Re: How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'
real life wrote:BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'?
oh I don't know
maybe because he didn't lie to America about it?
That seems to cause you no concern at all for the numerous lies that have issued from the WH. One has to wonder why, one has to wonder just what strange set of rules guides your moral compass.
No one has died because of Edward's lie.
Re: How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'
JTT wrote:real life wrote:BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'?
oh I don't know
maybe because he didn't lie to America about it?
That seems to cause you no concern at all for the numerous lies that have issued from the WH. One has to wonder why, one has to wonder just what strange set of rules guides your moral compass.
No one has died because of Edward's lie.
So as long as nobody dies its OK to lie, is that what your saying?
Re: How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'
mysteryman wrote:JTT wrote:real life wrote:BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'?
oh I don't know
maybe because he didn't lie to America about it?
That seems to cause you no concern at all for the numerous lies that have issued from the WH. One has to wonder why, one has to wonder just what strange set of rules guides your moral compass.
No one has died because of Edward's lie.
So as long as nobody dies its OK to lie, is that what your saying?
A flashback of the True Believers' Clinton/Lewenski apologist screed...
Re: How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'
Lash wrote:mysteryman wrote:JTT wrote:real life wrote:BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'?
oh I don't know
maybe because he didn't lie to America about it?
That seems to cause you no concern at all for the numerous lies that have issued from the WH. One has to wonder why, one has to wonder just what strange set of rules guides your moral compass.
No one has died because of Edward's lie.
So as long as nobody dies its OK to lie, is that what your saying?
A flashback of the True Believers' Clinton/Lewenski apologist screed...
That wasnt an answer.
Re: How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'
You never asked a question, MM.
Re: How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'
JTT wrote:You never asked a question, MM.
Actually, I did.
You said...
Quote:That seems to cause you no concern at all for the numerous lies that have issued from the WH. One has to wonder why, one has to wonder just what strange set of rules guides your moral compass.
No one has died because of Edward's lie.
And my response was to ask you this...
Quote:So as long as nobody dies its OK to lie, is that what your saying?
You never answered that question.
Re: How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'
JTT wrote:real life wrote:BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'?
oh I don't know
maybe because he didn't lie to America about it?
That seems to cause you no concern at all for the numerous lies that have issued from the WH. One has to wonder why, one has to wonder just what strange set of rules guides your moral compass.
No one has died because of Edward's lie.
Nice bait and switch.
BBBs question that I answered was comparing McCains personal behavior with Edwards personal behavior.
BBB didnt allege that anyone died due to an affair that John McCain had.
Are you?
Should we stoop to such an abysmal level about the the individual's personal weakness?
Is it proper?
How about degrading nonsensical politics?
I mean exposing hypocratical criminals?
The last thing we need is a sexual purity test for our politicians,
but we desperately need
political leaders whose word we can trust.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/sunday-roundup_b_117964.html
V the global citizens know your silly democracy.
Likewise we need politicians who will tell us what we need to hear, not what we want to hear. And we need to have a fair share of of the citizenry who would rather have their leaders speak truth than fiction, and who will thus reward truth telling at the polls. America has neither.....which is a big part of why we are in such steep decline as a nation.
Elizabeth Edwards Drank Her Husband's Kool-Aid
Elizabeth Edwards Drank Her Husband's Kool-Aid And Became His "Ambition Enabler"
by Bonnie Fuller
Posted August 9, 2008
It's easy to understand why John Edwards first felt he was entitled to cheat on his wife and family, and then second, thought he could keep it secret from the American public. He is a self-admitted "narcissist", and narcissists believe they are entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it. As psychologist Cooper Lawrence told me, "they always think some other poor schnook will get caught, not them."
The bigger question is "why did Elizabeth Edwards drink her husband's Kool-Aid? How could she have possibly believed that her husbands affair would remain a private matter when he was running for President of the United States? Hello, the National Enquirer had already broken the story last fall. Why in fact, did she knowingly encourage her spouse to even enter the campaign when she had been fully informed about the affair for over a year? And she helped support and propagate John Edwards' image as a devoted husband and family man.
She was so supportive that she even remained committed to his campaign after the discovery of her metastasized breast cancer. Despite the fact that she was facing a terminal illness, she was willing to take flack for her belief that John Edwards' presidential campaign was so important that not even her own health should stand in the way of its proceeding.
Elizabeth Edwards is now protesting in her own public statement that the public appetite to 'know" is the real culprit in the situation. The 'public' is being voyeuristic in her view and is getting in the way of her family's right to privacy.
Well, she may not want to admit it but Elizabeth is as guilty as her husband at this point, in inviting the public into her family's personal life. Once Bill Clinton's antics in the White House with Monica Lewinsky became Page One headlines for months, no presidential candidate or their family could ever realistically kid themselves, that marital fidelity would not be an issue in political life. If she had any questions about that last spring, she only had to make a call to Silda Spitzer.
No, Elizabeth Edwards had to be in some extraordinary form of denial and that's why she became her husband's "ambition enabler", when she supported his recent run for the presidency. My belief is that after almost thirty years of marriage she too had become so invested in his political ambitions, his cause, that she couldn't give up either, even after he cheated and she knew there was a chance his affair could be reported in the mainstream press.
"His success, now defined her success, so she was willing to go along with the fraud that that their marriage was fine," believes psychologist Victoria Zdrok, currently working on a book titled," Dr. Z on Straying."
Think about it. The Edwards met in law school; She still wears the $11 wedding ring he gave her. He became a successful trial lawyer and then a member of the Senate. She pursued a law career too but ultimately gave it up to support his career and take care of their family. As a couple they experienced the worst of tragedies, the death of their 16 year-old son, and then they made the decision to have two more children. It's easy to understand why Elizabeth Edwards would feel that her marriage was worth salvaging after her spouses' episode of infidelity. It's the presidential campaign that is far harder to understand.
That's why I believe that it's because Elizabeth had made such an enormous personal commitment to her role as her husband's helpmate and as a potential first lady and had made so many sacrifices over the years in the interests of realizing those goals, that she was willing to risk public exposure.
Her terminal illness may actually have also played a role in her decision to publicly stand by her man and his presidential ambitions, according to Zdrok. "When we seek death, we often seek to achieve a symbolic immortality. And becoming a presidential wife could have been that for her."
In any case, Elizabeth Edwards was a victim when her husband cheated. She did nothing to deserve that and as a wife she had every right and many reasons to forgive the jerk. But the decision to stand behind him and publicly broadcast his staunch family values image was her own doing. As courageous and admirable as she has been in dealing with her cancer, she is now the latest member of the Publicly Humiliated Wives Club, and she has no right to complain about the public's interest in knowing exactly what has happened. She helped get herself in this situation.
John McCain didn't lie? Who says so? Don't ask him any dates.
While on a trip as a Navy liaison with the Senate, McCain spied Hensley (now Mrs. Cindy McCain) at the Honolulu reception. In a recent television interview with Jay Leno on the "Tonight Show," Cindy McCain joked about how the Navy captain had pursued her. "He kind of chased me around . . . the hors d'oeuvre table," she said. "I was trying to get something to eat and I thought, 'This guy's kind of weird.' I was kind of trying to get away from him."John McCain was 42; she was 24. And he was very much married at the time, mid-April 1979.
*
"I spent as much time with Cindy in Washington and Arizona as our jobs would allow," McCain wrote. "I was separated from Carol, but our divorce would not become final until February of 1980." An examination of court documents tells a different story. McCain did not sue his wife for divorce until Feb. 19, 1980, and he wrote in his court petition that he and his wife had "cohabited" until Jan. 7 of that year -- or for the first nine months of his relationship with Hensley.
*
Although McCain suggested in his autobiography that months passed between his divorce and remarriage, the divorce was granted April 2, 1980, and he wed Hensley in a private ceremony five weeks later. McCain obtained an Arizona marriage license on March 6, 1980, while still legally married to his first wife.
So, John was screwing Cindy for almost a year in both Washington and Arizona while still married.
You should know that Ronald and Nancy Reagan helped Carol find a place to live after the zoom-zoom divorce. Reagan hardly ever said a word to McCain afterwards, the Reagan's thought Carol had been treated very shabbily and they should know from treating people shabbily. Just read the story of Ronnie dumping his first wife for lessons.
*
Joe(Oh yeah, straightshooter, that ol' maverick is, he is)Nation
but, that happened so LONG ago, SURELY it isn't relevant NOW?!?
[size=7](snark, snark)[/size]
snood wrote:but, that happened so LONG ago, SURELY it isn't relevant NOW?!?
[size=7](snark, snark)[/size]
Cindy wasn't John's employee.
Both Clinton's and Edwards' behavior toward their employees ( Monica and Rielle) quite possibly meet the definition of sexual harrassment.
Not that liberals care about such things.
real life wrote:
Cindy wasn't John's employee.
Both Clinton's and Edwards' behavior toward their employees ( Monica and Rielle) quite possibly meet the definition of sexual harrassment.
Not that liberals care about such things.
Can you say "Republican Florida senator who is so unimportant in the scene of things that I forgot his name and senate interns"?
Don't even get this started, you doofus.
Like I said, not that liberals care about such things.
Quote:Cindy wasn't John's employee.
Both Clinton's and Edwards' behavior toward their employees ( Monica and Rielle) quite possibly meet the definition of sexual harrassment.
Not that liberals care about such things.
Of course they meet the definition of sexual harassment, call the DA on John Edwards, will yah? But we were talking about fccking somebody other than your wife in the case of John McCain and then lying about it as John McCain did and continues to do, the lying part, not the fccking part so far as we know and yet, except for that Great Communicator and Fccker, Ronald Reagan, who dispised John McCain for what he did, the right and the Main Stream Media gives the Great Skirtchaser McCain a pass.
Joe(How come that is, boss?)Nation
