For the record, I think a certain modicum of privateness should be allowed for anyone in the public. Thank God we don’t have the same paparazzi problems here as they do in the EU. However, some things in private lives are pretty damn near important. Breaking the law, or doing things a vast majority of people think are wrong, should be disclosed so that the public has a better idea of the person’s ideals. Ryan has a kink, big deal. It was with his wife. She didn’t want to stay married to him in part because of it obviously. Clinton was going behind his wife’s back. Bigger deal. I know Ryan tried to keep his records sealed to protect his family, and I don’t expect Kerry to comment on Ryan or what he did, just the tactics behind the media coverage. Sometimes it seems that Republicans are held to a higher standard and are slandered more often. How many more conservatives have had newspaper expose’s about their private lives, and then stepped down? Is this because liberal ideology thinks of these as being less important issues, and therefore the Dems don’t ask them to step down, or is it because they are less frequently reported. I don’t know, and may have lead you all to believe I assume the latter. I don’t. Yet. I also don’t believe there is illegal activities in Kerry’s past, but then why go through the trouble of sealing the records? Just because you are going into public office?
When I saw this thread title I thought, Hmmm, John Kerry becomes Jack Ryan? I can’t believe I never thought of that before. Ryan looks a little bit more like Edwards, but, yes, it all makes sense now.
Then I came in here and the OP didn’t make any sense at all. I’m very disappointed.
Math symbol. Greater than. >
Well, Kerry’s wife was severely depressed and (IIRC) tried or wanted to commit suicide. Perhaps it was to protect her or her career, or his career.
You’re completely back-pedaling on the OP. First you slagged Kerry’s camp for not commenting, then said that wasn’t the point, then attacked liberals for doing this latest thing with Ryan (which we pointed out was from a conservative newspaper), then did some hand-waving about how conservatives get hit more with this sort of thing (BTW, maybe that’s because they tout “family values” as being so important and then be complete hypocrites in their actions).
Let me list some dirt-digging on Dems:
- Carter lusting in his thoughts (this was a big deal then)
- Gary Hart daring the press to follow him and then getting caught with a chick on his lap while on a boat called Funny Business
- Clinton’s affair with Gennifer Flowers
- Clinton and Monica Lewinsky
- Blair Hull, as mentioned previously
- Sen. Barbara Mikulski was outed as being a lesbian
If I had time I could dig up some more stuff. I think Norquist (Milwaukee mayor) had something nasty dug up, and IIRC he’s a Democrat.
Y’know, the above would probably sound a little more heartfelt if you hadn’t started this sorry excuse of a thread.
Bigger to who? You?
Well, here in reality, Republicans aren’t held to a higher standard; nor are they slandered more often. Were you asleep from '92-2000? Because that’s the only way that I can imagine you making such a statement.
Why does it matter? You think, as you already said, that a certain modicum of privateness should be allowed for anyone in the public.
Well, me. Mrs. Clinton. A vast number of people who hold marriage in a certain sanctity. I guess all of us. Anything you want to do with your wife is your thing, unless it is murder. Cheating on your wife is quite a bit more. If to you the other is worse, then is a public blowjob from a hooker better than a public blowjob from your wife(since cheating isn’t worse after all).
Asleep. Hmm. No, actually I was in middle school at the beginning. I still thought what he did was wrong then. Still do. The important part about that was that it was current. Not from the past. Allegations of sexual misconduct in the past for Mr. Clinton were also important. He wasn’t asked to step down once the Democrats knew about the allegations.
However, the fact that I think privacy should be held and the fact that it isn’t are not relevant. The drudge exclusive from sunday in theR’s quote notwithstanding, it seems like there is the some difference in how it is being reported. People wanted to know about Jack Ryan. People want to know about John Kerry. To sue for one and not the other is playing favorites. Also, the Tribune doesn’t appear to have made any progress on their suit that drudge reported on 3 days ago.
You gonna tell us why you think Clinton was a “past rapist”, or why an affair compares to illegal cocaine use, pal?
There are accounts, I don’t have any cites, that said that some of his encounters as governor were coerced and possibly forced. One woman had scarring from some biting that occurred if I remember. Also, in some states, affairs are breaking the law. Crack use is breaking the law. Both are due to lapses in judgement. I would expect more from a leader. I haven’t needed to smoke crack or have an affair yet, and they should be better than me. Or I won’t vote for them. And I’m not your pal.
So then you *were * asleep 1992-2000. Pleased to meet you, Mr. Van Winkle.
You got no facts, you got no argument. Welcome to Great Debates.
qcomdrj, if you can’t offer any evidence for Bill Clinton being a rapist then don’t make the accusation.
I would submit to you that Ryan’s sin was not going to a sex club, but being emotionally abusive to his wife. He took her there without telling her what kind of place it was, demanded that she perform public sex acts, and then belittled her when she began to cry. If the rest of what’s in those papers are true, then he was a classic control freak in every aspect of the relationship, not just sex.
All Bill ever did was get an occasional piece of strange. I don’t know how much Hillary knew about her husband’s affairs but if she didn’t know about them, she was the only one. In any case, she has chosen to stay married to Bill, so that means Bill’s dalliances were not enough to make her end the marriage while Jack Ryan’s abusive behavior was enough to make wife dump him.
For some of us the “sanctity” of marriage also means that a man should be respectful and sensitive to his extremely hot wife.
And what do the opinions of all those people (with the exception of Hillary) have in common? Dick all. And I’ll decide when murdering my wife is acceptable, thank you very much.
[/quote]
Depends on the skill sets involved, I s’pose. Y’know what, though? It’s none of your business whether I chastely sleep with my own wife or hire some chippie to piss on me. Follow?
Really? Well, nobody but you give a shit what you think was wrong. See, the world doesn’t revolve around you. Someday, maybe. But not just yet.
And Drudge is not a source. I know that he posts all kinds of outrageous shit, but it’s still shit. Also, “people” didn’t want to know about Ryan. The Trib had a hardon for him. Nor do “people” wanna know about Kerry. Another newsflash for ya: The Chicago Tribune is not a proxy for everyone. Favorites, schmavorites, ya little pisher.
You know what? There are two people who disagree with you – Jeri Ryan and Hillary Clinton. One may have thought “a kink” was enough to break up their marriage. – Or not, who knows exactly what the last straw was? The other clearly thought going behind her back wasn’t enough to end the marriage.
I’m going to say this, I hope, a little more plainly than I did the first time. Jack Ryan wasn’t forced to quit running for the Senate by the Chicago Tribune, the media, the Democrats, the law, the courts, or for that matter, by Jeri Ryan. He told the Illinois Republican bosses that there was nothing embarassing in his background, and that he only wanted to keep the records private because releasing them might hurt his son. When the records came out and the bosses saw they’d been lied to, they told Ryan they wouldn’t work to get him elected.
It wasn’t the Democrats who asked Jack Ryan to step down but his own party bosses. Your gripe is with them, not “liberals.”
The biggest sin of all that Ryan committed, at least in political terms, was being 20 points behind in the polls. If he’d been 20 points ahead, he might still be on the campaign trail. It was instructive to see that the IL GOP bosses either made half-hearted attempts to, well, not even defend him really, or outright turned their backs on him.
Hey, anybody know what’s happened to the stalker that Ryan’s camp sicced on Barack Obama?
Heres one .
Heres another , followed up by a nurse report .
Here’s another .
I tried to link to only less than extremely right sources.
I know the Democrats didn’t ask Ryan to step down, since he wasn’t a Democratic candidate.
GL, I didn’t use drudge as a source, theR did. I was responding to it. Try reading the whole post next time.
Being accused of rape does not mean someone is a rapist. Get back to me when he’s convicted.
Also, Dems could still have asked Ryan to step down, or at least condemned his actions. But, at least in this case, they took the high road and refused to engage in personal attacks against Ryan.
It’s absolutely ridiculous to say that if Kerry tries to block the unsealing of his divorce records, he must be ‘hiding something’. OF COURSE HE IS. He’s hiding the details of a very private divorce. I know this may come as a shock to some, but divorces aren’t the most pleasant things. People are angry and hurt, and sometimes say and do things they would later regret. Plus, statements by both sides are bound to be somewhat biased.
That doesn’t mean there is ‘dirt’ here - any more than the ‘dirt’ you’ll find in any divorce. Maybe we’ll find that the wife accused him of neglect, or philandering, or he accused her of non-performance or philandering, or whatever. That doesn’t mean any of it’s true, even if both sides believe what they said.
Kerry’s divorce should remain sealed. It was a travesty, in my opinion, that Jack Ryan’s divorce documents were made public. You can sort of understand why some Republicans want to play tit-for-tat, especially if they think that the unsealing of the Ryan documents was politically motivated.
But that doesn’t make it right. Kerry’s records should stay sealed.
Cheddersnax, does this mean OJ really didn’t kill anyone? In the eyes of the law, no, he’s not a murderer, ask what the popular opinion is.
In the United States, people are found guilty by a jury in a court of law, not by opinion polls.
Of course, if you don’t think the Constitution should be applied to our little debate here, I remind you that a majority of Americans do not believe Clinton raped Broaddrick.
qcomdrj, you call those reliable cites?
The first one actually links to a message board discussion which in turn links to story in which Elizabeth Ward Grayson actually refutes allegations that she had been raped by Bill Clinton (did you bother to read that link before you posted it?)
The rest of your links are related to the tired-ass, unproven Juanita Broaddrick allegations. Two of them are on World Net Daily. You said you avoided right wing sources, so maybe you’re unaware that WND is an extremely right wing source, far more so than Dudge. It’s a tabloid, not a newspaper.
Your “Nurse’s report” is no report at all but simply a hearsay allegation by a woman who may or may not have known Juanita Broaddrick.
There is nothing in any of these links which passes the laugh test. Anyone can make an allegation. An allegation, in itself, means exactly dick.
Did you know that Ronald Reagan was accused of rape too? He was, and that charge was just as credible as yours, which is to say not at all.