All those who support Elizabeth Edwards and her right to speak out, check in here.

[mzmolly]

I, for one, am tired of the nitpicking going on about how she decides to share her experiences. Some have suggested she's betraying feminism (and herself) for forgiving her husband, others that she's being "hard" on the mistress. I've also read that people "feel sorry for the children" who obviously, already know their father had an affair. I find these kind of remarks absurd.

Can we have a thread showing support for her please?

:kick:

[mzmolly]

1. Rielle Hunters idea for a television show (according to the NY Post)

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08112008/news/nationalnews/how_dare_that_brazen__floozy__123906.htm

Hunter, 42, soon told the scribe she also was working on a "genius" TV-show idea involving "women who help men get out of failing marriages by having affairs with them."

She supposedly went on to say:

Hunter had a thing for blabbing to writers. At a party about five years ago, she told a writer in California, "I am going to be famous, rich and famous. I'm going to meet a rich, powerful man."

If true, I think parasite is an apt description.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mzmolly]

9. No, apparently, she's an honorable, noble woman with only the best of

intentions.

[cali]

69. no one here has said any such thing

the point is that she's ultimately irrelevant. JE is the scumbag who broke his vows. He's the one that betrayed his wife and children. I feel sorry for EE, but I don't find her rehashing all this in public, particularly admirable, though I think she has every right to do so.

[mzmolly]

75. I don't know that she's

making an attempt at admiration?

[MonteLukast]

11. My gawd, is she delusional.

Yeah, it's the New York Post, but whoa.

That explains a lot. She thought the Edwards' marriage was failing to begin with?!

I've never heard of anyone so removed from Planet Earth.

[EFerrari]

25. She sounds like a narcissist -- no regard for others and no clue

how anti-social she sounds. Yikes.

You have to wonder how much Elizabeth hasn't said about this person.

[Scout]

82. John apparently didn't think his marriage was so great, eh?

can't imagine where the other woman got that idea

"She thought the Edwards' marriage was failing to begin with"

Yeah, that bitch just grabbed poor John by the cock, and dragged him kicking and screaming off somewhere and made him fuck her!

[mzmolly]

87. What a disgusting

post. I can only surmise that those who identify with "the other woman" with such vigor, have personal reasons for doing so?

I've not defended John Edwards, or his mistress. BOTH were wrong.

[Scout]

93. it's not defending Rielle to state the truth about John...

I can only surmise that those who identify with John with such vigor, have personal reasons for doing so.

as to your "question" (which it wasn't really, you just put a question mark at the end of your statement to try to prevent being called on your bullshit) are you trying to accuse someone of something? of being "other women" ourselves? you are laughable :rofl:

[mzmolly]

96. I did not identify

with John, anywhere. Also, I'm not making accusations. I'm merely assuming you must have a rationale for being so crude and insensitive. Perhaps it's just your nature.

[MonteLukast]

118. Delete-- wrong place

[vssmith]

104. I hate when that happens to me

[MonteLukast]

119. SHE thought his marriage wasn't so great. HE thought nothing of the kind.

Read more carefully next time.

[Scout]

146. yeah, he thought his marriage was so great he went out and fucked

a woman he wasn't married to!!! don't be so thick :eyes:

:rofl:

[SoCalDem]

129. Bwaaahahahahahahahaa

your description is perfect.. that poor man...had his seed STOLEN by that eeeeevil woman:)

I have no sympathy for any of them, except the kids..

Reille knew he was married

John knew he was married

Elizabeth knew he might stray (and probably had before).. what new bride asks her new husband to not cheat on her??..that's usually the furthest thing from their minbd on their wedding day..to their dream man..

Elizabeth could have divorced him..probably should have, but she chose to keep him..

He should have left her, but he probably did not want to wear the albatross of leaving a terminally ill wife of 30 years..

Either way, his political career was over..It was over when he came in 2nd, after LIVING in Iowa for 3 1/2 years, and begging for their votes...

He's an attractive man, with a wife who looks decades older..a man with one basic political "note", and people chose not to follow him..

he mucked up his personal life, and now it's time (way PAST time) for him to make a choice..

Stay with her for the time she has left, and THEN resume his "dating career"

Leave her now, and own up to the responsibility he now has for another child , with another woman..

None of his new choices include public political adventures..

[Hepburn]

73. Yeah, that and the term...

..."trash" do seem to fit that POS.

JMHO

[JerseygirlCT]

103. Oh brother. Nice rationalization there

I didn't willingly screw around with a married man. I HELPED him. I should be rewarded...

Yes, parasite is right. I hope her ideas fall on deaf ears.

[MonteLukast]

121. Newsweek link from last year

http://www.newsweek.com/id/151783

Her mental processes read like a hodgepodge of pseudo-positive psychology, New Age gobbledygook and self-gratifying rationalization.

Does she realize how much like a creepy Pygmalion she sounds? "I and I alone am going to wake John up to his potential."

:puke:

[JerseygirlCT]

123. I'm afraid it's not a new story

It sort of reads like a soap opera, it's so cliched, you know?

It's ok for ME to have an affair with a married man, because *I* can save him!

Ugh. Idiot. And selfish idiot to boot.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

2. I don't care about the Edwards family;

they're not my family, they're not my friends, and what they do with their lives is their business, not mine.

But, I'm curious that you find the fact that others having opinions different from yours to be "absurd".

Why is that? What's wrong with others seeing a situation differently than how you see it?

[mzmolly]

6. I'm curious that you'd be more curious about my feelings

than you are about the subject matter.

As for others seeing a situation differently than I do, I don't take issue with that. I formed an opinion on the remarks that were made, not the fact that others disagree with me.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

14. You didn't answer my questions,

but I'll be polite and answer yours:

I am curious about people who appear to be intolerant. Your post was so pointed that it piqued my interest, and now that you've weaseled and ducked and not answered, making a feeble attempt to turn it back on me by claiming that you're "curious," too. Feeble, yes, and intellectually dishonest.

So, you didn't answer my question about why you find the opinions of others "absurd".

Now, because I'm a curious sort - I'm a lawyer and a novelist, and I like asking questions almost as much as I enjoy answering them - how come you didn't answer?

[mzmolly]

22. I did. Perhaps you didn't grasp the answer because your question

was based upon a false premise?

I answered the so called question when I stated ~

"As for others seeing a situation differently than I do, I don't take issue with that. I formed an opinion on the remarks that were made, not the fact that others disagree with me."

Certainly a "lawyer and novelist" can comprehend my answer upon reading it for a second time? However, just in case, I've placed the original answer in bold/red letters so you can't miss it again. ;)

And, here is the link to my original answer to your "question" just in case you feel a need to read it a few more times ~

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5615296&mesg_id=5615371

[Tangerine LaBamba]

32. You "don't take issue with that"?

Read what you wrote.

How does that answer the question, "Why do you find that people who have an opinion different from yours to be 'absurd'?"

Never mind. You're clearly out of my league.......................

[mzmolly]

35. Never mind, indeed.

Perhaps when you can form a coherent, related question you'll understand the answers provided to you? I have read what I wrote and am comfortable with my remarks.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

36. I'll try, but I'm not optimistic.........

I have the feeling I'll never be fluent in gibberish.

But, thanks for the clarification................

[mzmolly]

41. Au contraire..........

"Why do you find that people who have an opinion different from yours to be 'absurd'?" <<< Jibberish.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

42. Now, come on -

you don't have to go out of your way to entertain me.

But, honestly, misspelling "gibberish"?

"Jibberish"?

Too much.

I was right. You're definitely out of my league ...............

[EFerrari]

44. And you are disrupting mzmolly's thread. Is there no other thread on DU

you can go play in?

[mzmolly]

52. Not to mention, it sounds like sympathy for "the other woman"

is perhaps involved in the statements/questions that lack any sort of sense? ;)

[Control-Z]

125. Shitting all over

sensitive threads seams to be said poster's objective. There IS a pattern, I've noticed.

[mzmolly]

150. Interesting. Seems like a few sock puppets friends are helping out as well?

Hmmmmm.

[pnwmom]

46. One thing I've noticed about mzmolly

she's no narcissist, that's for sure. She's not in that league.

Unlike Rielle Hunter and even some DUers, alas.

[mzmolly]

49. Oh not a typo!?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jibberish

Typo or not, your question was "gibberish" or "jibberish".

[Tangerine LaBamba]

50. Ah, yes, urbandictionary.com.......

You had to go and look it up?

A deliberate misspelling is different from a typo, but, hey, that's OK. I'm still laughing ..................

[mzmolly]

54. This, from the person who formed the following question?

"Why do you find that people who have an opinion different from yours to be 'absurd'?" Yep, jibberish.

I'm glad you found something to cling to in order to save face. After all as an "attorney and novelist" you have a reputation to uphold.

Do keep kicking this thread. I appreciate it.

Edited for punctuation. gasp!

[EFerrari]

57. After one of these threads

I nearly mailed back my PBK key out of despair one night.

lol

This out of work Shakespearean who is not a novelist nor an attorney gives this thread a big, big

:kick:

[mzmolly]

60. LOL

Ya know, I think I'll put "not a novelist or an attorney" right in my sig line E. :P

:pals:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

66. Fascinating ...........

You're protesting far too much, but you are funny.

Now you're concerned about my reputation. That's so sweet.

You're welcome.

[mzmolly]

76. Someone should concern

themselves with your reputation. Certainly you're not. Unless of course, you wish to be known as the obnoxious "novelist" who has trouble forming a simple sentence. If so, job well done!

[Scout]

81. i'm not having any problems understanding Tangerine's posts

of course i'm not PBK :eyes: :shrug:

i think you and EF might want to get a room somewhere for your little superiority party.

[mzmolly]

85. Good for you. But you've got the wrong

idea about who's claiming superiority in this thread.

[EFerrari]

106. It was a counter superiority party.

:)

[pnwmom]

19. This is a thread for people who care about Elizabeth.

She is a DUer, and she's fighting for her life. Let's support her now, and not use this thread to fight among ourselves.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

33. Who's fighting?

I asked a question about the OP's characterization of people who had opinions about Elizabeth as "absurd."

That's not a fight.................

[pnwmom]

43. It wasn't your initial question,

but your persistent follow-up questions ("how come you didn't answer?") that sounded unnecessarily argumentative.

Maybe, being a lawyer, you weren't aware of sounding more like a prosecutor than someone who cared about Elizabeth Edwards.

Although, since you already announced you didn't care about her . . . I'm still wondering what your point is being here. The OP asked for supportive posts for another DUer. If that's impossible for you, then why get involved?

[Tangerine LaBamba]

48. I said I didn't care about her, the family, that's correct -

I didn't say I didn't find the whole scenario compelling. Of course I do. Who wouldn't? That's different than caring about her. I don't care about people I don't know. But when they get involved in colossal cockups like this Edwards tragedy, yeah, I watch, and I wonder.

And I'm curious. When someone on DU calls the opinions of others "absurd," I'm curious, since I would expect less judgmental behavior and a wider range of tolerance.

Asking for an answer to a question is perceived by you as "argumentative"? That's curious, but then, lots of things that make no sense are curious.

For the record, I was never a prosecutor. I'm the defense kind of lawyer....................

[mzmolly]

59. Actually you said:

"I'm curious that you find the fact that others having opinions different from yours to be "absurd".

Aside from the fact that your question was poorly worded and made no sense, the implication appears to be that I take issue with others having differing opinions, which is false. I take issue with some of the statements that have been made regarding the subject matter.

Certainly that tolerance on differing opinions thing you preach can be extended to people like myself?

[Tangerine LaBamba]

65. Everyone's an editor, I guess........

I have no choice but to defer to your superior command of the language.

But, I seriously doubt that I'll ever have the gifts necessary to produce a sentence fragment of this caliber:

"Certainly that tolerance on differing opinions thing you preach can be extended to people like myself?"

If only for that line, if for nothing else, ah, yes, I shall tolerate you and tolerate you because entertainment like that doesn't come along every day.

Thanks a million ......................................

[mzmolly]

77. I'm not the one feigning superiority

you are, "novelist". My point was to note your obvious hypocrisy. Though admittedly, you do a good job of demonstrating that without my help.

[roguevalley]

110. she's dying and knows her influence ends at some point. she's

leaving herself her own legacy. I feel for her and the kids, not John or the trollep. And, I was for him since forever. SIGH!

[samplegirl]

3. I understand her hurt

and her need for closure and to heal. I think it was very unclassy of her to go public with such a private situation. Even the book sounds more like a money maker.

[mzmolly]

7. The situation was anything but

private.

[shireen]

12. she's a public figure who deserves the opportunity to present her point of view

she has every right to set the record straight about herself. she should not have to allow others to make assumptions and speculations about who she is.

some people will buy her book, and personally, i hope she makes some good money off it. But that book is also a historical record of her life as she sees it. It is something that her children will appreciate.

[mzmolly]

15. Indeed. A historical record is how I view

her book. Her story is part of her legacy.

[pnwmom]

17. Unclassy? It was already totally public. She's just getting her side out.

Who could blame a dying woman for that?

[EFerrari]

20. Excuse me? She didn't take this public. It was taken there for her.

It's good to see a strong woman like Elizabeth stand up for herself and not slink into some dark corner like a good little wife doing time for her husband's mistakes. She's much better than that.

[Dorian Gray]

72. Exactly

The situation was so public and (I assume) humiliating for her. I'm not comfortable piling on her for this at all.

She's gone through so much with her cancer and the very public outing of her husband's affair.

[Edith Ann]

114. unclassy

I find Elizabeth's restraint remarkable. I'd go ballistic on that woman. Then again I would have noticed a RH and how she acted around my husband a lot sooner. I would have known everyone he was traveling with and what their intentions were. When I saw her picture I would have made a point to meet her and then I would have thrown her sorry well worn ass out and turned on John to explain why she was there. EE's brother could have told her RH was no videographer. Someone wasn't paying attention.

I know he had already started the affair, but this may have prevented the baby.

[shireen]

4. I think Elizabeth was put in an impossible position

She learned about it after JE declared his candidacy.
When he made the announcement about the cancer return and plans to continue the campaign, she had been led to believe it was only one "indiscretion". At that point, she was dealing with a terminal illness and i can only imagine that she was just coasting from day-to-day. JE should have been the strong one and stepped down at that point. His decision to stay in the campaign was selfish.

I cannot imagine the mental anguish and shock she's had to deal with. I can understand how she would want to cling on to the life she used to have; she needed time to deal with it all, and it was hard to do in the midst of a demanding presidential campaign.

JE was a jerk, no question about it. After the scandal broke, i tried really hard to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it didn't take long for me to regret donating to his campaign and voting for him. His personal life is his business and his betrayal of his wife is a family matter. But he betrayed all of us by making himself a vulnerable candidate that may have allowed the Republicans to win. That public betrayal is unforgivable.

I continue to have nothing but admiration and affection for Elizabeth. Even when people were demonizing her for supporting JE during the campaign, knowing that his infidelity would be used against him by Republicans, i held back because i felt that she was an honorable person and there had to be a good reason for her actions. I think that Oprah interview answered my questions, and I'm glad i didn't turn on her like so many others did.

[MonteLukast]

8. Checking in here.

:wave:

[Hello_Kitty]

10. I'm not going to begrudge a gravely ill woman her catharsis and closure

Shit, how many times have we had to watch loyal wives get trotted out onstage to stand next to their philandering fuckwit husbands? Let Elizabeth have her moment. I listened to part of her interview on NPR today and was impressed by her grace and candor.

[mzmolly]

16. Well said!

:hi:

[flvegan]

13. Isn't Elizabeth Edwards still a DUer in good standing?

*ahem*

Sorry if that's a fly in the ointment.

[mzmolly]

26. Not at all.

If my post is inappropriate in any way, I hope it's removed.

Peace

[flvegan]

27. Not your post, mzmolly.

Not your post at all. This just seemed like a good thread to make that point.

:thumbsup:

[mzmolly]

29. Understood flvegan.

:hi:

[EFerrari]

18. As soon as I finish perfecting my own life, first thing, I'm starting in on yours.

lol

:toast:

[mzmolly]

23. LOL, that's good because I need some

perfection E.

:hi:

[rpannier]

21. The allegations that she's being hard on the mistress are silly

If my wife was having an affair you can be sure I'd have less-than-flattering words about the guy.
As my wife would about the other woman if I was having an affair.

If you're having an affair with a married person, regardless of whether you think their marriage is on the rocks, you are still scum (IMLHO).

[pnwmom]

24. I totally agree. It's not like she's letting John off the hook.

She has every right to be furious with both of them.

But, from my point of view, Rielle deserves even more of the blame because she cold-bloodedly pursued a man who was going through all the stress and sadness of having a seriously ill wife. She behaved despicably.

[EFerrari]

28. Exactly. Like a predator. There's a certain kind of person who keys to

vulnerability. When Doug was sick in bed for months, I could always count on a few of our acquaintances to try to engage me in that way. It's like clockwork. It isn't even about you but about how easy it would be for these awful people. They want the relationship without any of the work of building the relationship and they don't care who they hurt in the process.

[pnwmom]

47. Eww. . . well,

I guess you figured out who your real friends were.

Hope Doug is all better!

[Tangerine LaBamba]

37. You don't know that.............

No one knows who pursued whom.

You have the story that John told his wife, but he's been known to lie to his wife than once, and to his supporters.

No one, outside of John and The Other Woman, know what happened.................

[pnwmom]

53. There's no excuse for someone getting sexually involved with a person in a

thirty year marriage whose spouse is seriously ill. Period. She's despicable.

He behaved extremely badly, too, but he was under emotional stress at the time that mitigates his responsibility compared to hers.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

64. You're kinder to him

than you are to her.

Interesting..........................

[pnwmom]

67. I believe they both behaved badly, but she was more responsible, and therefore

bears the greater guilt.

Edwards was living with the sadness and stress of having a very ill spouse.

Hunter was not. She should have drawn a bright line.

[paulsby]

90. what utter rubbish

puhlleeeeeze.

hunter is not deserving of praise, and certainly did a bad thing, but...

sorry, the guy who person who cheats on their spouse is committing a worse offense than the one who knowingly has sex with a married person.

period.

the person who owes fealty is the spouse.

period.

they took a vow. they made a promise.

[northernlights]

143. sorry, but they are equally responsible

And equally abhorrent.

I never made a promise not to kick you in the shins with steel-toed boots, either. But I know if I do it you will be hurt. And if I go ahead and do it, I'm just as wrong for doing it as someone who promises not to and does it anyway.

[Dorian Gray]

74. This is the one point I disagree with you

I totally understand her anger at Rielle. Definitely. But I think that John deserves the brunt of her anger and blame.

[Scout]

83. poor JE, that little penis was just too much for him! that bitch Rielle

she made him fuck her, how could he help it, he was stressed and his wife was sick....

poor little johnny, it was that evil woman made him do it, she's the one who should get most of the blame.

this shit makes me sick :puke:

[mzmolly]

86. What makes me sick is your coming into a thread of support for Elizabeth

Edwards and posting your obnoxious, insensitive commentary.

[Scout]

94. who died and make you posting police?

my comments are obnoxious and insensitive, uh huh. and yours, excusing little johnny are what?

[mzmolly]

97. I've never excused

John Edwards behavior, EVER. I've also not engaged in defending the other woman involved.

[TorchTheWitch]

105. you and me both

How aweful it must be for people to have to constantly worry over all those preditory women after their poor stressed defenseless husbands so pitiously vulnerable to their dicks leaping from their pants the moment one tells them they think he's hot.

Damn, the excuses here sound even worse than a selfish shit of a cheating husband would make to the wives they betrayed and expect to be believed.

[EFerrari]

108. This thread, before it was littered up with spew, was to be in support of EE,

and not about JE at all.

If you're still angry with JE, why not go start your own thread for that purpose?

[TorchTheWitch]

137. I'll reply in any thread I choose to thanks

And one person's spew is another's relevant comment. I'll thank you not to trivialize others' opinions as spew nor decide who gets to say what in which threads.

This thread very obviously was not just a thread for supportive comments for Elizabeth as the OP opened the door for all manner of comments by making the accusation that certain comments in other threads on the subject of the Edwards affair were absurd. Further, the OP opines that it was said by others in threads concerning the Edwards affair that Elizabeth had no right to write the book or otherwise publically discuss the affair when NOBODY said any such thing.

Given this it appears the OP's intension was not actually to have a thread dedicated solely to support of Elizabeth concerning the affair but to chastize those who made comments she didn't like in other threads and attempting to stave off further comments she doesn't like on the subject by trying to disguise this thread as nothing but a support thread when very clearly that is not what it is.

Now, if you want a thread that actually IS dedicated to showing support for Elizabeth Edwards perhaps it would be a good idea for some interested person to make one since obviously, this one isn't and wasn't meant to be.

Moreover, I'm not angry at JE. I don't give a crap about him and never did. I always thought he was a basic scamming politician who wouldn't end up anywhere close to winning the nomination. I had little to no interest in the Dem primaries in general since I wasn't particularly interested in anyone in the race and just vote for whoever got the nomination. So, I'll thank you not to make assumptions on what I feel about Edwards particularly when I've never said anything about him and never felt much of anything about him. My interest in this subject is the a feelings and beliefs of other DUers about the affair and affairs in general.

[mzmolly]

149. Did you miss this comment?

"Can we have a thread showing support for her please?"

This thread was obviously intended to show support for Elizabeth Edwards. Ironically, we've actually gotten much support for Rielle Hunter in the thread as well.

"Further, the OP opines that it was said by others in threads concerning the Edwards affair that Elizabeth had no right to write the book or otherwise publically discuss the affair when NOBODY said any such thing."

While I take issue with your characterization of my comments, to suggest that NOBODY said any such thing is false. Have you read every comment on the matter? Have you viewed the commentary that Elizabeth Edwards is attention seeking and/or is harming her children by writing a book? Have you seen the commentary that she should have just let it go, not brought up the issue again?

You certainly have a right to come into a thread asking for support of Elizabeth Edwards, while choosing to support Rielle Hunter, but don't suggest that I invited such commentary. Start a thread supporting the "other women" if you like.

[BlooInBloo]

30. I support her right to speak out, as I support others' right to criticize.

[pnwmom]

55. Do you support the OP's attempt to limit a thread to messages of support

for another DUer who is suffering, both physically and emotionally?

[JuniperLea]

111. I for one support that attempt...

But that said, DU has never been a bastian of followers.

I have pals on both sides of this and it makes me sad.

[MrsBrady]

31. the whole point of feminism

is that we, and I mean I, you, any woman can make the decisions for her life...do what is best for herself...just like the menz.
If she wants to write a book, it's her own damned prerogative. If she hadn't written a book, then that would be her damned prerogative too.

Hunter is a bitch for pursuing a married man with kids...that is so trashy and low class.
and
Edwards was a complete ass for hurting and damaging his family...risking losing everything. And he did lose quite a bit.

It's Elizabeth's decision to decide what she wants to do. Hers.

my 2 cents, fwiw

[Tangerine LaBamba]

34. Your post just struck me ........

The assumption in all of this sad, sordid matter is that John Edwards told the truth.

Now, why would anyone believe that, since he lied to his wife more than once? It's just as possible that Edwards pursued the other woman.

Since no one's heard "the other woman's" side, how does anyone know what REALLY happened?

Either you believe John Edwards, or you keep an open mind until you find out from the woman herself.

Elizabeth Edwards is doing what she has to do. It might not be how others would do it, but, from the vantage point - we're all outsiders - no one knows what the truth is.

And, as I mentioned, as already documented, John Edwards lied to his wife more than once, and to his supporters with every breath he took, every promise he made..................................

[EFerrari]

40. And how does that fit into this thread in support of Elizabeth?

[pnwmom]

58. Unless John Edwards raped Rielle Hunter, she's more responsible than he is.

He was the one living with the misery and stress of a dying wife. Even if the scenario you describe is somehow true, it was up to Hunter to say -- sorry, John. Maybe someday in the future, but not now.

But I don't believe that's how it happened. I think she pursued an attractive, powerful man and he responded. If he really wanted to get involved with someone, he could have found someone much more attractive, smart, and interesting than she is.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

63. That's creative............

I have never understood how or why some people do what they do, but one thing has remained constant - I've always been surprised. Just when I think I've seen it all, along comes a new one.

Until someone sets the record straight about John Edwards and his extra-marital affair, it's all speculation. That you "think she pursued ... (Edwards)" is probably a pretty typical imaginary belief since it's almost traditional to blame the woman in an adulterous situation. Not terribly enlightened, but there's a place even for backward, uninformed thinking. At least it's not going to hurt anyone, which is all that matters.

It takes two, and only those two know what really happened............................

[Scout]

84. HE was the oath taker and oath breaker ... HE was the married one

HE committed adultery, she did not commit adultery, she did not break an oath to be faithful to Elizabeth

"If he really wanted to get involved with someone, he could have found someone much more attractive, smart, and interesting than she is."

you are too much. you don't think you are at all a feminist do you?

[paulsby]

91. bull

john was the one who made the contract, the covenant, the oath, in regards to elizabeth.

NOT the other woman. did she do a bad thing? yes. is he more responsible? of course.

it's not even close. marriage vows (should) mean something. HE was the one who took them. he was the one who betrayed them.

[TorchTheWitch]

112. I've noticed that as well

It is most often the case that men who have affairs keep the affair going by lying to the mistress as much as the wife. In this case we only know John's version through both him and Elizabeth, and since he's still lying, I have no reason to believe he is telling the truth about the mistress.

Since Elizabeth seems to have decided to forgive John and remain married to him I can understand if she has a need to believe him and shift the greater part of the blame onto the mistress in order to try to rebuild with him.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

120. Your post is so sensible,

and that makes your screen name even funnier.

Now I wonder how many other girlfriends John had out there, and how many might have been paid off with campaign funds, or with money from some other source. He's never been, shall we say, "underfunded."

[northernlights]

144. um, the "other side" comes through loud and clear in the link above

Reille's point of view is pretty well encapsulated by the newsweek writer.

It becomes pretty clear that she pursued Edwards. He is garbage for going for it. She is garbage for having pursued him.

They are equal garbage, imho.

[Triana]

38. What MrsBrady said - ditto.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Blue Diadem]

79. Excellent description of feminism.

I wish more would understand and embrace that definition, instead of thinking we.all.must.act.alike.

[bleever]

39. If I'm Elizabeth Edwards, and everyone else is talking about me

(or anyone who wants to talk about me and my family is talking), I'm going to make sure to take my turn.

And I do think she's incredibly brave, under the circumstances.

[EFerrari]

45. Hey, bleever. Is that interview up anywhere? I was working and missed it.

Do you know?

[bleever]

80. Here:

Links on the front page of Oprah's site: http://www.oprah.com/index

[EFerrari]

109. Thank you. n/t

[MrsBrady]

92. agreed n/t

[mykpart]

51. Elizabeth Edwards is a great woman.

I was struck by her knowledge and style in 2004, before we knew her cancer had returned. She is very brave and she has my support no matter how she chooses to live the end of her life. She can forgive John or not, she can write and say whatever she wants; she lived it, she has the right to share it with the public if she wants. I have tremendous respect and admiration for this woman.

[mzmolly]

61. Very well said.

Thanks.

[JI7]

56. i feel bad for her and the kids

but John is still being a jerk. by not acknowledging Hunter's child as his it's just making things worse.

and i think that other child is what is hurting Elizabeth the most. because the possiblity that she is Edwards means that Rielle can never totally go away. when she talked about this other women coming in and starting a family with him i know it was something that she thought of as a possiblity if she were to die.

Elizabeth said she could live anywhere from about a year to 10 or more years. from the interview while she is not well emotionally and still very hurt, she seemed to be ok in her physical health. i really hope she has many more years to live and is able to see her young children become adults.

and seeing Emma Claire and Jack not the usual playful self was sad also. Emma Claire especially as she is at that age where she isn't young enough not understand there is something hurting the family but not old enough that she has her own life and a better understanding of the world.

[mzmolly]

62. I too wish her many, many

more years.

[spoony]

68. I adore her.

She's a strong and good person and, as you said, should be able to "share her experiences" however she wants.

[H2O Man]

70. Yes, definitely.

No question about it.

Nominated.

[Inspired]

71. I've always supported Elizabeth and will continue to do so.

She is a remarkable woman and I have nothing but respect for her.

[havocmom]

78. When people are hurt by the poor choices of others, DAMN right they have a right to voice that!

Take it beyond this couple's struggle with betrayal in their marriage. Take it to all situations where the actions of some hurt others. Those hurt people most certainly have a right to point out how they have been betrayed and hurt.

To not have the possibility of exposure would mean all the bad acts of people would go unaddressed. The lesson society would learn is: Hurt others and you don't get held accountable. Don't hurt others and you get shit on. Gee, what a wonderful world THAT would be, for assholes and abusers.

[barbtries]

88. everyone has the right to speak out.

i'm really behind the curve on this issue. i've seen threads but none really telling me what is the controversy. so i can't say whether i think what she said was an error of judgment or what. i can say she has the right to speak out. she can't control people's reaction to what she said though, and they have a right to that as well.

[shanti]

89. yes

elizabeth was the victim here...women NEED to speak out against abuse, and i think this WAS abuse. "they" are always trying to shut women up. screw that!

[joshcryer]

95. I support her getting paid for something her husband did. I support the mistress, too.

I think that they should check out and get as much money as they can out of this situation. Book deals, movie deals, whole nine yards.

[imdjh]

98. I'm still in shock that is was a mistress instead of a mister.

[MrMickeysMom]

99. Yep, she's got MY support, alright...

I may not be interested in reading her book, or seeing Oprah, but I certainly can sympathize with her.

I'm not inclined to support believe anything he EVER says again. In fact, FUCK HIM and the whore he road in on.

Don't get my view point of life and own personal experience. I've had a good marriage all these years. However, if I ever went through what she did with THAT man, I'd clearly walk away collecting the proceeds from the book I WROTE, not the "I"m sorry" and compensation he might try to give me. I'd never trust again.

The children have to deal with the father they have, but a wife has to deal with the partner she's supposed to have wanted to be with the rest of her life. She doesn't have the luxury of knowing how long that might be.

All my best to you, Elizabeth. All my respect.

[blueworld]

100. So glad you did this for many reasons

I posted about this elsewhere today. Pardon my crudity, but I'm sick of women having to be viewed as either an ever-flowing-tit of love & forgiveness OR a brainless sex-toy. Feminism is about WOMEN - all different kinds & approaches & techniques & attitudes, which change as WOMEN grow & learn & mature.

Elizabeth Edwards has been a terrific mother and wife. She honored her vows & expected the same in return. While John is "only human", so is she! Elizabeth Edwards is a strong WOMAN. Undoubtedly she's hurt & grieving & trying to still love her husband. She loves her kids. She wants to communicate to them & to us.

Bravo for her book & her interviews. I'm tired of people arguing about her catharsis & "what are her motives" & "this hurts her kids". Sorry HE hurt the kids by creating the situation. And now the kids will have to see how humans handle this stuff - in pain & imperfectly, but love doesn't die overnight.

To the critics: buy the book or don't, but stop whining about her right to publish her thoughts & feelings.

P.S. How long do we suppose it will be before Hunter writes a book?

[mzmolly]

101. You raise some excellent points. One being, this book may actually be good for her children.

"the kids will have to see how humans handle this stuff - in pain & imperfectly"...

The children will also have a record of their Mothers version of events, vs. whatever they may be told in the future by others. Were I one of her children, I'd appreciate her sharing her story with me.

Also, not many people appear aware that the Edwards young children are home-schooled. They're pretty sheltered from the news cycle and hubbub about the affair.

[JerseygirlCT]

102. I support Elizabeth. nt

[JuniperLea]

107. I'm with you, mzmolly!

I felt more sorry for the children when their father acted like a lying ass.

Elizabeth is dying for fuck's sake! She has been used, abused, and she is doing what she wants to do with her last time on Earth. God bless her! She is entitled to do what she wants to do, and if that includes TELLING HER SIDE OF THE STORY, I say she has the right and she deserves a hell of a lot more respect than what I'm reading here these days. I'm actually starting to think about using the ignore button because some of these idiotic comments from cretins must surely be indicative of the stupidity to come from them in the future.

[noiretextatique]

113. i support her too

ashe's has every right to say whatever the hell she wants to say about HER life and HER experiences.

[cherokeeprogressive]

115. I fully support the First Amendment. She can say whatever she likes, whenever she likes.

The one thing the First Amendment DOESN'T do though, is guarantee a receptive audience.

It's private business. I don't care about it any longer. Additionally, and this is just my opinion; I think it undignified for her to be on a bashing tour at this point.

[Irishonly]

116. I support Elizabeth Edwards

John needs a male chasity belt but Elizabeth has the right to deal with her life in the way she thinks best.

[earth mom]

117. Elizabeth is dying. She wants to get her side of the story out and I don't blame her one bit.

Truth is often distorted which is seen around DU everyday-especially today if I might add.

But I really don't see the marriage surviving if that child is proven to be Johns.

It will get really sticky then and I don't think Elizabeth is willing to entangle herself up in visitation or having to deal with the skanky ho mistress.

[Horse with no Name]

122. I love Elizabeth and my support for her has never waivered

I contributed heavily to the campaign and I don't think a single penny donated was a penny lost.
I respected the message that John and Elizabeth brought to the table and I was incredibly sad when it was overlooked when they brought it and even pissed when it was co-oped and repackaged by other candidates.
With that being said...I can understand her forgiveness of John. I don't condone him having an affair. I felt he was always going to be targeted because he was so good looking, charismatic AND had a populist heart (those attributes alone in this political climate could have carried him a long way) and he should have known that as well and should have been more cautious to strangers bearing gifts.
I think that he was targeted by this woman, however, he is the one that ultimately had to close the deal, and he did.
We are all humans and I can think of worse transgressions one can commit against the other, and ultimately, what happens in John and Elizabeth's relationship is their business.

[liberalpragmatist]

124. The book isn't even mostly about the affair

According to the reviews, the bulk of the book is devoted to her battle with cancer and the death of her son.

> http://www.latimes.com/features/books/la-et-book8-2009may08,0,5029044.story

[Raine]

126. I support her right to speak out

I'm glad she's doing it. :thumbsup:

[bemildred]

127. Present. nt

[onestepforward]

128. Elizabeth Edwards is a wonderful woman and I support her. n/t

[Ken Burch]

130. I'm with you on this. Why would anyone hate on Elizabeth?

She was the VICTIM, people.

[varelse]

131. Checking in

Elizabeth is the only one who has the right to air her views, speak her mind, and share her opinions about events and people in her own life and how they have affected her. It's a damn shame that so many people here feel she should consult them before speaking out - the shame is theirs, not hers.

[livefreest]

132. I support Elizabeth Edwards in any decision she's made so far.

I wish her the best healing in all facets of her life.

[whokilledthem]

133. I wanted to vote for Edwards so bad

I really did. I knew Obama was a superstar, and I was glad to see him take it from Hillary. But Edwards was my guy.

Apparently he was a lot of peoples 'guy' so much... we all wound up in this mess with him. I thank God now he did not win it.

Then along comes Elizabeth, doing what every politicians wife does in this situation. She not only helped him lie and cover it up, and now, because she can use her victim status, she is trying so hard to redeem him to us.

But who will redeem Elizabeth? When will she redeem herself for the lies she helped hide behind that wonderful smile? Who will she sway enough to forgive her for lying to our faces even as her hubby was illegally funneling cash to his mistriss...?

We ALLLLLLL watch the others as they fall, like Vitter, and we watch as their wives are dragged to the podium with them so they can admit their BETRAYAL of their voters. And what words we all had to say about how gross and disgusting it is for a politicians wife to stand there and cling to her husband as he admits his 'faults', misdeeds', mistakes'. And it is in rightfil disgust that we disrespect these women who let themselves be used in such a way.

And yet because her name is Elizabeth Edwards we are all suppossed to just forgive and SUPPORT HER? Even as it becomes apparent she knew and went along with it all along, standing there by her hubby day by day as they went on and on about morals and values and principles and DUTY, because her ambition to be First Lady outweighed whatever dignity and credibility she lost in the doing of it.

I wonder how many of us would have cheered so loudly for poor little Elizabeth Edwards if we had known the secrets she was keeping and the lies she told to try and advance her husbands political carreer.

Yes, Yes, I know... but... but... she HAS CANCER! Yes, yes, boo-hoo. What a tragedy.

But it was the cancer around her, not inside of her that did the most damage to her. And what a great disservice it was to our ENTIRE nation that hung in the balance.

Now, when I think of how I cheered for John Edwards, I feel only disgust.

And when I see all the people Elizabeth helped to decieve on his behalf PRAISING HER... well, that to me is somehow even MORE disgusting.

Fuck John Edwards. And fuck Elizabeth Edwards too. Instead of disappointing us so badly in such a public way,.. They should just go away and wander in the wilderness until they BOTH understand how not to betray the people who admired them most.

[Inspired]

145. Actually, Elizabeth wasn't around that much in the 2008 campaign.

And now I know why. So, you can fault her but it is important to look at history with your eyes wide open. I was very much involved in this campaign both in 2004 and even more so in 2008. I was also very involved in the years between. I don't know everything but I think I have a decent perspective.

I expected her to practically move to Iowa and I was surprised to find that she didn't spend a great deal of time here. Sure, there were random events. But the Elizabeth who spoke of John wasn't the same Elizabeth who spoke in 2004. She didn't focus on JOHN...she focused more on ISSUES. She wasn't speaking of this great MAN and I don't think she was trying to advance HIS career as much as advance the ISSUES that she cared about. At the time I thought this was due to her health. The idea that John would cheat was so far beyond anything I could imagine. But we knew something was different. And we saw it immediately after he announced his candidacy.

I think it was obvious to most of us early in 2007 that John Edwards was not going to be our nominee. I think Elizabeth also knew this. I really do. Looking back I can see it very clearly. I'm sure Harrison Hickman knew this as well. I knew, in spite of leading the polls for months in Iowa, that the candidate I was backing would be lucky to place 3rd. We will never know if Elizabeth would have stopped the train if it looked like John could actually win. We will never know what Elizabeth would have done if she had found out the whole truth. At the time she thought it was one single discretion. One fuck up in a marriage of 30 years.

Elizabeth said it herself. She canceled many appearances because she just couldn't go out there and pretend that everything was OK.

Do you blame her because she didn't come out, hold a press conference and tell the world that her husband was a cheating snake as soon as she found out? I can't speak for Elizabeth but I'm sure she was in shock and didn't really know how to react. So, she did what she did. She quietly canceled appearances and changed how she spoke during the ones she didn't cancel.

I think she handled herself and this situation remarkably. I know she regrets not ending the campaign. But she can't change time and do things differently. No one can. It is what it is. Barack Obama is our president. This situation didn't end our world. It never was going to end our world because John Edwards was never going to be our nominee. But the issues he campaigned on, regardless if you think he was sincere or not, are important. If Elizabeth's efforts during the campaign helped raise awareness of these issues, then some good came out of John Edwards candidacy.

[karynnj]

147. It is true the EE of 2004 was not the EE of 2008

The EE of 2004 was not her husband's attack dog - if she were, she would never have become the loved figure she was. In 2007, she took that love and the 2004 persona and the sympathy for her tragic fight against cancer and used it to be an unassailable attack dog - dishonestly attacking the reputations of anyone who stood between JRE and the WH.

On the eve of the Iowa caucus, she spoke of her cancer and said Obama's plan did not cover pre-existing conditions. This was in the prepared part of her appearance. This was a lie and she knew it was a lie or it meant she read NOTHING about his plan and made this up out of whole cloth. The former is more likely true - given the timing. She never said it before, she waited until late in the day of day before the caucus. That is Chuck Colson/Karl Rove level politics.

So - any pretty, cleaned up view that she really didn't engage wholeheartedly is not believable.

[Inspired]

156. Believe what you want. It changes nothing.

[karynnj]

157. Same goes to you - you can believe that EE was a saint, but that doesn't make it so.

Nothing I cited can not be backed up by links to EE interviews. She opted to be an attack dog - attacking the Kerrys in 2005 - when it was possible he would run; attacking the Obamas; attacking HRC.

If she were just in it for the issues - she would have NOT made these attacks that in all 3 cases backed RW attacks or stereotypes. If she thought one of these 3 would be the likely candidate, why make these attacks?

[Inspired]

158. I think the word 'attack' is one of the most misused words I read on the DU.

It's very subjective, you know? You say attack...I say opinion. I'm always amused when people accuse others of 'attacking'.

If you'd like to post the caucus eve interview link, I'd really like to see what your definition of attack is. I was too busy with the campaign to read any interviews conducted that night. I do know that Elizabeth has a definite opinion on the kind of health care policy our country needs. So, it wouldn't surprise me if she was outspoken on this issue. I do know she thought Hillary's was decent. She also thought anything Obama had in mind would be far better than McCain's.

I did hear George Stephanopoulos say today that Edwards staffers were preparing a way out if the rumors about this affair were found to be true while the campaign was going on.

I don't think Elizabeth is a saint and I don't think she is perfect. However, she is a hero of mine. I like her and it is apparent that I've had a different kind of exposure to her compared to yours.

I also think John and Elizabeth were fools to continue on with the campaign. I think they would agree with that statement. I, like many others, struggle to make sense of it all. However, that does not change how I view Elizabeth because my admiration for her isn't just based on politics.

[karynnj]

159. By attacks - I mean negative personal comments

I was NOT speaking of her comments on HRC's healthcare plan. Any honest policy comment - no matter how negative is reasonable.

Her comments that elevated herself and her life choices over HRC's were bad enough, she had to backtrack.

My exposure to EE was seeing things she said and did PUBLICLY in 2005 - 2008. I frankly do not care if in a personal meeting with a supporter, she is nice as pie. EVERY POLITICIAN and their spouses are in that case - and yes, I've met some.

When you overtly LIE about an opponent's health care plan the night before a caucus - you have stepped over a line.

[Inspired]

160. God..whatever!!! This is a thread of support for Elizabeth.

I'm showing mine.

[karynnj]

161. Sure - but the OP, attacks the majority of us here as thinking or posting "absurd" things

Had it been just the subject with no supporting text or if it were in the Edwards' SUPPORT group - which it isn't, I would not have responded.

[mzmolly]

152. Exactly!

"I don't think she was trying to advance HIS career as much as advance the ISSUES that she cared about."

[mzmolly]

151. I'm not so sure you can speak to her motives.

You don't know why she chose to support her husband in the race. Could it be that she wanted to make a difference for others and believed that John had the most progressive platform? That's why I supported him. I liked his platform.

Interesting that a person with a mere 14 posts would comment thusly "F*ck John Edwards. And f*ck Elizabeth Edwards too."

Color me skeptical of YOUR motives "whokilledthem".

[whokilledthem]

134. BTW

For all of those 'supporting her right to speak out'....

Why DID she never speak out during the campaign...? You know, while she was telling us all John was the exact opposite of the man she KNEW he had become.

Funny how people only 'speak out' when they no longer have anything left to hide.

[Control-Z]

135. Obviously you have never loved, or been loved,

and then been deceived, the way Elizabeth has.

[whokilledthem]

148. Obviously

You don't know a damn thing about me to say that.

Keep trying to tell yourself that, but you would then be lying to yourself as much as Elizabeth Edwards ever did.

[mzmolly]

153. Never spoke during the campaign?

That's an interesting statement. Are you suggesting that she and Giuliani,s former wife should have had a public pity party?

[vanboggie]

136. Wait, wait, wait, she's not dying

Elizabeth Edwards is living, and doing a damned good job of it. I admire her courage on many fronts, and any way she wants to express herself is her decision.

Go Elizabeth! Thank you for sharing of yourself to help others.

[Vidar]

138. She's more than earned the right.

[Political Tiger]

139. "Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours"

But I can still kick it!

I have great admiration for Elizabeth Edwards!

[cherokeeprogressive]

140. I think it undignified for her to be on a bashing tour at this point.n/t

[mzmolly]

154. I think it's undignified to suggest she's on a "bashing tour".

eom.

[ShortnFiery]

162. My sentiments exactly. It's sad and pathetic to see her vindictiveness on national television.

I wonder what her conference with Saint Peter will be like? I would surmise it would have to do with "forgiveness" and permitting JUSTICE (vengeance?) to The Lord. :(

[1]

141. pretty much? if you expect your "mate" to be faithful to you? you are an idiot...

dudes and chicks are going to do what dudes and chicks do...

your "significant" other is as faithful to you as the next opportunity that shows up.

know that or be stupid.

duh!

[cali]

142. bullshit. yes, plenty of people break their marriage vows. plenty don't

you're making the common error of thinking that everyone is just like you.

[Raine]

155. Thinking that everyone cheats

is idiotic. "Dudes and chicks" are human beings who can think and reason not animals who only go by their baser instincts.