Surprise twists

In a twist I really didn’t see coming, I just received an email from Sundance thanking me for my alumni application.  So, I decided that if they were under the impression that I had already applied, I better actually apply so that I have some control over what my application looks like.  This doesn’t mean I’m in.  It just means that I might be in.  Eeks!  Why?  Oh, I don’t know.

Onto old news.  And it is old news now.  I have finally settled down enough to say a few words about John Edwards.  As you know, I was and, I guess, still am a big fan of his.  I really admired him for being one of the very few candidates — sometimes the only — who would address NAFTA and the enormous problems it has caused for millions of workers.  I’m currently reading The Big Squeeze, which is a very current book about the dire straits too many American workers are in.  It details the lives of factory workers, Wal-Mart employees, waitresses and dozens of others and discusses who is making it and why, and who isn’t and why not.  Anyway, it’s a fascinating and depressing study of the current working class.  And it reminds me of the reasons I liked John Edwards in the first place.  Ok, so, Edwards had an affair with a woman who seems battier than the bat that lives in the cabin we rent in Presque Isle every summer.  And then he lied about it.  And then there is a baby that may or may not be his.  And then one of his supporters gave the Bat Woman and an aide who has taken credit for the babe a bunch of money to live in southern California.  And then Edwards admitted the affair, but said it ended in 2006, the baby is not his and he told Elizabeth all about it.  He also mentioned the affair took place while his wife was in remission.  Hmm.  And the most recent news I read about it is that folks have now turned on Elizabeth, calling her complicit in the “cover-up.”  Double hmm. 

I don’t know what to think about all of it.  I don’t know that I need to think about it at all.  I do know, though, that I find it really obnoxious to blame Elizabeth for not wanting to see her personal family matters splattered all over the news.  What sane person would announce to the world, “My husband had an affair with this Looney Toon?”  It’s a new twist in blaming the woman.  Like the Sundance application being received when I hadn’t filled it out, I didn’t see it coming.


21 Responses to “Surprise twists”

  1. 1 Snoop Diggity-DANG-Dawg August 28, 2008 at 11:40 am

    “…I find it really obnoxious to blame Elizabeth for not wanting to see her personal family matters splattered all over the news.”

    Then WHY encourage and endorse his run for the Presidency? She’s not a stupid person. She knows their entire existence would be under a microscope if he ran for office, buut she stood up & cheered anyway.

    She should have taken him aside, and said, “Look jackass, We’ve got a 100 million dollars, a mansion & three healthy kids. We don’t need the presidency. Knock it off and let’s live our lives in peaceful obscurity.”

    But she didn’t. Because she wanted that power as much as she did.

    Karma’s a bitch, ain’t it?

  2. 2 Gretchen August 28, 2008 at 12:42 pm

    Karma, seriously? Thankfully, most of us can’t even begin to imagine being in Elizabeth Edwards’s shoes. The woman has Stage IV breast cancer, which is not curable at this point; is likely to be leaving behind two young children; and has already had to face the unimaginable — the tragic death of one of her children. Let’s not paint her as the millionaire in the mansion who has had an easy ride.

    Although I remain disappointed in John Edwards, I agree with Kate — to blame Elizabeth is simply ridiculous. I can’t pretend to understand their decision to stay in the presidential race in light of his affair and of her illness. But not having walked in Elizabeth’s shoes, I’m sure as hell not going to judge her.

  3. 3 kateandgracie August 28, 2008 at 1:58 pm

    Well said, Gretchen.

    I’m just not sure why she’s getting “blamed” for anything. While she may have known about the affair and still supported him running for pres, I don’t see why she should have come forward and told the world, “He had an affair!” That doesn’t make any sense to me. If they were dealing with it personally, and it truly was in the past, then why is she required to tell all of us about it.

    No one ever seems to blame Hillary for being complicit in the cover-ups of Bill’s (serial) affairs.

  4. 4 Sara H August 29, 2008 at 1:32 pm

    Holy surprise political twist again, thanks to McCain.

    I agree, blaming the spouse for not coming forward doesn’t quite make sense to me. I admit that something about it does make me slightly uncomfortable, but I think I’m being unreasonable, because on the other hand, that had to be a super humiliating time in her life and I’m not sure that any other person would have taken their personal humiliation/hurt public. Also, if you love your spouse and have the capability to forgive, how do you turn around and tank their career? That was one heck of a difficult position to be in from the spousal perspective.

  5. 5 kateandgracie August 29, 2008 at 2:43 pm

    Indeed, indeed.

    And I was just thinking the McCain thing fits right in with the post — didn’t see that one coming.

  6. 6 Gretchen August 29, 2008 at 2:59 pm

    Yeah, I don’t know what to make of it at all . . . I think having a young, vibrant woman campaigning next to McCain definitely makes him more appealing overall (he just seems a little stodgy and old next to all the Obama hype, I guess), but if he thinks that the former Clinton supporters will now join him, I think he’s mistaken. She’s ultra-conservative from the little I’ve read about her — I’m actually more comfortable with McCain. Not that I’ve ever strayed across party lines . . .

  7. 7 Gretchen August 29, 2008 at 3:00 pm

    Kate — Fix my typos, will ya??!! 🙂

  8. 8 kateandgracie August 29, 2008 at 3:14 pm

    Yeah, I don’t see how a self-described “hockey mom” — and not that there’s ANYTHING wrong with that — and super, super pro-lifer is going to take away Hillary’s core. It is really a surprising choice. I just can’t imagine what these debates are going to be like — Biden v. Palin. Eeks!

  9. 9 kateandgracie August 29, 2008 at 3:15 pm

    And may I just say that that first comment on here still scares me a little. I just don’t know what karma has to do with anything.

  10. 10 Sarayu August 29, 2008 at 4:08 pm

    I’m totally scared by the first comment as well. Who are you?

    Now, as far Hillary supporters straying to McCain, it’s a scary world out there. I saw numerous women on the news talking about how broken hearted and angry they were about Clinton’s loss and their disappointment was leading them to support McCain.

    It makes NO sense. In fact, I’m pretty sure one of them was a lesbian. I just wanted to shake her and say do you not believe you deserve the same rights as everyone else? How can someone go from supporting Clinton on issues such as equal pay, pro choice, and civil unions then go to McCain and Palin. I mean she’s a long standing member of the NRA! People are supposed to be voting based political beliefs not on the person’s gender or race. By switching to McCain because they don’t get to have a woman president, they are simply being as sexist as the people they oppose.

    Sorry to rant. It just makes me so mad!

    And now with McCain picking Palin, all those damn women will pay more attention to the prospect of a female vice president than to the actual issues at hand, and that scares me- almost as much as that karma comment.

  11. 11 Sara H August 29, 2008 at 4:31 pm

    I think I’m going to be really intrigued by this Palin person. Need to know more, but the election just got a whole lot more interesting.

    And, interestingly, I read that she vetoed a bill that would have prohibited state benefits for same sex partners. Not sure what was behind that, but I like her as the “maverick” type who isn’t dancing to the party tune all the time.

  12. 12 Gretchen August 29, 2008 at 5:02 pm

    As for our scary lurker, my guess is that he just found Kate’s blog from those automatically generated related topics . . . I bet he couldn’t find it again if he wanted to . . . (Yeah, I know it’s sexist, but I really do think snoopy lurker dog is a guy . . .)

  13. 13 kateandgracie September 2, 2008 at 10:39 am

    Holy more surprise twists. Bristol is preggers! Who saw this one coming?

  14. 14 Sarayu September 2, 2008 at 10:58 am

    I know. It’s pretty ridiculous. I love how they’re spinning the fact that she’s keeping the baby as “family values.” I didn’t realize teen pregnancy and pre-marital sex were part of Ms. Palin’s family ideals. She’s so much more open minded than I thought.

  15. 15 Gretchen September 2, 2008 at 12:18 pm

    I try so hard to be openminded when it comes to other mothers and not be judgmental, but I am failing miserably here. I can’t understand how she is supposed to stand for family values when she is willing to leave a 5-month old special needs baby behind while she campaigns for vice-president and also chooses to subject her 17-year-old to such scrutiny. She knew she was going to have to sacrifice the well-being of her children to pursue this and it just makes me sad . . . can you imagine being the most famous pregnant teenager in America? Poor girl . . .

    Again, I really try not to judge . . . I try to recognize that we all find our own balance between our careers and families and my choices wouldn’t necessarily be somone else’s . . . But I really have to laugh when I think about Palin being touted as an example for family values . . .

  16. 16 kateandgracie September 2, 2008 at 4:23 pm

    It is mystifying. That poor Bristol. And did you see that stuff about her beau’s myspace page? Egads.

  17. 17 Gretchen September 3, 2008 at 12:35 am

    Check out

    Dahlia was one of my law school roommates . . . THIS is whyI feel guilty about judging Palin and yet I still do . . .

  18. 18 Kristin September 3, 2008 at 9:24 am

    I like the name Bristol…

  19. 19 Heather September 3, 2008 at 9:50 am

    I like the name bristol, too.

    I’m trying not to judge palin for her career/family choices, too. all people running for high level offices are putting their own ambitions in front of spending time with their family. But, I am very willing to judge her for her conservative views, and the ridiculousness of any spin on bristol’s pregnancy as being family values, and choosing to run for vice president when it will thrust your pregnant teenager into the spotlight. i wonder if jamie lynn spears is happy or sad that she is no longer the country’s most famous pregnant teen.

    i’m also willing to judge those crazy hillary supporters who are considering mccain. to echo sarayu, they just really make me mad. argh.

  20. 20 kateandgracie September 3, 2008 at 10:06 am

    That was a very interesting article, Gretchen. And I think it really put its finger, for me anyway, on why it feels ok to judge Palin’s choices…I mean, one, she’s running for VP and I think it’s ok to judge those who want to run for such a high office. Ok, and maybe necessary. And two, more significantly perhaps, she has put herself out there as this uber-mom. So, if that’s her main platform, which it seems to be — that and her prolife stance — then I think it’s fair for us to ponder it and ask all the questions we’ve been asking. And I’m not concluding from any of it that she’s a bad mom or a bad person or anything really negative. Though I think it’s a very strange day when one of the first things a VP choice says about herself is that she’s a hockey mom. Americans seem more and more obsessed with electing candidates that seem like them. I want candidates who are smarter, more knowledgeable, more charming (impossible to think, I know!), and just all around a thousand times more capable than I. It’s a &^%#$@* country to run, you know?

  21. 21 kateandgracie September 3, 2008 at 10:07 am

    Also, does anyone else think it’s odd that McCain and others keep touting her anticorruption stance when one, she’s under investigation for some serious abuse of power, and two, she apparently fired the police chief and head librarian (head librarian!) when she became mayor in Wasilla because they hadn’t supported her candidacy? Seems a wee bit contradictory to me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

August 2008

Join 78 other subscribers

%d bloggers like this: