Why did Elizabeth Edwards write her new book?

[cali]

I honestly don't get her motivation for writing about her husband's affair. Pay back? wanting to get her side of the story out? She's bringing up something that had pretty much died down in the public sphere. Now, with her book and her public appearances, it will be all over the MSM again. How does this impact her young children? Just seems a strange thing to do.

[Demeter]

1. A Woman on the Verge of Divorce Needs Some Lawyer Money

[cali]

2. She has plenty of money for a lawyer.

it's not like she doesn't have access to funds if she needs them.

[WI_DEM]

52. She's not getting a divorce. Maybe she wants her side out before she dies?

[AngryAmish]

57. Not really - the lawyer will fo it on sp[ec and get the money later

There is no problem getting money out of the Edward marital estate.

Now if you have no cash, then you got a problem.

[MinneapolisMatt]

3. Maybe she wanted to get her side out...

...in case she dies from cancer sooner than later?

I know it's morbid, but possible.

[cali]

4. maybe. it just seems weird to write something

about this now, while her kids are still young and in a vulnerable place.

[pnwmom]

55. Maybe she wants her kids to read it someday, knowing that they will

be able to read about the whole thing in the media and hear about it from their father's point of view.

[havocmom]

24. Could be. When you reach the point of having nothing to lose, truth becomes more important

And when you have been hurt badly by the person who is supposed to be your best ally, the need to assure truth is out there can be a very driving force. It's not unheard of for the cheater to blame the victim. Happens too often.

[stevenleser]

68. Yup, happened in my 1st marriage

Wife cheated, I kicked her out, she blames me for kicking her out.

[karynnj]

43. but it hurts her rather than helps her

[WI_DEM]

53. Why does it hurt her? she is just being honest.

[Medusa]

131. Is she really?

From what I've seen so far in the excerpts that have been released, she assigns the blame to the other woman, not the 50-50 blame between her husband and the other woman.

[The Hope Mobile]

158. She's devastated and she's telling the story she WANTS to believe . . .

its not about truth, because if she wanted the whole truth out, she would want to know for sure whether that baby is John's. Instead she's fabricating (unintentionally) a story that is least difficult for her to swallow and she probably believes (subconsciously) that if she tells this version enough that it is what other people will believe too.
From my experience, she needs to believe that Hunter was a groupie and was the responsible party because otherwise the betrayal is too hard for her to bear no matter how resilient she is. To be put in such a publicly negative spotlight after imitating the perfect American family, (and I'm sure desperately trying to make it real) while she's deathly ill, has young, vulnerable children, etc., would feel like the ultimate betrayal and probably makes her feel utterly humiliated by being publicly "rejected", used, and fooled.
She wants people to know that she didn't just fall for his charm and stupidly believe everything he said, yet, most of the story is just that. . . desperately clinging to any chance that he was somehow forced to do it and that he didn't really betray her to the degree that he actually did. She can't even think about the possibility that that baby might be his.
She NEEDS to believe this or it will be that much harder to fight for her health/time with her children. It could break her "resilience" and that is the source of her sense of identity. Sounds pretty bleak probably but that's my take on the timing of her "tell all".

[havocmom]

70. The truth sometimes hurts

and it hurts liars and cheats more.

She seems a very inspiring person. If she can turn her pain into a light to help others, it gives her suffering grace.

[elleng]

92. 'truth' doesn't hurt liars AT ALL!

they just don't give a damn! Edw went on to run for prez AFTER Eliz KNEW about the affair. WHAT A SCUM BAG! (I've NEVER used that term before, fwiw.)

[havocmom]

100. No, many liars are VERY concerned with image and truth bashes image

[jules1962]

143. read the title of the book

"Resilience" is about much more than the affair. It is on overcoming bad things in life.

[Ian David]

5. So she can ask her husband to help proofread and stuff...

"Honey, tell me what's a better title for Chapter Six, 'My Bastard Husband Tore My Heart Out,' or 'Someday I'll Kill The Son-of-a-Bitch in his Sleep.'"

[Tutankhamun]

157. Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

:rofl:

[lazer47]

6. One word,,,,,Closure

[cali]

8. I don't see how this book provides closure for her

and it certainly won't provide it for Jack and Emma.

[havocmom]

26. Truth telling can be a comfort.

And at some point, Jack and Emma may well want the truth, but mom probably won't be there to answer questions then.

[Inuca]

113. Then tell it to your friends

and write something for the little children that they can read later (wasn't she already doing something like that? I kind of remember reading about it...). What true presonal comfort somebody can get from airing dirty laundry in publis (sounds harsh I guess, but that's what it is), I just cannot understand. I have no iea whether I am right or wrong, obviously, and it's not a very nice thing to say, sorry, but the only rational explantion I can think of is that she is trying to redeem her own public image, which rightly or wrongly she may seem as partially tarnished.

It may seem otherwise, but I am really not judging, I am just perplexed, and I find the whole thing sad.

[tsuki]

38. I agree. This need to splat your personal experiences all over

the tabloids is a bit too much for me. What ever happened to the stiff upper lip?

[pnwmom]

56. It will provide her voice to Jack and Emma when she is gone.

It will answer whatever they have heard from their father and the media.

[Inuca]

114. As I said above before reading your message

she had the option to write it only for the children's eyes, when they are old enough to understand. Had she chosen that, she could have been more open in what she chose to tell her own children vs. telling it to the millions that are going to get at least a glimpse at what she wrote.

[Captain Hilts]

21. Naw, this will open more than it closes.

But she probably wants to get her side of the story out.

[MADem]

7. To call the paramour "Pathetic" in the public square, perhaps?

This hasn't died down--that baby is the offspring of JE. The girlfriend was getting ready to go public, according to some sources.

Imagine how that little girl will feel as she grows up and realizes that Daddy spent a few years of her life denying her?

[Adelante]

12. Refusal to acknowledge one's child

To me, that is even lower than cheating on a cancer-stricken wife.

[quiller4]

60. There are more than a few contenders for father of that child. n/t

[WinkyDink]

81. Says you. How many visited the kid at 3:00 a.m. before trying to leave through the basement?

Don't even try to call me a "hater". I supported JE, traveled hours to hear him, got his autograph.

[hyphenate]

90. John has asked her to take a paternity test

and she refuses to do so. That tells me she's afraid of the world finding out the truth. For all we know, it's another kid from the same fertility doctor as octomom's.

It does raise the issue though, that until the child is completely tested, it is always going to be her word against his. And anyone who blames him without proof is just talking with and to a brick wall, and has absolutely zero credibility doing so.

[quiller4]

136. She has denied that Edwards is the father.

And, at least according to some of the gossip sites, she is getting regular support payments from another man with whom she has had an on again off again relationship for several years.

[Baby Snooks]

22. Calling her pathetic is pathetic....

I really do believe the book is just an attempt to soothe a wounded ego by portraying her husband as a victim the way Hillary Clinton did.

We all know those nasty women, intemperate vamps, seduced Bill Clinton and John Edwards. Poor defenseless men. Sorry but cheating husbands as victims just doesn't cut it.

"I'm not just some little woman standing by her man" Hillary Clinton protested. Obviously not.

As for Tammy Wynette, well, she stood by her man. Right after he picked himself up off the floor after she hit him upside the head with a cast iron skillet. The only thing Tammy Wynette's men were victims of were themselves.

Hillary should have been a little more like Tammy Wynette. Elizabeth Edwards as well. Of course Tammy Wynette didn't have an agenda.

[MADem]

29. Well, she's pathetic then, because she calls Rielle Hunter "pathetic" in the book. NT

[quiller4]

59. Rielle Hunter is pathetic but Elizabeth Edwards doesn't

grow in stature by stating the obvious.

[MADem]

88. I haven't read the book, so it's really not for me to say.

I feel sorry for Mrs. Edwards. I think she got fucked over, emotionally, spiritually, and worst of all--IN PUBLIC-- by an asshole of a husband.

She should have been the politician in the family. She's smarter than her husband, I suspect.

[avaistheone1]

105. Another vote for Rielle Hunter is pathetic.

[a kennedy]

9. because she might need her own money when this probe starts

John Edwards acknowledges federal probe over campaign funds

By MIKE BAKER

RALEIGH, N.C. - His once-prominent political career is buried and the turmoil of his marriage is playing out in public. Now, John Edwards is facing a federal inquiry.

The two-time Democratic presidential candidate acknowledged Sunday that investigators are assessing how he spent his campaign funds — a subject that could carry his extramarital affair from the tabloids to the courtroom. Edwards' political action committee paid more than $100,000 for video production to the firm of the woman with whom Edwards had an affair.

The former North Carolina senator said in a carefully worded statement that he is cooperating.

"I am confident that no funds from my campaign were used improperly," Edwards said in the statement. "However, I know that it is the role of government to ensure that this is true. We have made available to the United States both the people and the information necessary to help them get the issue resolved efficiently and in a timely matter."

full article: <http://www.startribune.com/nation/44259237.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUJ>

[cali]

10. Elizabeth is a savvy lawyer

it's absurd to think that she doesn't have her own money.

[mopinko]

35. you don't know. being a full time mom

and being shit on, it's a whole different flavor of shit than having a career of your own. especially after going back into baby making when the kids were almost grown.
maybe she has money, but she is still fighting for her life, and her self. if i were her, my regrets would be unfathomably deep. i would be thinkin' lorena bobbit.

(i spent 15 years as a full time mom, and 10 more now as parent #1, career still on the back burner.)

[elleng]

93. Hey, mop.

:hug:

[mopinko]

107. hey back at ya

how you doin'?

[elleng]

91. 'her own money' we have no idea about.

I'm fighting for mine, now, fwiw.

[TuxedoKat]

11. Agreed.

I don't get her motivation either, as she certainly doensn't need the money. Maybe she felt there was too much misinformation out there about it and had she had to set the record straight like you said. That's the only reason I think that might justify it, but what a cost for all involved, especially her kids.

[stray cat]

13. She believes she was something of worth to say about resiliance

Its being portrayed as a small inspirational book that blends stories of those she has met who bounced back from diverse trials.

"While on the campaign trail, Elizabeth met many others who have had to contend with serious adversity in their lives, and in Resilience, she draws on their experiences as well as her own, crafting an unsentimental and ultimately inspirational meditation on the gifts we can find among life’s biggest challenges. This short, powerful, pocket-sized inspirational book makes an ideal gift for anyone dealing with difficulties in their life, who can find peace in knowing they are not alone, and promise that things can get better".

[cali]

14. could be, but couldn't she have

done it without going into her husband's affair?

[stray cat]

15. How much detail of the affair is there in the book? It certainly qualifies as a difficult time

[MADem]

17. Not enough, apparently. It's a "short book" they say.

Doesn't address "the baby" at all....you know, "the baby" that is the spit image of her husband.

[Captain Hilts]

16. If she doesn't write her story, someone else will. That's why celebs often do these now.

It's actually a smart move.

I know that's why K Hepburn wrote hers.

[Baby Snooks]

27. Elizabeth Edwards is no Katherine Hepburn....

Elizabeth Edwards for one thing is the wife. Katherine Hepburn was the other woman.

[Captain Hilts]

39. It's more complicated than that. But prominent folks are wise to get their view out there.

The Tracy marriage was long over before Hepburn arrived.

Life's complicated.

[Baby Snooks]

48. Spencer Tracy...

He could have ended the marriage. Not that Katherine Hepburn would have married him. But I suspect she would have preferred not to have been the "other woman" and there's a bit of hypocrisy in the excuse of "the marriage was over when the affair started..." Spencer Tracy was just selfish. Period. But then most men are. As long as they're getting what they want, they don't care about whether anyone else is.

[TuxedoKat]

80. He always struck me

as kind of a jerk. I wonder if she - KH would have even married him if he'd been free. I think she was too independent.

[stevenleser]

84. That is a pretty gender biased thing to say, dontcha think?

Replace men with women, gays, african americans, asians and what you said is completely unacceptable. It shouldnt be acceptable for 'men' either.

[Saturday]

18. I agree with the money reason given above. nt

[sandnsea]

19. She wrote a book after the campaign too

Put a few things in it about Teresa that were completely unnecessary. Who knows. Maybe she writes them because people will buy them.

[Captain Hilts]

20. Sometimes people write these because they're bored shitless on campagin planes, etc.

I know that's why Eleanor R edited her father's letters in '32 and wrote her autobio in '36. nt

[karynnj]

45. That was all political

The strange thing is that anyone reading with any skepticism would read the comments on Teresa and quickly see the problem was Elizabeth Edwards' insecurity (on the whole decorating the room nonsense). On the cancer care information, Teresa who hosts annual conferences that deal with women's health among other things, was simply trying to be helpful. Edwards' blaming Teresa for her own fears was pathetic.

Given that, and the interviews where she again spoke of the Ewdards as everyday people - in spite of having been millionaires for decades, while the Kerrys were elitist and saying that Edwards was more progressive than Kerry - when in fact, in 2004 Kerry's programs were ALL far more progressive than Edwards and actually were consistent with the values Kerry had his whole life.

I really respect the grace shown by both Kerrys, who never said one negative thing is response.

[ellacott]

64. Wow, I didn't know she did that to the Kerrys

That's very disappointing. It's so wrong for her to say that the Kerrys are elitists. She's using the right wing talking points. I never believed that John Edwards was progressive at all. He has no record of that. When he was a Senator he votin record was not progressive at all. Even Feigngold pointed out his voting record and that was the reason that he didn't support him when he ran for President.

The Kerrys have been gracious by not saying anything publically against them. Bob Shrum did mention a few instances in his book but John Kerry never confirmed them.

[Cha]

72. The Kerrys are

inspirationally full of grace and caring.

[Diane R]

128. My views of her first book are the same as yours. I didn't like her nearly as much after I read it.

I'm glad you saw what I saw. She took gratuitous swipes at Theresa Kerry, Howard Dean, and others. I started to see a pattern.

I came to see her as quite self-absorbed, and self-indulging. I KNEW last August that she would write a book. I never, ever bought her self-imposed silence act. This woman loves to portray herself as noble.

Granted, I still think she has many wonderful qualities. But she is also calculated and shrewd. This is all about sticking it to John, and Reille.

Also...did anyone besides me notice that little Emma is hardly mentioned at all in her first book?

I would never spend money on another one of her books.

[abluelady]

23. Call Me Naive, But

I read her last book which was how she dealt with their child's death. I think it was a wonderful book on strength. And I think it helped others who had that type of loss. She was also very involved on a support website for those who lost a loved one. My guess is she is doing the same thing now--trying to offer support to others. I would like to think if I went through adversity I could do something to help others in the same boat.

[havocmom]

28. good points. When life brings pain, many try to make the pain serve a purpose

And there is lots of this kind of pain out there. It is some small comfort to know others find ways to cope and then get past it all.

When nearing the end of a tunnel, it is good to hold up a light for others who are not as far along the path.

[JDPriestly]

44. I think you are right. The job of a writer is to explore reality.

That is what she is doing. It may be very helpful to a lot of people out there who have to endure similarly painful betrayals. I think that is why she is writing it.

[gardenista]

71. If I could only recommend a reply...

This would be the one.

[dancingme]

25. Attention

that's the only reason I can come up with now. I used to admire her, but after this book I just see her as someone who definitely needs the audience attention that comes from a book tour.

[Klukie]

30. I don't know.....

but I wouldn't presume to judge her motivations. She is entitled to say what ever she wants about it...She more than earned the right. As far as impacting the children....I say that they were already impacted and they will only benefit from her strength and honesty.

[classof56]

33. You have hit the nail on the head, IMHO.

I agree with you, and if Elizabeth is reading this thread (I hear she's a DUer), I echo what Klukie says--you, Elizabeth, have more than earned the right to say what ever you want, and I for one look forward to reading your book and watching your interview on Oprah.

Blessings to Elizabeth!

[deerheadgal]

31. Before we speculate...

...perhaps we should actually read what she has to say.

[Baby Snooks]

37. I don't need to....

She indeed called the "other woman" pathetic. That's all I need to read.

You know what's pathetic? A wife trying to excuse a husband who can't keep his pants zipped. Enough already with the cheating husband as victim. A cheating husband is a victimizer. Not a victim.

[ShortnFiery]

139. Exactly. When a man cheats on his wife, IMO, the "other woman" is not to blame, it's him.

I can't understand for the life of me how wives of serial adulterous men seemingly ALWAYS blame "the other woman" instead of their husbands. :crazy: It makes ZERO sense to me because I know from raising children (especially teens), NOBODY makes another person do anything they truly don't want to do.

Elizabeth needs to BE HONEST and stop blaming the other woman ... it's her husband who was unfaithful, not the mistress. :shrug:

[CTyankee]

32. I think she was really stung by all the criticism from her fellow liberals on her

staying with him and in the campaign after she found out about the affair. She was getting some rough treatment. People whose opinion she valued were attacking her. She was no longer the "victim." That's a tough place to be. I know I wouldn't want to be there with my fellow liberals.

She wants her good standing back. And who knows how much time she has left?

I'm feeling sorry for her...

[avaistheone1]

141. I think Elizabeth is a very sweet and classy person.

I also think it is great she is sharing with other women how she got through an especially difficult and embarassing time while in the national spotlight.

[Beacool]

34. In my view, to set the record straight while she has the chance.

I think that she wants to leave a testament of what happened from her perspective. She also has small children and probably would like them to know the truth as she saw it and lived it at the time.

:-)

[cali]

36. she doesn't have to publish now to do that.

[Beacool]

41. True........

I never met the woman, so I'm just taking a guess.

:shrug:

[Mass]

40. She knows that talking about her husband cheating will make people buy the book?

We live in a voyeuristic society. People will exploit that.

[karynnj]

42. Confusion - bewilderment that she and JRE fell so far so fast

I agree with you that this creates another horrible, permanent legacy for the Edwards kids.

The strange thing is that she clearly put out the word that she is staying with JRE for the kids because of her health - unless her brother spoke unauthorized and lied to People magazine. Then there were stories that she was stunned that the story completely shattered JRE's reputation and she wanted her kids to know the good side as well. Now, if that were where she was, you would think that she would concentrate on her health care policy job and push JRE to quietly work on programs that actually did something for some aspect of poverty. This is the only thing that would make people believe that he was ever sincere and cared for anything other than himself.

With this book - as you say - she reignites the story. The one difference I see in the story then and her story now is the timeline. She now places it after the announcement. If so, she lied in August when she backed JRE up - because it was highly unlikely it was in 2006. In EE's own statement on Daily Kos ( http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/8/193337/7354/473/564989 ) she also agreed with JRE's timeline that he told her in 2006. One thing that likely stunned her was the number of people who blamed her for not stopping the run knowing this. I suspect that the charge that she knew before the kick off and was therefore guilty of risking the election bothers her.

In her book, she spoke of learning after the offical announcement - yet, she wasn't in New Orleans, or on any stop on the announcement tour until December 30 when he returned to NC on December 30. On December 31, they were on George Stephanopolis' show. (
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/3/24155/15367 Now, I may be underestimating EE, but I tend to doubt that Edwards told her of the affair on Dec 30 (the first day they were together since the kick off) and she did that interview the next day - http://www.abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Story?id=2762463&page=4

This segment is (in retrospect) interesting

"Stephanopoulos: I've been looking at the pod casts you all have been putting out. Are you going to be the You Tube candidate of 2008?

Edwards: What's funny is we actually did the announcement on You Tube the night before I was on your show on Thursday morning and I think it's a great way to reach grassroots people, to build a campaign from the ground up, which is the way I not only believe campaigns should be built now, but the way that we change the country.



Stephanopoulos: So in one of those pod casts you said...

Edwards on his podcast: I'd rather be successful or unsuccessful based on who I really am. Not based on some plastic Ken-doll.

That's the word Republicans used to describe you in the last campaign.

Elizabeth Edwards: I think it was Maureen Dowd. "

Now the video of this interview shows EE with JRE both laughing after this Hunter video segment is shown. (in the last 1 and a half minutes of this - http://www.abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=2762246 ) To me this is proof, that Elizabeth Edwards did not know on December 31, 2006 and that she lied to protect JRE's lie in her Daily Kos post - without considering what it would do to her own reputation. The problem is that the change now makes JRE look even worse as he lied even in his confession and it means that she lied to protect him.

[cali]

47. yes, it does look as if she lied.in August

I still don't really blame her.

[karynnj]

49. I don't either -

I suspect that she didn't have the full story until around the time JRE confessed. I suspect that she coordinated her story with his - without thinking of how that reflected on her and was horrified at some of the comments she got or were written about her elsewhere. I can fully understand why, as her life appeared to crash around her, she made illogical decisions.

Writing this book shows that she is still not acting completely rationally. JRE really created a nightmare for his entire family and possibly an innocent little girl who may have trouble when she learns of her father.

[Adelante]

54. Writing the book

I'm at a loss as to where I read this, but I did read someplace that the chapter about the affair was a last minute addition, not originally part of the project. Not that it explains anything about why now, but it may have been a hasty decision after pressure from the publishers for a more newsworthy product. I don't know if it's even true, however.

[marshall]

46. She probably didn't trust her husband to tell the story after she's gone

And with good reason. He could put whatever spin he wanted after she meets her maker (which unfortunately will be sooner rather than later). She was probably horrified at the thought of leaving him to rewrite history.

[Politicub]

50. Self expression?

Why not? It's her story and completely up to her how she wants to tell it.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

51. Regarding the whole "want to have my side of the story out"

Is this really necessary? It's not like people are blaming her for Edwards' affair and lack of human decency. If anything, people are blaming her for allowing his charade of a campaign to continue, putting the nation at risk for a Republican regime. Still, there's no real "side" to tell there.

My best guess is that this has to do with 1) money, as there's no such thing as "enough" money; 2) attention - those in the limelight grow accustomed to it being there; and/or 3) she wants to run for office herself and grabbing enough of #1 and #2 would certainly help her.

[sohndrsmith]

137. actually, from what I've read she is terminally ill. Money won't change that.

If she has any financial motivation, it would likely be for her children, because self-benefit doesn't make as much sense in her case, sadly.

I'm amazed at those who are judging her harshly or negatively - she did nothing wrong and she didn't cause this mess. Her reasons for her actions are hers. What we assume them to be may or may not be accurate (and are more likely inaccurate than not, including mine).

I do not - nor have I ever had - terminal cancer, but I've been in similar shoes on the other issues and the destructive effects are felt on so many more levels within a marriage/family than I (for one) realized.

I respect her actions - whatever her reasons may be. It's different for everyone who gets this forced on them, and there is no single appropriate or "right" way to deal with it. She has my full support.

[AtomicKitten]

58. It probably is as simple as wanting to get her view of the story out. n/t

[Political Heretic]

61. I don't know, but she is entitled.

[cali]

62. no one is saying she doesn't have the right to do it.

It will, however, create hardship for her young children.

[Political Heretic]

63. I know, I understand the point you are making.

I was just musing that the poor woman has sort of earned the right to "set the record straight" if she feels like she needs to do that before she dies.

I sincerely hope this is not the case, but maybe she doesn't trust John Edwards to treat her memory fairly when she's gone... I just don't know.

And I'm not bashing JE - he was my first choice up until he dropped out and then the story broke.

[applegrove]

65. I think we will hear about alot of other things than the affair. Elizabeth Edwards is a formidable

woman. She has lots to teach the world.

[LanternWaste]

66. Sometimes brutal, public honesty...

Gore Vidal wrote in 'Essays on America' that brutal, public honesty is sometimes the most cathartic process of emotional healing available. Your guess is as good as his, or mine, or any one of a thousand posters I imagine... :shrug:



I'm going to make my own guess here-- she probably told us why, if not in the preface, then in the body of the book.

[buzzycrumbhunger]

67. Maybe it's an attempt to undo the "victim" role

She wasn't just stung by criticism when she chose to stay with her cheating husband, but found herself to be yet another woman victimized by a man who seemed to find power to be a much greater priority than fidelity. Maybe she's just "representin'" and sending a message to other wives that it's never too late to take back their self worth as well as to men to quit being such weak (or is it vain?) fuckers that they think they can get away with this. How many wives of powerful men have been treated this way? It just seems to come with the territory. Think of all the political wives who've been jettisoned for other (often younger) women and even more who've simply put up with the cheating bullshit because it's accepted as coming with the territory.

I can also kind of relate to the need to set the example for your kids. My ex wasn't a cheating arsehole, just an arsehole, but I reached a point where I realized that in tolerating his emotionally abusive bullshit, I was setting a horrible example for my kids. They've since thanked me for finding the strength to get out and assert myself. My daughter, especially, needed to see what a strong woman was.

Of course, not having read the book I can only speculate from my own POV, but it doesn't seem fair to criticize without having done so.

[zulchzulu]

69. The big question is...

... will she do the book pimping interviews with or without her hubby...

:popcorn:

[beachmom]

73. Because she simply craves the attention.

[dancingme]

75. bingo!

[Diane R]

130. Bingo twice.

[karynnj]

144. I think you hit it on the nail

I wonder though if she has an inkling that the attention will likely not be the positive attention she got and enjoyed in 2004 though 2007. The media in 2004 loved the Edwards, especially Elizabeth, who they praised and positively contrasted to Teresa Heinz Kerry. Then there was the huge amount of sympathy for her brave fight against cancer - which she deserved. But, she used that sympathy to be one of the nastier attack dogs in any campaign in 2007 and 2008. In spite of that, it is clear is that even in the Obrah segments, she has the same ability to seem likable that she had in 2004.

I had respected her more than her husband in 2004 and like many thought JRE might be better than he seemed because of her. She lost me when she used her Saving Grace book to rewrite the history on Edwards' NEVER REMOTELY CLOSE 2004 primary race and to reinforce unfair RW stereotypes of Teresa Heinz Kerry. I initially thought it was the campaign that pushed her to write and say those things when there was a threat of Kerry unning and to make a series of unfair attacks on Clinton and Obama. Then she said Obama's health care plan did not cover people with pre-existing conditions on the eve of the Iowa caucus. The timing, when no response could be made and the fact that this was in prepared comments - not an off the cuff response to a question - and because it was easily shown - by a quick trip to Obama's web site - to be false make this to me a dirty trick worthy of Nixon, Colson or Rove. Fortunately, Iowa caucus goers take issues seriously enough that enough people at caucuses knew it was not true. At some point, I stopped giving her the benefit of the ever shrinking doubt. No matter how appealing she was in interviews, someone who did all the things she did in that campaign is not a person of good character.

There is no denying that she has had a roller coaster life in the last decade and a half. From the highs of being praised as a perfect political wife and half of a golden couple, who almost became the "second Family" and being seen as a potential First Lady, after being the wife of fast track, wealthy US Senator with a beautiful family, to the lows. No amount of material wealth, which she has had since her late twenties, or fame and public adoration could make up for losing a child, treasured as any child is by his parents, a stage 4 cancer diagnosis in her late 50s and the public humiliation of her husband whose career she worked as far for as he did. In addition to the pain caused in her marriage, it destroyed the image of her family.

If you doubt that image is very very important to her, think of the pages she wrote - over a year after the fact - of how she was panicked for weeks redecorating her house to prepare for the Kerry's coming to NC. Those pages say nothing of the Kerrys, but a huge amount about Elizabeth's insecurities. To me it is telling that long after the fact, she retells this without realizing that the problem existed only in her mind. Now, consider that that was her concern that her mansion would not be seen as good enough and what is now crumbling is the perception (and very likely the reality) of her marriage.

Up until the talk of this book, she has gotten sympathy and recognition. She could have used the healthcare platform she was given by CAP to be seen as an advocate for healthcare for all. This would have enabled her to have a very credible "after the JRE affair" life. It may be there is so much anger that she can't see how this could hurt her.

[Occam Bandage]

74. $he's just trying to get her $ide of the $tory out there. nt

[cali]

76. nah, I don't think she's doing it for the money

she's got plenty of that.

[MoonRiver]

77. I think she's very angry and very bitter.

She needs to get it all out. I don't blame her one bit.

[karynnj]

104. Angry and bitter, but self deluded enough to cover it with a ton of sugar coating

In terms of the affair, her book makes it clear that JRE lied in his public confession. It also is obvious to anyone that her March 2007 diagnosis gave her the perfect lever to end his race - without damaging his reputation.

Bringing up both the affair and the public lie and arguing that she wanted to end the race, when he didn't - ignoring that through 2007, she even took on the role of attack dog - makes JRE look worse. To me, it also makes her look worse. Had she stopped there, it would be a very angry and very bitter screed.

What she then seems to have done from this excerpt -http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1895709,00.html?cnn=yes - that was posted below, is to then cover everything with psuedo inspirational pablum - that does not come out as believable because any not completely tone deaf person would see that she is still angry and trying to deflect all blame. If her goal was to get past this and restore, at least for the kids, a positive view of both of their parents, this was completely the wrong way to go. How much better would it have been had she spent the time spent on this, working at her job as a health care advocate - quietly dismissing any questions on JRE?

[JuniperLea]

78. Dying does things...

Perspective shift?

Or, she's wanting to be sure her children are provided for, and she wants to set all that up including the proceeds from her book?

She's been through hell and back. I am ok with the decision. He has no political career left anyway, this can't hurt him.

[balantz]

79. John and Elizabeth rock! Always have, always will! n/t

[cali]

85. keep the faith.

[karynnj]

102. Well ........ there current relationship does sound rocky

[WinkyDink]

82. The truth shall set you free.

[Grateful for Hope]

83. I think she may have done this for a variety of reasons

First of all, I think it might have been cathartic for her to write about how the affair affected her. And, given how intelligent she is, I am sure she knows that catharsis is very good for one's overall health -- particularly pertinent for someone who is suffering from a life-threatening illness.

Second, I think she may have a great deal of anger at the whole situation. I know I would. Here she is trying to heal from cancer, meanwhile expending an extraordinary amount of energy in helping her husband win the nomination (energy that she could ill afford, IMO), and what is happening in the background? I would be more than livid.

Third, I think that if she is thinking that her time is limited, this book would be a legacy for her kids when they are grown.

I don't fault her for writing this book. I think that, whatever reasons she had, she felt they were important.

My one regret is that I supported Edwards in the primaries.

[Debi]

86. My opinion - Greed

I don't get all the sympathy here - she was a partner in the cover-up of her husband's affair and had he been the nominee or considered for VP he could have destroyed the 2008 election. She could have outed him and his lies. Now she wants to make a profit off the story. bah. Greedy.

[Adelante]

95. I don't know if it's greed or what

But I certainly agree with the rest of what you said.

[Debi]

109. Thanks

:hi:

[Orsino]

98. Greed may be too strong a word...

...but certainly she's written a book for money. That's not necessarily a bad thing, depending on whether she's delivering value and honesty.

I'm not willing to blame her for the cover-up, unless it's revealed that she knew about the campaign payments to the mistress.

[Debi]

108. 'value and honesty'

She's pretending to be honest NOW about something she covered up THEN. That's not honest.

[Orsino]

112. It matters what she knew, and what she covered up.

I don't think we have that all sorted out yet.

[Debi]

119. Just one of many articles says she knew in December of 2006

<snip>

Elizabeth Edwards, 59, who lives with her husband and family outside Chapel Hill, writes that John Edwards told her of his affair with campaign videographer Rielle Hunter shortly after he announced his second run for the presidency in December 2006 in New Orleans.

Elizabeth Edwards writes that she wanted her husband to quit the presidential race to protect the family. She writes that later events proved her right.

"He should not have run," she wrote.

But despite anger over the affair, Elizabeth Edwards stood by her husband, even though she harbored a secret that could have derailed the Democrats' chances of winning the White House if her husband had won the nomination.

When she revealed three months later, in March 2007, that her breast cancer had spread, Elizabeth Edwards stood beside her husband and said she encouraged him to press on with his second run for the presidency.

At the time, John Edwards said he would have withdrawn from the presidential race if his wife wanted.

<snip>

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/books/2009154979_edwards01.html

[Orsino]

124. Again: knew what, exactly?

Remaining silent about someone else's affair which was certain to embarrass her and her children is no significant offense in my book.

It suddenly seems obvious, though, that she must have known that the mistress was being paid with campaign funds. Unless I'm misunderstanding this point, it's a serious charge that I want her to address. And I don't believe I want to buy her book until I hear a satisfactory answer.

[Debi]

127. Wait...so you don't believe that news of the affair had come out during the campaign

it would have affected the outcome of the election had Edwards been the nominee or VP choice?

Whether or not John Edwards' mistress received campaign funds would have been secondary to the fact that the Democrats' hope for Whitehouse victory was having sex with someone other than his wife while on the campaign trail.

It may not be important to you but to others, who also had the opportunity to vote in the 2008 election, fidelity is important. Granted - John McCain would have been the comparison so maybe the choice would have been the lesser of two evils.

[Orsino]

129. I don't demand fidelity of candidates...

...but I sure as hell don't demand that the victims of others' infidelity draw the spotlight. I'll hold any adult in the know responsible for covering up the misuse of campaign funds, but
Elizabeth gets special consideration for protecting herself and her children from fall-out from the affair.

Before I go pillorying Elizabeth, the candidate himself and his senior staff have got some 'splainin' to do.

[avaistheone1]

146. Yes, indeed.

[juajen]

140. I believee that a lot of people on this thread are being very judgmental.

Considering the place she was in medically at the time, I give her kudos for attempting to hold things together, if not for her children and John, for herself. After all, how damn much grief at a time can one woman handle?

I love Elizabeth Edwards and, in spite of everything, will reserve some respect for what John did that was good. For instance, I believe he was a very good husband and father for many years; and, that Elizabeth took this into consideration as she was crashing because of his actions.

It's just too damn easy to assume what we would do in other's circumstances.

God Bless the whole Edwards family.

[polichick]

87. Catharsis maybe.

[hyphenate]

89. Because she could.

Write, that is.

[smalll]

94. Is this the ***OFFICIAL*** diehard Edwards supporters throw-Elizabeth-under-the-bus thread?

:rofl:

[cali]

97. no, it's clearly not that.

most comments on this thread don't throw her under the bus at all. And I like Elizabeth though I never had any use for John. To me, though, it's just a curious thing to write about his affair, but some of the posts make a lot of sense as to why she'd do it.

[Teaser]

96. people write books for two reasons

1) They have something important to say
2) They believe they will make money off it.

uually some combination of these 2. As money is not an issue here, I suspect the answer is mostly 1.

[Inuca]

115. A small rewrite of your first reason

they BELIEVE they have something important to say.

[Adelante]

99. Excerpt in Time: How I Survived John's Affair

Elizabeth Edwards: How I Survived John's Affair
By Elizabeth Edwards Tuesday, May. 05, 2009


... Like most wives — or husbands — in my position, I wanted to believe his involvement with this woman had been as little as possible. A single night, another opportunity, but that was it and he had wanted away from her.... It turned out that a single time was not all it was. More than a year later, I learned that he had allowed into our lives and had not, even when he knew better, made her leave us alone. I tried to get him to explain, but he did not know himself why he had allowed it to happen. In months of talking with him, I have come to understand his liaison with this woman, if I have, not as a substitute for me. Those with any fame or notoriety or power attract people for good reasons and bad. Some want to contribute and some want to take something away for themselves. They flatter and entreat, and it is engaging, even addictive. They look at our lives, which from the outside in particular are pictures of joy and plenty, and they want it for themselves. (Read an interview with Elizabeth Edwards and Teresa Heinz Kerry.)

Just as I don't want cancer to take over my life, I don't want this indiscretion, however long in duration, to take over my life either. But I need to deal with both; I need to find peace with both. It is hard for John, I can see, because it is something about which he is ashamed. But his willingness to open up is a statement that he trusts me, too. For quite a long time, I used whatever he admitted in the next argument and he was hesitant to say anything. That is, gratefully, behind us. There is still a great deal of sorting through to do — the lies went on for some time. And we both understand that there are no guarantees, but the road ahead looks clear enough, although from here it looks long.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1895709,00.html?cnn=yes

[karynnj]

101. It is clear that she is still in denial and still whitewashing JRE

I'm sorry, but I think she is still trying to respin a now fractured fairy tale like relationship back to what it was.

As a side, I never read the linked interview with Teresa and Elizabeth. That interview actually makes me angrier that Elizabeth in her book and the associated interviews labeled the Kerrys as elitists - after hearing Teresa speak of her background. Teresa is incredibly charming and fantastic in this interview. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,994769-1,00.html

[Adelante]

103. Agree

I didn't reread the interview, either. Teresa is the better person, imo.

[karynnj]

106. No contest -

I was lucky enough to meet Teresa Heinz Kerry at one of the book events. She is absolutely an incredible person. Did you see that Teresa went with Senator Kerry to Pakistan and Sudan last month. In Sudan in particular, she likely was extremely helpful in helping Senator Kerry.

[Inuca]

111. This fragment is rather painful and sad to read

(I did not go to the link for more). "(he) had not, even when he knew better, made her leave us alone". The woman, whatever her name is, I do not remember, is not a pestering bug. Very painful for EE, I am sure, but for the life of me I cannot think of any good reason why this should be vented in public again. Barely mentioned nay longer, the public attention span being what it is. I just cannot understand the psychology that would make her want to bring this once again into some kind of limelight. Sorry, it just does not make any sense to me...

[rvablue]

123. You know what I take away from these two paragraphs. EE blames the mistress and herself for getting

angry.

And JE is the victim, both of the mistresses "seducing" and EE's anger at him.

Poor John!

Yuck.

[Adelante]

126. I know, it's just bizarre nt

[XemaSab]

125. It's depressing that on the one hand she says the whole think makes her sick

and on the other hand she is still apologizing for him.

John hired her for his campaign, but Elizabeth thinks Rielle should have just "left (them) alone?"

Right...

[joshcryer]

110. Opportunism.

Why else?

[deaniac21]

116. It's become very obvious that she possesses very little of the

class her husband is known for.

[cali]

118. you're kidding, right?

yeah, that JE, he's just sooo classy. Cheating and lying is the epitome of class.

[Debi]

120. I think they may be running equally for the 'most class' trophy

He cheated and lied - she found out about it and lied and is now attempting to profit from it. Both are showing little class at the moment.

[rvablue]

122. Yeah, it's superclassy to run for your party's nomination knowing full well that you have a ten ton

skeleton in your closet that is bound to come out during the campaign.

This country was hurting -- really, really hurting -- from the reign of Shrub. And because of JE's arrogance, hubris, self-absorption and vanity he threatened the future of our party and our nation, too.

Yeah, that's a real class act there. NOT.

[polichick]

117. I suggested catharsis above, but she may also have needed it to be public...

...because she was humiliated in public.

[Jennicut]

121. I do feel bad for her on some level but at the same time airing your dirty laundry in public in

return for money does not look good. Still, like some said here it could be catharthis for her.
I was never an Edwards supporter and never thought he would be picked as VP ( he did not do the greatest in the debate against Cheney) so I am really not mad at Elizabeth over covering this up. When you are in the middle of it its hard to say what the right thing to do it. However, her kids do not need this out there.

[PresidentObama]

132. Why not? The story was already public. She has the right to air her side of the story.

Plus, maybe her story will help other couples in the same situation.

Elizabeth Edwards is a class act, I'm sure the book will clearly reflect that.

[laylah]

133. Maybe it was for relief?

I had two rules when I got with the father of my children..#1 DO NOT lie to me #2 DO NOT **ck around on me...he failed both tests. In the meantime, my children do not need to know what a scoundrel he is/was, to my detriment.

My point is, been there, done that, and may Elizabeth do whatever she needs to heal!

[renate]

134. to hurt and embarrass him the way he hurt and embarrassed her?

More power to her, I say. The depth of her pain is a clue to how much she loved him and how betrayed she felt--I don't blame her one bit for wanting to make the son of a gun pay.

I understand that keeping silent during the campaign, knowing that this time bomb was ticking, was not terribly wise. But maybe at the time it was a matter of pride for her to not seem to be seeking revenge, or maybe she didn't want to seem egotistical by saying "he cheated on me, therefore he is not fit to be president." After all, everyone knew that Bill cheated on Hillary--that taboo had been broken already. Maybe she thought it wouldn't have been a campaign-ender.

Or maybe she didn't know herself why she didn't say something, but not knowing what to say, said nothing.

Anyway, if she wants to remind us of what a hound dog John Edwards is, I just hope it helps her feel better. She's had a few really, really tough knocks in her life and one of them was completely avoidable.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

135. Maybe it offered some kind of catharsis.

Seems odd to me, too, but maybe it was her way of dealing with what had to be a terribly painful situation. And John Edwards can kiss my ass.

[jillan]

138. Maybe she knows how much she is loved and just wanted to share her story with her fans,

which I am one.

[ZombieHorde]

142. I have no idea. nt

[DURHAM D]

145. I don't know why EE wrote her book but it is the wrong thing for her to be talking about.

Elizabeth was hired last year as a senior fellow for The Center for American Progress. Her job was/is to work on health care issues. As far as I know she is still with CAP but if she is not it should not matter. Right now we are having a national debate on this issue and she is not participating.

Her book tour should be canceled and replaced with a series of townhall meetings all around the country to put a bright light on this issue and push the W.H., Senate and House into actually doing something for the American people.

Elizabeth you should be using your voice and unique skills for a better cause.

[Blue_In_AK]

147. I've actually lost a bit of respect for Elizabeth over this,

but of course she's entitled to get her side of the story out. I just think she already had the sympathy factor going for her, and now she just seems vindictive.

[ObamaKerryDem]

148. I understand your thinking on this, but I have to say, if I were her, I'd be feeling vindictive too.

I actually think it's kind of brave of her to speak out like this, after so many months of quiet. She must've known of the media storm this would invite (even before this new probe). I guess she just wants her side out there, especially in light of her illness and what it might mean to her future. This way, her side of it will definitely be there for Jack and Emma Claire, no matter what (since sadly, it doesn't seem like she can count on John to tell the complete truth about it..). The fact that she told Oprah she "has no idea" if it's his kid or not is quite telling, whether you take it literally (which I honestly do not) or think she's just wanting to keep that part of it--however little of it she can--to them privately, as a family and/or it's just too damn painful for her to admit..

Man, what a sad situation, all around. :(

[PresidentObama]

149. Lost respect? Why? You said yourself, she has the right to tell her side of the story.

It's already public. So it's time for her to finally put it to rest, and give her side of the story and maybe it can be positive and help other couples in the same situation.

I see no harm in this.

[cali]

150. it does stir the whole thing up

for her children- at a time when it had virtually died down. I see potential harm in it for them. And there's harm in it for JE's illegitimate child, as well.

There is something to be said for discretion.

[PresidentObama]

152. She has a right to get her side of the story out.

I'm confident in the Edwards ability to protect their children.

And I've seen no evidence that John Edwards has an illegitimate child. Could it be his? Yes. Is it his? I don't know, and neither do you.

[Blue_In_AK]

151. I only speak for myself,

just as Elizabeth speaks for herself. I personally lost some respect. That's just me.

[PresidentObama]

153. Well I respect your opinion, but I have to ask again--why?

The whole ordeal was public. She had the right to air her side of the story.

And I think her book can be very helpful to people in her situation.

[cali]

154. the whole thing had died down

now it's about as ugly as it can be. and frankly, I think the very American preoccupation about airing one's dirty laundry is somewhat repulsive. My European raised mother often says "Americans are a nation of scab pickers". I'm beginning to agree with her. yikes.

[PresidentObama]

160. She had the right to her side of the story. JE is being investigated, it was going to be fresh news

anyway. I'm sure John and Elizabeth were smart enough to know this would be brought back up by an investigation, and are smart enough and good enough parents to protect their children through the whole ordeal.

[Blue_In_AK]

155. I've been in her situation

but I didn't need to write a book about it, nor read anyone else's book about the experience. It just seems personal to me, and as Cali said, the matter had died down. I don't see what good is gained for anyone by continuing to pick at the scab.

[PresidentObama]

161. Again, the investigation is getting just as much press, if not more.

It died down, but the investigation meant it was going to be brought back up.

It's never going to fully go away. She had the right to tell her story, and provide a tool for other couples in the same situation.

[Hepburn]

156. Catharis....IMO. n/t

[elshiva]

159. To express herself. Also, there are a lot of people who

love her and identify with her story. She is a DUer after all. :hug: