Should the Media should butt out of pols' sex lives?

hold your cards...we have a winner...but I think it may go slightly past that....we are so inunndated with this kind of thing in our culture that even people like me and I would guess a great many on these threads who don't feed on this gossipy bullshit still know about it in great detail just from being awake......

True, Bear. F'rinstance, I know all about the Ryan story, at least the juicy stuff...

Fishing, how do you know they dug into his sex life? They may of thought that sort of thing wasn't something that is connected with Bush. One reason for that thinking might be that Bush is considered such a family man, but people forget that he wasn't always. And another reason might be that he is simply not cute. Or those people who dig for dirt for politicians may have thought since we complained so much about republican's digging for dirt in Clinton's personal life; then we shouldn't do the same.

But; you don't really know if anyone has dug for dirt on Bush's former private life back in his bad old days, do you?

I really could care or less about Bush's former sexual life. But if you are playing a game you got to play to win or you may as well stay home with you integrity intact. Maybe someday the game will be cleaner and nobler but right now it's not.

It's pretty simple. I pay attention.

http://www.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=159

Well, that's part of the story. The other part is that we, as a nation, continue to insist that people are free to practice all manner of consensual sexual acts in private, yet we would never elect anyone who openly proclaimed to have performed the kinds of sexual acts (attending "sex clubs," etc.) that were alleged in the Ryan divorce papers. The hypocrisy of the politicians is, in this case, matched only by the hypocrisy of the voters.

Well, amen to Joe.

He sure killed me with all his silly remarks.

Well, fishin, once again I stand corrected.

So there was something on Bush about a sexual incident. About an abortion no less. Do you know if flint was proved wrong? Wonder why CNN scrubbed it? (not expecting an answer on the last question.)

In any event, I can see why the dems would not use that issue to attack bush about.

I am personally against abortion. But I think using abortion crosses a line that I would not want my side to cross.

I don't see why people are making such a big deal about a guy wanting to have public sex with his wife. If he raped in public (or private) or if he even just harassed her about it all the time; I could see the big deal. But just asking, or for that matter even if she said yes, what's the big deal? The only way it is a big deal is if that guy acted real "morally upright" and was not.

I guess I was wrong earlier. If people brought up embarrassing incidents of Bush's he can always say that was before he was "born again."

It would've been a nothing deal if she had said "yes" -- but the articles I read indicated that she was horrified and physically sickened at the idea, and he tried it again after that was her reaction the first time.

That makes me not like him much, BUT, I still don't think that in and of itself is valid "news."

Barack Obama had a comfortable lead before any of this happened; I think the whole thing is pretty much moot, in terms of this particular race. Which makes it all the more unfortunate, IMO.

Well, here's what Jack Ryan said about "The Defense of Marriage"

The breakdown of the family over the past 35 years is one of the root causes of some of our society's most intractable social problems-criminal activity, illegitimacy, and the cyclical nature of poverty. As an elected leader, my interest will be in promoting laws and educating people about the fundamental importance of the traditional family unit as the nucleus of our society. In the wake of the recent Massachusetts State Supreme Court ruling that has spawned similar lawsuits in other states, it seems likely that defending traditional marriage and codifying that defense will be required at the federal level. As such, as a United States Senator, I would support legislation such as Senator Bill Frist's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), provided the language remains clear in the defining of traditional marriage and protecting the traditional family unit.

I'm not sure if this makes Ryan a "holier-than-thou" type, although I guess it makes him out to be "holier-than-homos." As someone who is defending "traditional marriages," I think it's relevant to compare his public stance with his private actions. In this particular case, it's clear that Ryan's notion of what it means to be "traditional" with his own wife is sharply at odds with his public pronouncements on the subject.

Unless, of course, "traditional marriages" traditionally involve periodic visits to sex clubs.

Has anyone seen Kerry's divorce papers, from his first wife?

Those records were sealed. If anyone had seen them, it would have been a result of someone's illegal act to release them.

Sounds to me, like the Chicago Tribune has gone "the way of all flesh".

Sensationalism and voyeurism is the meat that journalism feasts on. It sells papers.

Ryan's court papers were legally unsealed--the judge determined that there was not sufficient reason for them to remained sealed. Lighten up Chiyah . . .

Yes.

joefromchicago,

I guess that answers that about Kerry. It was a simple no fault divorce and the only thing sealed is financial records and things of that nature.

Since it does appear that the ryan guy did come on as a family man; his romps with wanting public sex does make him out to be a hypocrite. Which makes it different when it comes to using past sexual lives for political purposes.

That's a bit of a double edged sword there isn't it? It's ok to go after sealed records since they prove he's a hypocrite but no one would have known he was a hypocrite if they hadn't gotten the records unsealed to begin with.

(How does wanting to have public sex conflict with being a "family man"? He wanted the public sex with his wife didn't he??? )

I'd want to have public sex with Jeri Ryan as well.

.

I would imagine a lot of men would who like sort of thing in public.

fishin, your right, we would not have known it if we hadn't gone after it. (I seem to be going back and forth like a yo-yo)

I don't think public sex clubs is a family oriented form of entertainment. Neither is going to x rated movies even if your going with your spouse. Now if you and your spouse were in a private setting somewhere alone (that is not redundant) and you watched x rated movies or something along that nature then that is different. It is groups or a public thing that crosses the line between what is morally respectable or what is not. Kinda along the lines of an orgy like thing; I can't explain it well without digging myself in deeper. But I think you can figure it out.

Again, hate to repetitive, but; it is only a big deal if he went around acting all morally self righteous then turns around and engages in questionable activities himself. Which he did. I know we found out in a sleezy way, nevertheless...