> > > And maybe you should have added John Edwards having an affair > > > while his wife battles cancer. Or maybe the baby John Edwards > > > had with his mistress. Or maybe John Edwards telling everyone > > > that "they" are the only one he has confided some personal > > > details about his son's death. Oh yea, family values. The > > > dems really personify them. > > > > Edwards is the Dem nominee? > > No Lawson, he's not. But when Sal decided to come down on McCain > for dumping his first wife, and touted Obama's successful marriage, > and then sacastically referred to the Republicans as the party > of "family values", I thought I'd hi-light the recent revelations > of John Edwards having an affair while his wife battles cancer. An > affair he's had for four years, and may even have produced a baby. > > Hey, guess what. Edwards is a lawyer. If the allegations are > untrue, maybe he knows someone that can refute them and go after > the Enquirer. That is, since according to Sal, the accusations are > so baseless. > > Lawson, let's call it like it is.
Just as a question, could "like it is" include the possibility that none of this is any of our damned business? I'm pretty sure that if I were put under the scrutiny of running for public office, the press would have a field day with my indiscretions. The incident in the hot tub with the cheerleaders and the eels alone would probably bump me off the ticket. The French had the right attitude about these things as far as I'm concerned. Former president Chirac was a sonofabitch in his political dealings and basically maintained two families concurrently, and the French didn't seem to have any problem with this. The *predominantly Roman Catholic* French didn't seem to have any problem with this. When he died, his wife and family marched in the procession side by side with his mistress and family. I'm uncomfortable with gettin' morally medieval on politicians' asses as if their morals or lack thereof might make them incapable of doing a good job as a national leader. Winston Churchill was a drunk. FDR had a mistress for 20 years. JFK probably nailed more bimbos in the White House than Carter had Little Liver Pills. Gandhi slept snuggled up between two young girls. Nobel Peace Prize winners have turbulent and sometimes abusive relationships with their spouses. Hell, Alfred Nobel himself was one of the "masters of war," an arms manufacturer. Everybody has a closet, and as far as I can tell, everybody's got shit in that closet that they would prefer that the narrow-minded and moral members of society not see, so that they don't obsess on it. THAT they obsess on it does not mean that the politician in question has to obsess on it, or spend even a moment "defending" himself or herself against their accusations. The smart ones, in my opinion, should just let the narrow- minded obsess and do their own thing, and see how things work out. The Zen parable revolving around "Is that so?" springs to mind. I've mentioned a film here a few times, and never "gotten a bite" on it. I think it's a very good film. It deals with moral and ethical issues, and with the role of women in politics or public life, and with how they are held to different standards than the men sometimes. And it's a good movie to boot. What is not to like about that? The film is called "The Contender," and is about a woman who is nominated to fill the vacant VP spot for a sitting presidency. Shortly following her nomination by the presi- dent (Jeff Bridges, who has never been finer as the Columbo- like stringpuller of the Washingtonian puppets), revelations appear of an orgy back in college. What's a politician to do? What's a WOMAN to do? What's a HUMAN BEING to do when accused of something they don't feel merits a response? Joan Allen gives what should have been an Oscar-worthy performance answering these questions. Highly recommended for those who have to wade through the muck of the U.S. presidential election media and need to be reminded what having real ethics entails.
