Edwards Revisited: Stories of Deceit, Self Interest & Campaign Disputes Resurface

August 9, 2008

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Well it seems as though the flood gates have opened on good ‘ole John Edwards, and lets just say it would be in both his and his families best interest if he did his best to stay out of the public eye for a very - very long time. Since his admission to an extra marital affair, story after story of Edwards lies over the past couple of years have surfaced, or in this case, resurfaced - with the only difference being that this time people are taking them to heart.

Andrew Sullivan over at the DailyDish.com writes about a story recanted by longtime Democrat operative, and veteran campaign director (Kerry ‘04, Gore ‘00, etc) Bob Shrum which revolves around John Kerry’s VP selection in 2004 and the unease Kerry felt with Edwards after their initial meetings regarding the VP slot:

“Kerry talked with several potential picks, including Gephardt and Edwards. He was comfortable after his conversations with Gephardt, but even queasier about Edwards after they met. Edwards had told Kerry he was going to share a story with him that he’d never told anyone else—that after his son Wade had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home, laid there and hugged his body, and promised that he’d do all he could to make life better for people, to live up to Wade’s ideals of service. Kerry was stunned, not moved, because, as he told me later, Edwards had recounted the same exact story to him, almost in the exact same words, a year or two before—and with the same preface, that he’d never shared the memory with anyone else. Kerry said he found it chilling, and he decided he couldn’t pick Edwards unless he met with him again.

When they did, Kerry tried to get a better personal feel for his potential number two; as rivals for national office since 2000, shortly after Edwards had entered the Senate, the two men hadn’t spent a lot of time together. Kerry also wanted a specific reassurance. He asked Edwards for a commitment that if he was chosen and the ticket lost, Edwards wouldn’t run against him in 2008. Edwards agreed “absolutely,” as Kerry recalled him saying. If Kerry had shared this at the time, I would have told him what I did later: it was naive to think he could rely on a promise like that.”

This doesn’t come as a real big surprise - it’s fair to call the disconnect between Edwards and Kerry “common knowledge”, as they had a number of disputes, disagreements, and misc conflicts throughout the ‘04 race that culminated with the disagreement over whether or not Kerry should conceded - which as we all know, he ultimately followed through with.

However this story is really quite telling as to just what kind of person John Edwards is. Any man who would use his son Wade and his tragic death as a “pitch” to get something, or in this case the VP position, is disgusting - let alone telling the story in such a uniformed and regular manner that he cannot even keep track of whom he told it too.

Here is an excerpt from a New York Times cover story which analyzes the angst between Kerry and Edwards throughout the 2004 campaign. From the sounds of it - and there are many other reasons besides this article to believe the following - John Edwards simply wouldn’t listen, or in this case - carry out the traditional VP task due to his inability too function when he’s not the “number one” in whatever situation he finds himself apart of:

“To the end of their disappointing run, the two men were unable to agree on the script, whether for slogans or more substantive matters. And like so many political marriages, the one between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards — Senate colleagues who became rivals then running mates but never really friends — ended in recrimination and regrets.

Kerry aides complain that Mr. Edwards never stopped running for president — a Democratic Party official recalled some aides wearing “Edwards for President” pins at a fund-raiser long after they were working for the Kerry-Edwards ticket. Kerry supporters say Mr. Edwards refused to play the traditional vice-presidential role of attack dog even going up against a purebred, Dick Cheney. And Mr. Kerry had barely conceded the race, they say, before Mr. Edwards was aiming for 2008 and embarking on what one campaign aide called the “it wasn’t my fault tour” around his home state to distance himself from the lost.

The former running mates have spoken little since that day in Faneuil Hall. In March, Mr. Kerry telephoned the Edwardses after Mr. Edwards announced that his wife’s cancer had returned and was incurable, and that he was still running for president. A spokesman for Mr. Kerry said they had had a nice conversation. A spokesman for Mr. Edwards, however, said Mr. Kerry had spoken only with Elizabeth.”

This continues to reinforce the notion that it is in fact Elizabeth Edwards who is the real champion in the relationship. Time and time again you hear about Elizabeth Edwards taking meetings, discussing issues, etc, etc. However it seems that she has always been viewed as simply “John’s wife”, rather then the respected political force she rightfully deserves.

What does all of this mean? I don’t know. I suppose it is up to you to draw your own conclusions. Personally all of this rehashing of old Edwards stories strikes me much differently then it initially did - and know as unfortunate as it is to say, I really have no respect for Edwards, his work, or his arguments simply because I do not believe any of it was genuine.