I realized something after I hit publish on the last post. I dismiss those media accounts of Elizabeth Edwards possibly not being a very nice person. I do pause when I think of her defending him when she knew of the affair but he was still running for President, though I think that charade was also part of her denial/fear/worry/dread/victimhood (still lied to by Edwards)/anger of discovering the affair and not wanting it to be true, wanting to minimize its impact, to save what was her dream, too, of a happy marriage and high public office. In short, she gets a pass. I respect her and empathize to a certain extent with some of her pain, and know I've never experienced the extent of pain she has. And I think the accounts of her behavior are exaggerated, mostly reported anonymously, and written through a prism of politics, not real life.
But the other woman? Those exact same media accounts that call EE a shrew and harpy (namely the Game Change book as well as the one by the repellent aid of Edwards) describe the other woman as pretty much a kook. And I have totally accepted that as obvious fact. Clearly she's a kook, a hanger-on, brazen, shameless, a desperate Other Woman.
I suppose the good news is we'll never know, will we? (Until, god help us, she writes her own book and sits down for her tell all with whomever. Now that I think about it, the fact that she hasn't sought publicity probably means something - still getting paid off? hopeful of reuniting with Edwards?)
I'm done with this story, I really am, but I was surprised to realize the logical gap in my interpretation of this situation.
32 minutes ago