YOUR FLY IS OPEN!
Yes, yes, and yes. And yet...
You've painted up your lips an rolled and curled your tinted hair.
Ruby are you contemplating going out somewhere?
The Shadow on the wall tells me the sun is going down -
Oh Ruby
Don't take your love to town
It wasn't me that started that old crazy asian war
But I was proud to go and do my patriotic chore
And yes, it's true that I'm not the man I used to be...
Oh Ruby I still need some company.
Its hard to love a man whose legs are bent and paralysed
And THE WANTS AND the needs of a woman your age, Ruby I realize,
But it won't be long i've heard them say until I'M not around
Oh Ruby
Don't take your love to town
I think this is the presumed picture, and possibly the one a "cheater" in the spotlight will choose to be measured against even if there are other, private rules in place. In the first situation there's a single baddie. In the second there are two perverts.
It's wrong, but that's the way the potato mashes That's the way the market crashes,
Ah, but there's this, a comment from one post down:
'Auto, at issue: "Cheating." We'll most likely never know just whose rules were violated.
PeskyFly | 08.08.08 - 6:01 pm | # '
Just so, Pesk. Just so.
Okay, so if we're going to assume that Elizabeth Edwards was a willful cuckold, what about the baby? What if he had brought home some nasty VD? What about his three kids?
Speaking as the child of a cheating husband, I just don't see how anything but monogamy within an established family is anything but perfidy. Call it moralizing if you will, but I know from firsthand experience that when Dad is screwing around on Mom, it's going to do some damage to the home. If I am being completely naive here, then please hand me the missing piece of the picture.
First, busting out the Kenny Rogers is a nice touch, Pesky.
Auto, it's downright heartwarming to see such a strong streak of chivalry, nothing wrong with that at all. I'm just too damned jaded to join you, that's all..
Auto, let me ditto the Cracker but add that for some families open marriages work. Not saying that's the case here at all or that it always works. I'm only asking whose rules have been violated? This is an arena where all are hypocrites and all deserve spankings. Almost always.
Thief! 
More like file sharing, no?
To be sure. No cheating here. :-0
Pesky, I'll bet the kids in said marriages won't tell you that. I can dig it if two consenting adults want to go the swinger route, but when you're talking about minor children who aren't worldly enough to make wise decisions about their own genitals, much less anyone else's, I think there's a problem.
Perhaps I am biased, as I've been in a polyamorous relationship where there were no kids involved and it was a complete disaster for me. I am a sexually jealous person. I don't like sloppy seconds. Pussy just doesn't look that good after some other guy has dipped his dick in it, and that's just one of my personal hang-ups. I can understand if other people are wired differently than I am; consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want behind closed doors. But he's got three kids.
I'll tell you this much, I haven't spoken to my own sperm donor in ten years, and if I ever see that motherfucker again I am going to bash his teeth in for him. His infidelity is hardly the entire basis for that, he is worthless on a variety of levels, but it's still a significant factor. It definitely impacts the degree of respect I have for him. On the homebuilding / homewrecking scale, sexual promiscuity leans heavily toward the latter.
If it's just another politician fooling around, well, no huge whoop. Painful for the family, embarrassing, yes, but that shit has already happened (politicians getting caught schtupping boys, girls, hookers, etc.) a dozen times this year. The bigger indicator of how flawed this guy was as a candidate is that he would have the arrogance to risk the very future of the country.
Imagine if Edwards had somehow snagged the nomination. We'd be looking at the all-time news orgy fustercluck -- and President John McCain -- just because this guy wanted a little side-nook.
I don't think we're really talking about 'swingers' here, 'Crat. If we were, I might agree with you. I'd like to pose you a hypothetical: Man (or woman) becomes tragically disabled. What is the spouse, who presumably remains loving and devoted, then to do for (on in lieu of) conjugal relations? The question is hypothetical,but the situation exists in the real world, as I think we all know. Your answer?
"To have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness or in health, to love and to cherish 'till death do us part."
And just to add, I have been in several relationships with people who were too sick for sex. It was worth the wait.
There's no way to know if the Edwards had any sort of "arrangement", but even if they didn't and he's just a cheating asshole how is this are business. It's annoying all the moral outrage against this that just going to cause Elizabeth more pain by putting this in the spotlight.
Auto, that's real sweet. But you're reminding somebody who lives those vows every day.
Bottom line: John may have fucked up but he isn't the real bad guy in this piece, the National Enquirer is. Now any personal strife the family may have been dealing with is a public shame. And every stone your nearly sinless arm throws at John bounces off and hits Elizabeth too.
Great minds think alike (and post at the same time)
Look, the National Enquirer is to blame for their own shoddy reporting, the fact that they pay their sources, and their general prurient slant, but the ultimate fault for any harm caused to Elizabeth Edwards by this affair lies with John Edwards and no one else. The National Enquirer didn't fuck around on his wife.
Country songs are made for this situation:
The girls all get prettier at closing time
They all begin to look like movie stars
The girls all get prettier at closing time
When the change starts taking place
It puts a glow on every face
Of the falling angels of the back street bars.
If I could rate'em on a scale from 1 to 10
I'm lookin' for a 9 but 8 would slip right in
A few more drinks and I might slip to a 5 or even a 4
But when tomorrow morning comes,
And I wake up with a number 1
I swear I'll never do it anymore.
by the way, Rielle Hunter is not her real name. if she were a man, she would be a sexual predator! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ talks extensively about her.
The NY Post mentioned that she was the main squeeze (at one time) of Jay McInerney. He based a character in a book on her.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/
0809...bedw_123676.htm
Auto,
As clearly as I can: Love, trust, and sex aren't synonyms in any case. Ever. We've elevated sex to some unreasonable place in our public dialogue and these stones you're casting are from the same artillery basket used by the pro life movement and those who oppose same sex (and before them interracial) marriage.
Love is an emotion. Trust is a kind of agreement. Sex is an awesome but dangerous and potentially live altering thing people do together. Like snowboarding. But naked and sticky with funnier smells, faces, and really embarrssing noises.
Marriage is a partnership. In a partnership failures in trust-- any trust-- create problems, But in this case we're not interested in trust we're interested in other people's sex lives.
Politically, those who do BadSex can't be trusted. Just like those who windsurf. I don't know what people think about snowboarding.
In reality, it's only those who can't be trusted who can't be trusted.
Sex in love is particularly special but don't conflate the cherry with the ice cream or the cause with effect.
If I tell my wife I'm going to be in the office all night then go out drinking and playing poker with friends I've given her the same reasons to doubt my commitment to the partnership. But if this was the Edwards story people wouldn't be wringing their hands and lining up to piss in Little John's eye.
I give partnerships built on nothing but insane sex two big thumbs up. Way up. But I don't give marriages laid on the same foundation a snowball's shot in devil pussy. A marriage that's ripped apart by a fuck would eventually be ripped apart by something else. Because it's not the fucking, ever. It's the lying.
I don't think the Enquirer would pay big bucks for headlines like Former Senator and Failed Democratic Candidate John Edwards Lied to his Wife. Do you?
So why all the anguish?
That should read "I give relationships built on nothing but insane sex two big thumbs up." Marriage and partnership were supposed to be married together.
Blogging with the twins is always an adventure.
Let's get real here. All of these righteous allegations of rascality and shamefulness and invalidating vice would have been owed a thousandfold to JFK. Is that where we want to go?
What I would have typed if I wasn't too lazy. Two thumbs up pesky.
From what I hear JFK was out having threesomes set up by the mafia, and even the God of Democrats FDR wasn't an angel. Hell, if the Inquirer was around in George Washington's day...
Again: "Great minds..." and simultaneous brain-waves. And Holt, folks, is one of your True Blue spouses. I'd bet on it.
Well, Kibitzer she'd cut my balls off if I wasn't. As well she should.
Nah, you're True Blue. But you suggest a thought: "There but for the fear of (fill in the blank) go I." Or rather: "...DON'T go I." There's not a commenter so far on this page who wouldn't have availed themselves of JFK's nook if physically and circumstantially able to do so.
Well, we can't all be as pure as our good friend Auto. :-D
What a bunch of drama queens here!
I see Edwards as basically a good family man who was in a difficult personal situation and, as a result, made a big mistake. He fessed up to his wife and they began healing together.
Contrast this with John McCain who came back to find his wife, who remained faithful to him while he was a prisoner of war, imperfect due to a serious auto accident. Not the tall beauty she once was. So John starts screwing women all over the country and ends up marrying one of them a week after his divorced wife #1.
So maybe we should focus on this comparison rather than having a bash Edwards fest.
Say, er, Dwayne. Do the math. At this point, you'll find as many statements of the sort you just made as you will judgmenal comments concerning Edwards. Now, don't YOU go being self-righteous! Your comment was well-said but not exactly the only ray of redeeming light on this page. "Drama queens" Sheeesh!
I just need to be alone...
This just in. Joe Klein in Time:
"...Just about anyone under the age of 60 who has lived in this permissive society during the past 40 years, has done something that might be unfit for a Hallmark Greeting Card. In fact, I have profound qualms about any would-be politician who hasn't allowed him- or herself a moment of untrammeled human or chemical exploration. I fear that the media have driven an awful lot of interesting people away from public service for reasons that would have seemed extreme to the second generation of New England Puritans...."
For the rest, go to http://www.time-blog.com/swampla...08/
edwards.html.
Pesk, you and Dwayne do a Time Out.
I can't hear you Kibs... I'm being a drama queen.
Joe Klein has been bodysnatched. That's two reasonable statements from him in about two weeks.
Whatever else you say, Edwards showed remarkably bad judgment. Whatever his personal relationships, he had to know this would be an issue if he ever got caught. And he had to know someone would be out there, waiting to catch him. As was said in a previous threat, how in God's name could he have run for the nomination? What if he had won? It chills me to the bone.
THe press, of course, will try to establish guilt by political association, try to taint Obama with Edwards' affair in a way they never comtemplating doing with Larry Craig or Newt Gingrich, much less John McCain.
Jeffro, yep. If he'd won the nomination and this came out I'd have to wring his neck personally. It's just about the definition of huburis given the particular importance of this campaign.
What Edwards did was rip a page out of the Gary Hart (with a preface by Bill Clinton) textbook. It was stupid, unforgivable, and shallow.
BUT in this politcos are like rock stars era, The bimbo angled in and attracted a man with a burden and pressure.
OK, in short Edwards fell of the perfectos wagon and did a stupid human thing. It was lamebrained, but done.
I think that would be Bill Clinton with a preface by Gary Hart.
Commenting by HaloScan
