Read other letters about this article

• Tuesday, August 12, 2008 05:44 PM

  Not at all sure that Elizabeth Edwards had that knowledge.

  The point you're addressing in this column has to do with the question of Elizabeth Edwards campaigning for her husband as a better (than Hillary Clinton) advocate for women after she had knowledge (in the form of his alleged confession) of his affair.

  Leaving aside the question of whether or not John Edwards would or would not be a better advocate for women, the real question from where I sit is whether or not the premise (Elizabeth Edwards knew of the affair and campaigned anyway) is likely to be true. I don't believe that it is.

  John Edwards supposedly had a fit of conscience and confessed his infidelity to his wife well before there was any public hint of his affair or, at least so far as we know, a threat of exposure. Now I know that married men (and women too for that matter) do sometimes have such fits of conscience and do make such soul-cleansing confessions (which have the perverse effect of inflicting what may be unnecessary pain upon their spouses. Perhaps it would be better to simply cut off the affair, try to be a better husband/wife and just keep their mouth shut rather than assuage their guilt by confessing and inflicting such pain?) But really, how common is this sort of thing among the self-confessed self-absorbed egotist?

  I think it is far more likely that John Edwards is lying through his teeth when he tells us that he had confessed to his wife and ended the affair before his presidential run got under way in earnest. I expect that Elizabeth Edwards campaigned for her husband not knowing or not believing he had been involved with Rielle Hunter. Had she known, I doubt she would have stood for his public lies and denials of the affair since she would well understand (perhaps better than he narcissistic husband who I am sorry to say had my support in the primaries) the bombshell political implications of this sordid tale when the truth finally and inevitably came to light.

  If I could say anything today to John Edwards, it would be that his wife is too good for him. And to Elizabeth I would say the same.

  Anyway, I too disagree with Marcus. It don't think it was creepy for Elizabeth Edwards to campaign for her husband after she learned the truth concerning his affair because I don't think she learned the truth until the campaign was over. Therefore, she didn't campaign for him after knowing which makes moots the point.

  —Roman Berry Read Roman Berry's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel