Who is surprised? I hate to trivialize cheating, but he's a politician and they're practically celebrities. I'd be shocked if he (and Bush, and Obama, etc) hadn't.

Wow. Shocking. Another politician who cheats on his ailing wife. Will wonders never cease.

Coupla things:

1) I feel conflicted knowing about a politicians' private (if reprehensible) antics unless (and I guess I'm a hypocrite here) they go out of THEIR way to harass the sexual behavior of other consenting adults...the worst of those are Bible-thumping conservatives who are ready to overturn Roe, take away contraception, and make gays second-class citizens.

Thus I don't feel as bad when Newt Gingrich (having an affair while getting Clinton impeached...who am I kidding, if I'd been him, I can't say I wouldn't have done the same thing...it's not about morality, it's about sticking it to an opponent when he's wide open, even if it requires you to be tasteless) or Larry Craig are proven to be hypocrites.

Not that admire Elliot Spitzer (repulsed)...

I don't know.

I'm disappointed in Sen. Edwards and REALLY pity Elizabeth (breast cancer, supporting her husband throughout his campaigns...and now this) but I sort of wish that they'd leave the family alone...somehow I think a media circus is going to help when there are so many more pressing issues at hand, including those related to sex and health...i.e. that remarkable bullshit going on at the HHS...anyone seen CNN or MSNBC or FOX (ha, right) cover it?

I don't feel as bad when hypocrites trying to legislate punishments against family planning or gays are exposed (so long as it isn't round-the-clock coverage of something so trivial)...

I feel like this: he knew it would come out and he knew it would devastate his campaign so really he was wasting all his supporters time and money.

Honestly? I'm blasé about the whole issue.

I don't feel the sex lives of politicians are any of our business unless it involves criminal activity. In such scenarios, it's the illegality, *not* the sex that matters. One could make the argument that lying about an extra-marital affair means one could lie about other things. Somehow, I doubt that faithfully monogamous couples are less prone to lying just because of their monogamy.

Thoughts?

It's none of your business. If you think the news and politics should stay out of women's bedrooms, then stay out of his.

As someone who supported him through most of 2007 (back when he hired Amanda and Melissa), I am disappointed. More so in the recklessness -- imagine if he were the nominee now. It's a betrayal of Elizabeth and the kids, of course, but also a sign of a kind of self-destructive narcissism that is so often found in powerful men. To his credit, his statement today was excellent:

“It is inadequate to say to the people who believed in me that I am sorry, as it is inadequate to say to the people who love me that I am sorry. In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up - feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself. I have been stripped bare and will now work with everything I have to help my family and others who need my help.”

That's about the best you can say in a sitch like this.

I don't care who is fucking whom as long as they do their job strait.

i don't agree with it being our business (given that there's no hypocrisy here really), but since we DO know about it, i'm disappointed. i was hoping it would turn out to be a bullshit story, but knew that was a long shot. my heart goes out to his family.

It's like the Great Spitzer Meltdown 2.0 [minus a crime committed, but you get the drift]

I am disappointed. It doesn't affect my view of him as a politician; he has been, and always will be one of my favourite faces in politics. However, Edwards was someone I trusted. I have always found him to be genuine and true to his claims that he wants to promote the causes I care about, and has demonstrated with his own actions that they are important to him.

It's not who he is having sex with that is the problem. It is the betrayal and the lying and the inability to trust him, because those things do have some bearing on whether I would trust him to perform his job properly.

I also feel very sad for Elizabeth and their children. She is one of my favourite faces and voices around- I adore her. I would vote HER for president with no second thoughts. I hope that she is doing well, despite all of the obvious health and potentially emotional hurdles in her way.

I don't know if it matters but there's a chance that he is the father of the woman's child.

I just feel bad for the wives in these cases. It seems that are more or less forced to publicly support their husbands as seen in the Spitzer and other cases. It always pisses me off when the wives are standing behind them in press conferences saying they still support their husband in this difficult time, blah, blah, blah. But then again, maybe a lot of the politicians' marriages are just an arrangement and I'm projecting my own feelings on the matter.

Oh well, another sex scandal in government. How surprising.

We can all say we don't care and I am sure on this board we don't but the reality is what it is. His campaign was a sham because he would be devastated by this. I heard about this a long long time ago. Plus I feel for his wife and he did get good political mileage out of her.

I'm disappointed; I don't really care what goes on behind closed doors. BUT I do believe it shows something about someone's character if they are willing to lie to the people they love (assuming they didn't have some kind of open marriage agreement).

And, it shows great hubris and stupidity to believe that in this day and age, you can get away with this kind of thing.

He could have gracefully exited the campaign back in December, when the allegations first started.

I feel bad for his wife, family, and people who passionately supported him.

And I feel bad that he has likely killed what would have been a lengthy career. I really liked so many things about him, and now, this will be all most people will remember.

The thing that bothers me most is that on the major news outlets this story is being treated as bigger and more important then Russia invading Georgia and the dozens that were killed there today. Is a politician having sex really a bigger story?

It's very tempting to be cynical when stories like these break. Nothing caters more to the "ain't it awful" chorus we often break out into when we are quick to condemn those who break societal taboos.

The truth of the matter is the grand sweep and arc of power and influence have led to many sexual indiscretions like this. It's overly simplistic to condemn all men as weak because they can't keep their libidinous desires at bay.

So if we really want to ask ourselves some hard questions, one of them might be to consider the reasons why anyone, male or female, might be inclined to pursue an affair. The factors are many, and some can be chalked up to a lack of self-control, some can be attributed to environmental factors, and some may be a result of untreated emotional disorders.

I'm generally only concerned with this sort of thing when it involves gross hypocrisy. If you've tried to legislate values while simultaneously breaking them...well, you need to find another way to deal with your guilt.

Otherwise, I'm inclined to be compassionate. We're all fallible. I imagine extramarital affairs are quite common. It's just that most people don't have dozens of reporters trying to dig it up.

This leads me to wonder if monogamy is worthwhile as a social ideal. Does the norm itself cause more trouble than the breaking thereof? And I'm sure we all understand how it's rooted in patriarchal values.

"The thing that bothers me most is that on the major news outlets this story is being treated as bigger and more important then Russia invading Georgia and the dozens that were killed there today. Is a politician having sex really a bigger story?"

Ditto this times infinity.

"The truth of the matter is the grand sweep and arc of power and influence have led to many sexual indiscretions like this. It's overly simplistic to condemn all men as weak because they can't keep their libidinous desires at bay."

I am pretty sure no one is saying that. No one here, anyways. If there's ever been a group to analyze the dynamics of power and its effects, you're looking at it. Judging from Edwards' comments, he understands the power relations at work as well.

"This leads me to wonder if monogamy is worthwhile as a social ideal. Does the norm itself cause more trouble than the breaking thereof? And I'm sure we all understand how it's rooted in patriarchal values."

Socially is a tough one. I am inclined to say no, society shouldn't force one particular "type" of family, relationship, or what have you, on the wider population. Obviously many people do not or cannot adhere to it. I think that is their perogative.

However, individually, I am a person who likes to be monogamous. Call it socialization or even patriarchal brainwashing, but I like it. I, as far as I know, am capable of upholding that type of arrangement, and I desire my partner to as well. We made a mutual agreement to be monogamous, and therefore we both expect monogamy.

It's different when both [or multiple] parties know what they're getting into, what the expectations are, and make a mutual decision about how they want their relationship to look. I guess what I am trying to say is that monogamy doesn't have to be the standard ideal, but relationships need to have open, honest lines of communication so that people don't get emotionally hurt.

If I knew the guy personally the I'd probably give a crap, but since I don't the only things I can think about it are pretty incidental:

1) On the up side for him: at least he wasn't patrolling the kiddie pool for 20 y/o women, or waving his wang in an unsolicited manner at women (of course, you can do that when you have the strongest economic growth in history) This woman was not some Jr. Intern half his age.

2) On the down side: HRC wasn't going through cancer treatments when BJC was out doing his bullshit. I don't know if it should matter to me that his wife was sick, but it does for some reason.

The deciding vote will be if he coerces his wife to "stand by her man" for some god damned press conference, ala Spitzer and every other douche that gets busted like this.

If I were a public figure and did something like this to my family (it's easy to say "I wouldn't" but I don't get a lot of offers), instead of having them stand by me I would let each of them kick my balls on TV.

I think that's a sentiment the public could empathize with.

Like some of the other comments, I wondered HOW this was more important than rape in the military or the Russia-Georgia violence.

Also, the radio news coverage I heard emphasized Ms. Hunter, rather than Sen. Edwards:

"...the woman who had an affair with John Edwards" etc etc

as if HE wasn't involved.

Do. Not. Care.

:P

Logrus,

She knew in 2006, so she's been standing by ever since.

Next on CNN: Fire still hot, water still wet!

Ismone:

I mean that whole press conference deal where the guy admits it, does the head bow and says some generic "But with the support of my family..." bullshit.

It's one thing to eat a shit sandwich in private, everyone has had to do that for one reason or another, it's quite another to feel obliged to do your chewing in public and grin through it.

really? i thought we got over the who-slept-with-who syndrome years ago, agreeing that what people (famous or not) did in their private lives didn't really affect us unless we were directly involved.

so, having said that, i really think this should only matter to Edwards, Elizabeth (holy crap do I admire her for her strength while at the same time wish she'd be treated better by her husband), and their families. And possibly whoever he had the affair with.

Does it make me think any less of him as a politician? NO.

I'm upset about this... I really liked him as a candidate, and this will only hurt his reputation and credibility. I feel kind of bad for him, considering he brought this on himself, but I'm also angry that he would have an affair in the first place. Gah.

other than to hate the media for making someones private sexual life public I have no opinion. It is between him and his wife. She released a statement condemning the sensationalism on this issue. CNN has not shown anything else since the affair came out. Really is there nothing more important happening than what a man does with his dick? Didn't the Olympics start today? But no CNN has a "special investigative unit" on this story.

cheating on your spouse is disgusting, and I'm really surprised and a bit disappointed at the fact that other commenters are so ambivalent about this. Cheating on your sick wife isn't something that we shouldn't care about; it's a determinant of where your moral compass points. I personally don't want someone who would do that in office anymore than I would want someone like John McCain.

Furthermore, I think it should be clarified adultery isn't just a "bedroom" affair. Having a parent who and an uncle and a grandfather (etc) who cheated, I can say that it emotionally affects more people than you'd think, and can change your view of a person drastically, so it's very disturbing that it's regarded so nochalantly in America.

I find it DISGUSTING that Edwards hooked up with another woman WHILE HIS WIFE WAS FIGHTING CANCER. It seems like he was knocking her when she was already down by breaking his faithfulness, at that time especially.

I'm with BlackThirteeen. Thoughts: this doesn't really belong here. Leave it on the gossip sites, por favor.

Thanks, loves.

i completely disagree that this doesn't matter. what if he had been the democratic nominee, and this story broke? it's almost 100% certain that this would have ruined the party's chances in november. if he knew this was a possibility, it was completely irresponsible to run.

i do have to say that i'm not so quick to judge him on the fact that he had an affair while his wife was battling cancer. my mom is in the midst of treatment for stage four cancer. having a serious chronic - and potentially deadly - disease like this enter your family and your daily life is an unbearably difficult situation. would i hate my dad's guts if he did this to my mom? absolutely. but at the same time, i understand that this situation brings a lot of stress with it - and also that the idea that people are supposed to suddenly act like saints when cancer enters the picture is absurd. i'm not saying it isn't awful. i'm just saying that it's possible that he loved his wife, fully supported her through her treatment, and still did this.

Does it matter what Edwards does with his dick? No. What matters is that he lied to and betrayed his wife, whom we can presume believed that he would not sleep with another woman.

I don't have a lot of respect for people, men or women, who have affairs while married. Their partner is faithful, and they are not. They knowingly have sex with someone other than their spouse. It's an action, while staying faithful is a lack of said action.

Maybe I'm just too much of an idealist. This wouldn't be the first time.

The problem I have with Edwards, though, is that he shouldn't have run in the primaries knowing this. What a waste of good people's time and money, since he couldn't reasonably have believed this would not come out in the long, drawn out electoral process we now have.

Monogamy is not in the nature of the human animal, and, considering his circumstances, I think I can understand his action.

It's not that it's okay to cheat on one's mate, it's just that it is completely ordinary. We should strive not to, but, in something like 80% of marriages, one or both partners has an affair with some other man or some other woman. It doesn't make him an extraordinarily bad person, even if it's not a nice thing to do to his wife.

I understand that his wife is ill, and that many people feel this increases his obligation to be faithful, but the stress associated with this, and with the constant awareness of her mortality, an affair is an escape. It's an out, a way out of this constant hyper-awareness that the one you love will, very likely, predecease you.

I don't think it's as simple as "bad man, bad bad."

What puzzles me are the feelings people have about Elizabeth Edwards about this. I've seen comments online, cursing her out for staying with her husband. Many people of both sexes have affairs, and ultimately stay with their husbands or wives. The decision to keep a spouse, even after an affair, is extraordinarily personal, just as any matter of divorce or marriage in general. What the hell gives anyone the right to judge her?

I do not normally think consensual affairs are news. I think they are irrelevant to politics.

I also agree that Russia invading Georgia is bigger news.

I do think it is news that his finance chairman has been paying $15,000 a month to Rielle. I am not sure if this money came out of funds from the campaign, but if ti turns out that it did and it was hush money / child support, then that is highly unethical. People are not paying campaign contributions to him for that.

I have pretty mixed feelings about this, but I'm amazed that people are saying he shouldn't have run because of this. His presence in the race pushed everyone to talk about class issues that are normally not talked about, that (unfortunately) stopped being talked about as soon as he pulled out. It's pretty insulting to suggest that one man's infidelities are more important than many people's pathetic economic situations.

Also, no, we don't know for a fact that he and Elizabeth were monogamous. We aren't privy to their most intimate conversations; we don't know how they defined their relationship with each other and frankly, I don't want to know. I think it's sick and absurd how we obsess about politician's personal lives in this country, and I refuse to participate in it anymore.

What a disgusting affair. I'm definitely not a fan of the popular idea that a person is entitled to sex once they've come of age, and that it's "understandable" that someone in Edwards's situation would seek it out, once the wife wasn't satisfying any longer. It's not understandable--there's always masturbation. And while that's hardly the same as partnered sex, someone to whom sex felt like a need he could not do without probably shouldn't have entered such a heavy commitment as marriage. Especially not as someone in politics, in a country where 'the sanctity of marriage' is thrown around so often.

In the same book, what's really disgusting is that people would rather be dirtbags and have affairs than discuss the matter with their spouses.

This bums me out.

I believe in John Edwards, and believed he belongs in the white house. But now, no matter how good of a job he can or would do, this will taint his political career. It's not right or fair, but it's the way these things work.

I. Don't. Fucking. Care.

This has nothing to do with his ability to make laws and lead people. It is irrelevant. His personal life is none of my business.

I’ll be honest; this has made Edwards more human to me. He was always too shinning white knight for me. He was the probably the last person I would expect to do this. He didn’t have the supportive wife next to the podium, he confirmed it in a interview by himself and talked about his own narcissism; that gained me a measure of respect for him. The way I read the article was his wife’s cancer was in remission when this all started; I think perhaps the stress of running for office and being strong and supportive caused a collapse in Edwards, and he had an affair with some one he could be human. It doesn’t make it right, but he seems all so human. Georgia is big news, but anyone who reads up on the world new it was coming; my girlfriend thought I was clairvoyant when the story broke. To me the Olympics is just a huge track meet. Edwards was totally unexpected.

Please correct the record for your many commenters. The Edwards affair ended long before his wife was known to have cancer.

This really bums me out. Don't get me wrong, I am very angry with the Democratic Party and their move to the right, especially in the context of a post-Bush election, but I did think Edwards was one of the better Dems out there. I was really in to his primary campaign and this just breaks my heart. It's a shame our system is structured to give us only the choice between the two big-name parties.

With respect to nerdypants' comments, Edwards himself says that it matters because it highlights fundamental character flaws to many voters. Here's the story with the link to his interview in 2007 with Katie Couric where he talks about whether affairs matter. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/08/politics/main4333667.shtml

Cecilieaux--actually, Edwards claims that he had the affair while his wife's cancer was in remission--before it came back in an incurable form. So it was common knowledge that Elizabeth had cancer, but it was before it became terminal.

I find this to be not that big a deal. McCain had an affair and in the end ended up marrying his mistress. That's alright, but when Edwards has an affair that lasted all but two years and he ended up not staying with his mistress, that's now the queue to tar and feather him. It's his private life, and unless that also consists of torturing innocent people and sending solders into Iraq, I fail to see how earth shattering his personal life really is.

PS--I wonder how a woman candidate/politician would be treated if SHE had an affair. What do people think?

Elizabeth Edwards has asked for privacy and yet the media is ignoring this because it is easy to make money trafficking smut. People need to learn to mind their own business.

It's had to have happened at some point, but I can't figure a decent boolean search for it; but every statistic I've seen in the last decade indicates that men and women are about even when it comes the extramarital affairs, so while women represent a minority of public office holders there have had to have been some who have fucked around and gotten caught.

Maybe the general public is so bothered by the idea that women are just as sexual and capable of the exact kind of "amoral" behavior that men are usually associated with that when this kind of thing happens it is quickly shunted from the general awareness and dropped by the media.

Or it could be that women are just more clever about it and get caught a lot less (although this hasn't been my experience).

I'm with most of y'all...who cares.

BUT I do think it's interesting the way people are reacting to this and saying how Edwards probably won't be speaking at the convention. If they claim it's because of morality issues about cheating, what about the fact that Bill Clinton is speaking at the convention.

This has nothing to do with morality or concern for the wives and everything to do with politics. If people are angry that Edwards may have been the Dem candidate and therefore may have lost another huge election for the blue team, that makes sense. But they can't possibly argue that it's about the cheating since Bill Clinton totally got let back on the team once some time had passed.

I didn't read all the new responses since I posted mine last night, but I am pretty sure this wasn't mentioned before I posted, and I forgot to add it to mine.

I am happy he said he didn't want his wife standing behind him as he is making these confessions. He very accurately said this was not her mistake, and it is his alone to apologize for. He pointed out it is awkward and insulting to make these political wives stand there in front of the cameras, like many have in the past.

No, the correction on the timeline is not right. He had the affair after his wife's first cancer remission, not before she had cancer. She had not been diagnosed with her second episode of cancer yet, which is incurable but treatable.

"...in something like 80% of marriages, one or both partners has an affair with some other man or some other woman."

Um, werechick, where do you get that statistic?

The fact that he cheated on his wife does say something about his moral character. I can't imagine why people would be judging Elizabeth for taking him back, though. It's possible for some people to forgive something like that, even if it hurt them deeply. If she can get past it and still love him, I applaud her for it.

@ Mandoir: I've seen it in a couple of different places, but I seem to recall the lovely Mr. Dan Savage citing it. It broke down to 20% both of them cheating, 20% the wife cheating, and 40% the husband cheating. I'll see if I can scare up some citation.

About 60 percent of men and 40 percent of women will have an affair at some point in some marriage
"Monogamy Myth", Therapist Peggy Vaugn

Edwards always struck me as a creepy huckster, and I'm gratified (but still dismayed) to see that my estimate of his personality was right.

And no, I suppose it doesn't affect his political ability, but the point is moot since I never cared for his politics anyway. And even if I did, I would feel hesitant about supporting someone who I believe has acted like a perfidious asshole.

I fail to see how the "normalcy" of marital affairs makes this one not so bad.

Sorry, but John Edwards is not a normal guy. He made a very serious try to become the president of our country, and I hold him to a higher standard than the guy next door. Or my boss. Or my father. He sold himself as extraordinary, and this bit of news shows not only a character flaw, but it shows a profound lack of judgment. Even if that lack lasted only for a few days or weeks I feel it is important.

John Edwards won't be doing anything political for awhile, because he's politically toxic. No one is going to want to be associated with this scandal. Once the right time has passed then quite possibly he'll be back, just like Bill Clinton. However, the difference between the two is that Clinton was president, someone who is written into history, and John Edwards is still disposable. So we'll see.

Yeah, I'll have to agree with people who are arguing against applying the same standards to Edwards as exist for average folks.

People who run the show need to be far above average. We've had someone in the White House who got there because voters wanted a "regular guy" in there, and that's just about the stupidest qualification I can imagine.

Am I the only one that is disturbed by the fact that an aide of Edward's campaign copped to being this Hunter's baby's father and the fact that she was somehow being paid $15,000 a month? Edward's campaign fundraiser admits giving Hunter money, and though it hasn't been determined where this money came from, it could be campaign funds (which would probably be illegal, not to mention slimy). I'm sorry for Elizabeth Edwards, but if there was a gross misuse of funds surrounding her husband's already sort-of-shitty behavior it actually IS other people's business. I personally don't give a shit, but if I had contributed to Edwards' campaign, totally I would. Also, I would vote for someone who made a mistake and had an affair, I think families all work in different ways and John and Elizabeth could have had an understanding, but there's no excuse for bribing, fraud, or hypocrisy (http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/john_edwards_in_1999)

Also, he kept his wife at the center of his campaign while she was suffering from cancer while he was at least SOMEHOW involved with this woman and her child. I know I shouldn't judge people's actions, I just always had this hunch that he was a dirty politician, but this is just kind of sad.

I agree with Kid on this one. And it does matter.

Bee and Logrus, I have a good memory for this kind of thing but I can only remember two female American politicians known to have had affairs. Or maybe just one and a half--do federal judges count? Kimba Wood, one of Bill Clinton's failed nominees for attorney general, got written up in her lover's steamy diary when they were both married. She weathered the storm, got divorced, and is still a judge. Then there was Helen Chenoweth, a rightwing mouthbreather whose Idaho constituents reelected her to Congress after news of her affair came out. She died in a car crash a couple of years ago.

I admit that I haven't been watching much of the news lately but in none of the clips I saw did they mention the affairs that McCain had. I understand that those were in the past but I thought maybe this issue would lead to a talk of political figure's affairs and McCain's might be mentioned. The news harped so much on Clinton and now Edwards that I worry that it makes Democrats look like the unethical party to viewers not well informed. The possibility that this woman was paid money to keep quiet is what I find most concerning. I myself would not allow an affair to be the deciding factor on which candidate to vote for but in my opinion it is relevant. Edwards says he had the affair because of the "egotistical" mindset he was in. If he made one immoral and downright stupid decision in that mindset who is to say that he wouldn't make others that affect our country? (Of course, Bush has made plenty of those) I believe to some degree that morals in personal life are an indication of morals in professional/political life. If I was already toeing the line between two candidates this info could have swayed me.

In matters of sexuality, all kinds of things go out the window. People who are otherwise good can be carried away with sexual chemistry. And it is universal. There is cheating in heterosexual relationships, les-bi-gay relationships, polyamourous relationships and everywhere else on the spectrum. And unless a relationship is extremely special, everyone is tempted -- a stressful patch in a relationship, meeting or working with a charming and interesting co-worker or vendor, or having a moment when you really need to be comforted (to be reminded that you are still vital and attractive) and your partner is unavailable. Sometimes the visceral overtakes the ideological or political.

All this said, I don't know why this is a feminist issue and not just a weakness of our human condition. Men aren't the only ones who cheat.

I agree 100% with feminanimal, and would add that the woman was also on his payroll during the affair (as a videographer even though she lacked the experience and credentials). It always rubs me wrong when a politician's pays to keep his sexual partner nearby.

BalletBoy, I don't know whether previous commentators have argued, as you suggest they have, that this is "a feminist issue."

This bears repeating for some posters who seem not to comment frequently along the same lines: Because something is of interest to ________-ists(thus posted on a ______-ist site), does not mean that it cannot simultaneously be of interest to other communities.

Example: I belong to sites for non-European minorities, the global South, "developing" world, etc. I remember a story posted there about European governments' stances on issues affecting African/Arab immigrant women living in Europe. The fact that the story was posted on those "People of Color (TM)" websites and not on Feministing.com did not mean that the issues involved were not also of interest to feminists. They were. One affiliation does not preclude another.

Now, should this have been posted here in the first place? Well, some might argue that this deserves mention on a feminist site because Edwards is well-known (and made himself known) as the 2008 candidate who hired a high-profile feminist for his staff. I think the original posting--a few lines with "Thoughts?"--was just right for this site.

Also, what part of this post or the feminist commentators' posts does "men aren't the only ones who cheat" refer to?

Something being posted on a feminist site does not mean that the tacit message is "men in general have caused the harm we are posting about."

The fact that your mind leaped to fill in this Motivation blank says a bit about your (mis)understanding of feminism.

Sorry, delete the "NOT" from my sentence above: "This bears repeating for some posters who seem not to comment frequently along the same lines."

To Nestra: Your point is well taken. I am new to the site and believed that this issues discussed here, whatever they are, would always be in a 2nd Wave or 3rd Wave feminist perspective. I could be wrong.

To Okra: I may well misunderstand feminism. That is why I, as a man, am here to engage, based upon my life experiences, and learn from the responses here. No disrespect will ever be meant. But I believe that, by opening up over issues that may be difficult to discuss and hearing responses that may be difficult for me to hear, I will grow as a person. I (we) won't always agree but I will take all that is said to heart and mind.

Ugh.

Why the hell can't politicians keep it in their damn pants?!

Yes. Ideally we should all mind our own damn business and I don't personally care because I have no idea how their relationship works as a couple. Maybe she doesn't mind. Maybe he's an ass. Whatever.

But the issues fucking suffer and I voted for his populist ass in the primaries and now no one will care about their (he and his wife) issues because his political future is over.

nestra: RE: Credentials and experience.

Hunter had written and directed and produced, and appeared in "Billie Bob and Them". She had also started a production company, and been a writer before getting in to film making.

She got paid 100k for doing a long documentary of the campaign, as well as two additional payments totaling less than 20k. None of this is out of line for this kind of work and the money went to her production company, herself and her crew.

The way you're making it out is like she's some chippie or that she got paid off.

Logrus;

My understanding is that everything she did was self-produced, self-marketed, and self-financed. That's akin to vanity publishing.

What she ended up producing for Edwards were a few youtube quality, 5-6 minute long webisodes. I have seen them. They are not good. Parts are seemingly vindictive.

"The way you're making it out is like she's some chippie or that she got paid off."

No, by sleeping with someone that was on his payroll, Edwards made her appear that way.

When the whole Clinton scandal was happening I thought that it didn’t matter to me what he did personally. It was his business who he spent time with and who he slept with. But then of course I found out my father cheated on my mother and frankly that changed my opinion about a lot of things in my life.

First monogamy isn’t a battle we fight in our daily lives. Monogamy happens because people want it to happen. Cheating happens, not when people are “weak” because nature took over but when people have decided to cheat. Despite popular belief cheating doesn’t “just happen”. There is usually some emotional connection that helps the actual act itself. And it happens because the “cheater” wants to feel loved and accepted and wants their ego to be inflated etc. Therefore it is something that has been thought out.

Second cheating is emotional abuse; it is passive aggressive emotional abuse. Truthfully if a politician was verbally abusing his wife we would care about what he was saying or worse if he was hitting her, everyone would care. Because I doubt if you found out someone you worked was emotionally abusive to his wife you would say, well at least he does he job well. You would look at that person very differently. Therefore it is pointless to say what happens in his house isn’t our business because it is our business. Who you are as a person with your wife/partner and your children is the greatest test of who you really are and how you can get along with other people.

Third, he did something deceiving because he was selfish to someone he says he loved and signed a contract to be with them. Marriage is an emotional and financial contract and he broke it. As a politician you also sign a contract that says you will do what is best for that country, state, city whatever, but he proved he had an instance in his life when he broke that contract and deceived someone. That is what makes a politician untrustworthy in my case. He was selfish and he broke he word, this is something that could be repeatable in many different ways in his career. Because when will he be selfish again and lie to us? (cough cough the current president)

Fourth there are plenty of monogamous people out there who lie and do terrible things, just because they are monogamous doesn’t make them any better. But, here is the deal; HE was running to be president, a leader of this country. He wasn’t some bum off the street, he needed to be perfect. That is what people want; they demand perfection out of someone in office or on the movie screen. SO of course people would look for his flaws. If he was a monogamous person and he got caught for stealing a piece of gum it would have held the same weight as this. Just because cheating is not illegal in this country doesn’t mean people don’t appreciate measuring people’s moral standing in the same way other immoral things are done. SO to those of you who say what happens in his house doesn’t matter, would you feel the same way if he would have hurt his children or some someone else physically or emotionally? Just because it isn’t direct physical abuse for his wife doesn’t make it less abusive or less of a moral issue. A president needs morals and ethics to do the job correctly; we’ve had too many immoral presidents in so many different ways. I think it is the right thing to do to judge a leader of millions of people, a representative of what WE stand for on this basis. I also would have judged him the same way if he had said something racist or sexist etc because he needs to be an example of something great and I’m sorry cheating on your wife if she is or isn’t sick doesn’t make you great.