The Marrying Kind
Bill McGurn ·
Jan 7, 2011 at 7:19am
Some of us wondered how long John Edwards would wait after his wife died before he became engaged to his mistress. Now we know: Not long indeed. What strikes me about this story, however, is this line:
"After discussing it with a friend, Rielle said she decided to tell John's kids, 'Call me Mommy.'"
To put this in perspective, two of these Edwards children -- who just lost their mother -- are not yet teens.
- Comment (26)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
I'm surprised he didn't try to save money on a priest and just have a joint funeral/wedding.
Classy guy. And if it wasn't for the National Enquirer, he probably would be our VP right now.
Nov '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
You could create a whole soap opera based on the sordid epic of John Edwards — a low-down dirty dog, if ever there was one. His immorality is only compounded by his utter lack of class, good taste and decency. I will be surprised if his children do not eventually change their names out of unbearable shame.
In a slightly different world, the wretched Edwards might have become President. That is a very sobering and disturbing thought.
Re: The Marrying Kind
Far be it from me to defend John Edwards, but what would you have him do toward his youngest child, who is entirely blameless and as much in need of a father--and a married mother--as any child?
Aug '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
From all appearances, it seems Reille Hunter will easily qualify for the creepy stepmother Hall of Fame. Perhaps the children can put themselves up for adoption...
Re: The Marrying Kind
Or how about, "Call me the woman who slept with Daddy while Mommy was dying?"
Or maybe, "Call me 'Baggage.'"
Or "Call me 'Baby Mommy...'"
I'll stop now. I'm ashamed of myself. Call me nasty.
Re: The Marrying Kind
Claire, Even the most generous reading of the whole Edwards saga, before, during, and after Elizabeth, suggests that whatever John Edwards and Rielle Hunter may decide on any given issue, it almost never has anything to do with any good for any children involved but represents their own right to the pursuit of happiness. To presume that children age 10 and 12 -- still grieving for their mother -- want to call another woman "Mommy" is a monstrous form of narcissism. Not least from a woman that represented a public humiliation for their own mother.
Re: The Marrying Kind
The only thing we can be certain about is that this awful melodrama is not over.
May '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
Finally an issue on which both the left and the right can agree. We can all enjoy Jon Stewart's skewering of Edwards. He must easily be the most despised man in America today.
As to your point Claire. I don't think anyone would begrudge him remarrying and even trying to reconstruct a sense of family for his older children as well as his baby, but there are legitimate reasons for traditional periods of mourning and he placed his own interests ahead of his children's by not electing to wait just a bit. The baby wouldn't know the difference if he waited six months but it's a lot for a 10 yr-old to absorb right now. On the other hand, I can guarantee that even the 10 yr-old is old enough to despise the girlfriend for suggesting she be called anything but Rielle or perhaps Mrs. Edwards.
Sep '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
Or maybe, "Call me 'Baggage.'"
Call me Carrion Luggage.
Nov '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
What those kids "need" is a father who still has some claim to dignity and self-respect, and a mother who is not a tabloid bimbo. But, as the old saying goes, you cannot pick your parents. If John Edwards and Rielle Hunter get married, they are still loathsome human beings and will never qualify for the "Parents of the Year" award.
Re: The Marrying Kind
"Call me Mommy" is indeed grotesque (if that really happened--we're talking an unidentified source). But the only decent thing Edwards can do is to marry that woman. Is it true that the baby wouldn't know the difference? I'm not at all sure.
Don't get me wrong; I completely share the consensus view of John Edwards. But given the circumstances he's created and cannot undo, it hardly seems to me wrong for him to marry the living mother of his child. In a more traditional world, he would be forced to do so by her father, who would be armed with a shotgun. There's a reason for that tradition.
Sep '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
I'm wondering if the marrying part is true because I live in Durham, North Carolina, and you hear people all the time saying they saw Edwards at a party or a restaurant or a bar putting the make on young babes. Now, I can't say any of that's true, but it goes for common knowledge here.
I viewed John Edwards as a phony from the moment he entered the scene because his campaign for the U.S. Senate made him out to be this small town guy, never mentioning that he was one of the richest men in the state. But John's not the only bad one here, in my opinion, because Elizabeth reportedly would not let her children meet the young Frances, and I can't imagine that that helped them deal with their conflicting emotions about her or their father. To my mind, Elizabeth was every bit as self-absorbed as John and Rielle. Too bad they couldn't get along because they seem to have belonged together.
Jun '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
"I John, take you Rielle, to be my wedded wife. To have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for richer, or slightly poorer, in mild curable sickness, or in health, to love and to cherish 'till death, or significant weight gain, or hospitalization, do us part."
Re: The Marrying Kind
Maybe I am wrong. Perhaps Mr. Edwards is not here thinking of himself. Perhaps he is a man who does only what is best for his children: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ow1pwtFpvq8
May '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
I think we're basically in agreement. I'm reacting to the timing -- that's all. (And I know this isn't fair, but) as the father of a 10- and 12-year old (and one-time father of a three-year-old,) I would have had him wait a bit so that it doesn't become a news item as it has and the big kids have a chance to grieve before they have to put on their happy faces. (Prince Charles makes a nice example here though of course Camilla did not have a three-year-old to contend with,)
But the reality is that we don't have any real idea of the nature of the relationships here. We can only hope that the timing is not as painful as it appears to be for the older kids. And we can still have fun despising John Edwards.
May '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
Leslie Watkins: I'm wondering if the marrying part is true because I live in Durham, North Carolina, and you hear people all the time saying they saw Edwards at a party or a restaurant or a bar putting the make on young babes. Now, I can't say any of that's true, but it goes for common knowledge here.
* * *
Given what we know about Edwards, not only could both be true, there's a pretty good chance of it. Ms. Hunter may or may not be a fool, but she would have to be one to think Edwards will take his marriage vows seriously this time around.
Jun '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
"After discussing it with a friend, Rielle said she decided to tell John's kids, 'Call me Mommy.'" - Dearest Hide the coat hangers
Jun '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
All three players in this love triangle are vile. Elizabeth was no saint. I am not bashing the Enquirer, as it has earned a pretty good track record, but I'm skeptical of this whole story. John Edwards absolutley should be inbvolved in his love-child's life. But expecting his older kids to call Hunter mommy is gross, whether that request comes now or thirty years into the future.
Those poor kids!
Oct '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: "Call me Mommy" is indeed grotesque (if that really happened--we're talking an unidentified source). But the only decent thing Edwards can do is to marry that woman. Is it true that the baby wouldn't know the difference? I'm not at all sure.
Don't get me wrong; I completely share the consensus view of John Edwards. But given the circumstances he's created and cannot undo, it hardly seems to me wrong for him to marry the living mother of his child. In a more traditional world, he would be forced to do so by her father, who would be armed with a shotgun. There's a reason for that tradition. · Jan 7 at 8:23am
The problem though is that he was married at the time such a shotgun marriage would've taken place, making it "shotgun bigamy."
Jun '10
Re: The Marrying Kind
In olden days, Hunter would have hid out after the pregnancy began to show, given birth, and handed the little girl off to adoptive parents who would protect the child from the horrific life of papparazzi and scandal that will now follow her.