What say you?

John Edwards had an affair….. and a baby?
I didn’t vote for him. I thought he was an ambulance chaser and as much a blow hard as the rest of them but I find it interesting that there are those that will type with fingers of fury the moment that a Republican has a question mark raised against them before any facts or an admission has been made yet they view their candidates as immune to scrutiny. Where are those that said of the last great liar, slick Willie, “it’s just a bj”? Why aren’t they saying “it’s just a love child born of his campaign videographer while his wife is home with cancer”? And my larger question is: why do you suppose that Republicans aren’t posting about being up in arms that this has happened and judging the entire party by it?

Pick one.

A: They have a life. They don’t have time to sit around and post their whiny comments on a dating site all day like others do. They view a dating site as a site for seeking a potential date rather than demonstrating anger and hatred which are clearly counter-productive unless S&M is your thing.

B; See A

C: See A and B

D: All of the above

I think that the worst part of it all is that his poor wife has to suffer with this too. Not bad enough to be slowly dying...but now cannot even die with dignity!

On the one hand, I can sit back and say he's human, made his mistakes, did extra dumb considering he's a public person. I've been told by others, "So what, that's his business".

WHAT GETS ME, though, is his ABILITY AND OKAY-NESS to lie, lie well, lie for a good long time!!! So, being that we, as a public, are already jaded and wary of liars in politics, in spite of what he did in his marriage, IS THAT WHO I WOULD TRUST AS A POLITICIAN??? A GOOD LIAR???????

I'll pass!!!

I think she should cut off his chubby and after sticking it in a jar of peanut butter, say "you have chubby in my peanut butter"! Just to hear him say "you have peanut butter on my chubby".

In his defense (pun intended)he IS an attorney. They are conditioned to be persuasive and to win you over. Truth is of little consequence.

I think that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Where what has occured taints his image The first one of us without sin can cast the first stone.

So you would vote for him then? Or do we not discuss those who are to lead and if they can be held to a higher standard required for leadership?

Would I vote for him? It is a mute point as he is no longer running and has turned down the option of vice presidency. Therefore there is little to discuss

Im not going to pass judgement and I am not a Democrat, and to think I liked this guy
My heart goes out to his family

Don't sidestep the question. He was guessed to be low on the list for VP as it has been stated in the news. Would you vote for him in any political capacity knowing what you know? Be honest. Thou shalt not lie.

I've never cared too much about the private lives of public figures. Any of them.

I do get a chuckle when it's some family values type who is exposed. Mostly because I loath hypocrites. I am endlessly amused by family values types who get caught; sending sexually explicit texts to young boys, cruising public restrooms for sex, paying for a mistress's abortion and boinking their assistance while calling for the impeachment of someone else is doing the same thing.

The U.S. is sort of confused and muddled by this subject I think. We practically celebrate Kennedy doing Marilyn, marital indiscretions are at an all time high (not looking it up but I recall hearing 50% of married people have had affairs) and search for terms like gang-bang on the web more than apple pie...but we are shocked, simply shocked that a high profile politician had an affair.

How many married people are on this site? I know I get as many messages on dating sites from married guys as single guys.

Another point to consider. His wife was ill and likely not up to sharing the marital bed. I know of several couples who have found themselves in similar situations. In two cases it has been the wife who has sought a companion for her husband. Perhaps that was the case here but the Edwards family felt sharing this would be too shocking for the public to take in so he took the responsibility and admitted an affair.

So, would I vote for someone who'd had an affair? Yes as long as they weren't hypocritical, if they represented my position on major subjects and if they had a sound work ethic.

A republican! The first to post of the few that will! I expect that this thread will go down to the end of the list faster than Santa's finger on the list of honest politicians.
See my question above as to why you haven't heard republicans up in arms about this. The majority of people who will post their hatred here at the mere mentioning of his name will be:______________
No, not Fanta. Close though.

Uh, he was caught and exposed. Do you really think he would have come forward with an admission had he not been found out? What if he HAD been named as the VP choice before he was caught? How do you think it would have affected Obama's run for the oval office? BTW I am in the minority as a few here know. I support Obama and am a conservative republican. Why? Don't know. I guess I can't see as he can do any worse than the rest of them and hopefully will lead us to a better position on the world's stage.
Furthermore, are you saying that democrats don't care about family values? His support among democrats is falling faster than Bush's approval rating! Wait..... cancel that. A lead balloon from the Empire State Building can't even fall that fast.

So now in your opinion no one in the country has a job but Republicans?

Why dont you ever add anything substantial to a thread, steve?
It's always a bunch of generalizations about others, riddles, and sidestepping of facts!
Maybe you need to take a break and put the comic books away for awhile. Get your head out of the tabloids on the shelves in the check-out line and pay attention to the price of groceries. Do something to enlighten a few braincells. Maybe count on your fingers or something to bide the time waiting behind all those Democrats, Independents, and Republicans that are spending their hard earned cash on Milk and bread in this Republican economy. Think about how gas was $1.47 when Bush took office, the Gov had a balanced budget, and the country had a little respect around the world.

Feel free to take a break from all that thinking every now and then though. We would want your Republican brain to get frustrated and lose your comedic rhetoric!

Oh yeah,
What say you??

No, I am not saying dem's don't care about family values.

The neocons, the evangelicals, the family values folks are no more or less morally right (gee I hate even saying morally right) than people who belong to any other group. However they do set themselves up for a fall, both public and private, when they loudly proclaim that they are morally right while engaging in activities they condemn.

What bothers me as I have repeated several times here is people who say one thing and do another. People who thump bibles and point fingers.

I do not need the government to be my parent, to guide me morally or to tell me how I should conduct my private life. You cannot legislate morality.

From my personal experience I can say with assurance that no one, from any party, has an exclusive lock on living the "morally right way." Just what is that by the way?

Tap..Tap..Tap..Tap Look Im a republican looking for boy love in the restroom!!!

There are far more important issues in this country and real criminal corruption among political candidates to worry about than a man's personal marital problems.
I know the Christian Right and the Republican party, all try to drive a minor issue like this into the public's brain to distract their minds away from the real issues, but let's get real.

John Edwards admitted his mistake, and is not a political candidate right now. He's not running for any office anywhere. His problem is a private matter between him, his wife, and god now.
He had already, months ago, said he wasn't interested in the VP position, and the fact that this is even in the news is because the Republicans know no other way to campaign than to throw out tabloid trash and hope it distracts Americans away from their weaknesses. "THE REAL ISSUES" facing this country!

I was thinking more like this,

Ted Stevens Indicted On 7 Criminal Charges


WASHINGTON — Sen. Ted Stevens, the nation's longest-serving Republican senator and a major figure in Alaska politics since before statehood, was indicted Tuesday on seven felony counts of concealing more than a quarter of a million dollars in house renovations and gifts from a powerful oil contractor that lobbied him for government aid.

Stevens, 84, is the first sitting U.S. senator to face federal indictment since 1993. He declared, "I am innocent of these charges and intend to prove that."

He is accused of lying on his annual Senate financial disclosure reports between 1999 and 2006 _ an indictment that caps a lengthy FBI investigation that has upended Alaska politics and brought unfavorable attention to both Stevens and his congressional colleague, GOP Rep. Don Young. Both are running for re-election this year.

The Justice Department accused Stevens of accepting expensive work on his home in Girdwood, Alaska, a ski resort town outside Anchorage, from oil services contractor VECO Corp. and its executives. VECO normally builds oil processing equipment and pipelines, but its employees helped do the work on Stevens' home.

Prosecutors said that work included a new first floor, garage, wraparound deck, plumbing and electrical wiring. He also is accused of accepting from VECO a Viking gas grill, furniture and tools, and of failing to report swapping an old Ford for a new Land Rover to be driven by one of his children.

From May 1999 to August 2007, prosecutors said, the senator concealed "his continuing receipt of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of things of value from a private corporation."

Prosecutors said Stevens "took multiple steps to continue" receiving things from VECO and its founder, Bill Allen. The indictment says Allen and other VECO employees were soliciting Stevens for "multiple official actions ... knowing that Stevens could and did use his official position and his office on behalf of VECO during that same time period."

VECO's requests included funding and other aid for the company's projects and partnerships in Pakistan and Russia. It also included federal grants from several agencies, as well as help in building a national gas pipeline in Alaska's North Slope Region, according to the indictment filed in Washington.

At the White House, press secretary Dana Perino said, "The president has been working with Senator Stevens for many years, and he appreciates his strong leadership on key issues. This is a legal matter that the Department of Justice is handling, and so we will not comment further on it."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/29/ted-stevens-indicted_n_115634.html

Or distractions from things like this,

The primary purpose of the hearing on the “constitutional limitations” of the executive branch was not to consider the Kucinich impeachment resolutions, but it gave the Ohio Democrat and former presidential candidate another chance to advance his agenda. Kucinich was prohibited from “utilizing familiar terms,” but asked for his three separate impeachment resolutions to be entered into the Judiciary Committee record.

It also gave Kucinich a stage and a national spotlight beyond the House floor, where he had spent hours — often late hours after the House had concluded its business for the day — over the past few weeks reading his impeachment resolutions into the record.

More than an hour before the hearing began, more than 100 spectators had gathered to try and see the hearing live. Many of them were wearing “Impeach Bush” T-shirts and identified themselves through their attire as Iraq veterans against the war.

Only a handful gained seats in the main hearing room — Congressional staff had taken most of them — and those assembled outside began chanting “Shame! Shame!” upon hearing the announcement from Capitol Police that the hearing room was full.

Meanwhile, inside, Kucinich — who was greeted by loud cheers upon his entrance — immediately launched into his argument.

“The primary justifications for going to war, outlined in the legislation which the White House sent to Congress in October of 2002, have been determined conclusively to be untrue,” Kucinich said.

“What, then, should we do about it?” he continued. “The decision before us is whether to honor our oath as members of Congress to support and defend the Constitution that has been trampled time and again over the last seven years.”

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) was intent on steering the hearing back to its stated purpose.

“It’s no secret that I have grave concerns about the excesses in the exercise of executive branch authority by the present administration,” Conyers said. “We face few issues more difficult, complex or important than separation of powers in general and excesses of the executive branch.”

He did not mention impeachment or Kucinich’s resolutions during his opening statement.

Conyers also called a number of witnesses, including Reps. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) and Walter Jones (R-N.C.) to testify about the “excesses” and potential abuses of power by the Bush administration.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/kucinich-raises-bush-impeachment-at-hearing-2008-07-25.html


What say you Zap??