That's an incorrect interpretation of the Edwards affair. At this point, we have an old fling AND a new baby. The baby is his. Really, who doesn't put the father's name on the birth certificate? Is that realistic? No.

There is also the possibly improper use of campaign funds for his girlfriend and the bizarre attempt at cover-up by enlisting an aide to pose as the baby's biological father. The layers of dishonesty are appalling but pale in comparison to the ongoing refusal to acknowledge that the baby is his. Edwards needs to step up and do what is right for the child. frankly, I don't see what he has to lose at this point. No one believes that Edwards visited Rielle Hunter in the middle of the night at a hotel and played with some one else's child, do they?

Anyone who can't meet the basic needs of their own children has no business running for dog catcher much less higher office . I can understand an affair. John Edwards isn't the first and won't be the last. However, the dodges, the lies and the ongoing avoidance of responsibility for his child are inexcusable.

The author made a quick reference to the impact of poverty on children. A recent study (published on edweek) showed that children born in poverty showed cognitive and behavioral differences from their more affluent peers by as early as 9 months. That's important information that we can use. If there's a bettter argument for government-subsidized day care and pre-school for poor children, I can't think of it.

how do you expect to lead others? The Edwards situation is worse than most because he most likely has a child he has *never* recognized. I don't know what that is if not immoral, irresponsible and unethical. He owes child support and visits with the child. His own children should know this child. Rielle Hunter and both John and Elizabeth Edwards have had their time in the sun. Time to start taking care of this child in the right way, not dodging and literally running from papparazi when you are visiting your ex and her baby.

Diane Schuler's behavior was not understandable. It was bizarre and irresponsible and it was most certainly not the same as "having a glass of wine". She was loaded and high and driving children. If she had survived the crash, she would be facing many counts of manslaughter.

I hate to burst your bubble but Sarah Palin will be dining out, so to speak, on her bizarrely attractive persona for at least a decade or so. Her tens of millions will amply provide for Trig and I'm so happy for that. However, it will successfully inoculate the entire Palin family from coming to grips with what it's like for middle-class (instead of rich) people to provide services for their children when their insurers have had enough of paying for healthcare.

I'm sure I'm one of 100 posters to say the same thing but thanks are very much in order. It needs to be pointed out that our CURRENT healthcare system fails many at their most dire point. I'm also glad to see you included a child with a lif-long disability. Those of us who work with children with severe disabilities know that Medicaid and SSI are there for families. Insurance companies clearly don't want these clients even after there parents and the empoyers have paid many tens of thousands in premiums, anything to save their profit margin. Anyone with common sense should see that profit-driven enterprise and taking care of sick people don't go hand-in-hand.

That's far worse than Britney Spears. It's cringe-worthy for someone of that age and experience. I don't give her good odds going forward. Hopefully Miley will manage her downward spiral far better than Ms. Spears.

Just as a point of comparison: At 16/17 yrs old Beyonce Knowles could sing pretty well, dance like she KNEW how to shake it, and write some songs. These little girls with little to no talent have very good managers but they're clowns.

Very well said!

People who think Palin knows something about the lives of the disabled because of her son Trig are fooling themselves. Anyone who works with people with special needs knows how limited support is for these children, adukts and their families. Sarah Palin should thank her lucky stars she was fortunate enough to afford (or be afforded) excellent benefits and a sweet book deal. At least she won't go broke trying to get the level of services her child needs and will need for a very long time.

Thanks for that explanation. I still don't get how insurance companies can legally withhold care from a child after parents have paid premiums for medical coverage. I think it's a dodge to avoid paying high bills for a long time and incredibly disturbing.

Children born with or diagnosed with severe disabilties deserve the same coverage as those born typically and then have an accident. After all, these children benefit from interventions and make progress. I wonder if Palin would care to comment on those who have had claims rejected by their private insurers after paying years of premiums. Somehow I don't think she'll attach the word "evil" to that clearly evident (instead of fictional) practice anytime soon. However, I will. Private insurers who refuse to pay legitimate medical bills for disabled children are evil.