I'm willing to ignore the story because Edwards, early on in the primary season, did a lot of good for the Democrats.

He laid out a universal health care plan. Clinton and Obama had to match it, or at least provide alternatives. He made it the first contenious issue of '08.

He bullied the Democrats into boycotting FOX News. He made FOX pay for being twiddling idiots/malicious bastards over the last eight years.

Edwards kept the primary issue-focused. As soon as he dropped out, the very core of the primary became "gotcha" crap á la "bitter" and "Annie Oakley" and etc.

So yeah, it's sad that this happened. It's for the best that Edwards is no longer involved in Democratic politics. However, when he was involved, he did his best for the Democrats and it shows.

It remains rather difficult to digest why the sexual behavior of someone has such putative public implications, and in the Edwards case, it is impossible to attribute this ihnterest to other than the lowest of prurient curiosity. It will disappear fast, except in the smallest of so-called "minds."

I disagee Mandy. BBC (Before Bill Clinton) I might have agreed, but we -- and the candidates -- know full well how devastating to our COUNTRY risk-taking in this area and at this level can be. I'll hazard a guess that some of the potential VP candidates who have 'taken themselves out of the running' have done so because they know there is something similarly explosive in their past and care enough about their family, their party, and their country to stay out of that bright, bright spotlight. And I commend them for the decision. The very LAST thing that Democrats need is to have another president who, by his willingness to take such risks, drags all of us into his very private, and unsavory, life.

The original poster is correct - it's going to take some time to process and just when you think you've absorbed it .... some other mental connections are made and you feel the shock/distaste/dismay all over again. Ones that have caught up with me in strange moments are:

--- I can see where Edwards might feel that if he *didn't* run (when he'd clearly been planning to do so all along) his political future might have been in question. But as of March 2007, he had the best reason any living person has ever had to step out of a presidential race: the reoccurance of Elizabeth's cancer, in an ultimately fatal form. No one would have thought anything, except good thoughts, about him if he had stepped back at that time -- and he's still young, could have held a Cabinet post or even run in the future with this affair further and further back in history. McCain's candidacy shows that the worst sort of behavior of that sort can be overlooked if enough time has passed, should it ever come out.

So while it's shocking to me that he would run, knowing this was there to potentially explode ... it's even more shocking that he would not take advantage of the bittersweet "pass" that life handed him: a chance to step back, to give to his family the attention and care they ALL deserved (after what he and they knew he had put them through), and to lose nothing in the way of a rather sterling political future. To me, that is the Greek tragedy moment.

--- If Edwards had not been in the field, sucking up what little air that Hillary and Obama left available, who would have emerged as the 'traditional electable' one? Biden? Richardson? Dodd? How would that have changed things? Would more voters have looked at Obama's comparative inexperience and Hillary's strong negatives and seen less Ken-doll and more depth/experience/certainty in the 'other' alternative? ... maybe resulting in someone else at the head of the ticket and either Obama or Hillary as VP? Perhaps not likely but ..... we'll never know, will we? As a strong Biden supporter, I know I will always wonder.

"There are those moments that shake you awake at two in the morning where the history that you took for granted and the new reality suddenly snap into place. That process can't be hurried."

Very wise - and very true. And anything that affects THIS election. as this has done (and could have done much more so), is of importance to all of us and, in fact, to the world. We've got eight years of another thoughtless risk-taker to recover from -- if that's possible.

I think my highly negative view of this whole issure has more to do with the fact that I truly believe that child is his and he is denying his flesh and blood to protect himself. That tells me more about his character or lack thereof than the affair itself. We are all weak and fail. It is only a coward that would deny his own child.

Stranahan, maybe some progressives are just smart enough to focus on issues that matter most?

...any situation that involves prolonged deception takes a while to process. There are those moments that shake you awake at two in the morning where the history that you took for granted and the new reality suddenly snap into place.

Whatever. I am so turned off by witch-hunting weirdos who think that anybody--including a politician they don't know--owes them the "truth" about their underwear style or sex life. The overused phrase, "get a life" is the best I can think of for such invasive and boring people.

The problem I see with Edwards' affair is that is shows a lack of strategic intelligence and discipline after years of Bill Clinton's presidency went down the drain for the same reason.

But Edwards' risk-taking will only hurt the country IF we allow it to interfere with Obama's ability to choose the best partners in change. Me? I'll take a passionate and capable candidate like Edwards--even one who might blow it with stupid moves--over a status quo candidate I know for sure will do nothing positive.

The status quo powers are most terrified of an Edwards VP or attorney general, because he has guts and he is capable. Surely they've hunted for dirt since the beginning of the campaign in case Edwards came too close to a powerful position. I could care less if he had an affair, even if I would prefer to be married to someone who has experienced the power of honor in relationships.

It would be nice if Obama refuses to allow corporate media to dumb down his VP and cabinet selections and hamstring his presidency based on the personal weaknesses they will surely dig up on all the most capable candidates he considers. No candidate for any position is without weaknesses; Obama can remind the public of this and just continue with the truth that's brought him so far already.

Bush won twice, not because the public was so stupid, but because there was nobody like Obama who could (or was willing to) shut down his b.s. by speaking a little common sense. Obama can push the voters past this irrelevant issue.