A Note on the Content of John Edwards' Narcissism

If John Edwards is a true believer in the public private distinction that will be used to shrug off his affair, then he should still hang his head for the fact that he was willing to put his party and the nation on the pyre. It is one thing to have an affair. Life is very hard and there is a degree of forgetfulness in the erotic. But to have a tryst when you know as well as anyone that the knowledge of it will torpedo a presidential election, well, that is more than a peccadillo.

Let's be clear. Bill Clinton can set his jaw, wag his finger, and moralize as much as he likes but he galvanized the right and put George Bush House in the White House when he indulged in his bizarre sexcapades with intern Monica Lewinsky, lied about it, and then refused to step down as president. Forget the private issues, they are between Edwards, his wife and children. But the former North Carolina senator ran for president acutely aware that word of his affair was banging to get out of the closet.

Since the truth has slipped out, Edwards has already begun chastising himself for his narcissism but I hope part of the charges that he holds against himself include the self-reproach that like Bill Clinton, he somehow or other took himself to be so important to the nation that it was worth the risk to run for president even though he knew it would be lights out for all kinds of people and causes if his affair came to light.

Most big-time politicians are peacocks with egos and a need for love and attention that is to the psychological realm what Everest is to the geographical. Still, these Napoleons need to be reflective and restrained enough to understand that if they are going to have a liaison then they have to have character enough to ice their political ambitions.

Those who take these private matters seriously on a political level do so on the premise that character, which as Aristotle taught has everything to do with judgment, is manifest in our private lives. So far as these folks are concerned whether or not you cheat on your spouse does in fact speak to your ability to govern. I used to snigger at this notion as kind of misplaced Puritanism but John Edwards and Bill Clinton have gone a long way towards convincing me that I was wrong.

Comments

[wbgonne]

This is the discussion Democrats should have had BEFORE defending Bill Clinton to the bitter end, but better now than never. Honor, decency, and integrity should be prerequisites for national office, not optional characteristics. Only after those qualifications have been met should we consider the candidate's policy positions. This view certainly does not preclude from politics those who have affairs, divorces, and complicated lives. However, it does -- or should -- eliminate from contention those who show themselves to be essentially untrustworthy and dishonorable. Liars, in other words. Once Americans reclaim a common ground that insists upon essential decency, then we have a fighting chance to find solutions to the country's problems.

[Gordon Marino - Huffpost Blogger]

Well said. Thanks.
Gordon

[tea in the harbor]

FYI
Your proposed parameters would make the following people unfit for office:
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Franklin
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Lyndon Baines Johnson
William Jefferson Clinton
These are off the top of my head, and only the ones for which there is undeniable proof. There are many many more.
I would also offer the observation that had Mr. Bush dealt with his inner conflicts by acting out in his marriage, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and over four thousand of our troops would be alive today, there would be fifty thousand less seriously wounded Americans, and our National legacy would not include renditions, torture, black prisons, domestic spying, and Gitmo.
In no way do I endorse adultery, my point is that to choose our leaders on such criteria is patently foolish! My next wife, yes, the next leader of the free world, not so much!

[wbgonne]

You are missing the point. Lots of people have affairs or get divorced; plenty of people are single. I don't know anyone who thinks that should disqualify anybody from being president. I certainly don't. But there is a great difference between that and, say, getting BJs from an intern in the Oval Office, or, for instance, 2) having an affair and (probably) fathering a child while your wife is terminally ill and you are running for president. And then lying about it again and again to the detriment of those you are supposed to be serving (nevermind leading). Such selfish, reckless, heedless conduct is wrong because it is utterly dishonorable by any standard. This is a reflection our common values and it should be recognized and affirmed, not dismissed.

By the way, creepy selfishness can be just as dangerous in a president as W's dry drunkenness has proved to be.

[Livvy]

I have grown to believe it does matter today. Its not the sex part for me because powerful men seem to have been doing that forever - but it is that something is wrong in this day and age when a man like Clinton or Edwards are on the world stage and have made milestones few dream of and can do so much with that hard work and toss it away knowing that should they get caught they will let so many down.

They humiliate their spouses and children; they change forever all those people working for them and with them; they make a public more and more jaded about politics. For John Edwards he was a great advocate for the poor and now (for the foreseeable future at least) he is only about tabloid sex.

The recklessness that makes a person do this; risk all of this for some sexual comfort seems to me to not be a good trait for a man that leads the country. I realize they somehow believe they will never be caught but that is a bit scary to. A president needs to look at all his options and understand the ramifications of each one in his political decision making. Why would he not in his personal life. Its a disconnect that DOES seem to me to matter.

[Rjchinook]

I was for Edwards until he dropped out. As a single woman in my younger days I have been approached by dozens of married men, as I got older it was the workplace to online dating. I have a hard time believing women when they say they didn't know he was married or it was too late after they learned. When I heard men say "My wife doesn't understand me" or" We don't communicate anymore", etc., I would say "GO home and talk to your wife instead of me!" "Work on your marriage instead of USING THIS TIME chasing women! Words these men didn't expect to hear nor wanted to. Women who go after someone else's man or have a affair with a man knowing he's married totally disgusts me. If more women told these men to go home to their wives (and vice versa) I believe the divorce rate would go down considerably!
I believed in Edwards, I believed he was a man of character; sticking by his wife during her cancer, etc., What a disappointment.

I

[Boadicea]

The most telling and important disclosure in this case to date is that Edwards was indeed using donations to his charity organization to fund his not-yet-declared presidential campaign in 2006. The timelines, matched against the content of the webisodes and the checks written to a "campaign videographer" by the charity, are only the tip of the iceberg. This is illegal activity and it should be investigated.

Sneaky doesn't begin to describe this man.

[Rjchinook]

As disappointing as it is I think time spent more wisely would be going after Rove & impeaching Bush & Chaney; losing over 4,000 lives in a illegal war trumps Edwards affair.

[foxbat]

Marino says, "Let's be clear. Bill Clinton can set his jaw, wag his finger, and moralize as much as he likes but he galvanized the right and put George Bush House in the White House when he indulged in his bizarre sexcapades with intern Monica Lewinsky, lied about it, and then refused to step down as president.­"

I don't know about the "stepped down as president part,", but this is a lesson for all who are looking at the election and saying that content will win over personality. GWBush ran against Gore with a message of "bringing honor back to the office of President" which seems quite ironic now. He didn't run on a better economic plan, he didn't run on a superior military plan, he certainly didn't run on a better social plan. He took one major event from Clinton's prosperous 8years and made it TheCampaignIssue. The spin doctors overclocked and a new change in political direction occurred. Some blame Gore for not using Clinton more in his campaigning, but unfortunately, Clinton really left him no choice once the election became a referendum not so much on whether Clinton had "sexual relations with that woman," but rather on how he handled the aftermath and the "is" definition.

I think others have said it, but for Edwards and other political figures, folks seem to be willing to "forgive" the indiscretion, but have no tolerance for the aftermath in trying to cover it up when asked about it pointblank.

[Stevie57]

John Edwards narcissism is alive and well if he wants us to swallow the nonsense he spouted in his interview. The affair is at least partially not over, if he is meeting this lady at 2 AM in hotel rooms. I somehow have trouble believing that he was sneaking around to see his friend's baby.
...then the timing of the whole thing seems odd; whether he hired her after the affair started or not, again shrouded in mystery and inconsistencies.
He should either have confessed all, or shut up and continued grooming his hair in private.

But all this aside, Georgia is on fire and Russia seems bent on recapturing its past beligerent glories, people are losing houses, there is a build up of US militarism near Iran, and turns out McCain is involved with thousands losing jobs in the midwest.

Come on folks, let's leave the Edwards alone...we have REAL problems.

[66rock]

Good post and here is what bothers me personally. , Edward's apology didn't reach far enough.

This is Not just about his family. What about about our families who supported and donated to him?

What can we say to our young people to keep faith in our system, politicians? I think John Edwards needs to get back on TV and apologize to his supporters.

My son, who is working every day to pay off his student loans, donated(his first political donation) $100 to the Edwards campaign earlier this year because he truly believed that John Edwards was the best of the best to lead this country forward.

Shame on Edwards for running and betraying that trust.

[lifelonglearner]

Let’s not miss the real point. This is not merely a case of his having “made a terrible mistake in 2006”, confessing and working through it with his wife. This is about his going back to the well by meeting the other woman again in July 2008. This shows his total lack of judgment. The big furor should be about his recent actions, the epitome of bad judgment. No doubt he had purported to his wife that he had ended the other relationship (not just the sex but the entire relationship) and that he would never see the other woman again. In a hotel room 10pm to 2:30 am, oh please, he knew the risk. If he went there to see the woman for “damage control” as he has purported, he is an idiot or he thinks we are the idiots. He has shown no respect for or appreciation of his wife’s having given him another chance after 2006. This isn’t really about sex, it is about the ongoing deceit and lying required to pull off an affair, albeit badly. Furthermore, shame on him for re-entering the political arena at all, where he showed blatant disregard for the efforts of his staff and supporters. His exposure makes their efforts all for naught. Thinking you won’t get caught is a silly excuse. Combined with his bad judgment and lack of concern for others, he is not someone we ever need as a public official, elected or appointed.

[Viper]

If Jefferson had been held to this std we would have no Declaration of Independen­ce.. no third President , nor would we have had George Washington as a President.­.. Mount Rushmore would be w/o Presidents. And we will not even get into Ben Franklin..­.

Where did this myth of faithfulness in America or anywhere else oin the world come from... We have a Bible where leaders had hundreds of wives...


Regards

[remc]

As others have said, it's not the affair, it's the cover up. If he had been upfront and honest about it, people wouldn't care.

[jrosenb1]

I understand Gordon Marino's anguish over mixing politics with ego. But Elizabeth Edwards, who deserves as much respect as we can muster right now, has begged Americans to dispense with habitual voyeurism over this situation and allow her family some privacy. We have no business prowling around in the private lives of politicians, even when such lives become a public issue. Period. Preoccupation with this stuff has had a sickening effect on American politics.

So, I say, get over it. People make bad decisions. All of us do, including politicians. Our country faces too many important issues. A politics of distraction is deadly. We have no business passing judgment on politicians for personal decisions they make under the pressure cooker environment of public life. Anyhow, why blame the sinning politician? Why not cry out to high heaven against the social atmosphere that makes someone's private life fair game, makes it somehow "relevant"?

Democracy in America is greatly endangered. We partly have to blame the political theater that erupted in the '90s over a president's lie about a sexual indiscretion. We got dragged through an impeachment proceeding that trivialized the Constitution and made moral outrage the main political currency of our era. It enabled special interests to engineer the largest transfer of wealth upward in this country since the Gilded Age, leading us into war and economic chaos. And we should care about who's sleeping with whom? We Americans need to grow up.

[manumoka]

I used to respect Elizabeth alot. Now I see her as an enabler of this dangerous political bomb.

[athenasword]

Again I am struck by the double-standard at play... McBush has a past of woman-izing, and he also ditched his sick wife for another, prettier, younger woman. This gets no air time but we will hear about Edwards on a 24/7 loop. While it concerns me that Edwards didn't think this would be an issue if he was the Dem nominee, I don't see anyone making McCane's past a big issue.

[Anastasia]

Call me a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist but....

It's a fairly safe bet, that the Republican National Committee (or related group) has had all of the Dem candidates investigated to a tee, and we're not talking opposition research, but full-out private investigation stuff, the kind where they go through people's garbage and have them followed and photographed. It's also plausible that they were the ones who tipped the Enquirer off about Edwards affair. The timing of the revelation, after it could scuttle Edwards' chances in the primaries, but right before the convention, is convenient, to say the least.

If Bill Clinton having had any liaisons of the domestic kind since he left office, you can be sure that that will come out too, especially if Hillary has any major role in the Obama campaign. The same goes for any other potential VP nominees. Whoever Obama chooses, they'd better be monk-like, with not so much as a parking ticket on their record.

[robotfog]

He should choose an asexual, but most asexuals don't go around broadcasting it, so they might be hard to find.

[jmundstuk]

I never thought that Clinton should resign as president when the Lewinsky thing finally came out. Now, I do. I think you are right that his failure to resign was probably the key factor in getting W into the White House.

Again I say, what is it about these southern boys?

[neworleanslady68]

Since I too am married to a sometimes-cheating southern boy, I asked my mother that same question last night. She reminded me that it isn't just southern boys and gave me examples. She's right.

[Balloonman]

Remember, had CLINTON resigned or been indicted/convicted GORE woud be President and GORE as incumbent in 2000 would unlkely be defeated by GWBUSH. Thus no IRAQ and the direct path/enabler generating our current international and domestic ruination would be moot. Almost like turning back the clock. Had CLINTON been concerned about his high office protocol before acting out another sex fantasy there would have been no reason to waggle his finger and lie to our face. But face it, if private behaviour, always in the periphery of the public eye and anxious to be exposed, is proof of a man's personal commitment to an oath, vow, fidelity to serve the best interests of parties concerned--our Nation and his wife--then BILL CLINTON is not a particularly honourable man. We have a right to be suspicious, question why we place trust in such a lying person. If he will lie to his wfie, in BILL's case a number of alleged backseat limo affairs, over and over again, do you think such a person would hesitate to lie to us if it served him? To save his ass? To advance his ambitions? Promoting legislation, representing values as good for us, can we be sure that they are, or instead serve agenda that primarily satiate his aggrandized politic? To me, that's the thing, more perhaps than the disloyalty, the lying that reflects the man.

[robotfog]

even if he just didn't lie and get an investigation started, the story might not have had the legs to run for years rather than months. Back then, nearly every single "news" show ran with the story day after day even when they had nothing new. I understand why the investigation was important, but why talk about it when there was nothing new for weeks at a time?

I'm thinking it was the tawdry and constant coverage that screwed things up. I wish people could stop being influenced by their television, papers, and radio.

[twofish]

There was a Dilbert strip in which Dogbert is accused of abusing power. His question:
"And the other reason for having power would be...?" Cosi fan tutte.

I disagree that this would have torpedoed the election if Edwards was the nominee. it would have come out sooner, and been pushed aside by fall. After all, McCain did the same thing, only longer ago.

[sustainable]

I agree, if this had all come out sooner it wouldn't be a problem, if anything it might have helped Edwards because he always had that smooth talkin' pretty boy smug which could be more relateable now.

[jsinclair]

"Longer ago".

No, remember Vicki Iseman?

[OtayPanky]

The real question is this: when it comes to choosing our civic leaders, and our business leaders, do we need and want people who live their lives, however imperfectly, by some set of basic principles?

It's a deceptively simple question, because it's such a no-brainer.

Just think - if you have a child - what you would hope for in your child's choice for a life partner. Wouldn't you want someone who - with all of his or her imperfections - consciously chose to live his or her life by some set of basic principles.

Or as I put it to someone just today: I just wouldn't want someone like Bill Clinton or Donald Trump marrying my daughter.

That doesn't make it the ONLY qualification. Rather, it should be the first of many gates.

I am disappointed in John Edwards - and perhaps even more disappointed in his wife Elizabeth. I had always thought the story might be true, but also thought that she was simply a wronged spouse.

To know she was complicit in trying to cover this up and secure the nomination for him, knowing (as she must have) how revelation of the affair would destroy the Dem's chances in November..­.it's a bit of a shock to contemplate the egotism of BOTH of them.

Why not put authentic love of country before personal ambition? I just don't get it.

[robotfog]

I have a sick feeling that rational people like us will never understand it.

[JBS]

It does seem a little one-sided though.

"Character" and "judgement" don't seem to be such a big deal when it's a Republican ...

like Newt Gingrich, Bob Barr, John McCain, Rudolph Giuliani, Henry Hyde, Strom Thurmand, Michael Huffington, Bob Livingston, Helen Chenoworth, Bob Dole, Ronald Reagan, John Warner, Dan Burton, Bob Packwood, David Vitter, Tom DeLay, Bill Bennett, Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney

... and that guy with the "wide stance" in the Minneapolis airport mens room.

[Snowball]

The interesting thing is that the Corporate Media uniformly shrugged at all those Republican incidents of infidelity. Republicans run on the platform of family values but seem to be free of the consequences of their actions or any analysis of the utter hypocrisy and how it relates to their philosophical and political positions and their relentless demagoguery on family values.

On the other hand, if a lone Democrat is caught cheating on his wife, the Corporate Media talking heads quickly rush out to tell the gullible public how this will effect the elections. Even though Edwards isn't in it, somehow it is construed to tarnish the whole party.

[Gordon Marino - Huffpost Blogger]

Agreed but Edwards knows the political scene and the electorate. He was running for pres- his wife has cancer and he was blathering about family values. And then he denied the affair. Thanks for your comment.
Gordon

[susanra]

John Edwards never blathered about 'family values'. False accusation.