About Me
- Freeman
- Matthew Freeman is a Brooklyn based playwright with a BFA from Emerson College. His plays include THE DEATH OF KING ARTHUR, REASONS FOR MOVING, THE GREAT ESCAPE, THE AMERICANS, THE WHITE SWALLOW, AN INTERVIEW WITH THE AUTHOR, THE MOST WONDERFUL LOVE, WHEN IS A CLOCK, GLEE CLUB, THAT OLD SOFT SHOE and BRANDYWINE DISTILLERY FIRE. He served as Assistant Producer and Senior Writer for the live webcast from Times Square on New Year's Eve 2010-2012. As a freelance writer, he has contributed to Gamespy, Premiere, Complex Magazine, Maxim Online, and MTV Magazine. His plays have been published by Playscripts, Inc., New York Theatre Experience, and Samuel French.
5 comments:
*shrug*
I don't really get emotionally involved in the private lives of politicians. "Well that was dumb" is the height of my engagement with that stuff.
It honestly gives me a lot of conflicting responses. Not the least of which is how terrible this must be for his family. I think "well that was dumb" when someone falls off their bike or forgets to lock the front door when they leave the house.
I certainly think we have far too much public interest in the private lives of political figures. And I do think there's a difference between this and, say, Larry Craig and his hypocrisy, but what can I say? I like John Edwards. His public statements about this are pretty darn heartbreaking.
What's depressing is that news of the affair will carry more weight in determining his credibility as a future president than any ideas he may have about resolving global conflict.
That massive tool David Gregory (aka, "Karl Rove's favorite dancing partner") was blabbing about the "broader implications" of this affair for the Democratic Party? Um, what? Was the DNC supposed to burst into a hotel room and pull Edwards off of her? And why aren't the myriad scandals and peccadilloes affecting Republicans (Mark Foley, David "Diaper Boy" Vitter, Larry Craig, McCain dumping his handicapped first wife for Cindy) ever seen as containing "broader implications" for the GOP? For that matter (and here's where I possibly go into Conspiracy Cuckooland), why did the "suicide" of the DC madam disappear so quickly from the headlines?
All that said: pretty stupid and hubristic of Edwards to run knowing this was in his recent past, and it makes me glad he didn't get the nomination, even though I like some things about him (mostly, given that he didn't bring much to the ticket in 2004, I wasn't jazzed about him this time).
And somehow, his justifications that Elizabeth was in remission and that he "didn't love" Rielle Hunter don't actually make me feel any better, you know? Nor does Edwards' record of tsking Bill Clinton for his affair, or his opposition to gay marriage because of his "deeply held religious beliefs."
Guess my fantasy of him being AG just went out the window, though. I would have liked to see that.
I always thought that guy was a scum bag.
He’s against Civil Unions on grounds that it will erode the sanctity of marriage. This is just more proof that bigots like him, (and definitely those who agree with him) have no room to talk.
It looks to me like he's eroding it just fine without our help.
Dan F
Post a Comment