Their cheating didn't bother Dems, apparently

C

Canceled.LTroll.29

Banned
So now, we are treated to a spate of innuendo about Sen. John McCain.

It seems that some leftists are full of righteous moral indignation over reports that McCain cheated on his first wife.

Gee, I'm confused.

Haven't Dems told us "prudes" for years that infidelity is the norm, and that people in other countries (espcially the French) think we're unsophistcated in our attitudes toward extramarital actvities?

I thought a politician's sex life was nobody's business. At least that what the libs usually say.

Gosh, what do you call someone who pretends to be outraged by behavior they normally condone?

Liberal? Democrat? Hypocrite?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Condit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Jackson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Hart
 
Last edited:
The quote of John McCain admitting he distroyed his first marriage and takes all the blame is from his own book.

Its a FACT!


Why did it matter to you when Clinton did it?
 
indisputable said:
So now, we are treated to a spate of innuendo about Sen. John McCain.

It seems that some leftists are filled with righteous moral indignation over reports that McCain cheated on his first wife.

Gee, I'm confused.

Haven't Dems told us "prudes" for years that infidelity is the norm, and that people in other countries (espcially the French) think we're unsophistcated in our attitudes toward extramarital actvities?

I thought a politician's sex life was nobody's business. At least that what the libs usually say.

Gosh, what do you call someone who pretends to be outraged by behavior they normally condone?

Liberal? Democrat? Hypocrite?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Condit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Jackson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Hart
Click to expand...


you brough Clinton up you fool
 
Desh and anyone else interested, are we to look at the fidelity rates of all political contenders? Seems to be a lot to look at, considering just NY, Clinton, Kennedy family, perhaps McCain, then there is Chris Dodd and Kennedy and the waitress sandwich. So many women, so little time.
 
indisputable said:
Anyone with a "D" after their name gets a pass, don't they?
Click to expand...

Funny thing with me, I'm hoping that those of a more liberal bent will join me in calling out the elected officials for more than keeping it in their pants. That wasn't my problem with Clinton, though I had many a problem, rather it was his being 'above the law.' That is what the left is trying to say GW is guilty of, I don't see it, rather I see incompetence and an inabilty to recognize a strong chorus of doing the wrong thing. One needs to address, not ignore, especially when the case is more than made.
 
Kathianne said:
Funny thing with me, I'm hoping that those of a more liberal bent will join me in calling out the elected officials for more than keeping it in their pants. That wasn't my problem with Clinton, though I had many a problem, rather it was his being 'above the law.' That is what the left is trying to say GW is guilty of, I don't see it, rather I see incompetence and an inabilty to recognize a strong chorus of doing the wrong thing. One needs to address, not ignore, especially when the case is more than made.
Click to expand...

Concerning GW, I would say that condoning and encouraging Americans torturing people went a little beyond "incompetence" and an inability to recognise it is "the wrong thing", but that's just me.

And for the sake of balance the practice of "extraordinarty rendition", or plain old kidnapping and torture, was introduced under Mr Clinton and it didn't make him any less contemptible for doing it either.
 
Last edited:
charver said:
Concerning GW, I would say that condoning and encouraging Americans torturing people went a little beyond "incompetence" and an inability to recognise it is "the wrong thing", but that's just me.

And for the sake of balance the practice of "extraordinarty rendition", or plain old kidnapping and torture, was introduced under Mr Clinton and it didn't make him any less contemptible for doing it either.
Click to expand...

Unless of course one differs in the definition of torture.
 
Kathianne said:
Unless of course one differs in the definition of torture.
Click to expand...

Well, when your attorney general defines it as something stopping just short of outright death then i think definitions are a little irrelevant to all but the most blinkered.
 
Kathianne said:
Funny thing with me, I'm hoping that those of a more liberal bent will join me in calling out the elected officials for more than keeping it in their pants. That wasn't my problem with Clinton, though I had many a problem, rather it was his being 'above the law.' That is what the left is trying to say GW is guilty of, I don't see it, rather I see incompetence and an inabilty to recognize a strong chorus of doing the wrong thing. One needs to address, not ignore, especially when the case is more than made.
Click to expand...
This is correct. Whether or not people care about his infidelity (and I submit it wasn't the BJs the Rs cared about it was the supposed perjury) has little consequence.
 
charver said:
Concerning GW, I would say that condoning and encouraging Americans torturing people went a little beyond "incompetence" and an inability to recognise it is "the wrong thing", but that's just me.

And for the sake of balance the practice of "extraordinarty rendition", or plain old kidnapping and torture, was introduced under Mr Clinton and it didn't make him any less contemptible for doing it either.
Click to expand...
The torture and then the listening without warrants. Two of the absolute worst violations.
 
Seems to me modern politics is dredging up levels of hypocrisy that I find absolutely nauseating. Both parties will defend the actions of their own as irrelevant, private business, necessary for the country, or a slew of other excuses. Then moments later theses same defenders will point to the SAME (or similar) actions of members of the opposing party using fingers of shame and indignation.

I remember the issue of Clinton's (lack of) service record when he was running for president, and the cries of "foul" that came from many Clinton supporter's. Then fast forward to the Bush/Kerry campaign and the same people crying foul were the ones criticizing Bush for pulling strings to be placed in the TANG, while the same critics of Clinton were crying "foul" over the subject of service during Viet Nam being made an issue. Sheer hypocrisy from both sides.

McCain's infidelity certainly goes to character. But those pointing out his infidelity are the same ones who used to claim that the private lives of politicians has little bearing on their abilities in office.

What Clinton did in office was, IMO, worse than simple infidelity. (Think he would have gotten a BJ if he were not president, and she were not an WH intern?) But none the less, those incensed at Clinton's actions are now defending McCain's. Sheer hypocrisy.

(Others here seem to be pointing out the hypocrisy of the McCain infidelity issue - good for you.)

If this is the level our political system has sunk to, then there is little wonder our society is in the trouble it is in.
 
Do me a favor and ask the people arround you if they know that McCain cheated on his first wife repetedly and if they know Cindy mcCain had a non profit which she stole drugs from and forged her employees signatures to obtain hundereds of pills at a time?

Then ask how many know about Bill and the blue dress?


The hypocracy here is that it was all over the news when a dem did it and now that a Republcan is under the spot light it is hypocracy to talk of the facts of McCains failed ability to run a healthy family.

Lets keep in mind all marriages go through hard times and some people even cheat on their spouses. Some families manage to put their lives back together orthers are not so lucky.

McCain and his first wife drew the shortest of straws in the horrors their family had to face. Im truely sorry their marriage could not be saved. Imagine if they had? what an inspirational story that woudl have been. They were unable to and who could blame either of them? McCain just back from a horrible set of years no doubt suffereing from PTSD. I and nearly everyone else would forgive him for his inability to function at a normal level after what he had been through.

Then there is the Cindy McCain part where it seems he was unable to even recognize she had a problem. Her parents staged an intervention in like 1992. McCain is later quoted as saying he did not even know she had a drug problem until right before it hit the news.

How can that be folks?

I fear the man is still suffering from residual PTSD.

That is not supposed to go untreated and is not acceptable to have a president who has this problem.

He has just released some of his medical records and Im very glad to shee he is physically healthy. I worry about his mental state in lew of these facts and his obvious and well reported temper problems.
 
Comparing media response to a current event and media response to events of 16 plus years ago and complaining about the inequality of coverage? Surely you do recognize the difference. Are you so partisan you are going to claim media bias because they do not give events of 16 years ago the same coverage they gave the Clinton affair AS IT HAPPENED?

Tell me, how much media coverage is there of Clinton's affair NOW, when Bill makes the news out stumping for his wife? Would say it is approximately equal to the coverage the media is giving McCain's spouse's past?

Are democrats that frightened of McCain they need to make these kinds of hypocritical attacks? I thought the democratic party was all about REAL issues. That's what you claimed 4 years ago.
 
What about accusing Obama fo being muslim because he attended a school when he was 5?

That has been all over the news?

that was over 40 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top