards is a cheater…both accepted it so that their husbands can pursue the presidency.
does it make her a saint…no. it shows that she would agree to a lie if it meant that they reach the coveted power that many failed to attain.
Aug 19, 2008 - 4:20 am 27. Snoop Diggity-DANG-Dawg:I’ve often heard various folks comment on how wonderfully varied, complex and diverse the English language is, effortlessly welcoming foreign words and phrases ‘into the fold’. The depth of our language is sometimes described as a ‘bottomless reservoir’ of nuance.
I agreed with that sentiment, but no longer, thanks to John Edwards. I’ve been struggling the last two weeks for words to describe exactly how much of a douchebag he really is. And sadly, for the first time I find my native tongue wanting. The adjectives simply aren’t ‘there’ to accurately describe how much of a manipulative, calculating, reprehensible, scumbag, liar, phony, narcissistic, empty-suit, jackass he really is.
See that? My best effort to ‘capture’ the fundamental essence of John Edwards rings completely hollow. It’s like calling the Grand Canyon a ‘really big ravine’. I would otherwise be embarrassed by my linguistic impotence, but I really don’t think it’s my fault. He has simply re-defined the boundaries of douche-baggery, shattering the power of words to define him. It is, in wierd sort of way, a mark of greatness. A legacy, if you will.
Aug 19, 2008 - 5:57 am 28. RJ:Are you kidding? Putz for John, yet nothing for this wife of his? At what age did John learn how attractive his appearance was for others? And his wife, did she learn of her appearance too? Will John tell his shrink (you can bet both are sitting in offices talking and talking, some truths here, some lies there…will they stay in therapy long enough?) when he first realized how powerful he was and if when he engages in sexual play whether it is a “performance” or “pleasure” thing for him? And the wife: Will she come clean and admit what she has known for years? I don’t care for I am not in their family. As a voting citizen, I never liked either as leaders. As a father, I am saddened for the children and hope both parents find a voice of truth wherein they can talk with their children to minimize the damage. The odds are against this, but that’s why the word hope exists.
Aug 19, 2008 - 6:00 am 29. tanstaafl:…though Rush Limbaugh, in classic form, argued that she (Elizabeth) drove him to it.
Drove him to what “it” ?
The affair with Rielle ?
I don’t see that point made in your Rush Limbaugh link.
Aug 19, 2008 - 9:29 am 30. Rosemary:First, I seriously doubt this was John Edwards first foray into cheating on his wife. His narcissim is nothing new.
Secondly, those cheated upon in marriages very often make the choice of sticking it out - for various and many reasons (which doesn’t mean they’re necessarily good, but sometimes more understandable when there are children).
Thirdly, I feel so darned reluctant to judge Elizabeth in these circumstances. I enjoy listening to Rush and always learn something, but I don’t necessarily always agree with him. Maybe this other woman “gave” Edwards something Elizabeth didn’t - but hey, let’s face it: would you feel generously amorous after a bout of chemo??? It makes one sick for weeks, and about the time one feels better it’s time for the next round of chemo.
Oddly enough, on some levels I can understand the returning to the campaign trail after the initial learning of the affair. She’s sick, and she’s seeking something that will bring them together again.
It’s sad — regardless of what’s “true”, she’s been tossed more than her share to deal with and I think that Hunter woman’s remarks about her only reflect extremely poorly on both Edwards and that woman.
Aug 19, 2008 - 1:07 pm 31. Boulis:RE: Layla Elizabeth Gonzalez
I am a long-time lurker on these boards but this comment demanded a response. Look Ms. Gonzales, I don’t really want to insult you or anything but a “paean” is an Ancient Greek song/hymn often used to praise a divinity. I think you mistook it for the word “peon.” Your virulent attack seems unwarranted in light of this revelation, no?
Aug 20, 2008 - 7:14 am 32. tanstaafl:Women who have long idolized the plainspoken, unglamorous politician’s wife with a mind of her own, are chiming in with their paeans to Elizabeth as victim and heroine.
The word “paean” (as tribute) is used correctly in that sentence.
Aug 20, 2008 - 8:05 am 33. Boulis:That was my point: the author of the original article — Ms. Steinitz — used the word “paean” correctly. Ms. Gonzalez, however, in her comments above, seems to not be familiar with the word and is obviously confusing it with the word “peon.” Where exactly is the disconnect?
Aug 20, 2008 - 11:13 am 34. Snoop Diggity-DANG-Dawg:Ah, sorry to play the spoiler here, dunces, but the correct usage of ‘paean’ is as a non-modifying, reflexive, passive, perfective article, not unlike the common past-participle.
The correct usage of ‘peon’ is as follows:
“John Edwards is an deeply committed, upstanding member of our community and a beacon of promise for America’s working poor.”
“Dude, please don’t peon my leg and tell me it’s raining”.
Aug 21, 2008 - 5:57 am 35. Susan Katz Keating:Elizabeth Edwards, sadly, missed a great opportunity to speak out on behalf of a silenced population. Other women in her situation are not as fortunate as to have a high profile spouse who wants badly to appear “good.” The cheaters have little regard for the entire social contract, including rules governing fair play behind closed doors and in the courts.
Aug 21, 2008 - 12:38 pm 36. tanstaafl:Where exactly is the disconnect?
No disconnect.
Linking “The Paeans” didn’t seem like an insult, to the writers of the paeans or to E. Edwards.
signed,
paean-ed out
I feel sorry for Mrs. Edwards and the children. But the story will always be the (too many years now) we’ve had to listen to the Two Americas, I feel pretty, $400 haircut guy who has ranted, among other things, about the travesty of un-wed mommies.
And the story will always be suppression of said story in the MSM until John himself was forced to fess up (more or less fess up, since a partial CYA telling is worse than a full telling), after which said MSM even tried to take credit for “breaking” the story.
Aug 21, 2008 - 2:41 pm