Elizabeth Edwards | 04/15/2009 10:20 am

Lee Woodruff: Leave Elizabeth Edwards Alone!

Woodruff, wife of ABC’s Bob Woodruff, defends the wife of John Edwards for standing by her cheating husband.

By The Staff at wowOwow.com

Lee Woodruff/ Photo Courtesy of Stefan Radtke

Lee Woodruff, who just wrote a wonderful piece on wowOwow.com, hit the keys hard the other day after reading an article that criticized cancer-stricken Elizabeth Edwards’s reaction to her husband’s 2006 affair with mistress Rielle Hunter.

Responding on the Huffington Post to the Washington Post’s Sally Quinn, who said that Edwards "let" her husband lie and carry on an affair, Woodruff pleads with the press to please "leave Elizabeth alone"

I cannot imagine anyone being willing to endure a marriage grounded in continual suspicion or assumption of wrongdoing. Yes, there is a fine line between gullibility and believing in someone, between stupidity and strapping on a set of blinders. But if I’ve asked my hubby the same question four different ways and he’s answered it the same way every time — I want to believe he is right. Who among us is licking their chops to call the private investigator when life appears to be moving in the right direction? Who sits, daily vigilant for a sign of transgression, for a hair or two on the forearm to stand on end, to feel that ‘sixth sense.’ Who aches to sit outside a honky tonk bar in a trench coat with binoculars? Who invests in a home lie detector set just to keep ‘handy’ by the bed? Only the miserable I suppose.

And so I argue that we leave Elizabeth alone. Whether John Edwards was carrying on the affair in 2006 may very well be our business. Whether or not his wife knew in 2006 is firmly HER business. That belongs in the category marked ‘inner workings of a marriage.’ She was not the one running for public office, she was doing what strong women like Silda Wall Spitzer, Cynthia McCain and countless other accomplished, well educated, dedicated mothers have done throughout history — trusted their man, believed in him and supported his ambitions in numerous ways.

The Post column however seems to be on the cheating gent’s side and even asks readers to "give John Edwards the benefit of the doubt":

He lost a son in a tragic automobile accident. His wife developed breast cancer shortly before he lost the exhausting campaign for vice president. The cancer returned. It is inoperable.

Quinn goes on to say that the failed presidential candidate’s infidelities are no different than those of Eliot Spitzer, Bill Clinton or other high-powered men who’ve cheated on their significant others. What she does find "interesting" are Elizabeth Edwards "enabling" actions:

This is the thing that is driving me crazy. The wives. The enabling wives. Nobody has more respect for Elizabeth Edwards than I do. First of all, any woman who has lost a child gets a pass for life from me. Nothing could be more horrible. Not only that, she is brilliant, clever, capable, decent and courageous. She has battled cancer, taken care of her family and been a loyal campaigner for her husband. The grief she has gone through, having lost a child and knowing she may leave her other three motherless must be unbearable.

The problem is, SHE LET HIM DO IT …

She not only agreed to his run for the presidency, she encouraged him to do it, knowing the toll it would take on the family given her health problems. But, worse, she let him do it knowing that he had had an affair. What on earth was she thinking?

Click here to read the full Sally Quinn piece that led to Lee Woodruff’s whipping on HuffPo. When news of Spitzer’s scandal came to light last March, we asked our wowOwow contributors what they thought of Silda Spitzer standing by her disgraced husband. Click here to read their reactions.

13 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Without saying a lot, I agree with Lee Woodruff. I’ve always admired Mrs. Edwards and she deserves the right to her family and her children from criticism. Whatever she knew or didn’t know about John’s affair is between them. How money was given to the "mistress" may be a public topic, if the money came from campaign funds, but we don’t know that yet. All I know is, I agree with Lee and "leave Mrs. Edwards alone!"

By M J on 04/15/2009 10:48 am

This is just absolutely nuts. What - and why! - in the blue hell do we need to know about Elizabeth Edwards’ decision to stand by her man? Or Silda Spitzer, or Hillary Clinton, or any spouse that has had to endure that, for the whole world to see? That decision is THEIR business. For that matter - their marriage is THEIR business.

We must have one heck of a voyeuristic streak in society these days.

By - Nikki - on 04/15/2009 10:50 am

e-mail alert

Does anyone really know what went on in that marriage? Elizabeth Edwards lives in a goldfish bowl of public scrutiny. She does not deserve to be judged by anyone. It is hard enough to have a husband running for public office while battling cancer yet again. Let this lady have her privacy. Her private life is not the public’s right to know.

By Chris Glass` on 04/15/2009 10:51 am

e-mail alert

I think it is quite easy to critisize someone. No one has a clue what they will do till a situation presents itself. Yes people love to open their mouths and put one another down and say well she should or he should. That is so easy to do. Leave Elizabeth Edwards alone. It is her life to live. You do not know what you will do till you walk in someone else’s shoes:)

By S G on 04/15/2009 10:52 am

e-mail alert

I’m sorry…..but, the fact that she allowed people to contribute their hard earned money and time toward her husband’s campaign — knowing that his potential candidacy was compromised because he had an affair……..diminishes my respect for her.

Edwards’ candidacy diluted Hillary’s momentum in Iowa…..to Obama’s advantage.

By MK P on 04/15/2009 11:07 am

e-mail alert

I think Elizabeth Edwards has suffered enough and should be left alone by the media. But my personal opinion is that, knowing about her husband’s affair before agreeing to campaign with him made her an accomplice in a campaign that could very well have risked a Democratic win last November. Right or wrong as far as fairness goes, they knew that had John Edwards won the primary and the affair had come out closer to the election, the Republicans would have won. For that, my past respect for both of them has been diminished.

By DeBúrca obj on 04/15/2009 12:14 pm

e-mail alert

Most of the people criticizing John and Elizabeth Edwards are cheater, whether it’s a spouse or a boyfriend or girlfriend, if you’ve cheated, you’re a cheater, period…and a hypocrite.

Last I checked, Bill Clinton cheated multiple times on Hillary Clinton "BEFORE HE RAN FOR PRESIDENT." Was his campaign compromised? What about JFK’s? You think those affairs started after he got to the White House?

People are idiots. The media has made a spectacle out of John Edwards, and deservingly so because he should have none better (he should have know that they were out to get him). However, to sit here and act like he did any more than other politicians do by having an affair on his wife before or even during a campaign is ridiculous.

By H G on 04/15/2009 2:36 pm

e-mail alert

Most of the people criticizing John and Elizabeth Edwards are cheaters, whether it’s a spouse or a boyfriend or girlfriend, if you’ve cheated, you’re a cheater, period…and a hypocrite.

People are idiots. The media has made a spectacle out of John Edwards, and deservingly so because he should have known better (he should have known that they were out to get him). However, to sit here and act like he did any more than other politicians do by having an affair on his wife before or even during a campaign is ridiculous.

By H G on 04/15/2009 2:39 pm

e-mail alert

Quinn is wrong when she says the failed presidential candidate’s infidelities are no different than those of Eliot Spitzer, Bill Clinton or other high-powered men who’ve cheated on their significant others. Clinton and Spitzer are not men who have a wives struggling and battling cancer. Nor are the men married to women who had to bury a child because of the circumstances the Edward did. That is why John Edward actions are so egregious. On one hand I understand Lee Woodruff’s opinions as it relates to defending Elisabeth from the press, true, she trusted her husband and he betrayed it….what’s done is done. However on the other hand had it not been for the fact that Elizabeth has shown herself to be a strong, confident, in control and savvy woman, the fact that she has chose to stay with a man that betrayed her in the worst of ways. Not only by having an affair, but now it is revealed he had “unprotected sex” with her that resulted in a baby….it is unforgivable. So when I look at a woman like Elizabeth who I perceived to be so strong, confident and in control, to see her lower her standards by staying with him, I too like Quinn and others do question her intelligence in this matter.

By Belinda Joy on 04/15/2009 3:23 pm

e-mail alert

I see both sides of this post, but unless we have walked in her shoes I say leave the woman alone. Cancer & losing a child on top of her SOB of a spouse, we need to let it be. I feel bad for her.

By Barbara B on 04/15/2009 4:47 pm

e-mail alert

I feel sorry for Elizabeth Edwards.

This thread has brought up some interesting questions and some interesting points. However, I do believe that we the public have a right to know about how our politicians conduct themselves during "off hours". It is a testiment to their character.

John Edwards thought nothing of trotting out his picture perfect family during his campaigns. The whole WORLD felt his pain when Elizabeth was diagnosed with cancer. And he milked every single bit of sympathy.

Easy to see why we think he’s a slime, but why are people attacking her (and the other spouses that have had to suffer public infidelities)? Because we feel duped. Here you have a politician, who runs for office using his loving and beautiful family as a major selling point ("Look at my family! I’m so hot and I still am faithful to my wife!" Oh those stories about him taking her to Wendy’s every year on their anniversary, can we say HURL!) who has now been caught with his shorts down with a relationship that resulted in a child.

Again, it’s easy to see why we are obviously disgusted and distrustful of him. Why are we distrustful and angry with HER? Because it appears she knew about this. And as such, she is a part of the plan to fool the American public. She went out with her husband, knowing he was breaking the most sacred vow between two human beings, and smiled for the cameras and crowds. It’s almost like they BOTH thought we were so stupid we’d never find out what a game they were playing. And if they were willing to play with our heads about their own relationship, what else would they try to fool us about?

Again, I feel sorry for her, being married to a jerk is horrible. But staying with him after finding out about his indiscetions and not coming forward makes her a part of the duplicity and not a figure to be pittied as the wronged party.

By nanchan u on 04/15/2009 5:46 pm

e-mail alert

I recall in early 2007 that Elizabeth Edwards insisted on campaigning with her husband, in spite of having just found out she had incurable cancer in the bone. The media made it sound as if she would be dead in a month. Frankly I thought something was very wrong with the whole picture since she had young children at home. Seriously, if you had a short time to live wouldn’t you want to be with your kids? Something fishy there.

While my heart goes out to anyone with cancer, I felt that her cancer was overplayed in order to garner more votes for her husband. I’m also insensitive to her "poor me, I didn’t know he was having an affair" claim. Again, probably over-dramatized for their joint benefit.

E. Edwards has lost any sympathy and credibility from/with me.

By Andrea Brandon on 04/15/2009 7:22 pm