In Which I State the Obvious

In a number of different circumstances, Elizabeth Edwards’s media blitz came up and people have wondered what’s going on with that and I have been kind of dumbfounded because it seems to me rather obvious.  She asked one thing of her husband when they got married–that he remain faithful to her–and he couldn’t be bothered to do that for her, even though he agreed to it.  Now she’s dying and she’s leaving behind young children, children who she clearly does not want raised by Rielle Hunter.  But she knows that, no matter how important something is to her, even if John promises to abide by her wishes, he’s proven that he’s not a man of his word.  So, she can’t make him promise not to publicly take up with Hunter after Edwards is gone.

So, instead, she’s going to make it as clear as possible to the public that she would never abide by John taking up with Hunter, so that the public will make it impossible for him to do so when Edwards isn’t around to stop him.

Who knows if it will work or not, but her motives seem pretty damn clear.

13 thoughts on “In Which I State the Obvious

  1. Pingback: Wife After Death: What Elizabeth Edwards Is Doing : Post Politics: Political News and Views in Tennessee

  2. Maybe it’s just that I was raised that it’s tacky to air one’s dirty laundry — but is it just me, or does anyone else think it’s gross that she’s making money off a book about her husband’s affair?

  3. This is a woman who believed so strongly in her husband and what he claimed to stand for that she wanted him to continue his campaign for the presidency even if it meant leaving her to face cancer treatment alone. Even if, let’s face it, she was on her deathbed. I think we can assume that she felt a corresponding level of disillusionment, and a corresponding level of anger.

  4. Though I have to say that I don’t agree with B that this is about who is to raise her children. (I mean, has the guy shown the least smidgen of wanting to have a future with Hunter? I don’t think that’s an issue here.) I think it’s just anger at him. Big, big anger.

  5. Yes, but Hunter seems to be under the impression that she was going to slide into the Edwards household after Elizabeth left it, and I think Elizabeth wants to make sure it’s known that that is not the case.

  6. OK, I’m not as up on the gossip as I should be, then. Nobody ever tells me anythiiiiiiiiiing

  7. I can’t blame her for poisoning any future relationship for John with Hunter though I doubt if he will even think of Hunter after Elizabeth is gone. I don’t defend Edwards for his actions but I can understand them, especially having cared for a spouse with cancer for an extended period of time. I definitely had temptations and I wasn’t a good looking politician with lots of opportunities.

    After losing a child and then her health problems, I am surprised that this marriage has lasted, much less him having one affair. And with the clumsy way he handled this affair, I do think it was the only one.

    In an above board relationship, I can’t see Edwards taking up with scum like hunter.

  8. My understanding was that she contracted to write the book when she was “simply” suffering from cancer and prior to the infidelity.

    Although I expect John’s political career is pretty well stabbed through the heart dead, I also admit that once Elizabeth has succumbed to cancer, he might resurrect himself somehow. If Hunter re-enters the picture, he’s going to need to chase ambulances again.

  9. If Elizabeth Edwards is trying to get the public to side with her (thru this book, public appearances & speaking out, etc…) to make sure Hunter doesn’t enter the Edwards family picture after she is gone, she should be reminded how well that worked for Princess Diana and her campaign against Camilla Parker Bowles.

  10. Yes, but Hunter seems to be under the impression that she was going to slide into the Edwards household after Elizabeth left it,

    When did she say this? Or is this just people filling in the blanks for themselves?

    Also, I read recently that she DOES want Edwards to take a paternity test.

  11. Beth, I think the Princess Diana-Duchess Camilla thing has an entirely different flavor because Prince Charles allegedly always wanted to marry Camilla, but Queen Elizabeth wouldn’t let him. If John Edwards had always wanted to marry Rielle Hunter but for some reason was constrained to marry Elizabeth Edwards instead, then your analogy would work. The one thing I heard Princess Diana say that always stuck in my head was that her marriage had three people in it.

Comments are closed.