Salon’s Walter Shapiro writes:
“Presidential races are often about more than control of the levers of power and the policy direction of the nation. Prior campaigns forced the nation to confront questions about religion, divorce and career-minded first ladies. This time around, especially for the Democrats, everything is on the table: race (Barack Obama), gender (Hillary Clinton), Hispanic heritage (Bill Richardson) and now cancer (the Edwardses).”
For John and Elizabeth Edwards, cancer (and by extension, health care) is much more than an “issue” to be twisted and spun for political convenience. They are now in the clutches of something deep and extremely personal. And how could it be otherwise? As I’ve said before, serious illness can sometimes be a transforming experience. And from what we’ve seen, I suspect they’ve already crossed an important emotional bridge in their decision to open up their private struggle to the rest of us.
So what of the campaign? Their affliction may well impact every aspect of their presidential bid. We are now hearing about the profound “Elizabeth Effect” on Edwards’ campaign and how he it being perceived. Will the campaign attempt to “manage” that perception? In presidential politics–how could it be otherwise? Campaigns are often about the skillful manipulation of people’s attachments to images and stories. Even if the Edwardses are not complicit in this image-manipulation, their surrogates and others will be on their behalf.
It will be a serious challenge to see the truth of their battle with cancer through the distorted lens of a presidential race. But this truth will do more to advance health care reform in America than any speech or policy platform ever could.
