I don't see that quip in that link? It seems to think that Mr. Elliot is the most dangerous of rakes, and I'm inclined to agree.

But there's an unexamined assumption in that piece that good characters should be rewarded and bad characters punished by the author. That's exactly the sort of thing that Austen hated. She wanted things to be things like real life, where adultery and cheating and lying and defying the law can bring you hundreds of millions of loyal followers and a second presidency.

Why was Henry not punished like Julia was? Because he owned land and she didn't. That's the beginning and end of it. It's unfair because society is unfair.

And it's not just men who get away with things. Lucy Steele lies and schemes and manipulates her way all the way through Sense and Sensibility, and is rewarded by being not only an heiress of a great fortune, but a favored daughter-in-law. The difference between Lucy and Julia aren't their morals -- Lucy is far less moral than Julia. She's just a lot smarter and more disciplined.