Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the username or e-mail address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

A Friend Stopped By | 08/09/2008 8:37 pm

Big Bad John by Judy Bachrach

By Judy Bachrach

Editor’s Note: Judy Bachrach writes for Vanity Fair and is the creator of thecheckoutline.org, an online advice column for friends and relatives of the terminally ill.

This, I know, won’t make me popular anywhere.

I don’t think it’s anybody’s business except perhaps his wife’s, what John Edwards was doing in his down time two years ago. I don’t think it disqualifies him for political office. Not even the presidency. And I don’t think it makes him “a Don Juan John” or whatever else the tabloids decide to throw at him.

I think having an affair with a really bad film-maker who now has a baby of uncertain parentage makes Edwards — and I’m sorry to have to be so blunt about this but it’s true — a guy exactly like most other guys. Especially the guys on CNN and Fox and the guys on the National Enquirer who are currently tsk-tsking their way into every one of Edwards’ pecadillos. That kind of well-worn strategy is known as protective cover, and the men who deploy it find it really effective at gaining not only ratings and readers, but also the damp-eyed gratitude of many a deluded spouse and girlfriend – often both, and simultaneously.

I know what you’re thinking: this situation was different from most instances of infidelity. Elizabeth Edwards was sick with cancer. She recovers, or thinks she does, and her husband goes out on the campaign trail and messes with one of the trillions of women who used to date Jay McInerney. What’s with Edwards, anyway? What possessed him to stoop so low? Why did he think such a scandal would never come out? How could a presidential candidate be so reckless, so thoughtless, and just plain stupid?

Because he’s a male pol, that’s why. Or as Edwards himself put it in a statement that was remarkable for its sudden stab at candor, “In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic.”

That devolution was inevitable. What we demand of our national candidates is really pretty simple. We want them to be mass seducers. In other words, the very embodiment of the narcissism Edwards mentioned, with all that entails: lots of acclaim, lots of money, and legions of loving, loyal, and often lustful admirers. That, after all, is how politicians get elected. That’s what most men, even those who aren’t running for office, appear to desire. That’s their ticket to the big time. That’s how they win.

So why are we so shocked and horrified when they can’t seem to turn off the switch?

For more on wowOwow’s coverage of L’affaire Edwards:

 

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

DeBrcaobj
I am annoyed that Edwards had this in his closet and still ran for president, not because I think an affair SHOULD exclude him, but because he should have known the ramifications a hidden affair being revealed just before the election would have been, if he had won the nomination. That said though, I do agree with this article, the affair is nobody’s business but his wife’s and doesn’t say ANYTHING about the sort of president he would have been. In fact, my guess is that infidelity, especially by men, is probably normal male behavior that just doesn’t fit in well with the way our society is constructed.
By DeBrcaobj on 08/09/2008 9:47 pm
CaroleDunn
Exactly my view too. Unfortunately, the fascination with other people’s sex lives has little to do with the real issues at hand: the economy, the Iraq war, health care and all those things that have a real impact on people’s lives. I live abroad. The French and the English have constant sex scandels but few of them take up so much time and space in the mainstream media. They are reported, last for a couple of days, then dropped. The US media likes to interview and report on scandels until they’re beaten to death. Let’s relegate this kind of story to tabloid journalism and get back to the real issues.
By CaroleDunn on 08/10/2008 5:18 am
DeBrcaobj
Carole, The French are probably suspicious of any politician, male anyway, who does NOT have some sexual intrigue in his life!
By DeBrcaobj on 08/10/2008 7:52 am
AlessanO
When Edwards began the affair, he was not running for office, people wanted him to run, but he had not made that decision, it was 2006. He was going around stumping for the Dems running for the Senate and Congress, supporting unions and talking up raising the minimum wage. The videos were the idea of the stranger he met and he believed in her idea, of making these little videos, obviously he got involved beyond work, she was the chaser and she snagged him. Dumb men, you know what he was thinking with. People seem to think he sure have revealed he had an affair with a temporary worker he hired, before entering the race. Well, he didn’t, i certainly wouldn’t tell the whole world I had been unfaithful, if they found out later and still wanted to vote for him, they still could have. Like Bill Clinton, when he was running and Jennifer Flowers ratted on him. The women John Edwards had the affair told someone she had an affair and sold the story to a tabloid rag paper and destroyed a man and his family, that’s my take on it. It was personal between him and wife not the public, if she forgave him, I don’t see why the public can’t, since 50% of the married population is cheating on their spouses. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
By AlessanO on 08/10/2008 12:42 pm
DeBrcaobj
Alessan, Yes, he said it was over in 2006 so that would be well before the election. My problem with it is that he was aware this was in his past, in addition there were already some rumors at that time flying about, and I just think, especially after what happened to Clinton, Edwards should have known better than to run with this in his closet. I personally don’t care, but enough people care that, had he won the nomination, and this came out now, or worse, in October… it would have been a lost election. He knew the risk involved and took it anyway and by taking that risk he took his supporters and the Democratic Party with him. I’m just so glad he didn’t get the nomination and we don’t have to deal with it.
By DeBrcaobj on 08/10/2008 4:04 pm
JaneGoodwin
An affair is a betrayal, and a betrayal is a deal-breaker, no matter what the context might be. If he would do that to his wife and family, who loved and trusted him, what might he do to us? I am always shocked and horrified when a seemingly decent and honorable person turns out to be just one more horndog who can’t keep it in his pants. Correction: One more horndog who makes a conscious and deliberate CHOICE not to keep it in his pants. There are no “accidents” when it comes to infidelity. It’s always a choice. Shoddy, shabby, and cheap. Just like all the other horndogs who “can’t” keep it in their pants. And of course, one can’t be a happy cheating horndog without a woman of the same calibre. Sorry, John. Bad move. Deal-breaker.
By JaneGoodwin on 08/09/2008 9:50 pm
BellaMia
If they are all mass seducers then explain the following: FDR - cheated JFK - cheated RFK - cheated Johnson - cheated Jimmy Carter - cheated in his heart Gary Hart - cheated Bill Clinton - cheated John Edwards - cheated Nixon - faithful Ford - faithful Reagan - faithful Bush 1 - faithful Bush 2 - faithful Maybe it does have something to do with ideology.
By BellaMia on 08/09/2008 10:02 pm
ElizabethBennett
I notice that you did not include Eisenhower and McCain in that list; both cheated on their wives. Or Obama, who didn’t. Maybe the flap about John Edwards is being blown out of proportion because right wing pseudojournalists want to distract everyone from the fact that McCain was cheating on his first wife with his second wife for a while. So maybe it has nothing to do with ideology, and more to do with being male and getting caught. Besides I thought that Reagan did cheat on Jane Wyman, although it was after they separated and before they were divorced. Robert Novak’s book mentions it. Personally, I never found Nixon or Ford the least bit seductive. Neither Bushie either. Reagan, a bit in his Arrow shirt days.
By ElizabethBennett on 08/09/2008 11:01 pm
Frank Peterson
Yep McCain did too, Elizabeth, as did Eisenhower
By Frank Peterson on 08/09/2008 11:10 pm
phyllisDoylePepe
While Reagan was married to Wyman he had quite a few tussles in the hay––just for the record, mind you.
By phyllisDoylePepe on 08/10/2008 10:11 am
AlessanO
Listening to the pundits, most which are men, you would think they never heard of a man cheating, and it is though they don’t, won’t, etc. well, I don’t believe it, most of them are not good looking. It is always some ugly guy that gets bent out of shape, it’s just jealousy.
By AlessanO on 08/10/2008 12:48 pm
Susan B
Bella, how do you know, that any of the “faithful” were actually so? And you have Ronnie on the wrong list. I could add some Republican leaders to your officially CAUGHT cheating list: Eisenhower (with his military secretary) and Warren Harding (he died in the arms of a floozie at the Palace Hotel in SF). McCain was sleeping with Cindy (and a few others, say his buddies) before he divorced his first wife. It has nothing to do with ideology, and everything to do with being unable or unwilling to keep one’s pants zipped. The more powerful the man, the tougher that seems to be.
By Susan B on 08/10/2008 12:28 am
JamestheGame
Your list would’ve carried more weight if you hadn’t included Jimmy Carter. Please.
By JamestheGame on 08/10/2008 12:50 am
Susan B
Yes, that inclusion struck me as rather sanctimonious as well.
By Susan B on 08/12/2008 5:54 pm
JamestheGame
;-)
By JamestheGame on 08/12/2008 6:09 pm