Several people have written us in the past few days asking for our take on the John Edwards "affair" -- as we're supposed to be some kind of experts on this sort of thing. The whole situation just makes us feel weary and sad though, so all we really have to offer are a few disconnected thoughts, for what they're worth:
We just heard Brian Williams on NBC news ask, "Why did John Edwards lie?" Fair question. But what really jumped out at us was the fact that Brian Williams and the rest of the MSM (mainstream media) rarely accuse prominent politicians of "lying" when sex isn't the issue. Sure, Bill Clinton "lied" about his affair, but the word seems to be verboten when talking about whether or not he misled workers when pushing for NAFTA or other questions of actual policy. We get awkward constructions like, "Bush may have led the nation to war based upon false intelligence estimates," or "Some question McCain's assertion that Obama refused to visit the troops because cameras wouldn't be allowed," when "lie" would clearly be the best word for these occasions. Why can't we call a lie a lie -- even, or especially, when it's not about sex?
Back to Brian's question, "Why did he lie?" Obviously, he lied because he knew the truth would sink his political ambitions. But why would it sink his political ambitions? Because he lied. Does anyone else notice the snake-eating-its-own-tail nature of this reasoning? What if a politician's private life were private? Assuming no laws are being broken and no shameless hypocrisy is being enacted (like secretly gay politicians working hard to prevent gay people from having the right to marry [we're talking to you, Senator Craig], or smarmy morality enforcers secretly dressing up in diapers with prostitutes [talking to you, Senator Vitter]), why, precisely is this our business? If a politician has a live-and-let-live approach to the private matters of private individuals, why shouldn't he or she expect the same discretion? A character issue? Hmm. Seems to us, hypocrites passing laws that restrict other's rights have character issues worth public discussion. Adulterers who don't poke their noses into other people's sex lives generally aren't worth talking about in the public arena. The gay community seems to have settled on a policy of not outing secretly gay politicians unless they are actively working against gay rights. We're in favor of adopting this same policy for heterosexuals. Politicians who respect our privacy deserve to have their own. Those who don't, don't.
And this applies not just to sex. How many politicians and police spend their days tossing people in prison for casual use of marijuana or cocaine then go home and do a few lines with their friends? More than a few.
So Edwards lied because he knew the truth would destroy his career. This brings us to voodoo death. People die when a voodoo curse is placed upon them because they believe they will die. It's their belief that empowers the curse. The lesson -- which Republicans appear to be learning much quicker than Democrats -- is that if you don't build it, they won't come. Both Senators Craig and Vitter are still in office because they refused to believe the curse of public humiliation would kill their careers. And months later, they're still kicking and the public appears to have forgotten all about their sins, for the most part. How different would recent American history be if Bill and Hillary Clinton had simply said, "The internal dynamics of our marriage are nobody's business but ours"? No shame. No contrition. No denials. To us, this is where Clinton failed a test of character.
Not to excuse Edwards (we're in no position to excuse him or condemn him), but it should be noted that an affair does not necessarily mean one doesn't love his/her partner. The Edwards' marriage is beyond complicated. They've been through hell together (the death of a son), and it keeps getting worse. Say what you will, but sex with somebody new can offer a brief respite from the painful realities of life. Despite that big smile, John Edwards is clearly someone who could benefit from some forgetting -- even if only for a moment.
