Speak to the press, kiddo, or else a time out!!!

Note: The author of post originally under this title has replaced it with the following. --Ed.

The New York Times had a cover story this past Sunday about how politicians this year -- or at least several of them -- are dragging their kids along the campaign trail.  The biggest offender: John Edwards, who was quoted forcing his seven-year-old son to speak to the press against his wishes:

“'I don’t want to do this,' Jack protested to his father, John Edwards, the Democratic presidential

candidate and former North Carolina senator.

“I don’t care whether you want to do this,” Mr. Edwards replied.

A moment later, Jack hid his face in his hands.

The meanest part was when the Times snarked that the Edwards won't be keeping the kids at home in their North Carolina "28,000-square-foot pleasure palace, with a basketball court and a room dedicated to arts-and-crafts projects."  Instead, "This fall, the children will not be there much; instead of their routine of school, sports and friends, they will travel with their parents, spending days on buses and nights at Comfort Inns."

The reason:  Edwards says that if he leaves his kids at home, he'll miss them too much: “'For long periods of time to not see my children is not good for me,' [Edwards] said, adding a beat later that it did not benefit them either."

The article was mean-spirited, and I had the response it was intended to create: one of great anger at the Edwards family.

Personally, I don't think it is fun to have your kids in the press. I know this from recent experience.  But what the Edwards family wants to do is up to them.

I hope people will select their candidate on the issues and on the way that the candidate reflects what they believe.  I am a Democrat but my favorite candidate is not John Edwards.  He seems like he has a nice wife, however. 

Have a great day.  I will be offline for a week.  Happy Labor Day. I hope we all use this as an opportunity to think about bigger issues. I know I will. 

Comments

[jen]

I couldn't agree more. I like John Edwards and don't really care how he made his money, but I think they are crazy. Go home, build up your resume, and you'll have lots of time to run for president when your kids are in college and hopefully your wife is still alive. If I had 10 more years to live I wouldn't spend it on the campaign trail.

[Taste Like Crazy]

I agree with you whole heartedly.

[Robin Wolaner]

I winced at the story about Jack too (but it would have been true of any kid on the campaign trail, and the point of the Times story was that all the candidates were employing their kids in their campaigns to some extent). But I completely --vehemently -- disagree with your view that Edwards shouldn't run -- and I guess, by implication that any non-front runner with kids at home shouldn't run. That's the point of the primary season. You don't know if Hillary will be anointed. Reasonable people see possible scenarios where Clinton and Obama don't get the nod, and the fact is that Edwards has staked out positions different on some issues, whether you like him or not.

[Elizabeth Edwards]

With all due respect, what you would choose to do is relevant only once: when you choose how to spend your remaining days. I made my choice; because of our lives it was a public choice, but the choice doesn't belong to the public, it belongs to me. And with all due respect, you have no idea what the quality or amount of the time I spend with my children is. I am reasonably confident your information is wrong because a reporter from the New York Times who was with us for less than one hour is your source. A reporter, by the way, who asked for time with our children and who, because our children are in fact children, saw good behavior and bad and who reported our wonderful advantures together as if the children and I were ships passing in the night, which is simply not true. Just in case you want to know, when we read the story to Jack (which we did while we watched one of the two baseball games we went to with him this past week), his response was actually very adult: that's not fair, he said, everyone has good days and bad days. And finally, what I said about Hillary's choices is that I had made the same choices she had made as a parent, and when I changed my choices I was happier. Just like you don't get to decide what makes me happier, I don't get to decide what makes Hillary happier.

I want to be entirely clear. You don't get to say I am a terrible mother because you think you wouldn't make my choices in my situation. You don't get to say that my children don't want to be with us when you don't know them and when, parenthetically, you know that happy children can be periodically disagreeable. You don't get to judge me because you think you know exactly what you would do if you had my disease. I want to be really clear: you don't know. And if the sun always shines on you -- and I pray it does -- you will never know.

[Jill Asher]

Rebecca.
Well, this is quite an interesting post.

I have now met Elizabeth Edwards twice - once when she met with SV Moms Blog contributors and briefly at BlogHer. She actually hugged me ... and gosh, I was honored that she remembered us....

I had a different reaction when she responded about Hilary. I actually thought she was very respectful and just pointed out that they chose different paths in life. I didn't find it a "diss"...

I still have not figured out who I will vote for, but I hope that John Edwards keeps bringing up important topics that will affect the world. I believe he is a good person and the decisions that he and Elizabeth make are between them - it is not for us to judge.

Elizabeth and John, my prayers are with you and your family. You have both made this country and world a better place....

Jill

[chris]

I shudder to think what a New York Times reporter would chose to highlight about my interactions with my children.

But, how dare you call her a bad mother. You know nothing about how she and her husband interact with their children.

And what is wrong with bringing your children on a cross country trip in a bus? I bet the children will one day cherish these memories.

[Leslie]

Elizabeth -- she does "get to say" you're a bad mother. She does "get to say" what she thinks she'd do if she in your shoes.

Maybe she doesn't know how you feel or what kind of mother you are but you don't have the right to say she can't say it.

It's her opinion. It's called free speech. Maybe you cut class the day they covered it in law school...

[Susan]

Rebecca, I am put off by your assertion that you know what constitutes "quality time" for Mrs. Edwards and her family. I am also disturbed by your ability to both criticize Mrs. Edwards' choices AND deny her the option of disagreeing with Hilary Clinton's choices.

Is Elizabeth Edwards a bad mother because she isn't sitting at home waiting to die? Or because she dares to believe that her husband can lead this country? To say that Mrs. Edwards' choices make her a "tool" stoops to the worst kind of Mommy wars rhetoric.

Mrs. Edwards is right--you don't know what it would be like to walk in her shoes, to be the candidate's wife, the cancer patient, the mother. We all make our choices and in the end, we have to live with them. But it is out of bounds to assert that ANY woman's choices are wrong simply because they are not yours.

[Stefania/CityMama]

Rebecca,

I thought Mrs. Edwards was quite clear in explaining what happened with her infamous Hillary quote (the essence of which was that compared to Hillary, she lived a "more joyful life" by staying home with the kids.) If I recall, she said the reporter misquoted her or took her quote out of context. And, knowing reporters, I believe her.

I think as mothers we can all related to choices or sacrifices we make for our family. We uprooted our comfortable lives in Portland to move back to San Francisco for a job. I just quit a job that was making me miserable after I realized I spent all summer "with" my children but has missed out on everything because I was so preoccupied, stressed-out, and angry with myself. Sometimes you get jarred into facing reality--whatever that may be for yourself or your family--and a decision has to be made.

I cannot fault her one bit for wanting to spend every moment of every day with her youngest children. Not one bit. They are small, and this is just one year out of their lives. I don't think Cate felt it was a sacrifice to sleep on two chairs pushed together next to her parents' bed after her brother/their son died. When I remember that, the fact that The Edwardses are taking the little ones on the road this year is not only NOT surprising, but seems like absolutely the only choice.

I don't know who I'm going to vote for yet, but damn if I'm not proud that John Edwards gets himself out there every day and speaks from the heart as if he were a winner. Isn't that the embodiment of American spirit right there? The example we should be setting for our children is that if you are passionate about a cause, then go for it, and don't give up.

I'm not afraid to say that I would much rather my children follow in the footsteps of the Edwards family than the Clintons. How or why people prop up that repeat-cheater and the wife who was either too weak (or too ambitious) to kick him to the curb I will never understand.

I'll say again what I wrote after meeting Elizabeth Edwards the first time and reading her book: Saving Graces is probably the kindest, more generous book I have ever read. In writing it, Elizabeth Edwards is teaching us all a thing or two about how to be gracious. About how to be a genuinely good person. We can all learn from the example she sets.

No one has the right to judge what that mother and that father feel is best for their family. After all, we only know what they have been generous enough to share with us or what reporters choose to write about. I'm not fool enough to believe that's the whole story.

[Nicole/wksocmom]

I'm sure I won't get this exactly right, but I remember Mrs. Edwards sharing her original wedding vows, which was to serve the community. I sure didn't have those vows, but I am so grateful for those who do and am thankful for the Edwards for spending their time trying to help this country. You sure don't have to vote for John, but I don't think you can say what's best for her and her family. I hope I can meet you Elizabeth next time you chat with the SV Mommybloggers.

[Glennia]

Rebecca,

I normally refrain from commenting on your posts because usually my eyes are rolling around in my head so much I can't see to type.

I've had the opportunity to hear all three of the Democratic frontrunners speak over the past 6 months. I weigh carefully what their plans are for the country, and how their actions, past and present, fit into my vision of where I think our country needs to go next. I've met John and Elizabeth (twice), heard Barack Obama give an impassioned speech to a throng of true believers, and stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Hillary Clinton at a luncheon with other Silicon Valley women. I've read the side-by-side analysis of their healthcare plans and position papers on most of the issues. After all of this research and soul-searching, I'm still torn between Obama's visionary qualities and the Edwards passion for bringing hope to the hopeless.

I have ruled out Hillary Clinton because anyone (male or female) who would countenance using nuclear weapons as bargaining chip with another nation (after previously saying she would not), is pretending to have balls where none are needed. So much for mothers having empathy for others. John Edwards is the only candidate who has spoken out in favor of reduction of nuclear stockpiles, making the world safer for all children.

Secondly, our country has been a house divided for too long, starting in the Clinton administration. This division won't end if Hillary is elected, and as long as I have a choice as to who the nominee will be, it won't be her. I believe at my core that Barack Obama, as a mixed-race person, understands that what unites us is far greater than petty politics and personal pride. But, using your reasoning in your previous post, perhaps if Hillary had complimented my outfit when I met her, I'd have a real, concrete reason to vote for her.

Although I think Hillary is an impressive person, I don't buy the campaign rhetoric that she is more qualified than the others because her husband was President. If that's the case, I should be able to solve differential equations because my husband is a physicist and we used to work together. Sadly, I can't even balance our checkbook.

As for the choices to bring children on the campaign trail, I think the Edwards teach their children a valuable lesson about service, that in order to serve you have to sacrifice the comforts of home sometimes, that you put yourself out there for public scrutiny and potential scorn, but that in the end, this country with all its problems, and in all its glory, is worth it.

We've taken our son to 22 countries around the world, shown him places and people with much more than we have, and some who live in abject poverty. He had good days and bad days. Some days he loved all the experiences the world had to offer, and some days he wanted to go home and watch TV and ride his bike. By your standards, that makes us terrible, selfish parents. I think my son is the only one with the right to judge that, just like your children will judge you when they are old enough to think about their childhood and how it was spent.

And Leslie, I don't think Elizabeth missed that day in law school when they talked about free speech. Free speech does not extend to talking out of your ass.

[Beth B.]

I also met Elizabeth Edwards when she came to meet with SVMoms. Before I was married and had kids I volunteered at political conventions and did my time hanging with politicians. Meeting Elizabeth Edwards and hearing/reading about John Edwards gave me hope. They just get it. I believe anything they touch will be better because of it.

Now, as a women I find it interesting this "negative" lash back about parents bringing their kids on the campaign trail. Yeah I get it that there are more kids are on the campaign trail - but younger candidates means younger kids on the campaign trail. Yes, the campaign trail can be tough but I completely agree with Elizabeth Edwards when she said in the article that being on the road together "will allow their children to learn things on the road they might not in a classroom, and it will fulfill their highest priority: being together." Should we as women judge families that try to stay together instead of splitting up for long periods of time?

And are we saying that the only way kids learn is sitting at school? Routine is important but life experience is also meaningful. What about families that relocate together for temporary business assignments, are they bad parents? Let's stop judging families that want to stay together.

[Rebecca Eisenberg]

Oh Dear, Glennia, your post came out as I was writing mine. And I was going to complement you on it, until I read the last paragraph, which surprised me.

Yes, free speech, especially of a political nature, does protect speech that comes from a person's ass. If not, most political speeches would lead to criminal conviction!

And, to clarify, despite my attempts at snarkiness and humor, I have attempted to be consistent in why I support one candidate over another. Although record, experience and stands on issues are of course essential, what I think is most important is putting in a Democratic candidate who will carry the General Election - otherwise, none of it matters. And at this point, despite criticisms that many people have made (most of which I disagree with, but reasonable minds may disagree), the candidate most likely to carry is Hillary Clinton. And that would be the case whether or not she liked my dress, or whether or not she showed such great love for her daughter, who will be old enough to run for office some day too.

[Rebecca Eisenberg]

I have been thinking about it and maybe the kids are having fun on the bus.

[Glennia]

Rebecca,

Do you not remember Whitewater? Do you not remember Vince Foster? The Starr Report? 8 years of a Republican witch hunt that led to impeachment proceedings that ripped this nation apart? I don't think the Republicans are all suffering from mass amnesia, and I think they are hoping against hope that Hillary gets the nomination. Hillary's biggest liability in the general election will not be that she's a woman, it will be that she's a Clinton. If she does get elected, I seriously doubt that the Republicans will give her an easier time than they gave her husband, even if she doesn't have sex with an intern. The democratic majority hangs by a thread, and there is no telling what the balance of power will be in 2008.

You are correct that reasonable minds can disagree, but what bothered me about your post was the lack of reason displayed. I am well aware that political speech is protected, and if you made a political argument or contributed to the public discourse in some way, I fail to see it.

What I do see is a vicious, insulting attack that would make Ann Coulter blush. If you had expressed yourself the way you have in the comments, I probably would not have responded in kind with a snarky comment. That was my exasperation at knowing that you are far, far more thoughtful and intelligent than this post tells.

From your comments, I understand better where you are coming from on this. I still think that this kind of over-the-top rhetoric cheapens the serious debate and issues that face our country. As a contributor to this blog, you have a real opportunity to get your opinion out to many people, and really help Hillary's campaign by telling women like yourself why she is the best choice to lead the nation. I think moms are grappling with these issues and want to know what other moms think, and why we choose or don't choose to support various candidates. If you know what Hillary did for the Children's Defense League, why not state that? Exactly how did she help millions of poor children? That's an impressive fact, if true, and something moms might want to know about.

I will thank you for making me think about this: If I had terminal illness, I'd quit my job in a heartbeat and do something that means something to me more than a paycheck or a house in Palo Alto (albeit a modest condo and not a 'pleasure palace'). I'd do something that my son would be proud of. I'd do something that he would be part of, even if I couldn't be with him every moment of every day. I'd do something to make the world better for him long after I've "sloughed off this mortal coil." But that's me. Maybe it's time you and I and all the other moms realize that we are all terminal cases, and that we have one chance, and one chance only, to make a difference in this world.

I say we hug it out and agree to disagree. If Hillary wins the nomination, I'll vote for her, but I reserve the right not to like it.

[Redsy]

It's official.. I'm lighting a candle in my Elizabeth Edwards shrine.

I LOVE YOU ELIZABETH

:)

[Mir]

Actually, Glennia (and Leslie), free speech DOES extend to talking out of your ass. Rebecca is free to do so.

Ms. Edwards only ends up looking classier in comparison, though admittedly it's probably not a very fun way to do so.

I respect your right to make yourself look righteous and judgmental, Rebecca. Excellent work.

[mel]

This post is just blatantly critical of a mother who is doing what she thinks best for her children (which is HER CHOICE to make, not yours). How you could read one article and jump to this wild conclusion that she is not spending quality time with her children is beyond me. And how you imply that these children are not getting an education just because they are not stuck in a school building for a large portion of their day also amazes and disturbs me. Elizabeth Edwards is a brave and thoughtful woman/mother, and does not deserve to have her family life scrutinized by anyone but herself and her family-- least of all someone that aims to demean and belittle her for what are her personal choices. Elizabeth Edwards, I'm standing by you--you just do what you need to do :)

[Deputy's Wife]

A personal attack (based on a reporter's account) on another candidate's parenting choices is not a good way to showcase your candidate of choice. I won't go into a long-winded defense of Ms. Edwards because it is not my place to do so, nor is it any of my business what she and her husband chooses to do on how to raise their family.

What the Edwards family chooses to do, or not to do, with their family should not play into the role of John Edward's candidacy for president. What is even more sad, are the people who will actually take this article to heart. We need to base our own opinions on Sen. Edward's political track record, not if he is missing his son's baseball games. ALL of the candidates sacrifice their personal lives to have the honor of serving our country. They AND their families should be commended, not criticized for doing what is important to them.

I guess I will go ahead and say this. You crossed the line by personally attacking Elizabeth Edwards and her family. Neither you nor I, or anyone, has the right to judge her decisions as a mother. Every family should make decisions based on what is right for them and not on what they believe people will think. I personally applaud the Edwards family for taking their children on the campaign trail. Your definition of family is different from mine, from the Edwards, from everyone else. Maybe you should take a moment to appreciate that fact of life instead of criticizing it.

[Leslie]

I wonder what really happens on the happy family bus?

If it's anything like insiders blog about, I feel really sorry for the kids. Hope they're not treated like the "little people" John encounters along the way. I wouldn't be surprised if they are being dragged along and paraded as his "props."

I also hope that, in turn for every $400 haircut John gets, the kids get a nice treat and Elizabeth gets a day at the spa or some really awesome jewelry. She deserves it for being married to such a superficial ass. Actually I'm still not convinced that dragging them ALL along isn't his selfish mandate (of course she'd never admit to that).

[Enoch Choi]

Rebecca, it's a different issue to argue who can carry the democrats to victory, than to insult those interested in trying to do so. It's not funny, as much as I enjoy snarkiness. I think SVMB need more hugs. Sure you have the right to speak, but why waste your effort on this needless tirade?

[growingupartists]

I wholly respect the Edwards family's choice to take their kids on the road with them to campaign. It sounds like a great educational opportunity, and I admire anyone who challenges convention by living their WHOLE lives as a family, and not just fragments of it together.

I also wholly respect Rebecca for clarifying her family's values. I wish Elizabeth Edwards would have listed all of the great benefits her children have received on this journey, to counter Rebecca's opinion that motherhood can't happen on the road. But truly, she has the campaign, her children, and her health to focus on.

It seems we always stop at "don't hurt my feelings by criticizing my parenting", instead of being generous enough to share why and how we've come to make our decisions. Agree or disagree, there are reasons for letting one ball drop in favor of another. Faith and skill can be taught by women who juggle what others outrightly swear they'd never touch.

I'm just sick of the whining.

[growingupartists]

Case in point, "you don't know, you will never know..." and I'm not gonna tell you. God bless.

[jm]

I take issue with your post, not because I am going to vote for Edwards or Clinton (I'm an Obama gal thus far), but because your post was not about mothering.

It was about your frustration that Edwards is running against your favored candidate, Hilary. You want more unified support for Hilary right now among the Democrats.

Ranting against Elizabeth Edwards' keeping the family together on the campaign trail and calling her a bad mother is a very (sorry, I have to use this word) ignorant way to accomplish this. Sorry to be so blunt. Putting down another parent and their choices (unless that person is breaking a law in their raising of a child) just exposes your insecurity and pettiness. Whenever someone does this to another parent, I think the person who is making the accusation has the problem. It is not our place to judge anyone else's parenting choices about breastfeeding, about travel with their kids, about if they decide to make their kids share a room or give them their own room. Let me tell you why.

Years ago, I sat in my class in graduate school, listening to my Adult Development professor lecture on the early childhood experiences that predictably shape us as adults. That is to say, an early childhood experience that has a statistical predictive effect--the same effect--on any child who lives through it. (I wish my notes were at hand, but they are not.)

She told us that there is only one. One childhood experience which has a predictive affect.

There are experiences that can increase the probability of development in a certain area, but only one that is predictive. Two children can be bullied as they are growing up...and end up processing it completely differently. Two children can grow up poor, or rich, or in daycare or not, or being breastfed or not. And each one will process that differently. One poor child will be inspired to rise above their circumstances and another will be resentful of their lot in life.

None of us, not a single one of us, not even Ms. Edwards herself will know how being on the campaign trail will affect her children. They could look back on these days with the fondest memories. They could wish they had a more "Leave It to Beaver" year of homemade cookies and stickball in the backyard.

As parents, we can only do our best to keep our families close. To model compassion for others so our children can see that. To listen. To be true to ourselves so our children will be true to themselves. To be present, whether that takes place in the backyard or in the back of a campaign tour bus. And then hope for the best. The good news? Your argument with your three year old over a bath last night may not be that big a deal in the long run. The bad news? You have a lot less control as a parent than you ever thought you might in the long run.

Oh, and that one statistically predictive experience? The one that will affect each child that goes through it in some predictable ways? Early death of a parent. Be glad that you don't have to face down the increased possibility of that one right now and have a little compassion for those that do.

[biz]

How old are you Rebecca? I hope someday you eat your words. It is one thing to JUDGE a candidates politics - but wholly another level to think you can speak to their family issues.

Shame on you - and brava, Elizabeth Edwards for standing WITH your husband and children.

eko (who just returned from dragging her children across the world.)

[Jessica Ashley (Sassafrass)]

What I love most about Elizabeth Edwards' post is her opening line: "With all due respect, what you would choose to do is relevant only once: when you choose how to spend your remaining days."

There was a hard lesson that I learned in the very scary days that my brother was in a coma following a motorcycle accident and in the days of his recovery and rehabilitation and in the many days since all of that awfulness crashed into my family's life. You must choose joy, you must appreciate parts of each day. And many times, I have found, people have a very difficult time understanding this unless they've been through a trauma that inevitably puts all the priorities in place. I'm not saying every day since my brother came out of a coma have been perfect (far from it), but I can say that if I have the choice to be surrounded by my family, I am going to take it with more investment and gratefulness than I would have ever imagined before all that happened.

This event and these realizations are not the same as Elizabeth Edwards having cancer or the decision she and John made to pack their family up for the year on the campaign trail. But what I do hear and see and get is that the choice is out of the priority to be together, to have hope, to see life from a new perspective and to do it as a family. I just do not get why this would appear to be so wrong to someone.

There are many, many families who choose to go on the road with their kids for all reasons -- to see the country, to travel the world, to learn about other cultures, to homeschool. Is the fact that these families opt for this life scary to some people who stay at home somehow?

This isn't about the race for presidency as much as it is about the choices we make in educating and caring for and raising our children. I love Elizabeth Edwards for standing by her choice and for speaking to the people who feel free to call her a bad mother. There's too much of that mother-blaming shit anyway.

Some people will take any little soapbox they can find to stand on to shout out their opinions. As for me, I will choose my candidates out of thoughtful, analytical posts, articles, speeches and interviews and skip the finger-pointing, bad-mother-calling, all caps kinds of rants. And oh, how I wish one of those candidates was Elizabeth Edwards herself.

[Jessica Ashley (Sassafrass)]

After I posted my comment, it occurred to me why this post bothers me so much. It is totally conservative rhetoric inserted into a "liberal" political post.

[Badgerbag]

Oh come on... because their kid whines a bit you're going to slam their decision to take the kids on the road? That's no better than snarking or dirty-looking at any parent whose kid is acting up or tired.

[bonggamom]

Rebecca, usually I think your posts are great -- well-thought out, witty, opinionated, and always guaranteed to resonate with readers. However, I feel that with this one, Sancti-Mommy is rearing its ugly head. Oh, so you let your kid take a sip of your Starbucks coffee? Baaaad mommy! Oh, so you work full-time and put your kids in daycare? Baaaad mommy! Oh, so you drag your kids on the campaign trail with you? Baaaad mommy!

You should read the rest of the NYT article; all of the candidates are struggling to balance family time with campaign time. Does leaving the kids at home for weeks at a time (as Barack Obama does) make one a better or worse parent than Elizabeth & John Edwards?

I think it's fair to disagree with Ms. Edward's choices, but highly unfair to call her a "terrible mother" when her choices differ from your own.

And as for the son's outburst, I know I have spoken sharply to my daughter when she has refused to look up from her book and respond politely to the nice old lady who complimented her clothes and hair. That's parenting, and moments like these happen to everyone.

[jody]

You know what I think is funny. I think it is funny that people feel that it is okay to say whatever the hell they want about people, slashing and tearing flesh along the way, and they call it free speech.

You know what it is? It isn't free speech. It is pure gossip, ignorance and a lack of manners.

Elizabeth, I am a Republican. Defending you is not part of a political battle for me.

I have 4 kids and have spent the last 3 months, along with my husband, living in a 34ft travel trailer at the beach. It was by choice, and I can tell you I have never felt more blessed and close to my children as I have this summer. I cried when they started school yesterday. I didn't want them to leave and I couldn't wait for them to come home.

I get it.

Kuddos for you for choosing to bond with your family like this. And kuddos to you for being so gracious in your comment.

Rebecca, free speech does not mean that we should stop treating each other as human beings. Your opinion sort of lost its authority when you got nasty and judgemental.

[Jeanne]

Dear Rebecca,
I was diagnosed with a terminal illness nearly 5 years ago. Who knows how much time anyone really has? I have continued working and supporting my children (single Mom) and I just don't know any other way of life. I'm sure I could have found a way to stop working and be here waiting with cookies for my kids at the end of the school day.
If I had, I wonder who's name would have appeared on my sons very first job application after the question:
Who is your hero/who do you admire most?
Because my name was there. Because I didn't give up on life.
I hope you find peace in your heart.

[stephv]

(Had to post this here too from the other entry-it fit) I thought the liberals all espoused the "lets-hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya" view of tolerance while wrapped in their 600 thread count sheet of political correctness. . Where is the tolerance here? As for me, I don't identify with either party. They all lie and to blindly endorse a candidate because they are "nice" or "warm" is way too female a response. That said, I think EE is cool and I admire her bravery in the face of such challenge, politics aside. She is choosing life.

[Rebecca Eisenberg]

One thing Elizabeth wrote, that people keep latching on to is this:

"With all due respect, what you would choose to do is relevant only once: when you choose how to spend your remaining days."

I couldn't disagree more. What we choose to do is always relevant, whether we are dying or not. Especially when we do it in the public eye.

I'm just sayin'.

[sarcastic journalist]

I'm not all the way through the comments and I'm cringing.

All I shall say is this: I would think it would be very hard to walk in Elizabeth's shoes. To be faced with cancer, a husband's dream possibly coming true and three children in your life is a lot on one's plate.

But who's to say she can't mother on the road or that a child can't enjoy that year? I know of many people who have taken their children out of school to travel the world-- getting to experience a presidential campaign is something most of us can't imagine.

And, seriously, how many of us are the perfect mom? Those of us who stay at home day in and day out, are we perfect? Are we any better than Elizabeth?

I think not....

[sarcastic journalist]

Might I add, every time you say "pleasure palace," I can't help but think of an adult "toy" store....

Just a thought.

[jm]

Rebecca--

I hear you. I hear that you want Hillary Clinton to be our next President. I hear that she is your candidate of choice. I hear that you feel Elizabeth Edwards bashed your candidate of choice. And you're mad. I hear all of that.

I read the NYT article. As someone who has taught media studies and has been interviewed by the NYT, WSJ, WaPo et al., it is no surprise to me reporters have a point of view that they have a hard time concealing. And that this often leads to their providing a not totally accurate view of the situation of which they are writing. Happens all of the time.

Of the last nine NYT articles written by Kantor, seven of them cover Obama as the subject of the article. In the article to which you refer, Kantor is comparing the choices made by Obama and Edwards. She favors Obama. This is no surprise given her recent collection of articles. Hell, I should thank her since I am an Obama supporter. But I won't, because I believe her article was colored very much by her opinion in what she selected to write about and quote, and how she ordered her piece.

For example:

Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama represent poles of the debate — Mr. Edwards has upended his children’s lives for the campaign while Mr. Obama is determined to keep his daughters rooted at home with their routines intact — while the others fall somewhere in between.

This sentence could have also read as follows had Kantor's allegiances been different:

Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama represent poles of the debate — Mr. Edwards is determined to keep his family close to him while Mr. Obama has abandoned his family to life on the road — while the others fall somewhere in between.

I don't know you personally and I imagine that you're probably a decent and thoughtful person. (We share a friend and colleague who I think highly of. If he is associated with you, that is good enough for me.) And I don't have an issue with your opinion. An opinion is an opinion...something you hold personally and you are welcome to it. I have an issue with your interpretation of the choices made by a person who has a history of service and sacrifice to her family and her life's work...serving the American people and her country. And I have an issue with your personal attack of that person based upon your interpretation. An interpretation that has been gathered from a third-party source with vague impressions and an agenda.

Why did this push buttons with me? Why do I even care? I think Elizabeth Edwards seems like a reasoned and compassionate person, but she is not a personal friend or even the wife of my preferred candidate.

I think the last paragraph set me off, that was part of it:

John and Elizabeth: Seriously, people, you look like tools. Pack it up and go home to your pleasure palace. Your children -- and the world -- will thank you for it.

Tools? Pleasure palace? That seemed malicious and uncalled for. But, I'm originally from New York. I've heard worse in traffic in downtown Manhattan on a Friday afternoon. So that wasn't all of it.

I'm tired of mothers bashing other mothers for their choices without knowing the whole story or based upon their own insecurities and agendas. I'm tired of the personal lives of candidates becoming fodder for political debate when how they do their damn job is all we should care about. (When was the last time a Board of Directors fired a working mom CFO because she wasn't spending enough time with her kids?) And I'm way tired of the seeming inability of the media to cover any subject with depth and a balanced point of view, as well as our eagerness as the American Public to lap up all of the drama without asking any questions about the often complex and nuanced issues. Your post was the perfect storm of these issues.

Personally, I can totally picture an adult asking my daughter a question someday, her sulky refusal to answer because she is having an off day, and my having to say to her all of the things that John Edwards said. Because I was that kid and my mother said them to me. It happens. I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that the Edwards' are shilling their kids for politics. Very few kids that age would be comfortable sharing their parents with crowds. My kid hates sharing me with anyone. So, I should stay at home and not participate in the social service projects that I do or the work that I do or teach or have a social life? If so, what is that teaching her?

Anyone called into public service has tough choices about how to balance work and family. I have friends who are missionaries, CEO's, journalists, medical researchers, doctors, environmentalists, social workers...all who have to make sacrifices to advance their work. My husband is a pastor's kid who had to share both of his parents with an entire community 24/7. Was his life under a magnifying glass in a small town normal when compared to a Leave It to Beaver ideal? Hardly. But no one is prouder of the work that his parents have accomplished over the years on behalf of others.

I'm glad that there are those in politics who will work hard, like the Edwards, Obama's, Clinton's, Kennedy's, Wellstone's et al., to balance work and family to serve others. The alternatives if they all stayed home are terrible to contemplate.

[jm]

One more thing (isn't there always one more thing?)

I've been thinking about your rebuttal in the comments above and your seemingly honest confusion at the emotion that your post stirred up in the first place. I think if you re-read your post carefully, you will see what we saw. That you angrily attacked the spouse of someone in a very public way about their personal life and parenting choices based upon your desperation to see a specific candidate in political office. And that is not okay. It's not okay for Republicans to do it to Democrats. It's not okay for Democrats to do it to Republicans. It's not okay for Democrats to do it to Democrats.

It's not okay. It's not about free speech. Ann Coulter throws lines about free speech about quite freely and what she is doing is not about free speech. It's about cheapening political discourse.

You're angry about the comments that Elizabeth Edwards made comparing her husband and Hillary Clinton, and what you believe it implied. That's totally fine. Stick up for your candidate. Talk her up. We all need to speak out about our candidates and why we are supporting them.

But trying to create a case for your candidate by wrapping it in a defense for how you believe someone else's children should be raised? That's not fine.

[Mom101]

This post is disconcerting for any number of reasons, most of them already expressed eloquently below. But one thing no one has mentioned is that this is not some Hollywood star dragging his kid on a shoot. Or even me - a mom who often travels for work and has indeed taken my daughter along, even if it meant I could only see her an hour each morning. (Tool that I am.)

This is a family who, I believe, genuinely feels compelled to serve.

I've never felt a higher calling to service to this degree and I can't quite put myself in the Edwards' shoes. But thank God there are people like this in our country--overall decent people still willing to run for office to try to effect positive change, in spite of the the vitriol, the intense scrutiny, the brutal personal attacks they have to endure to get there.

[Kim]

Wow. I read the NY times article on Sunday too, but am just now reading this post. I've really missed out! A lot has been said, so I'll try to just make one point:

What bothers me is that I'm getting the sense that Rebecca has chosen to label Ms. Edwards as a bad mom becuase of a choice she made for personal fulfillment. It's almost like a SAHM criticizing another mom who works becuase she wants to, not becuase she "needs to," which is ironic since Rebecca has made it clear that she works.

I just don't see why we have to put our dreams on hold just becuase we have children. And won't we be better examples to our children by pursuing our dreams, especially if we were in our dying days and had the opportunity to influence a nation?

To Ms. Edwards, you go girl. Thank you for your inspiration.

[Chookooloonks]

I've never met Elizabeth Edwards, and admittedly know very little about the John Edwards campaign, but I have to say, after merely reading this diatribe, and Elizabeth's response in the comments?

Forget John: ELIZABETH EDWARDS for President.

[amy]

I feel really horrible that Elizabeth Edwards had to read such harsh and truly unfair criticism of her parenting by another mother no less. Have some compassion for this amazing woman who is doing her very best under the most difficult of circumstances. Running for president is not something you do when you have cancer and young children unless you feel "called" to serve. These are wealthy people (who created their own riches by the way with their own brains and hard work)who could certainly stay home, but they are choosing to do something for their country which is noble and not base as some seem to feel. You may disagree with their politics, but please do not put down their parenting especially when we do not know. I think it is incredible to me that a person would read an article from a journalist who has spent ONE FREAKING HOUR with this family, and then make a harsh and cruel judgment. I may not be certain about my vote, but I am certain that Elizabeth Edwards is the bravest human being in the public eye right now.

[Irene]

How nice that you are such a wonderful mom that you can say the choices that other mothers make are wrong. How nice that you have nothing much more to do then sit online all day and night posting about how bad you think others are. Maybe someone should look into the type of mother you are?
It is obvious you do not like the Edwards Family........so move on. So nice that now that the News is showing you for what you really are you changed your mind.
So you do not like the Edwards......in your own words........pack up and move on lady, we will all thank you for it.

[Tane]

"Ok, Ok. People, you tell me not to attack Elizabeth Edwards, who is a 'public figure', and then you attack ME personally." - Rebecca

Criticism whether justified or not does not create warm and fuzzy feelings, Rebecca. I am not a mother or married. I am not an avid reader of any of your blog postings or this site nor am I a "full" supporter of John Edwards, so my opinion is just that MY OPINION.

I happened to be watching Good Morning America when their segment regarding Elizabeth's response to your post appeared. I quickly logged on to see what all the fuss was about. I read your post and each of the corresponding comments. I have to agree [for the most part] with the comments shared by both jim and Glennia.

Rebecca, you are entitled to your opinion just as Elizabeth is entitled to make decisions SHE feels serves in the best interest of HER family without having to suffer a "backlash".

As a "public figure" in the blogosphere, you [Rebecca] should be more responsible in your postings [so that there wouldn't be a need to write an "epilogue" to your original posting] or you open yourself to criticism, similar to the one you offered to the Edwards' choice of what can be viewed as fostering togetherness as a family.

[Jana]

Well I am glad you changed your mind. I think that a mother who knows she won't see her kids grow up is going to be likely to make the same choices that Elizabeth Edwards made. No child is going to be happy all the time, but I think being together as a family is most important for this family, who has had so much tragedy.

Moreover, do you really know anything about John Edwards work before he became a senator. Are you aware that his cases (because he made a bit of money on his first one) were far from "ambulance chasing". He didn't need to take lawsuits just to take them.

Read about how he won a verdict for a child who was literally evicerated when her intestines were pulled out of her body by a swimming pool drain with a faultily made cover. And about how this suit changed standards for those covers and protected gooodness knows how many other children from a horrific accident.

Or how another lawsuit got trucking companies to stop rewarding truckers for speeding through the country, when he obatained a judgment for a child orphaned by such callous corporate irresponisbility.

[Karen]

I think that personal attacks on presidential candidates and their families are wrong. To me they are as obnoxious as those computerized phone calls I receive during dinner time asking me to vote for a particular candidate. Each time I receive one, it makes me resolve NOT to vote for that candidate.

So Rebecca, please inform me of who your choice is for President...I want to make sure to stike him or her off the list of potential candidates to win my vote.

[jm]

Now that I think about it some more, Chelsea seemed to turn out okay even though her parents dragged her around on the campaign trail quite a bit when she was, what, 10? 11? And around Arkansas before that. Makes you think, doesn't it?

[dianeri]

Bravo! Rebecca for your open mindedness to hearing other people's opinions on this page and adjusting yours slightly. I really disliked your original posting, but respect your subsequent actions.

[Rachel Armstrong]

Rebecca,

You sound like a real piece of work. Who the heck are you to tell someone else how to parent their children, whether they are a politician or not? I would much rather be with my mom and dad than at home with a nanny. Furthermore, every other candidate is involving their kids in the campaign. Just because your pal Hillary is not does not give me a warm or fuzzy feeling.

Gosh, I hope when I become a Mom I do not become a scathing hag who has to disparage others and blog about their shortcomings because I am a lawyer in some start up somewhere in San Francisco. Personally, I think you need to get a life and stop throwing rocks at other people. You are only opening yourself up to get them tossed back at you. Oh, and for the record, I haven't decided who to vote for, but your comments push me closer to Mr. Edwards- I like his wife for calling you out like the uncouth individual you obviously are! You don't get to make decisions for others Rebecca, you control freak!

[Tech Mama]

I also commented on another post that people seem to be missing an important point: Why does the media so quickly jump on controversial issues (by blowing it up and throwing in the word "mommy wars") without showing other opinions? Sharing opinions is just that. Has the media covered moms in support of families staying together on the road? Or is that not news worthy? Can moms have a good debate on issues without the media or public viewing it as mommy wars?

[stephv]

They're viewed as "mommy wars" because women spend so much of our time dissecting and judging each other. How many times do you hear a guy comment on his coworkers parenting style, whether or not they feed their kids fast food or if they have nannies? Estrogen fueled honey for the bees of the media. (Yes, men judge and dissect too, however women are immeasurably worse.)Dirty little secret no self respecting female will admit to as she disses her kids playmate's mom over a latte.