Read about it here. Two comments by Edwards stand out as particularly loathsome:
In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 44-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.... [emphasis added]
Edwards made a point of telling Woodruff that his wife's cancer was in remission when he began the affair with Hunter. Elizabeth Edwards has since been diagnosed with an incurable form of the disease.
Am I the only one that is bewildered by these statements? Why tell the world that you did not love a woman with whom you had an affair? Why inflict more public shame on your former mistress by announcing through the media that you in fact used her as a means to facilitate your orgasms and nothing more?
And what of his second statement, that he had this loveless recreational sexfest when his wife had regained her health? What sort of mind thinks that this caveat--his wife's recovery--somehow diminishes the wickedness of his act? If anything, it increases it. For if we juxtapose Edwards' two assertions, he is in fact claiming that he engaged in loveless sex during a juncture in time when his beloved wife was no longer burdened by an illness. So, rather than celebrating his wife's recovery by renewing their intimacy, he elected to objectify another woman, who was under his employ, for the primary purpose of facilitating his own pleasure.