Elizabeth Edwards Drank Her Husband's Kool-Aid And Became His "Ambition Enabler"
It's easy to understand why John Edwards first felt he was entitled to cheat on his wife and family, and then second, thought he could keep it secret from the American public. He is a self-admitted "narcissist", and narcissists believe they are entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it. As psychologist Cooper Lawrence told me, "they always think some other poor schnook will get caught, not them."
The bigger question is "why did Elizabeth Edwards drink her husband's Kool-Aid? How could she have possibly believed that her husbands affair would remain a private matter when he was running for President of the United States? Hello, the National Enquirer had already broken the story last fall. Why in fact, did she knowingly encourage her spouse to even enter the campaign when she had been fully informed about the affair for over a year? And she helped support and propagate John Edwards' image as a devoted husband and family man.
She was so supportive that she even remained committed to his campaign after the discovery of her metastasized breast cancer. Despite the fact that she was facing a terminal illness, she was willing to take flack for her belief that John Edwards' presidential campaign was so important that not even her own health should stand in the way of its proceeding.
Elizabeth Edwards is now protesting in her own public statement that the public appetite to 'know" is the real culprit in the situation. The 'public' is being voyeuristic in her view and is getting in the way of her family's right to privacy.
Well, she may not want to admit it but Elizabeth is as guilty as her husband at this point, in inviting the public into her family's personal life. Once Bill Clinton's antics in the White House with Monica Lewinsky became Page One headlines for months, no presidential candidate or their family could ever realistically kid themselves, that marital fidelity would not be an issue in political life. If she had any questions about that last spring, she only had to make a call to Silda Spitzer.
No, Elizabeth Edwards had to be in some extraordinary form of denial and that's why she became her husband's "ambition enabler", when she supported his recent run for the presidency. My belief is that after almost thirty years of marriage she too had become so invested in his political ambitions, his cause, that she couldn't give up either, even after he cheated and she knew there was a chance his affair could be reported in the mainstream press.
"His success, now defined her success, so she was willing to go along with the fraud that that their marriage was fine," believes psychologist Victoria Zdrok, currently working on a book titled," Dr. Z on Straying."
Think about it. The Edwards met in law school; She still wears the $11 wedding ring he gave her. He became a successful trial lawyer and then a member of the Senate. She pursued a law career too but ultimately gave it up to support his career and take care of their family. As a couple they experienced the worst of tragedies, the death of their 16 year-old son, and then they made the decision to have two more children. It's easy to understand why Elizabeth Edwards would feel that her marriage was worth salvaging after her spouses' episode of infidelity. It's the presidential campaign that is far harder to understand.
That's why I believe that it's because Elizabeth had made such an enormous personal commitment to her role as her husband's helpmate and as a potential first lady and had made so many sacrifices over the years in the interests of realizing those goals, that she was willing to risk public exposure.
Her terminal illness may actually have also played a role in her decision to publicly stand by her man and his presidential ambitions, according to Zdrok. "When we seek death, we often seek to achieve a symbolic immortality. And becoming a presidential wife could have been that for her."
In any case, Elizabeth Edwards was a victim when her husband cheated. She did nothing to deserve that and as a wife she had every right and many reasons to forgive the jerk. But the decision to stand behind him and publicly broadcast his staunch family values image was her own doing. As courageous and admirable as she has been in dealing with her cancer, she is now the latest member of the Publicly Humiliated Wives Club, and she has no right to complain about the public's interest in knowing exactly what has happened. She helped get herself in this situation.
Follow Bonnie Fuller on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bonniefuller
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Maybe Ms. Edwards was of the mistaken belief that most Americans have evolved beyond the stage of gossipping old hens. Perhaps she thought her thirty year marriage, though not perfect, put her in a position to judge her husband's overall character more accurately than the thousand under-worked reporters who are now causing her family such public angst.
What good is to come of this? He is no longer running for office, the danger posed by a wandering winkie in the White House, grave as it may have been, has been lifted. We can now continue merrily on our way with the first open war criminal in American history at the helm, a trail of innocent bodies in his wake, and in OUR name. Our Constitution torn and tattered and covered in the stains of renditions, black prisons, torture and preemptive war waged for no valid reason.
Put some more time into this, Bonnie, as our Nation descends into a new Dark Age. Perhaps you could consult a fortune teller and be on hand with a camera if he strays again!
Remember, you are the omnipotent press, it is not Ms. Edward's place to forgive her husband, it is yours!
Thank you.
Well put!
Oh, you are so much more noble than the rest of us. Get a grip. This guy is STILL involved with his mistress. Wake up to the fact that he could have been our nominee and we would have no chance to defeat McGoofy. For that possibility, both of the Edwards are guilty. My Edwards supporting daughter is crushed by his behavior--she actually volunteered for him. What do I tell her?
Tell her it is small-minded and intellectually unsound to base a decision of this magnitude on the basis one error in judgement. Tell her most of our founders made the same mistake, and that the results of their efforts were still superior to those of Mr. Bush and his band of ne'r do wells!
Tell her John isn't running and that our Nation needs her and her generation to help heal the festering wounds inflicted by this Administration, that we don't have time to waste on irellevant gossip!
Tell her that her willingness to get involved in our political process is the most Patriotic and decent action she could take, and that while few of us are without sin, most of us want to work together to "Build a more perfect Union."
Thank you Tea - this was well said
"tea", love your post.
What a gross exercise....and for what? The Kool Aid reference puts it over the top.
Obviously intollerence is not limited to the cross waving right.
What separates these liberals from a conservative is a hem line!
Just call me an old fashioned radical!
As usual, it's not the affair itself that's the problem; as usual, more problematic is the cover-up once exposed.
What's really troubling in all of this is his use of campaign funds to hire and pay his mistress to produce a documentary when her company didn't have experience in this area. That just reeks of a kind of "preferential treatment" (there's a more appropriate word for it, but I can't think of it at the moment) that is one of the worst aspects of our political system.
Every candidate can espouse any number of honorable values, but it's how they live up to them in their official functions as an elected representative that reveals the kind of person they area (how they treat staff, whether a campaign contribution would really impact their decision making, etc).
(That's why the firings of the staffers in the WH travel office all those years ago by Hillary Clinton while she was First Lady revealed everything that I needed to know about her).
But what's also bothersome is Edward's denial of being the father of Ms. Hunter's child that's really worrisome. But he's mega-rich, so he may well be financially supporting the raising of their child, which seems the right thing to do. But we'll have to suspend judgment about the facts surrounding his paternity come out.
John Edwards ran for POTUS knowing he had this, and who knows what else, on his back.
Still, some defend him. Talk about drinking kool-aid....
I don't think most people are defending him. We recognize he is human, and made a mistake. This is between John and his wife.
The truth is that Elizabeth may have been better qualified to be POTUS than John was...behind every great man is a great woman...the absolute truth...and yes, his success became hers, because as HC just proved, sexism is still the greatest prejudice in this country, as well as around the world... EE's chance to really suceed was undeniably tied to her husbands sucess...that does not preclude the fact that Elizabeth and John Edwards have done a wonderful and important job bringing the issue of poverty and health care to the public's attention,.. and for the rest, I say we leave the judgement of John Edwards up to Elizabeth and God...
I expect the action word is "great". People need someone to attack so they will not give kudos to all the good work that the Edwards' have done. And those of you who are so hateful should check out ALL men of power. None of your role models is without a blemish...and often it is having to do with affairs. I agree with and applaud you Fiona...well said.
I disagree, in America racism is still by far the greater prejudice and hindrance, not sexism. As a biracial woman, I think I'm in a position to know!
Prejudice in any form serves only to separate us from good people and good ideas, regardless of why the prejudice exists.. tolerance takes time but I am optimisitic that there will be a day when race or gender do not define our opportunities or our success.
Love hurts. True love endures.
Edwards didn't cheat on you, Bonnie, though the acid in your blog would appear to push that he did.
He didn't cheat on me, you, or another person in this world.
He cheated on his wife. Since she forgave him, so should we.
Blaming Elizabeth for anything in this matter is not only unfair__it is pure evil.
Really this is a private family issue with the Edwards. It doesn't need to be dragged through the headlines.
It ceased being a private matter when people responded to their incessant pleas for money for their campaign. At least half of these solicitations were signed by Elizabeth. This money was used to fund the less than stellar work of his mistress and god knows what else. You cannot expect privacy in a situation like this.
Oh gimme a break. It is not 'evil' to call out a politician on a stupid move. This man should have known better. Elizabeth should have known better. We just went thru almost 8 years of Republican rule because Bill Clinton couldn't keep his pants on, or honor his vows. We live in a digital age, where everything is under a microscope, and the Edwards really thought they could hide his 'affair?' C'mon. We don't have to 'forgive' him at all.
But this was a real humdinger! Not only was he cheating with a boobie who had a hx of cheating....he did it with a 42 y/o who obviously didn't use birth control. Then he photographed himself with her, where everyone could see his flirting and her subtle references to their 'affair.' The damage that could have been inflicted here on the Democrats in the single most important election of the century is incalculable.
But we are supposed to all forgive and forget? There is such a thing as 'cheap forgiveness.' I don't get the sense either John Edwards or Elizabeth truly are sorry for putting the party through this ordeal. If they want to forgive, then it is most definitely not our business... but when you are a public figure, and the election hinges on being 'the family values guy' - you better not lie!
The person who wrote the headline for this story really needs to find a new cliche' to use. Really, "drinking the Kool-Aid" is so hackneyed. I read it on every website, hurled by McCain followers at Obama followers and vice-versa.
Elizabeth believed John Edwards because she loves him and her family. She's a strong woman suffering from a terminal disease. She probably doesn't want to put her children through any more trauma. Kool-Aid had nothing to do with this decision, I'd bet.
This is a great piece, Ms. Fuller and I completely agree.
I have to take issue with many of the comments who are oversimplifying this by saying we shouldn't judge, let's move on, it's their private business, etc., etc., etc.
I think Ms. Fuller's assessment is exactly right in her understanding of Mrs. Edwards wanting to salvage her marriage. After all, they have shared many trials and tribulations, as well as good times over many years.
The bigger issue is that Mrs. Edwards, knowing what she knew, and being an intelligent woman, should have discouraged her husband from running for the highest office in the land and she should have thought more of the repercussions to the Party, had he won the nomination, and to the country.
Instead, she went out there before the public and touted her husband's family values credentials. This does indeed make her, as Ms. Fuller rightly points out, Edwards' "ambition enabler" and potential party destroyer.
To be fair, she may have been in a sort of denial mode and did not see this as 'enabling'. But still, she's too intelligent a woman to play cheerleader to a man that could have put the Democratic Party into a tailspin.
I have to take issue with your comment that engages in the same pop-psychology that is just the modern form of judgmentalism and involving yourself in the lives of others, when you have more pressing concerns. If this is what politics have been reduced to, then it all makes sense that the American public is fiddling and being fiddles while their homes burn.
I'm not interested in the lives of others. In fact, I didn't even watch the Clinton impeachment hearings because I felt it was a family matter that should not be publicized or politicized.
That being said, it was publicized and politicized much to our embarrassment and it definitely hurt the Democratic 'brand'.
I've since come to understand that because these are public figures who are either in high office or running for high office, they need to live up to certain standards.
It's not so much about being judgmental OF them, but seeing the lapse of judgment BY them. They have a responsibility when they take (or hope to take) the oath of office, and behaviior that doesn't consider likely consequences is a violation of that responsibility and a betrayal of the trust they solicited and won from the public.
No, I'm not judging them for their actions, but rather for the lack of good judgment on their parts.
Ms. Fuller,
What makes you think that because John Edwards strayed in his marriage of THIRTY years that he does not appreciate "family values"? He may indeed value his marriage, value his partnership, value his family life, family interactions and feel genuine remorse about his actions.
The fact that he confessed to his wife, came clean with her about the affair BEFORE it was discovered publicly, says alot about his relationship with her. They faced a difficulty (what long term marriage doesn't have various challenges??) and forged ahead together. What is NOT "family values" about that?
Many marriages may not have sexual infidelity but they have verbal abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, substance abuse, rage-aholicism, all of which are AGAINST the marriage vows of "love, honor" etc. But it seems that only the SEXUAL breaking of vows.....where we put our private parts.....is the only vow-breaking that is recognized as such.
BULLOCKS!
Let those who've never gone against ANY of the vows to "love, honor, cherish" their spouses be the only ones to speak about "family values".
Till that is the case then NOBODY has the right to claim they live up to "family values" as put forward by either political party and/or religious codes of conduct.
Exactly, are you not sick unto death of the unctious, self-righteous moralizers blathering their condemnation and judgments of other people for being human beings?
It would have been better, I suppose, if John Edwards hadn't had an affair. Well, he did. He told his wife. She decided to forgive him and work through the difficulty together. In private. None of which involved any of us. Leave them alone PRESS! I hate the press. These gossipy, self-righteous, blathering idiots and their megaphones. The press ought to be destroyed.
I'm tired of conservative "family values" What about people of faith who value families. Yours, mine and ours and communities who support each other again instead of always putting some people down so they can lift themselves up. We need a redirection of our love and need for each other in our society. I hope JE and EE's friends and family give them what they need to survive.
I've watched this family ever since they were introducted to us in 2004. I know some of their family history as do all of you. I've watched them run from the death of their son to having 2 childern to a political career. Then EE breast cancer. They continued to run through a 2nd presidential campaign. As a Clinical Social Worker, I wondered what would happen when they hit the wall. Now I know. The good thing is that , hopefully, EE health is good enough that they can survive and grow stronger once again before the inevitable and JE's left to take care of 2 young children by himself. I believe they had a good run before this affair and will have one again. Good Luck to all in the family. JE LEARN FROM THIS AND DON'T DO IT AGAIN.
Exactly!! Who cares if the jerk has an affair. The whole issue is both of them making a concious decision to continue the run for the White House, while at the same time thinking this sordid story would never be exposed. The lies and the attempts at cover up would have sunk the Democratic party had Edwards actually won the nomination. They had to know this, but they didn't care.
It's also probable that he is still lying about what happened, and it may come out that he is buying the silence of this woman and even Andrew Young. Wasn't it a huge tip-off when he had that $400 haircut?
The "narcissist" Franklin D Roosevelt saved this country in one of its darkest hours. He too was unfaithful to his wife. Juvenile moralistic posturing about other people's private lives, so prominent among Republicans, has gotten a foothold at the Huffington Post.
Polls say that Republicans are getting layed more than Democrats.
Does this mean that their spouses are coming in the office between appointments and meetings or are they just better at covering up brief interludes?
That's not a relevant analogy; the yellow journalism at that time was nothing like the National Enquirer and the Drudge Report, and this isn't a discussion of the way things should be, but of the way they are. The simple fact is that relevations of philandering can sink a political campaign, like it or not, because the American public is much more interested in what a politician does behind closed doors than what s/he does on the floor of the legislature, and the media we have now feeds into that.
What bugs me UTTERLY.......
Republicans CAMPAIGN on the issue of family values, fidelity, heterosexual marriage etc. and then have secret affairs, gay bathroom sex, solicit boys via emails etc. and their party still pretends to be about "family values".
Democrats campaign on economic and foreign policy issues and are more liberal and open-minded, forgiving and realistic about "family values" which include RIGHTS of others to have reproductive choice and sexual preferences. When they stray from marriage vows etc., never having campaigned on them in the first place, they get roasted for being hypocrites and the party then is hamstrung insofar as being able to represent "family" values.
So many comments here about how this is a personal matter and that the level of outrage is not proportional to the failing when compared to what Bush etc have done. While the latter does have some truth, human beings have a natural revulsion to private/personal betrayal. Because then the question is - if they are willing to do that to those they love, what makes us think they will do right by the rest of us? BTW, just b/c one has a problem with Edwards does not mean that one is okay with Bush - allowing the deaths of thousands speaks to character too. These things are not mutually exclusive.
Your blog is spot-on....could not have been said better.
I have little sympathy for Liz Edwards because she calculated and enabled this man in the fraud he perpetrated. She was his most visible and passionate cheerleader! How contemputuous of the country and the people. Her behavior in fact was more egregious than his rather typical ambition and horniness, an everyday thing with men. And what about her self-righteous public moralizing about the bad behavior of others.....unbelieveable! I don't have a clue what thoughts lay buried in this woman's heart, but she is very audacious to insist on "privacy" now....I say let everything come out. They may be suffering and humiliated but they deserve it.
when you live in a glass house . . . .
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
