So is John Edwards a disgusting individual in your opinion?  Just trying to get perspective.

Did John Edwards molest his sisters? 

---

There is a difference between Edwards and pretty much any democrat versus the republicans in these situations...


Anyone know what it is?

---

Did John Edwards molest his sisters? 

 

To my knowledge no.  Do you have a point?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

There is a difference between Edwards and pretty much any democrat versus the republicans in these situations...


Anyone know what it is?

 

My guess is that when republicans are involved in something like this, it's a big deal.  If it's a democrat, not news.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

There is a difference between Edwards and pretty much any democrat versus the republicans in these situations...


Anyone know what it is?

 

Democrats have no morals to compromise? Republicans aren't usually interested in having heterosexual affairs?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Democrats have no morals to compromise? Republicans aren't usually interested in having heterosexual affairs?

There is some truth in both of those statements

---

To my knowledge no.  Do you have a point?

I am confused why you are asking what my point is. Are you not awareof the Duggar that molested his sisters. Something most would consider disgusting along with the family covering it up handling it internally, hence my disgusting individual comment...... 

---

Are you even capable of having a rational discussion? I can't really tell from the babble that you posted.


For your information, John Edwards is not from "like 15 years ago". As of matter of fact, he was being vetted to be Barrack Hussein Obama's running mate in the 2008 election. Perhaps you weren't the best student in your history class.

Good one...I guess? I was already out of college by 2007 and I'm not sure they teach Edward's extramarital affair in Civics. Could be wrong.

---

I think this guy is an nonredeemable piece of chicken excrement.  

---

I am confused why you are asking what my point is. Are you not awareof the Duggar that molested his sisters. Something most would consider disgusting along with the family covering it up handling it internally, hence my disgusting individual comment...... 

 

Don't try to take things out of context.  Sure the guy is scum, but his "molesting of his sisters" occurred at a a young age.  That points to a problem of adolescence and perhaps something not right in the home.  However, I digress a bit.  What gets put out in the media is that "he molested his sisters".  It's not pointed out that it happened in the younger years.  He's being framed as being some kind of pedophile or worse when in fact it happened when he was a young child.  Perhaps that's where the attention should be focused.

 

Instead, the narrative is that "he molested his younger sisters".  No more information is presented.

 

In contrast, what John Edwards did was have an affair while his wife was battling a terrible disease.  I don't know if you are familiar with cancer treatment, but it's not a pretty sight.  While having said affair he fathered a child, then tried to lie about it.  Eventually his wife succumbed to the disease, and the very person that she trusted with herself betrayed her.

 

So tell me.  Which person is deserving of the title of being "more despicable"?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

There are disgusting human beings from all walks of life.  I don't understand any glee that anyone can get from a story like this.  I certainly could not understand anyone even attempting to defend this perverted individual.  

 

Here is one thing that I also don't get.  Why is it when a piece of human excrement does something wrong side 1 jumps all over it and side points 2 out an example of someone from side 1 that did something similar?  To me all of these sick twisted individual's need to go away and never be heard from again.  May their victims heal, get some kind of closure and move on to a happy life.  

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Good one...I guess? I was already out of college by 2007 and I'm not sure they teach Edward's extramarital affair in Civics. Could be wrong.

 

That explains a lot of your posts.  Did they actually teach you anything while indoctrinating you?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Don't try to take things out of context.  Sure the guy is scum, but his "molesting of his sisters" occurred at a a young age.  That points to a problem of adolescence and perhaps something not right in the home.  However, I digress a bit.  What gets put out in the media is that "he molested his sisters".  It's not pointed out that it happened in the younger years.  He's being framed as being some kind of pedophile or worse when in fact it happened when he was a young child.  Perhaps that's where the attention should be focused.

 

Instead, the narrative is that "he molested his younger sisters".  No more information is presented.

 

In contrast, what John Edwards did was have an affair while his wife was battling a terrible disease.  I don't know if you are familiar with cancer treatment, but it's not a pretty sight.  While having said affair he fathered a child, then tried to lie about it.  Eventually his wife succumbed to the disease, and the very person that she trusted with herself betrayed her.

 

So tell me.  Which person is deserving of the title of being "more despicable"?

I am utterly flabbergasted that you are defending this guy. 

 

Let me get this straight.

 

One man cheats on his wife while she is deathly ill and fathers a child out of wedlock. Horrible for sure. Nobody was physically harmed here unless there is something I am unaware of. Emotionally, sure and it's a terrible thing to do to someone. I have no respect for John Edwards.

 

The other one has molested/raped/fondled (whatever word you want to use to try to tone down how disgusting this is) how many young girls including his own sisters? Then goes on to have (allegedly) extra marital affairs after his family shoved it under the rug seeing no justice done.  All the while claiming how full of love and faith the whole family is to con their way into a TV show to make millions? 

 

Now, with all that said. I would like to point out how you have tried to not only defend this piece of scum but also attempted to pull the "well look what this democrat did that actual isn't even the same thing at all but is somehow worse!!!!" I expect that of some other ilk on here but not you. You are better than that. 

---

I am utterly flabbergasted that you are defending this guy. 

 

Let me get this straight.

 

One man cheats on his wife while she is deathly ill and fathers a child out of wedlock. Horrible for sure. Nobody was physically harmed here unless there is something I am unaware of. Emotionally, sure and it's a terrible thing to do to someone. I have no respect for John Edwards.

 

The other one has molested/raped/fondled (whatever word you want to use to try to tone down how disgusting this is) how many young girls including his own sisters? Then goes on to have (allegedly) extra marital affairs after his family shoved it under the rug seeing no justice done.  All the while claiming how full of love and faith the whole family is to con their way into a TV show to make millions? 

 

Now, with all that said. I would like to point out how you have tried to not only defend this piece of scum but also attempted to pull the "well look what this democrat did that actual isn't even the same thing at all but is somehow worse!!!!" I expect that of some other ilk on here but not you. You are better than that. 

It's just how things are, you know?


It's like when Megyn Kelly called Josh Duggar "curious", while calling the black teen girl who was manhandled by police at a pool party "Not a Saint"


Funny how people have different standards for different people.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Don't try to take things out of context.  Sure the guy is scum, but his "molesting of his sisters" occurred at a a young age.

Don't give me that. You're better and smarter than that. Josh Duggar was 14 to 15 years old when he was molesting his 9 and 10-year-old sisters. It's not like he was 8 years old and playfully grabbed their chests in the bathtub. He was more than old enough to know that what he was doing was extremely inappropriate, arguably more than old enough to understand the concepts of sexual assault and rape.

 

I don't even want to begin to play the "which is worse?" game with Edwards and Duggar because, frankly, both men did something sick and horrible. That game accomplishes nothing other than creating hard feelings by encouraging both sides to think of themselves as morally superior when, really, the concept of either one of these actions being "worse" than the other is laughable. One man cheated on his wife while she was dying of cancer, but he didn't sexually molest a kid either. The other guy sexually molested five girls, two of them his own sisters, but he was under 18 at the time, and none of them were fighting cancer. See how stupid it is to try and say that what John Edwards did is worse than what Josh Duggar did? See how stupid it would be to turn it around?

 

Here's the deal with this thread: it was revealed a while back that a pseudo-celebrity who positions himself as a public figure and role model for the "family values" crowd admitted to molesting his two sisters. He toured the press circuit tearfully apologizing for his actions, saying that he had a problem in his youth and begging forgiveness. His core audience gladly gives him that forgiveness, then it comes out that he has accounts on a website for married individuals to meet up with other married individuals for the purposes of cheating on their spouses. It has nothing to do with his political allegiances--at least, it didn't until you dragged that up. Even Drifter commented on the person rather than the party. It has everything to do with the fact that this man, who positions himself as a role model, has sexual feelings for minors and sleeps around while his wife cares for their four kids. It's utterly ridiculous for you to come in here and make this about political parties.

 

No one had said one damn dirty thing about the letter after his name on his voter ID card until you came in insisting that a Democrat wouldn't have been scrutinized for similar actions. Have you conveniently forgotten about how John Edwards was dragged through the mud by everybody, and his career was a smoldering pile of cow dung afterwards? How about Bill Clinton nearly being forced out of the White House because he couldn't keep his cigar out of Monica's dress? What about Anthony Weiner being skewered by the national media--all of the national media--before resigning in disgrace?

 

Don't even try to come in here and act like Josh Duggar gets crap for rape and adultery because he's a Republican, while Democrats get away with it all the time. Josh Duggar is getting it piled on because he's a public figure that positions himself as a role model--a role model that sexually assaults his siblings and brazenly cheats on his wife.

---

That whole family struck me as odd, when they had a miscarriage and filmed an episode the mom said something along the lines " oh well The Lord giveth and The Lord taketh" it struck me at best these people have become almost detached from the individual children. It was almost like each kid they successfully had was just a number to tally up, where they really nurturing all 20 something of these kids?


What sucks is the stigma they are casting on large families. I know families with 6-10 children one even as large as 11 children they really do live different lifestyles but they nurture each of their children.


This Josh guys is just a sexual pervert, I mean raping your sisters isn't something you find well adjusted and fully nurtured children doing. Clearly he's developed into a full blown sexual pervert. I hope his kids and wife get far far away from him.

---

You're right. I concede that it is not funny...


But I must admit that I s an glad that phony family is getting their payback.


They made millions of dollars shilling to religious suckers by creating a false/bogus front. They even tried to use their phoney personas to affect politics and thus other people's lives.

They deserve this, and I for one am glad they have been exposed for the phonies they are.

Those who are able to decide for themselves deserve the consequences of their actions. The kids do not. 

 

As for the rest of your comments, I somewhat agree. I've never seen an episode of their show and don't really care to watch how people raise their kids since I have no interest in birthing and raising any myself, but the idea of how they live has intrigued me. But I hate so-called reality TV enough to stay away. That, and I don't agree with an aspect of it all that I can't discuss here due to COC.

---

Don't try to take things out of context.  Sure the guy is scum, but his "molesting of his sisters" occurred at a a young age.  That points to a problem of adolescence and perhaps something not right in the home.  However, I digress a bit.  What gets put out in the media is that "he molested his sisters".  It's not pointed out that it happened in the younger years.  He's being framed as being some kind of pedophile or worse when in fact it happened when he was a young child.  Perhaps that's where the attention should be focused.

 

Instead, the narrative is that "he molested his younger sisters".  No more information is presented.

 

 

Dude. He was a teenager. He knew exactly what he was doing. And obviously his 'teenage issues' aren't limited to his teen years. This guy is disturbed on so many levels. 

---

 

Here's the deal with this thread: it was revealed a while back that a pseudo-celebrity who positions himself as a public figure and role model for the "family values" crowd admitted to molesting his two sisters. He toured the press circuit tearfully apologizing for his actions, saying that he had a problem in his youth and begging forgiveness. His core audience gladly gives him that forgiveness, then it comes out that he has accounts on a website for married individuals to meet up with other married individuals for the purposes of cheating on their spouses. It has nothing to do with his political allegiances--at least, it didn't until you dragged that up. Even Drifter commented on the person rather than the party. It has everything to do with the fact that this man, who positions himself as a role model, has sexual feelings for minors and sleeps around while his wife cares for their four kids. It's utterly ridiculous for you to come in here and make this about political parties.

 

So which is it?  Does it have nothing to do with his political allegiances or are you taking into account his public endorsement of conservative principles of family values?  


 

No one had said one damn dirty thing about the letter after his name on his voter ID card until you came in insisting that a Democrat wouldn't have been scrutinized for similar actions. Have you conveniently forgotten about how John Edwards was dragged through the mud by everybody, and his career was a smoldering pile of cow dung afterwards? How about Bill Clinton nearly being forced out of the White House because he couldn't keep his cigar out of Monica's dress? What about Anthony Weiner being skewered by the national media--all of the national media--before resigning in disgrace?

 

Don't even try to come in here and act like Josh Duggar gets crap for rape and adultery because he's a Republican, while Democrats get away with it all the time. Josh Duggar is getting it piled on because he's a public figure that positions himself as a role model--a role model that sexually assaults his siblings and brazenly cheats on his wife.

 

1.) There is a contextual difference between clothes on touching of someone in your relative age group and pedophilia molestation. Its not to justify the former, but there is a difference and its unfair to confuse the two.  To call it rape is whole other thing but i think we all know that its for show.  

 

2.) Case and point with Bill Clinton, he has a laundry list of accusations of sexual misconduct that go way beyond the pale of a cigar with Monica.  You have alleged sexual assaults that have nothing to do with misplaced adolescent curiosity. Add into that the fact that we now know that he associated with a guy who ran an underaged brothel that Bill was at least around and then couple that with the fact that Uma Abedin is the wife of Anthony Weiner and Chief assistant to the secretary of state and you have a situation where the inner circle of the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination has an inner circle of abusers, pedophiles, and molesters not to mention her own track record as the head of BIMBO eruptions on her husbands Campaign.  I guarantee you if one of the Dugars ran for president it would be hard to have a press conference where this wouldn't come up.  

 

3.) Adultery is one of the most cowardly acts under the face of the sun.  I have no sympathy for the guy.

---

My guess is that when republicans are involved in something like this, it's a big deal.  If it's a democrat, not news.

 

 

Democrats have no morals to compromise? Republicans aren't usually interested in having heterosexual affairs?

 

Both very good guesses and also very funny! 

 

But, the difference I see is that Republicans run on the fact that they are anti-abortion, and pro-marriage.  They flat out pander to a certain high moral segment of the population, even though they are usually the gayest, or the most falandering...

 

Democrats don't run on morality.  They run  on issues.  I'm not saying that democrats don't pander, all politicians do.  It's just that even when a democrat gets caught in some nasty thing, it's not something where you can say, "what a hypocrite".

 

The John Edwards issue, for instance.  Yeah, it was nasty...  But he wasn't running a family values campaign.  He was running a populace campaign focused on the fact that there "Are 2 Americas".  

 

On the flip side, a Republican will get caught trying to solicit a man in a bathroom while campaigning for the defense of marriage and how his faith drives him and his decisions, and blah blah blah...

 

So that's the difference...

---