This is sad news, if true. My heart goes out to the Edwards family.
May the ultimate news be hopeful.
Posted by hell's kitchen at March 22, 2007 09:24 AMBest wishes to the Edwards family.
Just when I had decided I could see him as President...doh!
Posted by Roy Batty at March 22, 2007 09:26 AMHaving been through this once (the initial) with my wife, and statistally anticipate a recurrance - I hope I handle it with this same grace and dignity.
If I were callous and cynical - what a great way to let Clinton and Obama squabble themselves out of the public conciousness 'ore the next ten months.
Posted by Thomas Ware at March 22, 2007 09:31 AMJohn & Elizabeth just announced that the campaign will NOT be suspended!
As I watched CNN with the 2 of them, gutsy as Hell as they publically faced down this horrific news all I could think of was, Hey Ann Coulter, you called John Edwards a f*****t because you wanted to imply that he was a wuss; and guess what, before the cameras is a man and his wife who have more real strength and integrity than most of us have ever seen or will see in our politicians. GO EDWARDS!
Dewey defeats Truman?
Posted by snark at March 22, 2007 09:47 AMI just read two stories that both said the campaign would continue, so I was a bit confused by the lead.
Unfortunately, one of the stories in the Los Angeles Times had this:
John Edwards said a biopsy of her rib had showed that the cancer had returned.
The bone is one of the most common places where breast cancer spreads, and once it does so it is not considered curable.
But how long women survive depends on how widespread the cancer is in the bone, and many can survive for years. The longer it takes for cancer to spread after the initial tumor, the better the prognosis. She was diagnosed in 2004.
Gutsy indeed! I can't imagine how this hits John Edwards.
Posted by DeminNewJ at March 22, 2007 09:57 AMCancer in the bones. I hope things are as hopeful as they made it out to be. Everything I've heard about bone cancer is that it's excruciatingly painful. I wonder how long someone can live with it. She's a class act and I think they're an amazing couple.
Posted by CG at March 22, 2007 10:00 AMWoo-hoo! Edwards in 08!
I do hope she doesn't have multiple myeloma...insidious stuff...
Posted by Roy Batty at March 22, 2007 10:14 AMBad decision. Edwards belongs with his wife.
Posted by Don Bacon at March 22, 2007 10:25 AMLauri should note the dignity, graciousness and honesty of Elizabeth Edwards. She could learn alot.
Posted by Judith at March 22, 2007 10:33 AMThat should read Laura.
Posted by Judith at March 22, 2007 10:35 AMDon - Edwards is with his wife. I have no doubt she encouraged him to continue with his run.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 22, 2007 11:01 AMEdwards says his wife's cancer has returned, but for some reason he is continuing
You disapprove of them continuing? that's what "some reason" says to me... I think Elizabeth is quite capable of making this decision and that John is certainly smart enough to figure out if he should or should not continue...
He's not exploiting the cancer and he's not ignoring his wife.
Posted by OldCoastie at March 22, 2007 11:36 AMWhen my mother got cancer in the 70s, she never stopped planning ahead or living her life each day. She believed that keep the cancer at bay - and it did, she lived another seventeen years and did not die from the cancer. This is exactly what the Edwards' should do, continue to live, not go home and wait to die.
Posted by ann at March 22, 2007 11:38 AMRight on, Ann.
Same thing with my husband, although he did not live as long.
These days metastatic cancer is often a chronic disease of unknown length.
You can't put your life on indefinite hold to see what a chronic disease will do.
You have to go on. Life does.
The Edwards are going on.
Let us wish them the best and go with them.
Norah "I channel Republicans" O’Donnell got her report wrong? What a surprise.
Posted by anon at March 22, 2007 12:11 PMSteve,
All of MSM got played by Politico’s Ben Smith who appears to have made up the story.
Posted by Christopher at March 22, 2007 01:01 PMlife goes on, cancer or no / look at Lance Armstrong / i had cancer a few years ago and restored a vintage 1965 Dodge Dart at the same time so we would both keep on chugging / i say cheers for the Edwards family
Posted by Katherine Hunter at March 22, 2007 02:06 PMThe Edwards's aren't "going on", they are moving into one of the most physically and mentally stressful situations that one can imagine. Is incredible stress helpful in resisting cancer?
Posted by Don Bacon at March 22, 2007 02:08 PMDon, Here's what Jane Hamsher (who has dealt with breast cancer herself) says to Jay Carney who echoed your sentiments:
...Elizabeth Edwards is no longer entitled to free will, self determination, and certainly not capable of making decisions about her own life. Nor is she entitled to respect for her choices which we think are honorable but are really just selfish. No, she and her husband owe it to white males everywhere to do the brave thing. Edwards must forthwith kneel by her bedside, teardrops falling on her porcelain hand as he scribbles love sonnets with parchment and quill. Because let's face it, she's got one foot in the grave. Who the fuck does he think she is, Elizabeth Barrett Browning? What patronizing drivel. How thoroughly offensive.
And Elizabeth Edwards commented on an earlier post at FDL:
From the comments: Thank you, Jane. And all the commenters here. You all inspire us. Now, back to work. — Elizabeth Edwards
Can you not respect her choice to keep "going on?"
Posted by iamcoyote at March 22, 2007 02:29 PMDon, if my family is to go by, hell, yes. Some people react well to stress--it works almost like a tonic. If you condemn them to "suffer nobly" and play the fainting violet they will simply die--or kick your butt into next week for trying.
The Edwards know what is best for them.
having a terminal illness is not about the illness or how you want to live it's about how you want to die
i am with Jane Hamsher / yes
Posted by Katherine at March 22, 2007 03:35 PMFrom Oregon Science & Health Univ. regarding the optimism of the Edwardses.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/03/_the_news_that_cancer.html
Posted by Wordsmith at March 22, 2007 03:43 PMSorry - here's the link in an easier 'format' OSHU
Googling "stress cancer" I see that:
1. Nobody has found a direct link between stress and cancer.
2. There is anecdotal testimony linking stress and cancer.
3. Stress suppresses the immune system and thereby promotes disease.
"Terminal illness"?? Did I miss something?
Certainly Elizabeth Edwards is entitled to make decisions about her own life. So am I, so are you, so is everyone. But that doesn't mean that those decisions are correct just because they are self-made. Certainly her decision was influenced by her husband's ambition. I'm afraid that she will be forced to "suffer nobly" for her husband's ambition because of the stress/disease connection, and I think that that's wrong. It's just my opinion, lightly held. I'd definitely feel differently if she were restoring a '65 Dodge Dart, which can hardly be compared to a presidential campaign full of movement, money-raising, speaking, decision-making, verbal attacks and rubber chicken, all stressful.
I wish them both well. I'd feel better about her chances if they were watching "Lucy" reruns and living a less hectic existence instead of flying around the country trying to say and do the right things but, as you say, that's their business, even if they're wrong.
Posted by Don Bacon at March 22, 2007 06:00 PMObviously the little leady isn't thinkin' straight eh Don?
Just wants to please her ambitious man?
What a load of drivel.
Posted by snark at March 22, 2007 07:22 PMsnark,
You're becoming more literate beyond your "whatever". Keep working on it. For your next lesson push the envelope beyond "drivel" and include some un-troll-like facts and become part of the Reality-Based Community.
I love it. John and Elizabeth are two very intelligent, educated and sensible people. They jointly made a decision about their future, and someone is saying they are wrong in that decision. Jeez.
Posted by Judith at March 22, 2007 10:30 PM"Drivel" is understood by many of us to be an attempt to turn a vibrant, intelligent, professional woman with a mind of her own into a sick little girl that would "suffer nobly" for her "husband's ambition" if she continued living the life she chose instead of fading away to live out her days in a swoon of despair. "Drivel" is saying that you know what's best for someone else and they're stupid for not listening to you. "Drivel" is archaic notions of women's roles in society, and their inherent capabilities based on their gender. This isn't the first time, Don, that you've made judgements about women in politics based on old-fashioned gender stereotypes; this is just the most heinous example.
There, is that a better expansion of the meaning of drivel?
Posted by iamcoyote at March 23, 2007 06:01 AMwe are each unique and base our life and death choices on being true to ourselves / John and Elizabeth are being true to themselves and honest with others / as for me restoring an old car was indeed a big deal since i would never be in a position to run for president (i am too old) so i think Don Bacon is a bit too self righteous in his criticism of the Edwards decision and flippant about mine.
Posted by Katherine Hunter at March 23, 2007 06:45 AM
WillSuspend Campaign