Showing posts with label john edwards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label john edwards. Show all posts

Saturday, April 07, 2007

I'm Sure He Has Excellent Reasons...

...but I have only one comment to make about John Edwards and declining to participate in a Fox News debate for the second time:

Do I really want a man in charge of my country's military who is this afraid of a news network?

I mean, c'mon; so Fox has a decidedly conservative bent. How is it that Republicans have never been so afraid of CNN (or PBS, or NBC, or even the Letterman Show) that they wouldn't go a-whoring after votes on any of those venues? Reagan was certainly never afraid of "liberal agendas" when he debated Carter back in '80. Can you imagine McCain passing up an opportunity to pimp himself to any network that'll give him the benefit of his "war hero" status? Of course not!

Yet here we have a man who really, really wants to lead our nation as Commander-in-Chief, Lord High Muckity Muck, and High Priest of the Sacred Roundish Office that can't stand the thought of Fox exercising their right to free speech.

Pity.

Monday, March 26, 2007

Couric and the Edwards

Understanding that Hugh Hewitt is about umpteen times smarter than I am, I beg to differ with his characterization of Couric's interview with the Edwards on yesterday's "60 Minutes."

Couric was merely doing what she's being paid all those millions to do: interview people and report news. Hewitt opines that she stepped outside the boundaries of decency, however, when she tried to get John Edwards to admit that his decision to continue his candidacy was nothing short of callous disregard for his wife's condition. I don't quite see it that way.
Note: All previous disclaimers about having no love for Edwards' politics (or Couric's, for that matter) are still in effect; lest you think that I have somehow gone soft on Edwards the Candidate.
There are two problems here. One obvious problem is the definition of when, precisely, something that occurs in the life of a very public figure should be none of the public's business. In this case, although I happen to understand Edwards' decision, I also understand the need to keep our candidates under the microscope. We're talking about a man who has designs on the seat of perhaps the highest political power in the civilized world. His motives for seeking office are just as suspect as his views on the issues we all face. It behooves us to know how this man supports his own family, how they support him, and whether any of this factors into his ability to lead the nation.

The second problem is Couric herself. She finds herself trying to fit into a mold cast by newscasters of days past. Newscasters are supposed to ask the "tough" questions in order to root out the news that they then pass along to the unwashed masses. Unfortunately, Couric is no tough-guy newscaster. She spent far too long portraying the "America's Sweetheart" personna on daytime TV to be believable as a hard-nosed reporter today. Thus, she comes off as more of a Barbara Walters-like touchy-feely interviewer (she practically fed them the answers to her "tough" questions) as opposed to a Mike Wallace ambush interviewer.

Like Hewitt, I didn't watch the segment. I refuse to watch "60 Minutes" unless my name is mentioned somehow (in which case I'll likely be in prison). However, having read the interview, I can state unequivocally that I'm glad I didn't.

Another non-event.

Thursday, March 22, 2007

Regarding Elizabeth Edwards

When I saw the flash on Drudge last night, I immediately suspected a recurrence of Elizabeth Edwards' cancer. Turned out to be true.

While I was initially surprised that Edwards would decide to continue this campaign in spite of his wife's condition, I certainly understand not quitting. Whatever else I may think of John Edwards, he is no quitter. Whatever his underlying motivations may be (and it's all mere speculation on our part), he is completely dedicated to running for the office.

One thing this blogger will not do is take Edwards to task for this decision, nor impugn any ulterior motivation on his part. That would not only be impolitic of me, it also lowers me to the level of some Kos Kid who crows over the deaths of anyone with whom he does not agree.

Cancer is insidious. It cares not what a person's politics may be, nor what color their skin reflects. There are also as many ways to react to cancer as there are victims of this disease in its seemingly countless forms.

I have written elsewhere about RoboMom. RoboMom is my mom-in-law, and she fought that battle for six years before succumbing to the disease. One thing she did not want was for anyone to be inconvenienced on her account. Fortunately, we as a family (all of her kids, grandkids, and siblings) were far too stubborn to let her get away with that. We graciously overrode her objections to "fussing" too much over her, and I think she was secretly pleased and grateful that we insisted.

Elizabeth Edwards is a politician's wife. Being a political spouse requires certain sacrifices; sacrifices that, I suspect, Elizabeth came to grips with many, many years ago. She understands what a campaign like this means to her husband, and she is just as dedicated to seeing it through as he is. The last thing a woman like Elizabeth wants is to be a distraction to her husband. I count this as a good thing.

Decisions like this are never made lightly. When Edwards says that they really never even discussed the possibility of his dropping out, I take him at his word. What I suspect is that these issues were discussed and settled during the onset of the disease in 2004. The talking part is behind them. Edwards has already indicated that he will be where and whenever his wife may need him. This, too, I would expect.

This is not to say that this decision to go on might not change in the foreseeable future. Heaven only knows what kinds of treatments Elizabeth may receive, or how the disease may progress. Six years of watching RoboMom taught me that you can't reliably predict anything about cancer. Can't be done.

So, this blog may consider John Edwards to be a fool of a politician, and I reserve the right to rake him over the coals for his politics, but you will not find me berating him for his "handling" of this intensely personal issue.

You just won't.