<p>Just thought I’d point out that in 2004 the Edwards’ pretty much took the kids with them for most of the traveling – they are a wealthy family and can afford to hire whatever support staff they need to make it all work out – so I am sure the kids will have plenty of time with their parents. </p>
<p>If I were in Elizabeth Edward’s shoes, I think what I would want more than anything would be to live long enough to see my husband sworn in as President. And sitting out the 2008 election would probably not be the best way to get that done. </p>
<p>Personally, the one time I was really sick in a kind of scary way, I didn’t really want much face time with my husband and then 4-year-old kid anyway. I think the kindest thing my husband did for me during that time was to take the kid off my hands during the day so I could get some sleep. </p>
<p>Elizabeth is a big internet user/blogger, by the way. On her off days, when not sleeping, she probably will keep herself entertained quite well propped up in bed with her laptop. (I’m assuming that some days are a lot worse than others with chemo).</p>
<p>I doubt that either of them cooks dinner. They probably have a number of people who take care of household chores. They probably also discussed what each should be doing. Breast cancer hasn’t affected her brain, you know. And, contra what you seem to think, she is not yet at death’s door. She is quite capable of making decisions for herself and telling him to go off to that fund-raiser. She is a woman, not a cypher.</p>
<p>I don’t think they can do that this time – except during the summer. The kids are school-age now. They have to be in school.</p>
<p>There was only a very short time between the diagnosis and the press conference. I think it must have been extraordinarily difficult for Elizabeth and John to process the enormous change in their lives in that short a time. I wouldn’t be surprised if their plans change again within the next few weeks, and I wouldn’t blame them at all if that happened.</p>
<p>It doesn’t look like they make his and her decisions. It seems quite apparent that they make JOINT decisions, like most couples in strong relationships. It’s unbelievably patronizing of her to assume what he’s doing goes against what she wants, when she’s saying the opposite.</p>
<p>My goodness, this should transcend political squabbling, and thankfully for the most part it has, so far. Cancer doesn’t discriminate against gender, race, religion, age, and definitely not political party. I wish Elizabeth Edwards the best and may her public fight against cancer bring yet another face to the American public and spur even more research to find a cure.</p>
<p>How can it transcend politics when the man is a full-time candidate for President of the United States? </p>
<p>The illness certainly transcends politics, but not the decision to continue seeking the nomination. Just the opposite, actually. Continuing the campaign makes his wife’s incurable cancer the central focus of the Edwards campaign. It has to. What do Democrats do when he gets the nomination and has to suspend campaigning in September 2008? Just kiss the election goodbye and accept eight years of Newt Gingrich?</p>
<p>That is a logical point for their campaign and the Edwards to consider ID. However, your earlier posts did not seem to be concerned with the aspect of her illness. What I read from your posts were concerns about his track record as a lawyer, spending time with their children, having dinner together, etc.</p>
<p>I would expect their decisions to change with her health. Right now, I fully support and admire their decision. No one has a crystal ball to the future. </p>
<p>From above posts, I note she has a 16% chance of a 5-year survival. I have a close friend who survived 23 months – unheard of – after a diagnosis of Stage IV pancreatic cancer. Miracles do happen … and the doctors have advances in treatment all the time.</p>
<p>Hmm. I don’t think there’s any black-or-white way to look at this situation or his decision to continue.
Campaigning-- constantly being under the spotlight and microscope-- must be brutal for spouses of political candidates, even in the best of health. I hope the press respect her wishes and decisioins as she fights this.</p>
<p>To ID: I understand your concerns about the Edwards campaign and the effect his wife’s cancer battle might have on it. But as a breast cancer survivor myself and someone who shares Elizabeth Edward’s political views, I believe that I “get” their decision. She strikes me as that rare person who long ago accepted the idea of her own morality. This doesn’t mean that she won’t fight like hell to stay alive as long as possible, but that she is at peace with the idea of her own passing. What she is not as peace with is the state of our nation and she, I suspect, worries greatly about the world that her children will grow up in. She passionately believes that our country is on the wrong path and feels the urgent need to do her part to change it. Her best bet for achieving that goal is to continue to support her husband in his quest to become president. She believes that he understands better than any other current candidate the plight of most Americans and the overarching need to change course. To my mind, that is what family values is all about.</p>
<p>the kids can also be home schooled or have private tutors/teachers on the road as Calmom stated they are a wealthy family and can afford to hire whatever support staff they need to make it all work out.</p>
<p>Personally I applaude her decision to go forward and live her life instead of sitting back, wringing her hands and saying woe is me. No matter what my political views are I have always liked them as a couple and her especially. It is great to see the level of love and respect that they have for one another.</p>
<p>I also agree with mini, that there is a big teachable moment in all of this especially when it comes to informing people about breast cancer. (on a side note, I hope that your wife is doing well).</p>
<p>carlmom - Not to make light of this serious topic, but I think that you meant that Mrs. Edwards has accepted the idea of her own “mortality” not “morality”! One missing letter changes the meaning quite a bit!</p>
<p>I think the announcement to continue the campaign more likely resulted from one of two possible rationales:</p>
<p>a) The Edwards simply have not come to grips with the reality of a continued campaign. Perfectly understandable. I suspect that a different decision will emerge after a period of reflection following the initial shock.</p>
<p>b) Perhaps they fully understand the implications, but simply decided that yesterday was not the time to pull the plug. Major donor fundraising events are scheduled every day for the remainder of the 1st quarter reporting period. A bigger war chest and some time to discuss options puts the Edwards in a better position to impact the election.</p>
<p>^ So much for dropping the political squabbling. :eek:
Some people never give up!</p>
<p>I personally think that the so called Democratic Presidential candidate that some view as the current “front runner” hasn’t come to grips with her own morality. But then again, that is just my humble opinion. :o</p>
<p>I think carlmom nailed it. They are continuing the campaign because Elizabeth insisted on it; she wants him to keep getting his views and message out to the American people. He’s a long way from winning the nomination so they are not factoring into their decision what her health will be in '08. And there is probably a lot of “hasn’t hit them yet” in there too. They are taking the most optimistic view (an attitude that can help in the fight) regarding her chances to live with the cancer for some years. Once you declare to yourself that you’re not going to let the cancer “win” right now, the next logical step is to agree to continue what you had been planning to do as though the cancer treatment is a minor inconvenience. Every person has to approach this kind of decision on their own terms and I think that’s what Elizabeth has done. The decision to stay in the race was her decision before it was a joint decision, IMO.</p>
<p>Mother of Two: yes, quite the typo, that one. And to think I was once an editor… And ID: I don’t dispute that either of your “options” might play a role in the Edwards’ decision-making, yet I truly believe that, in the final analysis, their choice to go forward ultimately transcends the standard political considerations. Whether one agrees with them or not, the Edwards, hand in hand, believe at a deep level that they are on a mission to make this country a better place.</p>
<p>All Presidential candidates have some degree of messianic narcissistic tendencies, but that doesn’t (or shouldn’t) trump pragmatic decision making.</p>
<p>I’ll give 'em a pass for a few months. There’s plenty of time to drop out of the race.</p>