Lovely Liberals strangely silent about Lovely Edwards upcoming admission....

[FarmallMTA]

... that he's the father of the same sweet little girl he's been denying and treating like Breach of Rule 10 removed. on the bottom of his shoes for many months.

Figures he's such a lying, scheming, worthless scumbag liberal still being enabled and covered up for lying scheming worthless scumbag liberals just like him. Democrats really love "the people," don't they?

How can his conscience stand the way he's been such a cowardly child hating jerk and how can all his liberal democrat supporters live with themselves knowing what he is and what they've promoted?

Scum, one and all, and so is the party that spawned him and them.

[leftysergeant]

Scum, one and all, and so is the party that spawned him and them.

He's old news. We dropped him.

When are you going to denounce the DirtTea Baggers and that lying maggot Kenny and the horndogs of The Family?

[Shalamar]

The 'Family Values' party going after the democrats? Did they get tired of their own sleeping around?

[Puppycow]

... that he's the father of the same sweet little girl he's been denying and treating like ***** on the bottom of his shoes for many months.

Figures he's such a lying, scheming, worthless scumbag liberal still being enabled and covered up for lying scheming worthless scumbag liberals just like him. Democrats really love "the people," don't they?

How can his conscience stand the way he's been such a cowardly child hating jerk and how can all his liberal democrat supporters live with themselves knowing what he is and what they've promoted?

Scum, one and all, and so is the party that spawned him and them.

Well I'm a democrat and I was never a fan of Edwards to begin with. Who are these people who are still defending him? I think he is almost universally disapproved of now. Silence does not indicate approval, but it could indicate that people don't care enough about a has-been like Edwards to comment. There are lots of other issues competing for attention.

[Marc39]

He's old news. We dropped him.

When are you going to denounce the DirtTea Baggers and that lying maggot Kenny and the horndogs of The Family?

You didn't drop him due to ethical lapses, however.

[Thunder]

i stopped being a fan of Edwards after i saw the Youtube video of him...and his hair. they are clearly two different entities.

which one rules the other? I don't know.

[David Wong]

... that he's the father of the same sweet little girl he's been denying and treating like ***** on the bottom of his shoes for many months.

Figures he's such a lying, scheming, worthless scumbag liberal still being enabled and covered up for lying scheming worthless scumbag liberals just like him. Democrats really love "the people," don't they?

How can his conscience stand the way he's been such a cowardly child hating jerk and how can all his liberal democrat supporters live with themselves knowing what he is and what they've promoted?

Scum, one and all, and so is the party that spawned him and them.

Have you ever been diagnosed with a mental illness?

Just asking.

Please keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use personal attacks to argue your point.

[corplinx]

Who cares? Edwards was a flash in the pan added to the Kerry ticket because he was young looking. He was and is not relevant to politics or issues.

[Thunder]

Next they will start calling John Edwards the leader of the Democratic Party.

=)

[Tricky]

Well I'm a moderate liberal and a big Edwards supporter. I thought he had the best plans for America. Unquestionably, I'm very much against the way Edwards has treated his marriage vows, especially considering his wife is battling cancer. I am glad I didn't get President Edwards, even though that is what I once wanted.

I won't say I was "wrong" because his campaign was nothing to do with marital infidelity. The things he said during the campaign, I still support. Though he turned out to be morally corrupt, that doesn't mean that his politics were also corrupt.

I believe Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy and John McCain and Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich and all the other politicians who have made a mess of their personal lives should not have those personal lives be an issue in their political lives. We are not hiring them to be saints. We are hiring them to make and enforce laws. Their ability to do that does not hinge on their morality.

George Washington had a mistriss. Thomas Jefferson had illigitimate children by his personal slave. Benjamin Franklin, one of the greatest men this country has ever known, was a randy little bugger. Did that make them less great? I say no. This idea that only monogomous, heterosexual politicians can be effective politicians is a fairly recent development, and one of which I highly disapprove.

[Marc39]

Who cares? Edwards was a flash in the pan added to the Kerry ticket because he was young looking. He was and is not relevant to politics or issues.

Well, he certainly is not relevant to politics now, having been summarily thrown under the bus. That the National Enquirer had broken the story does not speak well for the incompetent, hypocritical [Liberal] mainstream media. As to his relevance to issues, that depends on the issues.

[tyr_13]

Well, he certainly is not relevant to politics now, having been summarily thrown under the bus. That the National Enquirer had broken the story does not speak well for the incompetent, hypocritical [Liberal] mainstream media. As to his relevance to issues, that depends on the issues.

How does this speak against mainstream media? That they didn't cover something irrelevant first is a bad thing? Wow...just wow.

[Marc39]

How does this speak against mainstream media? That they didn't cover something irrelevant first is a bad thing? Wow...just wow.

It's over your head. Sorry.

Please keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use personal attacks to argue your point.

[Shalamar]

How does this speak against mainstream media? That they didn't cover something irrelevant first is a bad thing? Wow...just wow.

The evil subversive librul media NEVER attacks their own!

[Dr Adequate]

... that he's the father of the same sweet little girl he's been denying and treating like ***** on the bottom of his shoes for many months.

Figures he's such a lying, scheming, worthless scumbag liberal still being enabled and covered up for lying scheming worthless scumbag liberals just like him. Democrats really love "the people," don't they?

How can his conscience stand the way he's been such a cowardly child hating jerk and how can all his liberal democrat supporters live with themselves knowing what he is and what they've promoted?

Scum, one and all, and so is the party that spawned him and them. My, looks like someone's in need of attention.

[KoihimeNakamura]

.. isn't this the EXACT same thread that went to AAH but with some slightly different names?

[ravdin]

John Edwards is a lying hypocrite who does not deserve to be entrusted with public office.

Wait, did you have a point to all this?

[Puppycow]

How does this speak against mainstream media? That they didn't cover something irrelevant first is a bad thing? Wow...just wow.

Sorry, but as much as we might wish that it would be irrelevant, it wouldn't be. Say it came to light after he was nominated or elected. It would become a huge scandal that would either cause him to lose the election in the former case or distract him from his job and weaken him politically if it was after the election.

[makaya325]

From reading the title of this thread, i have to ask:

What is so bad about being a liberal? You are trying to say that it is a bad thing. I hope you are not one of those bible-thumping right wing-nuts

[Dr Adequate]

Sorry, but as much as we might wish that it would be irrelevant, it wouldn't be. Say it came to light after he was nominated or elected. It would become a huge scandal that would either cause him to lose the election in the former case or distract him from his job and weaken him politically if it was after the election. It's lucky for us liberals there was that bloke ... whatsisname ... Osama? I forget. But for some reason which has slipped my mind, the mainstream media turned their attention on him, rather than focusing on Edwards. I can't think why they should have wasted our time with these irrelevant issues, when Edwards might have WON THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION and then BECOME PRESIDENT OF THE USA, people!!!

But probably not. Maybe that's why.

[Dr Adequate]

I hope you are not one of those bible-thumping right wing-nuts I have never noticed him thumping the Bible.

[makaya325]

I have never noticed him thumping the Bible.

Wow, just, wow :covereyes

[MattusMaximus]

Next they will start calling John Edwards the leader of the Democratic Party.

=)

Who hasn't provided a valid birth certificate ;)

[corplinx]

Unquestionably, I'm very much against the way Edwards has treated his marriage vows, especially considering his wife is battling cancer

I'm not. She seemed fine with his infidelity and using her cancer story to forward his career despite knowing it.

I'm not offended unless she is.

The people who should be offended were his faithful supporters. Running for president with such a fresh body in your closet is a slap in the face to them.

[Hokulele]

Meh, Edwards is just a Gary Hart wannabe.

[leftysergeant]

Yeah, the way he treated his wife was kind of crappy, but it hardly rises to the dispicable levels of some prominent Republicans in recent history, some of whom still confabulate that they are fit to hold office, like Sanford and Ensign.

At least Edwards did not hand Elizabeth divorce papers while she was undergoing painful and trying treatments as did a certain dough-faced, prematurely grey-haired, blustering, history-distorting, pseudo-intellectual Republican former Speaker of the House with a nickname that suggests a slimey, crawly four-legged critter that lives under rocks, and who sounds like Kermit the Frog.

Edwards did not make other people's sexual ethics his business.

How many jerk Republican congress critters can say the same thing, and, of those, how many have themselves been caught with their zippers open at inappropriate times?

Edwards does not matter any more.

Right now, we are all far more concerned with a bunch of lying sociopaths claiming they are the victims because they are not allowed to act like dirt bags at public events, to the hurt of political dialogue in America.

Get real, get relevant. Your shiuney thing on a string does not distract Democrats and other rational creatures from the dirty deeds of the rightwing hordes.

[Cleon]

Yes, liberals are constantly hanging on the word of John Edwards. They are so dedicated to him that they have elected him to a position of complete irrelevance in the Democratic Party.

[Marc39]

I have never noticed him thumping the Bible.

Edwards was doing a lot of thumping, but, never with a bible.

[leftysergeant]

Edwards was doing a lot of thumping, but, never with a bible.

I think it is jealousy that we see here.

(When was the last time a prominent Democrat got caught with somebody else's puffy pills in his tacklebox coming back from a "fishing trip" to an island nation known for its kiddie brothels?)

[Marc39]

I think it is jealousy that we see here.

(When was the last time a prominent Democrat got caught with somebody else's puffy pills in his tacklebox coming back from a "fishing trip" to an island nation known for its kiddie brothels?)

Jealousy? Have you seen Rielle Hunter? Woof woof.

[Marc39]

Yeah, the way he treated his wife was kind of crappy, but it hardly rises to the dispicable levels of some prominent Republicans in recent history, some of whom still confabulate that they are fit to hold office, like Sanford and Ensign.

At least Edwards did not hand Elizabeth divorce papers while she was undergoing painful and trying treatments as did a certain dough-faced, prematurely grey-haired, blustering, history-distorting, pseudo-intellectual Republican former Speaker of the House with a nickname that suggests a slimey, crawly four-legged critter that lives under rocks, and who sounds like Kermit the Frog.

Edwards did not make other people's sexual ethics his business.

How many jerk Republican congress critters can say the same thing, and, of those, how many have themselves been caught with their zippers open at inappropriate times?

Edwards does not matter any more.

Right now, we are all far more concerned with a bunch of lying sociopaths claiming they are the victims because they are not allowed to act like dirt bags at public events, to the hurt of political dialogue in America.

Get real, get relevant. Your shiuney thing on a string does not distract Democrats and other rational creatures from the dirty deeds of the rightwing hordes.

Edwards claims there are two Americas. And, he has children in both.

[Random]

That the National Enquirer had broken the story does not speak well for the incompetent, hypocritical [Liberal] mainstream media.

I think it was just a natural continuation of the media’s “ignore Edwards” campaign. The primaries were weird. It would be Clinton, Edwards, Obama, and the media would report Clinton beating Obama. It would be Obama, Edwards, Clinton, and the media would report Obama beating Clinton. It would be Edwards, Obama, Clinton, and the media would report Obama and Clinton were neck and neck. Rudy 9u11iani got a fraction of the support of Edwards, and got vastly more airtime.

The media had their little “Historic first _____ president” story ready to go and was just debating whether they should put black or female in the blank space.

[ravdin]

Edwards is a social conservative, which is why I never liked him. He was quick to invoke his belief in god to explain why he could never support gay marriage, for example- an indistinguishable position from many in the GOP. Yet he wasn't too holy to father a child out of wedlock, deny paternity of his daughter, or pay hush money from his campaign to his mistress. It's not at all surprising he doesn't have any friends left in his own party. Nobody likes a hypocrite.

[davefoc]

... that he's the father of the same sweet little girl he's been denying and treating like Breach of Rule 10 removed. on the bottom of his shoes for many months.

Figures he's such a lying, scheming, worthless scumbag liberal still being enabled and covered up for lying scheming worthless scumbag liberals just like him. Democrats really love "the people," don't they?

How can his conscience stand the way he's been such a cowardly child hating jerk and how can all his liberal democrat supporters live with themselves knowing what he is and what they've promoted?

Scum, one and all, and so is the party that spawned him and them.

It is certainly true that the biases of people affect their perceptions of the transgressions of the politicians that they support.

But I think FarmallMTA misses the mark twice with his post.

1. It suggests that biases that lead an individual to judge politicians he agrees with is a uniquely liberal phenomena and conservatives don't have similar biases.
2. It exaggerates the degree with which liberals are accepting and supportive of Edwards right now, especially in this forum.

I have yet to see one post in this forum that defends, minimizes or makes excuses for Edwards. In a previous thread, the majority of the posters seemed very skeptical of what Edwards claimed with regard to the details of this case. I doubt they were all conservatives.

Even before this sex scandal broke, Edwards ethics with regard to the malpractice lawsuits that he made the bulk of his money from were routinely criticised. I don't think the only people criticizing Edwards for that were JREF conservatives.

Perhaps FarmallMTA has not noticed but the current administration is judged to be liberal by many people and yet it is under that administration that Edwards is being investigated for misuse of campaign funds.

Somehow, FarmallMTA, has turned what is a nice salacious story with lots of juicy details into a piece of evidence to support his idea that liberals are bad. If he is going to use salacious sex scandals as a basis for this judgment I would expect that given the current run of sex scandals, that almost entirely involve conservatives, FarmallMTA will decide to become a liberal.

ETA: Link to the story:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/politics/story/5791651/

One detail that strikes me as surprising was that Andrew Young (Edwards campaign aide and not the ex mayor of Atlanta) claimed to be the father. To what end? By the time the story broke Edwards political career was toast, why engage in a lie that was unlikely to be believed enough to help Edwards and even if it was true it wouldn't have been enough to save Edwards' political career. Was this supposed to make Edwards' wife feel better?

[dudalb]

And with the likes of the Governor of South Carolina, the Conservatives are not in a position to throw stones...

[leftysergeant]

Jealousy? Have you seen Rielle Hunter? Woof woof.

Why do you fear the sexuality of real women? You all have Ann Coulter as a "sex symbol" and want to talk smack about Rielle's looks?

Freakin WIERD.

[quadraginta]

Edwards claims there are two Americas. And, he has children in both.
Do you write your own lines?

Or do you have a script?

[skeptical]

Figures he's such a lying, scheming, worthless scumbag liberal still being enabled and covered up for lying scheming worthless scumbag liberals just like him. Democrats really love "the people," don't they?

Can you be more specific about exactly which "scumbag liberals" you are referring to and what specific action actions said scumbags have undertaken with regard to said actions by Edwards that are "still being enabled and covered up for"? Links appreciated.


How can his conscience stand the way he's been such a cowardly child hating jerk and how can all his liberal democrat supporters live with themselves knowing what he is and what they've promoted?

I imagine the same way conservatives lived with themselves for supporting Nixon even though he committed criminal acts while serving as President or for supporting Mark Foley even though he tried to seduce young male paiges. Or is it only "liberals" that are expected to have perfect judgment about people?

Sorry, did I introduce too much reasonableness? I can try going into rant mode if that's what you're looking for.

[shawmutt]

Infidelity and asshattery abounds in every political party around the world. I'm not sure why one politician's crappy actions are becoming the victim of political hackery.

[quixotecoyote]

Do you write your own lines?

Or do you have a script?

I'd say he stole it from Andy Borowitz (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fandy-borowitz%2Fjohn-edwards-deluged-with_b_218527.html&ei=0M6FSo-PJcSD-Qbnh_i6CQ&usg=AFQjCNEuI0V-UwE70Q14KlIPgDuYApCdxQ) but I doubt he reads HuffPost

[dudalb]

I believe Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy and John McCain and Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich and all the other politicians who have made a mess of their personal lives should not have those personal lives be an issue in their political lives. We are not hiring them to be saints. We are hiring them to make and enforce laws. Their ability to do that does not hinge on their morality.

So what kind of ethics a politician has should have no bearing on his fitness for public office????????
I think you are in a small,small morality there, pal.

[Thunder]

why again should i give two ***** about John Edwards?

[Tricky]

I suspect that FarmallMTA's point, apart from just wanting to bash liberals, is that the Edwards affair hasn't been the big news-making event that things like Sanford's Argentina honey and Craig's toe-tapping in the stall did. Well let's face it. Those things are pretty unusual. The Edward's story is just another "politician has affair" story. Ho hum.

Are liberals hypocrites because they are less interested in this story? Perhaps, to the extent that all partisans are a bit hypocritical about their reaction to another party's pecadillos vs. their own party's naughtiness. But in truth, the only people I have seen here defending Sanford and Craig et. al. are the liberals. They seem to be the ones saying, "A politician's sex life isn't germane to their performance as a politician." At least, that's what I've said, and I freely admit I am a liberal.

Yes, I'm glad now that Edwards didn't get elected, though I supported him in the primaries. That is because sex scandals detract from important stuff, not because I think he is any less qualified for office because he is an adulterer. I suspect that if we kicked all the adulterers out of politics, we could never get a quorum.

[leftysergeant]

So what kind of ethics a politician has should have no bearing on his fitness for public office????????
I think you are in a small,small morality there, pal.

How well they live up to the ethics that they profess might matter.

Sanford and Ensign were trying to tell the rest of the country how to act in regards to sexual conduct.

Newt laughs about trhe sexuality of his liberal opponents.

They all claim to practice Christian values.

Christianity is all about reconciliiation of Man with God and Man.

Newt, Sanford and Ensign fail.

Whether Kennedy and Edwards have failed is in the hands of God and their spouses.

[applecorped]

Whether Kennedy and Edwards have failed is in the hands of God and their spouses.

Fail is the new succeed.:rolleyes:

[shawmutt]

Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner who ********** his slaves--he seemed to do just fine.

[ravdin]

I suspect that FarmallMTA's point, apart from just wanting to bash liberals, is that the Edwards affair hasn't been the big news-making event that things like Sanford's Argentina honey and Craig's toe-tapping in the stall did. Well let's face it. Those things are pretty unusual. The Edward's story is just another "politician has affair" story. Ho hum.

To me, one major difference is that Edwards is a private citizen (albeit one with a high profile). He'd very much like to be in a position to influence the rest of us with his messed up worldview, but he's not. So in that sense his story is less deserving of attention than a scandal involving a politician currently in office.

If you want to be nonpartisan about it then there's plenty you can say about the peccadilloes of former Democratic governors Spitzer and Blagojevich, both of whom tarnished their offices. At least the closest Edwards came to that was to finish third in the most recent Presidential primary.

How well they live up to the ethics that they profess might matter.

Sanford and Ensign were trying to tell the rest of the country how to act in regards to sexual conduct.

Newt laughs about trhe sexuality of his liberal opponents.

They all claim to practice Christian values.

Christianity is all about reconciliiation of Man with God and Man.

Newt, Sanford and Ensign fail.

Whether Kennedy and Edwards have failed is in the hands of God and their spouses.

So are you suggesting that it's a "Christian" value to use campaign funds, donated in good faith by supporters, to hush up your mistress and the mother of your illegitimate child?

[quadraginta]

I'd say he stole it from Andy Borowitz (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fandy-borowitz%2Fjohn-edwards-deluged-with_b_218527.html&ei=0M6FSo-PJcSD-Qbnh_i6CQ&usg=AFQjCNEuI0V-UwE70Q14KlIPgDuYApCdxQ) but I doubt he reads HuffPost
Cool. An Edwards quote, no less.

He should have attributed it. It would have had more pizazz that way.

[Darth Rotor]

He's old news. We dropped him.

When are you going to denounce the DirtTea Baggers and that lying maggot Kenny and the horndogs of The Family?
Lefty, don't you recognize, in Farmal's opening post, your own rhetorical style, dressed up in slightly different clothing? ;);)

DR

[Darth Rotor]

George Washington had a mistriss. Thomas Jefferson had illigitimate children by his personal slave. Benjamin Franklin, one of the greatest men this country has ever known, was a randy little bugger. Did that make them less great? I say no. This idea that only monogomous, heterosexual politicians can be effective politicians is a fairly recent development, and one of which I highly disapprove.
Tricky:

I am offended that you compare John Edwards to Virginians George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. (Actually, he has better hair than either, but that's beside the point.)

I respectfully request that you retract this slanderous association against them. Edwards cannot hold their jocks -- and they are dead and unmoving.

I also will get over the offense to the dearly departed, anon, thanks to Tullamore Dew and it being Friday. :cool:

DR

[Darth Rotor]

Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner who ********** his slaves--he seemed to do just fine.
Just the attractive, female ones.
(As far as we know.)

DR

[quixotecoyote]

Cool. An Edwards quote, no less.

He should have attributed it. It would have had more pizazz that way.

:eek:
Uhh, quad, that story was a fairly obvious bit of satire.

Borowitz is a comedian.

[dudalb]

I suspect that FarmallMTA's point, apart from just wanting to bash liberals, is that the Edwards affair hasn't been the big news-making event that things like Sanford's Argentina honey and Craig's toe-tapping in the stall did. Well let's face it. Those things are pretty unusual. The Edward's story is just another "politician has affair" story. Ho hum.

Are liberals hypocrites because they are less interested in this story? Perhaps, to the extent that all partisans are a bit hypocritical about their reaction to another party's pecadillos vs. their own party's naughtiness. But in truth, the only people I have seen here defending Sanford and Craig et. al. are the liberals. They seem to be the ones saying, "A politician's sex life isn't germane to their performance as a politician." At least, that's what I've said, and I freely admit I am a liberal.

Yes, I'm glad now that Edwards didn't get elected, though I supported him in the primaries. That is because sex scandals detract from important stuff, not because I think he is any less qualified for office because he is an adulterer. I suspect that if we kicked all the adulterers out of politics, we could never get a quorum.

Being an adulterer is one thing, having a kid and trying not to provide for him is something else.

[Marc39]

Why do you fear the sexuality of real women? ...talk smack about Rielle's looks?

Freakin WIERD.

I have a beautiful Bentley. Why would I want to look at a trashy trailer?

[quadraginta]

:eek:
Uhh, quad, that story was a fairly obvious bit of satire.

Yes. I know.

Mine wasn't obvious enough, apparently. Sorry,

Borowitz is a comedian.


That, too.

[leftysergeant]

Lefty, don't you recognize, in Farmal's opening post, your own rhetorical style, dressed up in slightly different clothing? ;);)

DR

My style is actually a little more reality-based.

Kenny is an idiot and a con man and a liar.

The C Street boys are horndogs and members of a whackadoodle religious cult.

FarmAll seems to think that we give a rat's what happens to Edwards now, and that he somehow reflects on our moral character, after we threw him under the bus in disgust, but the Republicans are still clinging to their creeps like Sanford and Ensign.

Very Calvanistic of him.

[applecorped]

My style is actually a little more reality-based.



:jaw-dropp

[Tricky]

Tricky:

I am offended that you compare John Edwards to Virginians George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. (Actually, he has better hair than either, but that's beside the point.)

I respectfully request that you retract this slanderous association against them. Edwards cannot hold their jocks -- and they are dead and unmoving.

I also will get over the offense to the dearly departed, anon, thanks to Tullamore Dew and it being Friday. :cool:

DR
So maybe you prefer Patrick Henry, that famous Virginian who said "Give me liberty or give me death" who then declined to fight in the Revolutionary war? :p

[tyr_13]

Being an adulterer is one thing, having a kid and trying not to provide for him is something else.

Her.

See, it isn't just liberals not paying attention to this story. :p

[davefoc]

Once you get past the idiotic attempt to turn this into some sort of indictment of liberals in general and you can put aside any empathy you might have for the people actually hurt by all this, this is turning out to be a damn good scandal.

As sex scandals go, this is a pretty good one. We've got lies and lies about lies, infidelity to a partner dying of cancer and the probable complicity by her in the first round of lies, a politician that was within shouting distance of the presidency, putting the mistress on the campaign payroll, a government investigation of the campaign funds hanky panky, vaguely erotic campaign ads produced by the mistress, a child born out of wedlock, early morning trysts and the associated bizarro land explanations and now we have rumors of sex tapes. OK, I don't think we should get our hopes up too much on the last item, this is still a pretty good sex scandal even without the tapes but sex tapes would definitely help this sex scandal break into the top five American sex scandals.

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/06/28/2009-06-28_aides_tale_of_john_edwards_sex_tape.html

Of course, the news media will completely ignore this scandal because the media is controlled by the liberals that would never report on a story that involved one of their own. Still, this would be a pretty good story if there was just somebody in the media that would be willing to go against their liberal overlords to actually report on this story, but that will never happen and we'll never hear about this story.

[Bob Klase]

So maybe you prefer Patrick Henry, that famous Virginian who said "Give me liberty or give me death" who then declined to fight in the Revolutionary war? :p

That might require some clarification or referencing.

wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Henry)

In August 1775, Henry became colonel of the 1st Virginia Regiment. At the outset of the Revolutionary War, Henry led militia against Royal Governor Lord Dunmore in defense of some disputed gunpowder, an event known as the Gunpowder Incident.

[BenBurch]

I'm not silent, and I haven't been silent. The man is a PIG.

[varwoche]

Scum, one and all, and so is the party that spawned him and them. Given your low opinion of the non comments (and non commenters), and given your moral, upright character, you must have ripped Sanford, Ensign, and Craig new orifices when those scandals broke.

...scanning FarmallMTA's posting history...

Oops.

[quadraginta]

You know, you had me going there for a bit. I almost believed you had moments of lucidity.

You started out with ...

Once you get past the idiotic attempt to turn this into some sort of indictment of liberals in general and you can put aside any empathy you might have for the people actually hurt by all this, this is turning out to be a damn good scandal.

<snip>

My hopes were up. I was stunned. I actually found myself agreeing with something you said.

Then you proved it was all just a tease by wrapping up with this ...

Of course, the news media will completely ignore this scandal because the media is controlled by the liberals that would never report on a story that involved one of their own.

<snip>


Sometimes I'm so gullible.

[davefoc]

My hopes were up. I was stunned. I actually found myself agreeing with something you said.

Then you proved it was all just a tease by wrapping up with this ...

Sometimes I'm so gullible.

Clearly, I should have added a smiley. :)

Sometimes the only audience for davefoc's humor is davefoc and I think he got the joke.

But maybe, your post was more sarcasm on top of davefoc's sarcasm, and davefoc was a little slow to get it without a smiley. Hmm, the mind boggles.

[dudalb]

This thread wins an award for double standards.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by leftysergeant
How well they live up to the ethics that they profess might matter.

Sanford and Ensign were trying to tell the rest of the country how to act in regards to sexual conduct.

Newt laughs about trhe sexuality of his liberal opponents.

They all claim to practice Christian values.

Christianity is all about reconciliiation of Man with God and Man.

Newt, Sanford and Ensign fail.

Whether Kennedy and Edwards have failed is in the hands of God and their spouses.


Double Standard Much?

[Dorian Gray]

Who cares? See, he's not a politician anymore. Whereas most of the Republicans who have effed up ARE currently holding office. See how that works? See why it matters?

Why aren't you all hair-on-fire about all the other scandalous stories that the press has dropped - you know, the ones about conservative politicians? It's because you have the fail sauce all over your plate, and you keep dipping your chicken in it.

[Dorian Gray]

Please do not make personal insults, including changing usernames to insultingly similar ones.

[KingMerv00]

*Arrives fashionably late for the annual generalization and tu quoque festival.*

Hope you don't mind that I double parked. It's OK cuz I saw some other guy do it last month.

WOO! PARTY! All of the Kennedys are drunks! Republicans are all born again Christians! WOOO!

:bcake:

[rwguinn]

....

I believe Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy and John McCain and Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich and all the other politicians who have made a mess of their personal lives should not have those personal lives be an issue in their political lives. We are not hiring them to be saints. We are hiring them to make and enforce laws. Their ability to do that does not hinge on their morality.

...
Waiddaminit!!!
What?
How does that work, exactly (or even approximately).
I believe that all those folks (esp Kennedy!) have the belief that the laws they make only apply to everybody else...

[rwguinn]

[quote=Tricky;5003352]...

I believe Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy and John McCain and Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich and all the other politicians who have made a mess of their personal lives should not have those personal lives be an issue in their political lives. We are not hiring them to be saints. We are hiring them to make and enforce laws. Their ability to do that does not hinge on their morality. ...
[quote]
What?!!!!
That works, if you grant them their apparent belief (particulary illustrated by Sen. Kennedy) that the laws they make only apply to everybody else...

[GreyICE]

What public office does Edwards hold again? Senate? Nope. House? Nope.

I mean what's the bacon here? Ex-politician is scumbag, news at 11?

[Drysdale]

What public office does Edwards hold again? Senate? Nope. House? Nope.

I mean what's the bacon here? Ex-politician is scumbag, news at 11?

So why the continued attacks on Palin?
She's no more in politics than Edwards.

[Tricky]

...

I believe Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy and John McCain and Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich and all the other politicians who have made a mess of their personal lives should not have those personal lives be an issue in their political lives. We are not hiring them to be saints. We are hiring them to make and enforce laws. Their ability to do that does not hinge on their morality. ...

What?!!!!
That works, if you grant them their apparent belief (particulary illustrated by Sen. Kennedy) that the laws they make only apply to everybody else...
As far as I know, there is no law against adultry. While Ted Kennedy probably broke some laws and probably should have been punished for that, the fact that he was having an affair is nobody's business.

[GreyICE]

So why the continued attacks on Palin?
She's no more in politics than Edwards.
First, Palin has been out of office for under two months. Edwards hasn't be relevant since mid-2008.

Second, noticed them dying down? Yep. They have. Sure, they resurge a bit whenever she opens her mouth on public television, but I'm sure Edwards would get flak if he popped up on prominent media.

So basically, you've compared a woman out of office for 1.5 months who gets criticized whenever she runs her mouth to the conservative press versus a man whose been out of any important position for a year now, and hasn't opened his mouth.

Yep, fair treatment. And as we all know, fairness is what? Liberal. So definitely highly biased.

[Tricky]

So why the continued attacks on Palin?
She's no more in politics than Edwards.

Yes she is. Palin has changed jobs from politician to political commentator. She is in politics just as much as Dick Cheney is in politics.

What political commentary have you heard from Edwards recently?
(ETA: I see I have echoed GreyICE)

[quadraginta]

As far as I know, there is no law against adultry. While Ted Kennedy probably broke some laws and probably should have been punished for that, the fact that he was having an affair is nobody's business.


Not that it's particularly relevant, but Edwards is an NC resident and in NC adultery is still against the law (not sure, I think it's a misdemeanor).

For that matter so is alienation of affection (not the same as adultery), and a sodomy or crimes against nature type law which pretty much makes it illegal to have any kind of sex which isn't the "missionary position" with anyone, including a willing spouse. Yes, this includes oral sex.

That last one doesn't get used much.

:D

:mad: But it has been used. Some years ago there was a guy who got two to five after being caught getting a (ahem) from his girlfriend. I'm not quite sure why she didn't get charged.

[MattusMaximus]

And with the likes of the Governor of South Carolina, the Conservatives are not in a position to throw stones...

True. But some of them are so ideological, they'll do it anyway.

As evidenced by some posts here...

[MattusMaximus]

So why the continued attacks on Palin?
She's no more in politics than Edwards.

I'll echo the responses to this question, with one added note...

Sarah Palin is a dangerous & cynical nitwit and religious ideologue who still has big political aspirations and far too many people who deify her. She's not going away anytime soon.

John Edwards is a grade-A douchebag who isn't worth the electrons I've used to type his name. And he has no political support & isn't looking for any. He's history.

That is why I continue to criticize Palin.

You gotta problem wit dat?! :mad:

[leftysergeant]

So why the continued attacks on Palin?
She's no more in politics than Edwards.

So she should follow Edwards' example and sit down, shut up and don't say anything stupid at an event planned to make it look as though she were still somebody of importance to the country.

(As though she ever really were,)

[Drysdale]

So she should follow Edwards' example and sit down, shut up and don't say anything stupid at an event planned to make it look as though she were still somebody of importance to the country.

(As though she ever really were,)

Or, since she's a conservative the media continues to attack her irregardless. Hmmm,nah could'nt be.

[GreyICE]

So she should follow Edwards' example and sit down, shut up and don't say anything stupid at an event planned to make it look as though she were still somebody of importance to the country.

(As though she ever really were,)
Who can forget her important diplomatic connections with Putin though? I mean who knows what would have happened if those channels weren't open!

[Tricky]

Or, since she's a conservative the media continues to attack her irregardless. Hmmm,nah could'nt be.
Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that she keeps making media attacks on the Obama administration. Nah, couldn't be.

[quadraginta]

Or, since she's a conservative the media continues to attack her irregardless. Hmmm,nah could'nt be.


So your position is that whenever she makes a public statement it should be universally ignored by all the media?

Hmmm ...

Ya know what? I like that idea.

[GreyICE]

So your position is that whenever she makes a public statement it should be universally ignored by all the media?

Hmmm ...

Ya know what? I like that idea.

No, no, that demonstrates bias too. Because if the liberal media ignores an important conservative speaker, they're just displaying their bias again. They're ignoring a prominent intellectual voice in the conservative movement in an attempt to make their liberal values seem more mainstream.

You have forgotten the first premise.

[thaiboxerken]

Private citizen is a scumbag. Why aren't you libruls all over this story?! I know, it's because all libruls are scumbags that cheat on their spouses and ignore their bastard children!!!

[quadraginta]

No, no, that demonstrates bias too. Because if the liberal media ignores an important conservative speaker, they're just displaying their bias again. They're ignoring a prominent intellectual voice in the conservative movement in an attempt to make their liberal values seem more mainstream.

You have forgotten the first premise.

I like that.

Sarah Palin.

I like that. I have to clean the coffee off my monitor, but I still like that.

[SezMe]

Yeah, that caught my eye as well. I think the brown stains will come out of my office chair.