When irresponsible rumor mongers engage in ugly gossip, especially in politics, my first instinct is to ignore it. As a rule, there’s no reason to dignify obnoxious rumors with a response. Besides, by criticizing the smear, one necessarily helps disseminate the nonsense.
There is, however, another side to this. If the Swiftboat lies teach us anything, it’s that attacks need to be shot down, quickly and thoroughly. Just as importantly, those who spread the lies need to be held accountable for their recklessness. Pretending the bogus attacks don’t exist is almost counter-productive — the whispers continue, and reasonable people start to wonder what to believe.
With that in mind, today’s edition of the politics of personal destruction features a scurrilous attack on former Sen. John Edwards. Here’s Slate’s Mickey Kaus, who apparently has given up on being taken seriously:
The National Enquirer claims to have enough of the Edwards cheating-on-cancer-stricken-wife story, including “bombshell” e-mails, to run with. … P.S.: They “met in a bar.” Sounds familiar! … You read it here first. … OK, you read it on HuffPo first. … HuffPo ‘s Sam Stein now has lots of background material. … P.P.S.: When I ask friends they split roughly 50/50 on whether, if true, this is a legitimate story. The MSM seems to be strenuously trying to not report it. Given how Edwards’ campaign has tacitly and effectively used Elizabeth and her struggle, etc., I think if true it’s scummy behavior on his part that Democratic primary voters should know about. His campaign is denying it. (emphasis in the original)
Yes, the basis for all of this is a story in the National Enquirer. Please.
And yet, some of the more vile players can’t help themselves. Some of the far-right sites are on the case, and Coulter was on MSNBC last night peddling the story, to the point that even Tucker Carlson started mocking her.
Some are even trying to compare this to Larry Craig’s scandal, which seems pretty silly, given that Craig was arrested and pleaded guilty. Edwards’ alleged “affair” is bolstered by nothing but over-active imaginations.
Now, given the article that I wrote for the Washington Monthly last year, I suspect it’s only a matter of time before I get an email asking me why Giuliani’s and McCain’s affairs are worth talking about, but this Edwards story isn’t.
It’s pretty simple, really. First, my article was primarily about the historical oddity of the “family values” party having admitted adulterers leading its presidential field. No admitted adulterer had ever run for president before, and yet the GOP field now has two. My story wasn’t an expose; it was an analysis of whether this dynamic will matter as the race unfolds.
Second, Giuliani and McCain admitted their extra-marital affairs. Coulter, Kaus, and others are relying on a supermarket tabloid; I simply used the public record. I had footage of Giuliani walking in a parade with his mistress. What does the right have on Edwards? A gossip rag?
There was about a week in 2004 in which there were whispers about John Kerry and an intern. There was nothing to the story, news outlets wisely stayed away, and the rumors quickly disappeared. One can only hope the same thing will happen with this nonsense.
Post Script: Just as an aside, if credible news outlets do decide to pursue this story, the real losers may very well be Giuliani and McCain. Right now, their adulterous backgrounds have been completely ignored, and haven’t factored into the race at all. If this smear on Edwards puts infidelity on the table, those two, in particular, have a lot to lose.