John Edwards "puke"

[ZiaAries]

Yep

[mogadishu]

It's funny cos it's true


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AE847UXu3Q

[ZiaAries]

Good one mog!

[Cambridge]

How do you know that his first wife had not moved on to someone else because she thought he was dead those years he was a POW?

There were Vietnam POW's that came back and found their wives had remarried. Maybe the first Ms McCain was not 'pleasantly' surprised when he came back. I dunno.

Because that’s not how it happened. She was a Navy wife and stuck by his side. He was not MIA…she and the Navy knew he was in a prison camp and would eventually come home.

She (and he, once) were good friends with the Ronald Reagans, and after he took up with Cindy the Reagans would have nothing further to do with him. That’s a comment on the facts as they saw them.

I'm totally with you guys that Edwards is a butt plug. But why is Obama letting the Clintons speak? They are both equally adulterers. In particular, Willy lied after the fact and he has been disbarred as a result of lying under oath. If I watch any of at all, I will make a point of turning it off when either of the Clintons speak.

[Cambridge]

Elizabeth Edwards is no victim

Among the very real truths concerning the differences between men and women, a significant one that the public got to witness once more last week is the truth regarding the sexual imperative - a truth that most people inherently know on some level, even if many refuse to acknowledge it. That truth, oversimplified and cogently expressed by Billy Crystal in the movie, "When Harry Met Sally," is this: Sexual accomplishment (conquest) is infinitely more significant to the ego-drive of men than it is to women, just as outward appearance is more significant for women. Put another way - women are judged by their youth and beauty; men are judged by their ability to attract women of youth and beauty.

In the case of Sen. John Edwards, we once again see a relatively powerful, successful middle-age man succumbing to the temptations of a younger woman. As a culture, we like to identify the women involved (often both cuckold and concubine) as victims (seduced and/or abandoned) and the men as perpetrators (seducer/abandoner). In art and literature, the theme of the weak, easily manipulated, somewhat pathetic older man, from "The Blue Angel" to "Double Indemnity" to "Body Heat," is common. In the real world, we don't like to think that our national leaders can be so easily manipulated by a mere girl. Being the perp is so much more macho.

The American cultural imperative that pressures women to look young and men to need to sleep with those women is oppressive to all involved. The feminist movement, while essentially progressive and sexually liberating, has also often emphasized the victim nature of womanhood and served to strengthen a double standard that, in this case, demonizes masculinity in general, and powerful men in particular.

Little has changed since Sigmund Freud noticed that people, as a rule, are pretty mixed up, repressed, confused and neurotic about sex. These stereotypes are damaging to women as well as men. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards are not victims. They are strong, accomplished and enlightened women who, perhaps, are able to see their partners, relationships and family holistically and have been able to include forgiveness in their hearts and vows. They should be heroes to the family values crowd.

Jeremy Snitkin is a marriage and family therapist in Marin County.

[ZiaAries]

Elizabeth Edwards is no victim


Jeremy Snitkin is a marriage and family therapist in Marin County.

Of course a man would say as much.

[Cambridge]

Elizabeth Edwards is no victim


Jeremy Snitkin is a marriage and family therapist in Marin County.

Of course a man would say as much.

It's his opinion piece, not mine. But I thought he was quite complimentary toward women...more so than the National Organization of Women. Maybe, read it again.

[ZiaAries]

Elizabeth Edwards is no victim


Jeremy Snitkin is a marriage and family therapist in Marin County.

Of course a man would say as much.

It's his opinion piece, not mine. But I thought he was quite complimentary toward women...more so than the National Organization of Women. Maybe, read it again.

I understand your thinking it is complimentary, however, I disagree that she is not a victim. I see her as a victim of a lying, cheating no-good creep. Perhaps his earning potential is reason enough for her to stay with him.

[mogadishu]

Elizabeth Edwards is no victim


Jeremy Snitkin is a marriage and family therapist in Marin County.

Of course a man would say as much.

It's his opinion piece, not mine. But I thought he was quite complimentary toward women...more so than the National Organization of Women. Maybe, read it again.

I thought it was nonsense.

[Fred75]

Elizabeth Edwards is no victim

Among the very real truths concerning the differences between men and women, a significant one that the public got to witness once more last week is the truth regarding the sexual imperative - a truth that most people inherently know on some level, even if many refuse to acknowledge it. That truth, oversimplified and cogently expressed by Billy Crystal in the movie, "When Harry Met Sally," is this: Sexual accomplishment (conquest) is infinitely more significant to the ego-drive of men than it is to women, just as outward appearance is more significant for women. Put another way - women are judged by their youth and beauty; men are judged by their ability to attract women of youth and beauty.

In the case of Sen. John Edwards, we once again see a relatively powerful, successful middle-age man succumbing to the temptations of a younger woman. As a culture, we like to identify the women involved (often both cuckold and concubine) as victims (seduced and/or abandoned) and the men as perpetrators (seducer/abandoner). In art and literature, the theme of the weak, easily manipulated, somewhat pathetic older man, from "The Blue Angel" to "Double Indemnity" to "Body Heat," is common. In the real world, we don't like to think that our national leaders can be so easily manipulated by a mere girl. Being the perp is so much more macho.

The American cultural imperative that pressures women to look young and men to need to sleep with those women is oppressive to all involved. The feminist movement, while essentially progressive and sexually liberating, has also often emphasized the victim nature of womanhood and served to strengthen a double standard that, in this case, demonizes masculinity in general, and powerful men in particular.

Little has changed since Sigmund Freud noticed that people, as a rule, are pretty mixed up, repressed, confused and neurotic about sex. These stereotypes are damaging to women as well as men. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards are not victims. They are strong, accomplished and enlightened women who, perhaps, are able to see their partners, relationships and family holistically and have been able to include forgiveness in their hearts and vows. They should be heroes to the family values crowd.

Jeremy Snitkin is a marriage and family therapist in Marin County.

She's a victim of the feminist movement because the feminist movement calls marriage oppressive. Therefore devaluing vows.
That then makes his infidelities a bit more acceptable.

[mogadishu]

Fred = pro-liberal, anti-marriage.

Well well. Whoulda thunk?

[Cambridge]

Zia, Moga and Fred are all on the same side on this issue…and it is the wrong side. What Jeremy Snitkin is saying is, victim hood = weakness. If you want to continue to portray women as weak and victims, go ahead and perpetuate the myth that they cannot, and have not the “manhood,” nor even the “womanhood,” to pee with the big dogs in the tall grass.

If we are going to truly liberate women we have to discard the 19th century vision of women as the “weaker” sex. In a sense this is very close to the position of Obama on the race issue. Notice he is not all that sympathetic to issues of Black poverty and other issues. This is why old-school Jessie Jackson insulted him.

What Jesse Jackson was saying was that Obama was abandoning the old vision of Blacks as weak and victims…as po’ boys, holdin’ the hand out. And why wouldn’t Jackson take this position? He is vested in the old welfare state. Obama is giving the modern vision of a strong, individual human being, Black or White.

Likewise, what Snitkin is saying is that Jill Ireland, and the National Organization of Women, are saying (like Jesse Jackson) that women need not take pride in themselves. Norsiree, they need only cast themselves as victims. Here is the response that logic compels:

These stereotypes are damaging to women as well as men. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards are not victims. They are strong, accomplished [individuals]…

That woman are automatically victims is as demeaning to women as Jesse Jackson’s vision of the role Blacks should play as beggin' the massa fo mo welfare.

[ZiaAries]

I don't portray women as weak. A woman stricken with breast cancer and fighting for her life would be in a WEAKENED state while her mutherfucker scum of a husband was not taking care of her while he kept the company of a skank other woman.

Cam, I'm not blind to the article you present. I whole-heartedly believe women are the stronger sex. However that does not change what Edward did to his wife and family. I think the article appears to be your attempt to sweep Edward's true pond-scum character under the rug.

Now there!

[Big Ben]

Elizabeth edwards is a victim.

We're not talking about an ordinary situation where she could kick her husband in the balls and leave him for having an affair. Rather, she is stricken with cancer and her spouse went off and shot his rocks off, probably many times if it is his child.

I thought liberals were supposed to be the compassionate ones. True compassion is applying it to the right situations, rather than misusing it to promote the social cause of the day.

[ZiaAries]

Ben, You better never cheat on me. We share two children you know, OR are we divorced. You KNOW what I'll do to you if you do.

Wedding ring around ________!