Yesterday afternoon, before heading to the gig, I had the opportunity to view a little television. I caught the disappointing final couple innings of the Cards/Cubs game and then I made a quick run through the news channels, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. All three of them were wall to wall on this John Edwards extramarital affair business.
Edwards, had an affair with former staffer, Rielle Hunter, was photographed by the National Enquirer after having some kind meeting with her a couple of weeks ago and then yesterday, Edwards issued a statement admitting to the affair. Until the statement, Edwards had publicly denied any affair.
So, I was watching the wonks on the three news networks and each channel had at least a couple of folks discussing Edwards statement and offering commentary and analysis. None of them showed or read the complete statement, by the way, they were focusing on excerpts. That right there is problematic because, the actual statement is the news. The actual statement should be the focus, show us that and let us interpret it.
But, in reality, these statements aren’t for us, the public. The statements that public figures make when they screw up are designed for the press to interpret.
I was flipping through the news channels and they were all making note of recent politicians’ various infidelities. The pundits on each separate network were all discussing some version of this question; What makes these guys think that they can get away with this stuff? That was the discussion, what made John Edwards or Spitzer or Craig think they would get away with it? Not, why did they do it? Why did they think they could get away with it?
So, you have a guy that gets a case of the wandering dink. Obviously, he has a character flaw, right?
What is the character flaw? The character flaw is that the guy can’t control his lust. He acts on his lust. The character flaw is not that he thinks he can get away with it.
So, this morning I made it a point to find Edwards’ actual statement. Here is the entire thing.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS
August 8, 2008
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
In 2006, I made a serious error in judgment and conducted myself in a way that was disloyal to my family and to my core beliefs. I recognized my mistake and I told my wife that I had a liaison with another woman, and I asked for her forgiveness. Although I was honest in every painful detail with my family, I did not tell the public. When a supermarket tabloid told a version of the story, I used the fact that the story contained many falsities to deny it. But being 99% honest is no longer enough.
I was and am ashamed of my conduct and choices, and I had hoped that it would never become public. With my family, I took responsibility for my actions in 2006 and today I take full responsibility publicly. But that misconduct took place for a short period in 2006. It ended then. I am and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby, and I am truly hopeful that a test will be done so this fact can be definitively established. I only know that the apparent father has said publicly that he is the father of the baby. I also have not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby.
It is inadequate to say to the people who believed in me that I am sorry, as it is inadequate to say to the people who love me that I am sorry. In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up – feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself. I have been stripped bare and will now work with everything I have to help my family and others who need my help.
I have given a complete interview on this matter and having done so, will have nothing more to say.
First off, that “statement” is not so long and involved that we the people can’t digest or understand it.
But, that “statement” is not meant for us. It is written directly to the press. It’s really a press release.
The core issue is; Edwards, who was running for the highest office, a married man with a family, acted upon his lust. That’s never really addressed. He made an “error in judgment”. Then he goes on to slam The Enquirer, without naming them which is direct pandering to the mainstream press. Then, he says has taken “responsibility” and that it only happened for a little while. Also, he wants to make it clear that he isn’t responsible for any baby. Then he gets to the heart of the matter as far as the press is concerned, he announces why, he thought he could get away with it.
I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic.
He gave the pack of cur dogs the rotted meat that they crave and they pounced. That’s why Edwards thought he could get away with it, he’s an egocentric narcissist. And after all, it takes somebody with an ego, a touch of narcissism to be a politician, right? They all have that, right? Edwards ego and narcissism just got out of control and he thought he get away with it, that’s all.
Is the implication supposed to be that, now that we know why he thought he could get away with an extramarital affair, he is in the process of rehabilitation?
It’s complete nonsense. It’s fantasy.
Here is what matters. John Edwards was an entrusted civil servant. If he had an extramarital affair and he decides that he doesn’t ever want to be an entrusted civil servant anymore, fine. We’ll leave it at that.
If, on the other hand, John Edwards wants to one day again be an entrusted civil servant then, the fact that he did act on his lust and why he did so are relevant. But, why he thought he could get away with it, is not.
Related posts
Tags: character flaw, John Edwards, news networks
Pat Darnell and Friends wrote,
This is the old impeachable offensive Hugh Hefner diatribe argument against monogamy and about being playboys; Hefner is 99% Playboy, by his own definition. In contrast I would submit Larry Flynn, who could be considered 100% playboy in his day.
Taking time to understand the argument in context of who is going to get the press report, is ambitious. Let’s give it the old heigh ho.
It is the 1% that confounds the jury on this one. Ego and narcissism, now there is a combination I personally would not recognize… ahem. You see, Timmy, there is no such thing as being half pregnant, nor only a 1% a liar by omissions of facts. Both of these conditions are either 0 or 100%’ers. Sorry Edwards.
The fact is “What brings in the votes and bankable money does not a monogamous marriage make.”
So this conclusion is very accurate, because no one cares if Edwards is a civil servant or not, like no one cares if Hugh Hefner is a playboy or not:
However, in the press release he never mentions being an “entrusted civil servant.” Although implied, I really think the gist is around does a tryst with someone other than the public family on record, of any Senator or entrusted CS, constitute a form of threat to National Security, and could after all be considered an act of treason?
That is the big no-no that our guy of the hour, Edwards, is trying to avoid. The real story is that they used to shoot traitors.
Meet the Raven!
Link | August 9th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Pribek wrote,
Does that have anything to do with national security? I don’t know.
Does it speak to why Edwards thought he could go pump a loaf and not get caught? Yes. And, the fact is that Edwards and the press are pushing this as the agenda.
But, the real issue has nothing to do with impeachable offenses, national security, Hugh Hefner or Narcissus. None of that matters because he didn’t win the nomination. And, if he were to just head home and chase ambulances, the fact that he was slutting around while campaigning for President and while his wife is terminally ill is just a human interest story. But, if he decides that he wants to still play politician then, it becomes relevant. And, the way he has handled it so far, leads me to believe he is at least considering a return to politics.
Link | August 9th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Pat Darnell and Friends wrote,
Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp for Edwards, until he proves he can legislate again, without pumping a loaf, or pushing a 2% agenda.
My final answer.
Link | August 9th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
J wrote,
“Pumping a loaf”? Is that similar to “pinching a loaf”? Or taken from the line in the Sheik Yerbouti album:
“Sir Richard Pump-a-loaf, the demented bread boffer…”
Inquiring minds want to know…
Link | August 10th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Pribek wrote,
Good work J. Yes Yes Yes
Sir Richard Pump-a-loaf was where I was going there.
Link | August 10th, 2008 at 1:13 pm