Olbermann Reads Elizabeth Edwards' Statement on the Affair

[ultraist]

Run time: 01:05 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx-Py7zXxUg   Posted on YouTube: August 09, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 09, 2008 By DU Member: ultraist Views on DU: 1336

 
Elizabeth Edwards' statement on her husband's 2006 affair is read by Keith Olbermann on Countdown.

Elizabeth originally issued her statement on the blog, DailyKos, where it was recieved with a huge outpouring of support, just hours after John Edwards publicly admitted to the affair and apologized.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/8/193337/7354/473/564989

Today

by elizabethedwards
Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 07:40:51 PM EDT

"Our family has been through a lot. Some caused by nature, some caused by human weakness, and some -- most recently -- caused by the desire for sensationalism and profit without any regard for the human consequences. None of these has been easy. But we have stood with one another through them all. Although John believes he should stand alone and take the consequences of his action now, when the door closes behind him, he has his family waiting for him.

John made a terrible mistake in 2006. The fact that it is a mistake that many others have made before him did not make it any easier for me to hear when he told me what he had done. But he did tell me. And we began a long and painful process in 2006, a process oddly made somewhat easier with my diagnosis in March of 2007. This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage as well. Because of a recent string of hurtful and absurd lies in a tabloid publication, because of a picture falsely suggesting that John was spending time with a child it wrongly alleged he had fathered outside our marriage, our private matter could no longer be wholly private.

The pain of the long journey since 2006 was about to be renewed.

John has spoken in a long on-camera interview I hope you watch. Admitting one's mistakes is a hard thing for anyone to do, and I am proud of the courage John showed by his honesty in the face of shame. The toll on our family of news helicopters over our house and reporters in our driveway is yet unknown. But now the truth is out, and the repair work that began in 2006 will continue. I ask that the public, who expressed concern about the harm John's conduct has done to us, think also about the real harm that the present voyeurism does and give me and my family the privacy we need at this time."

[ultraist]

1. Stay Strong, Elizabeth!

:hug:

[Mojorabbit]

2. Was Keith on on the west coast?

The olympics came on at his normal time here and if so does that mean no Keith for the duration of the games?

[ultraist]

4. I don't know

It looked like he was in his regular studio, but I'm not 100% on that.

[Berry Cool]

11. Which channel were you watching? MSNBC or NBC?

I'm on the East Coast, but Keith was on at his normal time here on MSNBC. At the same time, NBC was running the opening ceremonies.

I see no indication that KO will not be airing during the Olympics. He was on regularly in 2004. In fact, he was originally rehired by MSNBC in 2003 to help anchor the 2004 Olympics, but by the time they rolled around MSNBC kept him on the Countdown job instead, because they felt keeping him on that show during an election year rather than putting a sub on it while he covered the Olympics was important to the show. I see no reason why anything would change this time out.

On edit, adding: Also, at the end of Friday's show, KO ended it as usual. He didn't say anything about going on hiatus during the Games or anything like "See you in two weeks." So one would assume it's business as usual next week.

[Mojorabbit]

13. I was watching msnbc

and at 8 when Keith normally comes on the olympics was on. At least I think I was watching msnbc. I will see on Mon.

[stlsaxman]

3. She is one amazing human being.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[mzmolly]

5. I have great admiration for Elizabeth Edwards and wish she and her family well.

I admit I'm confused about the facts surrounding this matter, but am grateful from a human perspective that Elizabeth Edwards has the ability to request privacy given JE is not the nominee, or the VP candidate at this time.

I shall respect her request and not comment on this matter again, personally.

[graegoyle]

6. Respect when it is due.

Did they forget for the past year and a half that the affair had taken place?

They became public figures by choice, not by circumstance nor accident. They wanted to be President and First Lady. Now they want to be left alone, even though, if John had won the nomination, they would have knowingly put the Democratic Party in a very precarious position. I'm not saying that loyalty to the party is all that important, but I find a lot of arrogance and hypocrisy in their words and deeds.

They are in predicaments that many people face, but they chose to become and remain public figures. They should have known what would happen if this became public knowledge and they seem to have done nothing to mitigate that.

If they led private lives or left the public stage, I would say that they deserve to be left alone on this matter. However, they chose to remain public figures--even after the affair--so they don't have much of a position to request special treatment now.

[marshall]

7. He did admit to being narcissistic and egocentric

You've got to give him credit for gumption--other politicians who have reluctantly admitted to extramarital affairs in the wake of incontrovertible evidence have not had the balls to take that much blame for what they did.

Other than the money trail it's really a non-issue. He obviously is not going to be VP or AG or anything else. I don't think his campaign people will go to jail for diverting donated funds to hush this woman up but I do think it will take a big chunk out of Edwards's bank account.

[graegoyle]

8. But, just like the others...

...he lied and denied until he got caught. He lied while his family watched him and he knew that they knew he was lying. The more I think about this, the more despicable he becomes as a husband and father. (I still have respect for what he did and tried to do as a public servant--I can separate the two roles to some degree.)

But that's not my point. My point is that they both chose to remain on the public stage, running for the "highest office in the land", but they want privacy now that the affair has become public knowledge and it is an inconvenience for them to be in public.

I've done plenty of stupid things; I'm not saying they have to be perfect, but the arrogance and hypocrisy in this request for privacy disturbs me, especially considering the support they received from the public about their son and Elizabeth's health.

I'm not hot-and-bothered about this situation; I had no particular affinity toward them other than that they seemed like good people for a couple in politics. I just greatly dislike the petition for a double-standard in this instance: They have just become a typical political couple.

[mzmolly]

9. I was speaking for myself when I said I would respect the wishes of Mrs. Edwards.

I must say I find it baffling that you've had roughly 40 posts here in seven years and you wish to spend your time blasting the Edwards? This, with all that's gone on in this country?

Feel free to use your few posts here, to critique the imperfect among us if you so choose. As for me, I'm moving on.

[Divine Discontent]

10. good catch on the post count and years here, and commenting about THIS story

when there's so much horrible scandal by the B*sh administration to really complain about daily. Thankfully this will go away, even if the MSM tries to 'sell' it, it doesn't have legs, because John's not the VP candidate.

[graegoyle]

12. Yeah, great catch on the post count.

Hmmm...

So I don't post my opinion in every thread. So I post when I think I have a perspective that hasn't been presented in the discussion. So I don't make posts of, "Yay, hooray!" or, "I completely hate you."

I'm criticizing the fact that they chose to be public figures and now want privacy when they have a scandal. I see that as significantly hypocritcal from a couple who seemed to have a great deal of integrity.

Do I think Newt Gingrich's divorce of one woman on her sick bed to marry another was proper? Do I think McCain leaving his first wife for a younger, richer woman was nice? Do I think impeachment of Clinton over his affair was proper? Do I think Bob Barr allowing his wife to get an abortion with his "pro-life" stance was proper? Do I think George W. Bush is anything close to a decent human being?

No. Not even close. My opinions on many things such as those are fairly in line with the general consensus of the views here; I don't really feel compelled to just add a "megadittoes" to a thread. Only occassionally do I feel that a certain perspective is unrepresented and that is when I feel like posting.

Yeah, great catch.

And regarding mzmolly's comment of speaking only for herself: That should go without saying and I didn't mean to imply any criticism of you, personally, for your stance; I was just stating, again, the hypocrisy in Elizabeth's request.

[Divine Discontent]

14. understood. be well...

[ghostsofgiants]

16. So your point is that public figures are not allowed to have any sort of private life?

Public life and private life are now mutually exclusive? They can't have both? Was their family life really all that public before this affair came out? Yeah, we know he has a wife and kids, but really, what else do we know about their family? Not much, I would imagine, because they should reserve the right to their privacy even when something like this happens.

[Quantess]

15. The voyeurism is at least as intense toward politicians as celebrities.

The difference is that celebrities' scandals and affairs are seen as amusement, but politicians' scandals are treated with a lot more hostility.