I saw this and felt geniune empathy for Elizabeth Edwards. It was painful to watch that bit when she was asked point-blank if she wondered if John Edwards was the father of Hunter's child and she could not even bring herself to call the baby "she" but "it".

Still, I wonder what was the point of opening this can of worms again. John Edwards's political career is DOA at the present, the Edwards have two very young children, and Elizaeth has terminal cancer. It's not the way I would chose to deal with this but with that said, I find it so hard to be harsh on someone who is obviously in a lot of pain.

I never really get why women like this seem to think the other woman is entirely at fault. In Mrs. Edwards' place the name that wouldn't cross my lips ever again would be John Edwards. Whatserface is a stranger to Mrs. Edwards - a low-classy, attention-seeking, skank - and so her actions don't constitute a betrayal. John Edwards, on the other hand, is the guy who promised fidelity to his wife, broke his promise, lied about it, told her a bit of the truth, and continued to lie to her until the truth came out. How he could stand beside his wife, grinning and twitching, while Oprah's cameras rolled, is beyond me. I found myself wanting Mrs. Edwards to bounce his nasty, lying head down his basketball court and slam dunk it. What kind of lesson does all this send to the Edwards' kids?

I agree with Rebecca, that a big part of this appearance on Oprah is to loom over the future and prevent Reille from entering it. It is a tacit acknowledgment that there might be something real, like a child, connecting those two. Even if there is paternity test after she dies, she wants to ensure that hers husband's involvement is minimal.

What Mrs. Edwards is forgetting, is that by being in the spotlight, she is not letting the public forget Ms. Hunter, no matter how much she insists that she is not worth mentioning.

That prick of a husband of hers pulled the same kind of fast one on an awful lot of juries in his time.

I have great sympathy for Elizabeth Edwards, and I'm sure she has her reasons for writing this book and discussing her life on Oprah. But I also find it a bit sad that the story of Edwards' affair and his possible child is being covered on every news program, web site and newspaper, while the issues of poverty and inequality that both of the Edwards championed for so long have disappeared from news coverage almost entirely.

I'm not saying that John Edwards should bring up these issues - his credibility is shot and his political career is clearly over - but for the 99.9% of us who don't know the Edwards family personally, does this scandal really affect our lives? We'll put them on television to talk about the sex and gossip, but we won't mention the issues that made people listen to Edwards in the first place, issues that might actually affect the people watching.

Seriously. Who cares? Did I really just read an opinion piece about an Oprah interview? What a total waste of thought, but I guess whatever puts food on the table.

I loved Traister's description of John Edwards being dragged though a field of soft horseshit by his pinky toes. But I think if he's doing it right he's getting dragged not backward but face-forward, 'cause when you're recovering from infidelity, whether it's alone or together, someone is going to eat shit.

"As perplexing as her tortured tour may be, Edwards clearly has a couple of missions, and regaining her dignity and her sense of power are chief among them. One way to do that, of course, is to be the person who says everything that everyone else might be saying behind your back, so that they don't think you're clueless or weak. Another is to develop your own account of what happened, including the vulnerabilities that you are able to turn into strengths by expressing them with grace and beauty. Another is to trash that bitch who banged your husband in front of the whole world, with Oprah on your side."

I think there may a fourth goal: punish her cheating husband. Revenge is most definitely a dish best served cold, and forcing your cheating husband to invite Oprah into the home so Oprah can ask questions about the infidelity is very cold. Please note: I see no problem with this. In fact, I approve wholeheartedly.

Mrs Edwards will most likely die of this cancer. I doubt she has any long term goal of dealing with the infidelity once and for all. There is much more than that at stake. Infidelity may seem trivial as a result. She wants to get busy moving forward. Its all she has.

I've never understood why everyone has so much sympathy for Elizabeth Edwards. The only person who is completely blameless and who's life has been shattered is the Edwards' oldest daughter. She loses her brother, then her mother undergoes risky hormone treatments to have more children which probably caused the cancer, and then her disgusting father falls prey to some slut. John Edwards has fathered a child and no matter how Elizabeth feels about the situation, John Edwards has to bring this child into his life and by extension into all their lives. Elizabeth doesn't get to control this, just like she doesn't get to control the cancer. The welfare of the bastard daughter is more important than anything. If Elizabeth wants to leave her children a real legacy, she should try showing them what forgiveness looks like. Shining a bright light on the skanky mistress will probably dim any further ardor dumb John Edwards has for that Hunter woman, and the baby will only benefit from a relationship with her father, flawed as he is. Find out the whole truth (Elizabeth already knows, I'm willing to bet) and do the right thing. And beg forgiveness from their oldest daughter whose life they have ruined.