Skip to main content

Another Eros Stricken Married Male Bites the Dust


This Friday, August 8, 2008, Sen. John Edwards, once a Democrat presidential candidate, now a repentant philanderer, announced that he did indeed have an affair with a young lady who filmed his campaign.

According to an Associated Press front page story in the Journal Inquirer Edwards has “denied fathering a daughter born to the woman with whom he had the affair, and offered to be tested to prove it… After the story broke Friday, Edwards released a statement that said, 'In 2006, I made a serious error in judgment… I recognized my mistake and told my wife that I had a liaison with another woman, and I asked for her forgiveness. I was honest in every painful detail with my family. I took responsibility for my action in 2006, and today I take full responsibility publicly.'”

The cause of Edward’s infidelity was that ol’devil hubris, according to the AP report and Edwards’ statement: “In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic.”

Edwards, bewitched by his own public appearance, regrets falling into an erotic pool, and if people want to beat up on him, that’s fine. He’s already beaten himself up.

Addressing the cancer question – though stricken with cancer, his valiant wife never-the-less campaigned for her cheating husband – Edwards’ wife said that the healing process was “oddly made easier” after she had been diagnosed with cancer in March 2007.

Some few remarks seem to be in order.

It was not that ol’devil hubris but those ol’devils Eros (think erotic) and Pan (think panic), the Greek Gods of sexual desire and free love, that drove Edward into the arms of the film-maker.

This sometimes happens among men and women. When they do not have attachments, we are trained to look the other way and put it all down to human emotion. In the post-Freudian period, we males delight in offering our wills as a blood sacrifice to the Ego, the Super Ego having shrunken in the post-Christian period to the size of a flea whose fierce bites are tolerable. In addition, women’s liberation has liberated the worst excesses of men and, all things else being equal, women.

The back-message of Edwards’ statement to the watchful media is: I’m human too; we all make mistakes. Couldn’t you find it in your heart to forgive me now that I have made a public affirmation of sorrow and repentance, and allow myself and my wife to recover and heal?

The healing process has now begun. Could you please get out of the way?

This is the usual trajectory in the case of straying politicians: fierce denials and assertions of moral rectitude; followed by the pursuit of the doubtful – in this case, moral Furies from the National Inquirer, whose two reporters followed Edwards to his liaison with the film-maker, who may or may not (Greta Van Susteren will find out) have born him a child; followed by the shock of discovery in the respectable media; followed by abject remorse and the vagrant hope that it will all go away, so that the principle culprit can resume his political career unattended by the Furies.

Such miracles happen: A drowning in Chappaquiddick was not a bar to Edward Kennedy’s long and vigorous career in the U.S. Senate; so far, Sen. Larry Craig has survived a bathroom incident in Washington; Barney Frank, who lent his house out to a procurer of sexual favors, is still plying his trade in the U.S. House of Representatives. And the countryside is littered with the corpses of discarded wives thrown over for prettier, richer women. Current and former presidential candidates John McCain, Chris Dodd and Edward Kennedy all did it. The names of U.S. Congressmen who did it would fill a small phone book.

It cannot be convincingly argued that representatives who blithely toss their ex-wives on the ash heaps of their marriage beds do not represent their constituents, since the divorce and marriage in the United States are approaching parity.

So, what’s the problem with a little fooling around in the age of liberation provided, as Edwards insists, there is no outstanding issue (read: baby) involved? And even if the worship of Eros and Pan has produced and out-of-wedlock child, why is there a problem so long as the cheater (think Jesse Jackson) supports the child?

If Edwards had made these arguments, he would have been at least plausible, though his political career would have bitten the dust.

Comments

Great Piece Don.
Guess Edwards could boil it all down to the man's prayer from the Red Green show:
"I'm a man,
And I can change,
If I have to,
I guess."

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...