tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1203082776419426855.post7948915095190518839..comments2024-03-26T02:19:27.813-07:00Comments on ♆ The Macho Response ♆: "John" John In The John John (With All The Rest)The Crack Emceehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08366101526773588864noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1203082776419426855.post-40959509177437248492008-07-27T06:24:00.000-07:002008-07-27T06:24:00.000-07:00Well let's look at that: your post is clearly "adu...Well let's look at that: your post is clearly "adulterer = Democrat". I'm not proposing adultery, I'm not excusing those who practice it, and I'm certainly not a <I>slimy relatavist</I> as that is just sliding further and further from the proposition.<BR/><BR/>If you had written a thread called 'Adulterers are creeps' and then had a couple of televangelists, a celebrity or two, then I would not have commented. My opinion on adultery, whatever it might be, would have no bearing on your proposition (adulterers are creeps) and I would have let it lie.<BR/><BR/>If you had been more partisan and said that committing adultery with your sick wife is despicable and then only shown Democrats doing it, I <I>might</I> have let it slide. The statement is still sound, and we trust to a Democrat supporter to supply Republican counterparts for the same argument.<BR/><BR/>But neither of these is the proposition. <BR/><BR/><B>'What kind of monster would cheat on a woman with cancer!<BR/><BR/>TMR's answer: a Democrat.'</B><BR/><BR/>The task of anyone challenging your argument then is to prove two things: <BR/>1. There are Democrats who would not cheat on a woman with cancer.<BR/>2. There are non-Democrats who would cheat on a woman with cancer.<BR/><BR/>For point one: Jimmy Carter<BR/>For point two: I found Newt pretty quickly and couldn't believe it but it becomes a little unfair if you start knocking out the entire subset of conservatives with cancerous wives that they are also known to be cheating on and besides, you go on to list other Democrats who cheated on healthier spouses so I felt it reasonable to suggest that that would include a far large number than just 'Democrats'.<BR/><BR/>qed your proposition is misleading and wrong.Berko Willshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03071651884274086458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1203082776419426855.post-12370415805655267502008-07-26T19:36:00.000-07:002008-07-26T19:36:00.000-07:00I see - even though I addressed it already and sho...I see - even though I addressed it already and showed his ex wife understood and wants him to be president - you're still going to push the John McCain story. Interesting.<BR/><BR/>And Newt and his wife had already agreed to divorce - that's why they were "haggling" in the hospital - again: hardly the same as John Edwards. <BR/><BR/><I>TMR</I> has <B>never</B> defended Rudy's behavior. Period.<BR/><BR/>Now, the biggest question I have for you, Berko Ol' Boy, is:<BR/><BR/>What's your point? Are you <B>defending John Edwards's adultery</B>? Trying to say "everybody does it" when that - clearly - isn't so? Are you trying to prove that the Democratic Party's many current adulterers should be in office when none of them - none of them - has done anything substantial enough, in my opinion, to justify keeping them in office once they prove they ain't worth shit otherwise.<BR/><BR/>Where do you stand, Berko? Are you a slimey relativist - or someone who thinks people (like the spouses) deserve decent treatment and at least a little respect? <BR/><BR/>If you don't like what Rudy did (as I don't) then I'd hope that would mean you "get it" and would condemn the Democrats too. <BR/><BR/>I don't think (as in the case of Newt or McCain) we, as outsiders to a marriage, have a right to say what makes it right for those in it. But when the wrong is clear - like when Bill and Hillary Clinton told everyone Monica was "crazy" and a "stalker" - then it's society's job is say so and put a stop to it. <BR/><BR/>And grabbing at any other partisan example you think you can find ain't doing that, Berko:<BR/><BR/>You're just acting as part of the problem, man.The Crack Emceehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08366101526773588864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1203082776419426855.post-12789971477108806112008-07-26T18:50:00.000-07:002008-07-26T18:50:00.000-07:00No, adultery is not exclusively DemocratProbably n...No, <A HREF="http://undeniableliberalism.blogspot.com/2007/03/republican-adultery.html" REL="nofollow">adultery is not exclusively Democrat</A><BR/><BR/>Probably need to do some spin on Newt's cancer wife after attacking Senator Edwards.<BR/><BR/>Also, not related but you might "enjoy" <A HREF="" REL="nofollow">this interview with Bob Barr.http://www.tylwythteg.com/enemies/Barr/barr1.html</A>Berko Willshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03071651884274086458noreply@blogger.com