He asked (and I am paraphrasing), "What's the difference between Edwards' story and Newt Gingrich? With John McCain? Well Newt Gingrich isn't running for anything and John McCain's affairs are well documented."
He went on to ask "what sort of man" has an affair with a woman recovering from cancer?
In discussing Edwards, he's right. What sort of man does that?
It's Miller's ease at excusing McCain's infidelities that proves my point about the hypocrisy of the guardians of "our" moral fiber when they (not incorrectly) criticize John Edwards' infidelities while curiously ignoring John McCain's.
Kevin Miller, hypocrite.
UPDATE: Here's a picture of with another pillar of conservative ethics, indicted and disgraced former member of Congress, Tom Delay:
John K: Of course Miller is ranting about Edwards. If you liberals haven't figured out, it is good for ratings. Ordinary people do not like what Edwards did. And they still think he is lying about the child.
ReplyDeleteHave you lefties considered this? Wolfson, he formerly of the Clinton camp, is making the case that if the press (yah the lefty press Ed Heath) had come clean when they knew about this, then Sen. Clinton would have gotten the nomination. So all you Clinton people in here, looks like you opened the door right into your nose.
Which is not hard for a liberal to do. LMAO
John K: Tom Delay committed the same sin as Rove, he beat Democrats at their own game and won elections. And for that you lefties have hunted him down and tried to use the courts to silence him. Hasn't worked.
ReplyDeleteI remember when Delay was on Miller's show and how they commisserated that DeLay was a victim of "losing by means of prosecution, whenever he could not be defeated via election."
ReplyDeleteIt was an uncanny moment--the very same Viagra-induced Hammer that went after Dems with bogus legal investigation after bogus legal investigation--the Clintons the foremost of them--all through the 90s. the time of the 'glorious' Gingrich revolution.
Kevin me well enough not to take my call as DeLay was on, but the next hour I wasat least able on-air to sneer and chuckle at their pathetic cases of amnesia and hypocricy.
Um, yeah, Tom Delay was laundering campaign contributions. And he's about as relevant as Newt Gingrich these days, so...
ReplyDeleteAnd, again, John, no one here is defending Edwards' actions, so please stop lying in that regard.
As for the press covering this story earlier, many publications have expressed why they hadn't - because it would have been reporting rumors. Nice to see, John, that it's perfectly acceptable in your little deranged world to go after people on the basis of unsubstantiated rumors(big surprise, considering the ginned up arguments for the Iraq War!), but heaven forbid someone raises questions about "Deferment" Dick Cheney or George "aWol" Bush.
If unsubstantiated rumors are enough proof for you, then I'm sure you would agree that McCain should not have been let off with a simple dismissal of allegations of an affair with Iseman. Of course, in consideration of McCain's history of carousing, there probably was sufficient reason to investigate that story even after both McCain and Iseman denied it.
Simply put, John, the media didn't have anything to go on other than reporting by the National Enquirer, so look for another scapegoat other than the media. Now that Edwards' has admitted to the affair, there's an ACTUAL story.
But if we're going to keep discussing this as though it's relevant to the campaigns, then it's only fair to look at both of the candidates, as their the ones running for office and John Edwards is a private citizen at this point.
Obama has nothing to hide; McCain has a history of infidelity.
You said, John K., that if a person will lie to cheat on their wife, they'll lie about anything. And there's no question that McCain was less than forthcoming to his first wife about his affair with Cindy. Whether it was 30 years ago doesn't matter, unless you would concede that a person can "redeem" themselves from such behavior. If Edwards is tainted as a liar for the rest of his life, why doesn't the same standard apply to McCain? If this act makes a person a liar, what difference does it make if it was 2 years ago, 10 years ago or 30 years ago?
If McCain's affair is out of bounds, then I'll assume it's because of this reason - he's put it behind him, he's changed for the better. And if that's the case, then it's clear you and the right's skewering of Edwards is purely for political opportunism and not genuine outrage over his marital indiscretion, as is always the case when the rightwing freak machine raises the issue of moral values.
The fact that you will not make a pronouncement condeming McCain's treatment of his first wife is just further evidence that the GOP(Goofy Old Perverts) is perfectly willing to look the other way while attacking others for what they themselves are guilty of.
McCain's roaming libido is right at home with a party that attempted to cover-up the actions of a child predator(Mark Foley), had no qualms about Vitter's sexscapades with prostitutes or Larry Craig soliciting sex in the men's room of an airport.
It's one standard for cosnervatives and Republicans and an entirely different standard for everyone else. You have made this abundantly clear, John K. And because of this, I'm sure there is more than enough room for you and the other wingers aboard McCain's Hypocrite Express.
John K: Uh Jaywillie, I am not a McCain supporter. I have not sent one dollar to his campaign. So, Jaywillie you will have to reach farther than that. LOL LOL
ReplyDeleteIf John Edwards was republican...
ReplyDeletehe would have told his wife during a chemo treatment
he would have left his wife and kids penniless and married the trophy skank
he would have blamed the affair on the "looney left"
he would admit his mistake but proclaim that he now found Jesus and is forgiven by his Lord
the affair would have been with a young boy he picked up at an airport restroom
Oh my CathCatz
ReplyDeleteYou are a true believer in stereo-types.
Or is your list an attempt at humor? I don't know.
Ladies and gentlemen Cathcatz has given us a perfect example of political bigotry.
Gewurztraminer- damn, i like that wine too.
ReplyDeletewhy does everyone have to capitalize my name? anyway...
political bigotry? really? it's called satire. its in direct response to the reaction of the right with regard to edwards' affair.
and yes, i thought it was pretty damned funny.
i might add, an accusation of "bigotry" is awfully rich coming from someone with your picture on their profile.
ReplyDeletepot. meet. kettle.