Why wasn't John Edwards' affair a bigger deal?
So we got a touch of egg on our face. We were incredibly skeptical when the National Enquirer broke the story of John Edwards' affair (even after they knocked it out of the park on that Siamese twins story that 1 time). So, we were a little shocked when we found out that he indeed did have an affair with old Rielle Hunter. This is, obviously, a shocker (heh). Back in 2006, we (at Tango, not the Dish's fastidious sub-staff, we always thought there was something smarmy about his smile and $1,000 haircuts) thought that the John and Elizabeth Edwards were the best couple among presidential candidates. Ugh.
Clearly, all was not as rock-steady as we guessed. At any rate, not to get into the nitty-gritty of this sordid ordeal but the Enquirer promised a second act to this morality tale: a love child. Borrowing from MJ, Edwards claims that "the kids is not my son (daughter)." The New York Daily News reports that Hunter will never have a paternity test though Edwards said he'd submit to it. Edwards claims that it would be impossible for Rielle's 5-month old daughter couldn't be possibly his given that their tryst ended in 2006.
In retrospect, it's sort of strange that this wasn't more of a story. A) America loves a good and dirty affair; and B) we love seeing the high and might brought low. So, why didn't this thing get more traction? Was it because the Natty Inquisitor was in the lead? Was it that John Edwards is by most measures a pretty decent guy (ambulance chasing claims notwithstanding) and not technically in public office? Or have we just had enough of the sordid and want the substance? Whatever the case may be, it looks like this is just another bump in the road for the resilient Edwards fam. If they can get through the death of a child and the cancer then a little ass on the side probably isn't that big of deal. Luckily, he didn't even have to promise that he'd make Elizabeth president.