digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at huffingtonpost.com —

How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'?

huffingtonpost.com — We have this weird notion in America now that if a politician is caught in an affair that his career is done. We seem to be saying that what he did in his private life effects his policies or how he governs.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • barbiesnow, on 08/08/2008, -24/+189Why is there a double standard here, only because he had this affair years ago? The hypocrisy and reason behind him leaving his wife who was disabled and disfigured due to a car accident...so he takes up with Cindy while still married to Carol..
    • sulthernao, on 08/09/2008, -2/+46Then he had an affair with an intern while married to Cindy.
      • FlaG8r, on 08/09/2008, -17/+6Is that documented?
      • tkstock, on 08/09/2008, -21/+10It's well documented in the minds of every McCain hater. Other than that... no.
      • diggproof, on 08/09/2008, -11/+5FlaG8r wants to see McCain's balls
      • Charlotte_Web, on 08/09/2008, -27/+6McCain's affairs -- 30 years ago, and he admitted to them.

        Let's talk about the allegations of Obama drug use and gay sex, less than 10 years ago when he was in the state senate:

        http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Did_Obama_snort_ ...
      • cygnus2112, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2How is it different? John McCain was separated from Carol when he met Cindy. They had been through quite a few separations before that, too. The marriage didn't work out.

        Edwards wasn't separated. His wife was in remission for cancer.
    • cheeseysynapse, on 08/09/2008, -6/+8When your some lowly politician...........it doesn't make national news. When you run for president.........its a little different. Ask Gary Hart
    • tkstock, on 08/09/2008, -9/+14According to McCain's friends, John was separated from his wife for all intents and purposes (but still living together) when he met Cindy.

      To be honest, I lived with a girl for one year after we broke up - it was a convenience. We were still on friendly terms, and even went so far as to see other people while we were still living together. I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised if it was a similar situation in the McCain household at the time. Let me say it for the record, I don't know.
      • SpinningHead, on 08/09/2008, -0/+9"The nature and timing of his divorce from Carol Shepp alienated key friends -- and his version doesn't always match that in court documents."
        http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la- ...
      • tkstock, on 08/09/2008, -2/+7"By contrast, some of McCain's friends, including the Senate aide who was at the reception where McCain first met Hensley, believed he was separated at that time." - latimes

        McCain himself admitted he was unfaithful to her in his memoir, "Faith of My Fathers," blaming the marriage's collapse on "my own selfishness and immaturity. … I cannot escape blame by pointing a finger at the [stress of] war. The blame was entirely mine."

        At least he didn't dodge the issue. It appears that he beats himself up before anyone else can.
      • richirwin, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3"At least he didn't dodge the issue. It appears that he beats himself up before anyone else can."

        Only because he couldn't get away with it.
      • savagesteve13, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2Whats REALLY creepy is McCain's mistress looks like his wife.
    • DrVonNugent, on 08/09/2008, -17/+10Ahh, another first comment by barbiesnow on a HuffPo article. Way to plug the spam machine.
      Buried.
      • DyceFreak, on 08/09/2008, -7/+4thats 2 stupid reasons to bury this...
        tho it sure as hell isn't worth the digg, you getting pissed at either The Huff, or a spammer is hardly a reason to bury an article.

        Though a good reason is;
        Nobody give's a ***** about Edwards or McCain, let alone their love life. McCain could go to china and ***** 50 prostitutes and I think I wouldn't look at him any differently.
      • SpinningHead, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la- ...
    • Biller13, on 08/09/2008, -11/+5Because people change. Are you the same person you were 5 years ago? I doubt not. The difference is very simple, McCain was a nobody at the time. Edwards could have been the next president of the United States. Imagine if this story came out with Obama having the affair, his campaign would be over. Edwards would have destroyed the Dem's chances in November if he were the nominee. He also repeatedly lied about it instead of coming clean.

      In 10 years if we still hear about Edwards this will be a thing of the past. For the most part that rests on his wife, if she stays with him and they work through it as the Clinton's did he will get through it. If she divorces him, he is finished in the public eye.

      I would also add, this is a pretty crappy article. I don't see why people continue to link to this Huffington Post garbage. I could have easily written a much better article in a matter of hours.
      • arvvvs, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2Plus wat Mccain did dosen't make up for what Edwards did.
      • pfenixfire, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1Uhh... Edwards' affair took place in 2006. For some reason the media decided to just now release this story. So my question for you is what is the difference between 10 years for McCain and 2 for Edwards?

        And his wife did forgive back when he told he in 2006 and I doubt that she would decide 2 years later to divorce him now.
      • DarkShroud, on 08/09/2008, -2/+2So I'm supposed to trust someone (Edwards) to run the country who cheats on his wife who is dying of cancer.
      • pfenixfire, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2@DarkShroud Edwards cheated on his wife in 2006, his wife discovered the cancer in 2007. And another horny ass politician ran this country a few years ago better than our current president.
      • JumpingJack79, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2Biller13, I agree with you that people change over years. But, for example, McCain is touting his POW status (which happened 40 years ago, BEFORE his affair and divorce) as a proof of his honor and high moral values. Well, guess what, while he may no longer cheat on his wife, his honorable persona is also gone, as he has become a complete do-anything-to-win hypocrite.
      • JumpingJack79, on 08/09/2008, -2/+2Let me explain. If you ask him today, he can't even tell you what he stands for, because giving out any policy detail would alianete either his right-wing base or everybody else. The only things he can tell you are:
        - "win the war in Iraq" (doesn't tell how he defines "win" and when that might happen),
        - "I know how to catch Bin Laden" (you do? well then you must tell it to the ones in charge of catching him, otherwise you're protecting the world's biggest terrorist to win the election -- but seriously, McCain doesn't even know whether Al Qaeda is Sunni or Shi'ite, so he's probably just lying to win the election),
        - "drill off-shore" (while that's a populist gimmick most of the public fell for, he would NOT support it if it would mean also closing tax loopholes for the Big Oil),
        - "Obama bad" (distort or make up whatever is necessary to produce one-sentence sound bites that raise fear and suspicion, all that while claiming that he wants to run an honorable campaign and talk about issues).
      • Kesseire, on 08/09/2008, -1/+0And the Vicky Iseman shenanigans were only a few months ago.

        McCain tried to get his wife to participate in a topless ("and sometimes bottomless" according to ESPN) "beauty pageant" only a week or so ago.

        He's been quoted calling his wife a "*****" in front of reporters in just the past few years.

        McCain's affair is simply one link in a long line of disgusting behavior - behavior we can count on continuing once he's in the White House. I've had enough media frenzies about Presidential affairs, and I have no desire to sit through another four or eight years of it.
    • bleachxfan911, on 08/09/2008, -3/+3Wow someone with some brains! On DIGG! I'm surprised no one's tried to rebuttal you considering you actually make sense.
    • MxM111, on 08/09/2008, -3/+6How is it different?
      Both are equally immoral.
      But Edwards is more stupid because he made it during his presidential campaign.
      • pfenixfire, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3Actually Edwards' affair took place in 2006. Still, pretty stupid thinking he could run for president without this coming out.
      • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3To be fair, it wasn't until he lost the primary that it came out.
      • MxM111, on 08/10/2008, -0/+1A) Was not she working on his campaign at that time? Did not he know that he is gonna run for the president?
        B) How does" when it become known " relate whether his actions were smart or not?
    • dienaked, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2Well, one reason for your so-called 'double-standard' is McCain didn't make a public statement about how being faithful to your spouse was a big indicator of your personal morals.
    • richirwin, on 08/09/2008, -1/+7It's different because John McCain is a republican and a war hero and doesn't deserve to be saddled with a wife who is crippled.

      Had she not been crippled, he may have stuck with her.

      A cripple would just have slowed him down.

      That's ok.

      John McCain - A war hero who lacks honor.
    • jabberwolf, on 08/09/2008, -4/+2Maybe because...
      just maybe to do a fair comparison:
      HE WAS IN A ***** PRISON CAMP FOR 4 ***** YEARS, CAME BACK AND WASNT IN LOVE AND HAD ISSUE..... YOU *****!!

      What did Edwards have - a busy campaign? How difficult and compelling!


      • PrevaliKato, on 08/09/2008, -0/+0Ouch! Was this supposed to be an intelligent answer?

        What Edwards did was wrong and amazingly stupid, he should have to answer for it. I feel sorry for his wife and the young kid from the bimbo. Can you say Karma?

        I loved McCain, read his book Faith of My Fathers and Worth Fighting for, followed his career but McCain has become self-serving. His campaign proves it. The McCain from roughly 10 years ago is not the McCain of today and anyone that can read and is an honest would agree because the facts don’t lie.

        Talking about facts; yours are a little off. McCain was a POW for roughly 5.5 years. You helps to read before you launch into an immature tirade!

      • richirwin, on 08/10/2008, -0/+1You didn't say ***** enough.

        You would may a more salient point if you said ***** a few more times.

        Saying ***** a lot will cleanse John McCain of the immoral behavior that he committed.
  • vexingmodstwo, on 08/08/2008, -76/+39WOW, you guys are desperate....
    • CryRightardCry, on 08/08/2008, -16/+37Like McCain was desperate to cheat on his wife then divorce her after the accident and then marry his new wife weeks after the divorce was final?
      Nah, not that desperate.

      OR, maybe you'll be an atypical rightard, and be able to actually explain what you mean by that.
      What's desperate about comparing the two cases?
      Why can't you admit you cheer an adulterer?
      Do you lack the honesty and integrity?
      Seems like you do.
      Still being a warmonger but still too ***** to enlist? Pathetic coward.
      • soot, on 08/09/2008, -22/+12Stop calling others names.
      • tpearl, on 08/09/2008, -26/+7Cryrightardcry is a whiny douche.
      • akchrs, on 08/09/2008, -21/+6Stop smoking pot 24/7 and get a job.
      • ramup, on 08/09/2008, -17/+5@cryrightardcry

        You are clearly behaving like your namesake.Cry retard psycho cry.
      • UglyBunny, on 08/09/2008, -5/+20Notice none of the people who have replied so far have been able to answer CryRightardCry's question, they merely make baseless attacks against his character.
      • akchrs, on 08/09/2008, -13/+4I answered CryRightardCry questions.
      • Biller13, on 08/09/2008, -9/+2Damn you really jumped all over him. Are you really that bitter & angry at the world? Do you tell your friends who disagree with you politically they are are cowards? No, you're just a coward who acts tough online to compensate for your ***** life. Second, you don't know ***** about him. Maybe he is for the war maybe against it how the ***** do you know? You're just some narcissistic loser with too much time on his hands looking to yell at anyone who disagrees with you. Get a life.
      • thatsmyaibo, on 08/09/2008, -3/+4You're an idiot. So it's better to cheat on your wife and have a child while your wife is dying in front of you than to break up the broken relationship and commit to the person you really have feelings for? I don't think McCain is right for cheating but Edwards has just proved he was scum.
      • Coven, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3except the kid isn't his and he's willing to take a paternity test to prove it.
    • soot, on 08/09/2008, -6/+12But isn't it a valid point?
      • radiofrequency, on 08/09/2008, -13/+7Not really. You're telling me you wouldn't divorce your wife if she were disfigured in a car accident while you were sitting in a POW camp for over half a decade?

        People divorce for far worse reasons than that.
      • soot, on 08/09/2008, -2/+4What cause is enough for a man to leave his wife is totally subjective. Someone might think a cancer-stricken spouse is grounds enough for a divorce. They're both wrong in my opinion.
      • soot, on 08/09/2008, -3/+2**for a divorce or infidelity, rather.

        The comment thread system sucks on this site.
      • UglyBunny, on 08/09/2008, -5/+6The point isn't that he divorced his wife, the point is that he started seeing his second wife before his divorce was final. THAT MAKES HIM A CHEATER.
    • jabberwolf, on 08/09/2008, -2/+2When losing what do you think Obamatards go after.

      Some young POW that came back and fell out of love. Yep, that's no different thana rich and powerful candidate having and affair, not out of love.... just a fling.
    • rhythmatic, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1screw the huffington post
      sincerely,
      an obama supporter
  • starkruzr, on 08/08/2008, -28/+264It's okay for Republicans, because they're in favor of family values. Democrats hate children and families and want everyone to have gay sex.

    I thought we all knew this.
    • Cuchanu, on 08/08/2008, -3/+62FYI Larry Craig only has sex with guys in bathrooms because he doesn't want a woman to get pregnant and have an abortion. He's not gay.

      If John Edwards had been that smart he wouldn't have a 'love child.'
      • Bartboy919, on 08/09/2008, -1/+17well its common knowledge that republicans only have Gay affairs while democrats only have heterosexual affairs.
      • ancientshoes, on 08/09/2008, -20/+3gay 'republicans' are nothing but closet democrats, I thought this was common knowledge
      • UglyBunny, on 08/09/2008, -2/+13right ancientshoes, that's why they're some of the most hard-core right wingers in their party.

        Mark Foley

        U.S. Representative
        (September 28, 2006)

        The Crime: Sending sexually laced, gramatically challenged instant messages and e-mails to teenaged boys in the Congressional page program for more than 10 years.

        The Hypocrisy: Chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. One of the foremost opponents of child pornography in Congress.

        Larry Craig

        U.S. Senator
        Senate Liason for Mitt Romney’s Presidential Campaign
        (June 11, 2007)

        The Crime: Soliciting sex from an undercover cop in an airport bathroom

        The Hypocrisy: Craig twice voted against adding the words “sexual orientation” to the federal hate crimes law. Craig also voted to give states the right to refuse to recognize gay marriage–a right they already had, but the Senator wanted to really, really prove he didn’t like gay people.

        The Quote: “I am not gay, I don’t do these kinds of things.”

        Bob Allen

        Member of the Florida House of Representatives
        Florida Chairman of John McCain’s Presidential Campaign
        (July 11, 2007)

        The Crime: Offering an undercover cop $20 to allow Allen to blow him in a men’s room in a public park. After being arrested, Allen tried to explain that he only offered to blow the cop because the cop was a “burly black man” and he “didn’t want to become a statistic.”

        The Hypocrisy: Allen was one of 21 Florida legislators to sign Gov. Jeb Bush’s friend-of-the-court brief supporting the state’s ban on gays adopting children, and he co-sponsored an unsuccessful bill that would have enhanced penalties for “offenses involving unnatural and lascivious acts” such as indecent exposure.

        The Quote: “I certainly wasn’t there to have sex with anybody and certainly wasn’t there to exchange money for it.”
      • richirwin, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2"gay 'republicans' are nothing but closet democrats, I thought this was common knowledge"

        There are a LOT of "closet Democrats" then.

        Regarding Bob Allen, let's recap - Bob Allen felt threatened, so he offered the burly black police officer $20 to blow the burly black police officer so he (Bob Allen) wouldn't "become a statistic." (FYI, that's an advanced self-defense technique - offer to pay your assailant to blow them to keep from getting beaten up.)

        To continue UglyBunny's theme...

        Glenn Murphy

        Chairman of the Young Republican National Federation

        The Crime: Performed oral sex on a sleeping man following a July 28 party at a home in Jeffersonville, KY.

        LOL, what a great role model. (Seriously)
      • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -1/+3Funny thing is, not a single person involved (except the tabloids) actually claims that Edwards is the father of that womans kid (and the timeline doesn't work for it to be his kid)
    • DaDrake, on 08/09/2008, -9/+1John Edwards runs on Family Values --- certainly more then John McCain. You obviously never seen one of John Edwards presidential handouts.
    • JamesMonet, on 08/09/2008, -9/+2Democrats and Republicans are almost identical in what matters most ... their ACTIONS. And their actions generally side with corporations and what's best for them. Of course, they'll spin it as "What's best for the corporations is what's best for the American economy." But - as we've found out from Bush's regime and the Dem-controlled Congress, fondling corporations' nether regions hasn't worked out too well for the average American.
      • EveningStarNM, on 08/10/2008, -0/+1What? You're talking about issues? Obviously, you're an unpatriotic American. You're supposed to be paying attention to the sexual relationships of public figures, not to the issues that actually matter! (Secretary Chertoff, I think we have one here that needs to be watched more closely.)
    • SaperKain, on 08/09/2008, -0/+12I can already hear evangelical/republican mafia getting their hit squad ready to somehow tie this to Barack Obama.
      • atmenterprises, on 08/09/2008, -2/+1Well they do have the same political affiliation, although that is a very loose tie.
    • jabberwolf, on 08/09/2008, -3/+1Star... if you lived in SF - that isnt entirely false !!
    • adeane, on 08/09/2008, -2/+0Democrats are the Abortion Party. All abortion, all the time, 24/7, that's what we're about :-)
  • throop77, on 08/08/2008, -30/+163Its not different. They are both scumbags.
    • mummbleswers, on 08/09/2008, -3/+20It is different, no one wants to hear the words "McCain" and "sex" in the same..blah! Oh sorry, I just threw up on my keyboard thinking about it.
    • sabroskie, on 08/09/2008, -6/+4It is different and they are both scumbags.
    • ancientshoes, on 08/09/2008, -13/+3really? what Vietnamese prison did YOU stay in for years you conceited *****? what country did you serve and suffered for you miserable piece of *****?

      What does this have to do with anything? For what he went through for this country completely eclipses any affairs he might have had, and you should have an unending amount of respect for the man for what he has done, no matter if you are voting for him or not. If you don't believe me, ask his ex-wife.
      • omegared, on 08/09/2008, -1/+4guess what you can be touted, and still be a *****. Does being put in a jail let someone get off the hook for something else you have done?
      • dasamps, on 08/09/2008, -1/+10I didn't know something made affairs okay. I have no respect for McCain.
      • illinoise89, on 08/09/2008, -1/+4I honor what McCain went through for our country in Vietnam. The man he was in the war is gone, however.
      • RoroCo, on 08/09/2008, -1/+5By that logic... All I have to do is get my wallet stolen, then I can punch you in the face. Please say yes, because I am going downtown tonight and my wallet is feeling flighty...
      • antipoet, on 08/09/2008, -2/+3I pity him for what he had to go through too, but how does this make him a hero? As far as greatness goes - how about we honor the soldiers who succeeded instead of excusing the ones who ended up having dirt served to them in a hole?
      • throop77, on 08/10/2008, -0/+1lol.
    • haikuFU, on 08/09/2008, -1/+5Additionally, do you really want to put your trust in someone that would betray the one person they should remain loyal to? He's gonna betray you also.
      • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2I don't care who he sleeps with, as long as he does his job as President.
  • ObamAmerican48, on 08/08/2008, -26/+104Good point, McCain also betrayed a wife in poor health. If McCain is smart he'll let this topic alone unless he wants all of the Obama supporters to loudly and forcefully and visibly remember his "little" indiscretion.

    But right now I'm a little too miffed at Edwards to go off on McCain. I expect this kind of crap from somebody like McCain; from Edwards, not in a million years. I am HUGELY disappointed. I frequently expressed hope that he would be the VP. Now I feel like a betrayed idiot.

    I guess that's one difference between liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans...I expect this kind of two faced hypocrisy from conservatives/Republicans (i.e., Gingrich, McCain). I expect better standards and examples from liberals/Democrats.

    Thanks, John. We apparently hardly knew ye.
    • Cuchanu, on 08/08/2008, -1/+21Like the article says, it doesn't necessarily mean he wouldn't make a good VP (or Prez or whatever)
    • motivatedmama, on 08/08/2008, -4/+19Democrats fall in love. Republicans fall in line.
      The MSM has gone crazy with this and I can't even watch it anymore. We have an administration that has embroiled us in an illegal war and this is what has peoples heads spinning?
      There are venial sins and then there are mortal sins.
      If only Edwards had fessed up earlier *sigh* : (
    • MommaKatz, on 08/09/2008, -4/+22What the hell?! He had an affair, so did Clinton, McLame (several), on and on and on and on and on....

      The affair was in 2006 and short lived. He told his wife - in 2006, they dealt with it, privately. (Shocker - its a private matter!!) So, he owns up to his mistake, makes amends and the public treats him like this (and to those who say he should have fessed up to the public earlier, I call ***** cuz you KNOW how the right and half the left would have treated him!)

      McSame, on the other hand denies, lies, or simply doesn't address the issue of his affairs

      Apparently the moral of the story is that if you lie, even by default, and have a family eager to live in denial, you have character. On the other hand, if you recognize your error, admit the error to your wife, and work on rebuilding the relationship after owning up to the damage you become damaged goods with poor character and must immediately end your public, political career.

      People wonder why we end up with a crazy bastard with a God complex in office. I don't, our expectations of perfection leaves room for little else to survive the process. Keep laying the ground for the nightmare era of McSame. That's exactly what the MSM and public reaction toward Edwards will accomplish
      • dasamps, on 08/09/2008, -0/+9I respect Edwards for actually dealing with the issue and staying with his wife. I do not respect McCain for leaving his wife, especially after an accident.
      • arvvvs, on 08/09/2008, -0/+4On another note... Remember what Clinton did... IN OFFICE
        Along with JFK and Rosevelt.
    • kurtskrap, on 08/09/2008, -15/+1"I expect this kind of two faced hypocrisy from conservatives/Republicans"

      Then why is it every time there's something like this on the news, it's almost always a Democrat? Clinton...Edwards...McGreevy..Spitzer...
    • bestsoccerdog, on 08/09/2008, -15/+2I really hope you're joking. Edwards is a lying scumbag. That's all he's ever been, and that's all he'll ever be. I would expect this from Edwards. His job is to lie to get money and sue people who made mistakes. Edwards is a good example of what all liberals are like. Liers. (And now all the liberals will dig me down because they don't like to hear the truth)
    • radiofrequency, on 08/09/2008, -10/+5If the dems really wanted a family values candidate they would have nominated Hillary. She stood by her man.
      • swiftekho, on 08/09/2008, -1/+5She stood by her man so that she could eventually run for president. The Clinton name is synonymous with power (sadly) in this country.
      • Kesseire, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1No, the Democrats nominated Barack Obama, who by all appearances has an amazing relationship with his wife and takes his roles as husband and father very seriously.

        Personally, I don't think "standing by your man" (or woman) when he or she cheats on you demonstrates "family values". I think it demonstrates poor self-esteem and a willingness to be kicked around. Neither are traits I'd particularly care to have in a President.
    • sabroskie, on 08/09/2008, -8/+1Looks like Obama is saving that card for later.
    • Vector713, on 08/09/2008, -3/+12There are the good and the bad in BOTH parties. Don't be so pretentious.
      • ObamAmerican48, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1I love being pretentious. I'm at my best when I'm pretentious.
    • rotundo, on 08/09/2008, -0/+4You know what's funny -- watching The Dark Knight with a friend this past week they mentioned that the ending was stupid: how could the public turn their back on Harvey Dent after all the good he had done, just because he did something wrong? It's two separate things! Doing something bad doesn't mean that good things fought for or accomplished were not real. We agreed that was a stupid part of the movie, and that people could handle a flawed hero.

      However, I found out today that essentially the movie was right: the public as a whole doesn't have the ability to see the good in someone who is flawed, or who ***** up.

      What he did was awful for his wife and family, but it's terribly common and no surprise at all to anyone who's been paying attention. This awful thing has no bearing whatsoever on his abilities to perform his job. Until we understand that, we're more or less doomed.

      (FYI, I don't know much or give a crap about John Edwards specifically, I'm just talking about the concept)
    • doctorfungi, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2I'm sorry but if you're so one sided that you take the position that Democrats are perfect and Republicans are all horrible, then you're just a ***** idiot.
    • Littledevil8701, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2I don't understand why you feel betrayed. Is your name Elizabeth Edwards? Did you exchange vows with him? No? It was a private matter in his marriage. He discussed it with his wife 2 years ago and she obviously has forgiven him if they are still married. People have affairs all the time. It doesn't make them a bad person, it says that they have poor judgment. We have more important issues to be upset about other than some dude having an affair.
      • Kesseire, on 08/09/2008, -0/+0The story had already broken in some outlets when he was pursuing his bid to be the Democratic nominee. Given that, I can understand why the Democratic party would feel betrayed. Edwards opted to run for President while KNOWING this affair was waiting on the wings, and knowing that the Republicans would use it against him during the campaign. It was irresponsible of him, and it doesn't speak well to his "party loyalty."

        I'm not a Democrat, but I can understand why so many of them are pissed off at Edwards.
    • dwcottrell, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1You are now doing exactly what you complain about ... that a personal affair SHOULD condemn a person who has excellent political successes and abilities.

      Unless it is motivated by or to the political process it has NOTHING AT ALL to do with anything. Sometimes it does, with a pompous prick ranting about family values while freely roaming the field. Then it belongs in the political process not because of the sex but because of the hipocrasy and lies.

      The event matters only when it is related to the political process, or more commonly when the subsequent lies and deceits point out the far more importantly fact that the individual is a liar and deceiver.

      If the event happens, is not related to the political system, and is acknowledged then I see no purpose at all in not allowing the individual to continue in politics and we can watch to see the melodrama in his/her personal life as separate entertainment.

  • DD2CC2U, on 08/08/2008, -25/+91John McCain cheated on Cindy McCain. Why hasn't anyone reported on that?
    • CryRightardCry, on 08/08/2008, -11/+31They have, the rightards are just so dishonest and honorless that they continue to pretend they don't know it.
      Or maybe they really don't know it, they are pretty stupid.
      • Naieve, on 08/09/2008, -11/+8Maybe they have to listen to people like you and can't help but respond from a completely partisan position because of your total lack of tact.
      • Bamont, on 08/09/2008, -4/+5Actually - it happened a long time ago. (Thirty years).

        Doesn't justify it in any sense, but I'd be willing to bet at least half of Digg users weren't alive when it happened. "Righttards"? Please - I think for myself, unlike some of Digg that relies on dailymail and huffington post to come to their conclusions on right and wrong.

        On another note - I do like how justification for Edwards immediately hits the front page - in an apparent attempt to derail the obvious by focusing on McCain. Apologetic much, Democrats?
    • rkho, on 08/09/2008, -10/+13John McCain called Cindy McCain a *****. Why hasn't anyone reported on THAT?
      • FlaG8r, on 08/09/2008, -6/+9Who really cares about that? What percentage of married people haven't called each other a horrible name at some point? Probably less than one.
      • 17999, on 08/09/2008, -2/+2Are you upset because someone called you one?
    • DaDrake, on 08/09/2008, -1/+7Because there isn't evidence and you forgot about the NYT front page article on this.... when again .... there isn't evidence (read it, it's a bunch of what-if hearsay mumble jumble ..... the Edwards story has pictures and bank records).
    • Biller13, on 08/09/2008, -2/+5They have, are you retarted? All of his crap from the past was brought up during the 2000 elections. It came up again earlier this year but because it was such a long time ago it was dismissed rightfully so. If it changes who you are going to vote for then so be it.
  • Rotzooi, on 08/08/2008, -22/+61The Republicans don't have a better argument against Obama than OMG!!! John Edwards banged someone who is not his wife!!! OMG!!111 It's sad, really. Who the ***** cares? Let's stick to the issues. 99% of politicians are dodgy scumbags, but since Kucinich and Paul are out, let's choose the least scummy one to lead our country. Protip: it's not McCain.
    • jorichter, on 08/09/2008, -1/+17OMG and
      He's too young.
      He's a "Muslim."
      His middle name is "Hussein" (like Saddam get it?)
      No flag pin.
      etc.

      Basically all *****. But it is the best they got, and sadly millions of Americans will believe it.
      • JensUK, on 08/09/2008, -6/+5He voted for the FISA bill.

        He's for offshore drilling.

        He's ready to support AIPAC.

        He'll monger war with Iran.
      • jorichter, on 08/09/2008, -1/+7@JensUK

        "He'll monger a war with Iran" and John "100 years in Iraq" McCain won't? Better yet his joke "Bomb bomb bomb Iran etc."

        Do you know that McCain supported FISA too? Do you know McCain's position on offshore drilling?

        Obama is the better of two. Period.
      • bleachxfan911, on 08/09/2008, -6/+5At least McCain didn't flip flop on those.
      • JBmtk, on 08/09/2008, -5/+3Point being they both suck, but Obama is the lesser evil.
        It is a real shame to see that happen, given the total population of the US. This just shows that the people with the right heart and mind do not win in politics, only the cheaters and wealthy.


      • sailormoonbeam, on 08/09/2008, -2/+7um....mccain has flipped way way more than obama. they just don't call it flipping if ur a conservative. in mccain's case, it's a reasonable change of mind *sigh*
      • rotundo, on 08/09/2008, -0/+5Who gives a ***** about "flip flopping"? When the situation develops, or new information comes to light, changing your stance is often the right thing to do. If you've never "flip flopped", then you're an arrogant stubborn fool who thinks they know it all.
      • pfenixfire, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3@bleachxfan911

        McCain was the original flip-flopper on offshore drilling. Just a month ago he was dead set against it. Of course people in this country are so stupid that they allowed McCain and the Neo-Cons into thinking that drilling offshore would lower gas prices. Obama was painted into a corner with this and had to flip flop on the issue to shelve it and move on to non-gimmicky issues.
      • DarkShroud, on 08/09/2008, -2/+1@pfenixfire, there is a difference between opposing drilling when gas is $2.** and when gas is $4.**. And yes I keep my tires inflated, Its still killing my mother to drive to work though, unless she wants to spend an hour and a half switching between trains & buses vs 30minutes to get there.
      • pfenixfire, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2@DarkShroud
        there is no difference if drilling off shore wouldn't help whether its $2 or $4. It would take years for the oil companies to survey any new oil fields off shore and even then the oil would not go into the United States' oil supply, it would, by international agreement, have to be divided throughout the world. It's nothing more than a gimmick.

        I have trouble affording gas as well and understand that people just want something done, but off shore drilling isn't going to do crap. We need to re-regulate the oil industry like it was before bush & co allowed private speculators to run a muck all while concentrating on battery technology and alternative fuels. We had an gas crisis in the 70's and we have one now. If we do not plan for the future, we will have other crisis every few years until we finally stop thinking in only the short term and instead fix the our dependence on oil now.

        Also, I don't recall saying anything about keeping your tires inflated, but that's good advice nonetheless./sarcasm
      • DarkShroud, on 08/10/2008, -0/+1@pfenixfire, then maybe Bill Clinton shouldn't have blocked drilling in anwar and off the cost 10 years ago and we wouldn't be having these problems now. We have to start some time and use a variety of solutions instead of "putting all of our eggs in one basket" to turn an old phrase. I'm all for electric cars. But we need Clean Coal plants (yes this technology exists, Coal is clean burning now) , Nuclear Power, Wind, & Natural Gas.
    • bestsoccerdog, on 08/09/2008, -8/+4It is sad. Just to let you know, the Republicans are not the same as the media. The media is reporting this. The republicans haven't said anything against Obama about Edwards. Kucinich and Paul would make this country hell, I'm glad they're out. We don't need someone worse than Obama in. I wonder what will happen when McCain wins the election. I have a feeling it won't even make it to the front page since all the liberals will dig it down to prevent themselves from seeing the truth, as they always do.
      • sailormoonbeam, on 08/09/2008, -2/+2well, when obama wins, i'm sure we'll just have to celebrate to show u how it's done!
    • macmaine, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2I don't think any Republicans are using this as an argument against Obama. Perhaps against Democrats in general, noting how Bill Clinton and now John Edwards are examples of hypocrisy in action. But nearly all politicians are scum and liars, it's just a matter of who gets caught doing what.
    • CoolBluReason, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1Eh, I'm just gonna write in Stephen Colbert.
      • KJSatz, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2Please don't--a vote for Colbert is a vote for McCain (and as a member of the Colbert Nation I wince saying this!).
  • merlin484, on 08/08/2008, -29/+81McCain would make a ***** president, THAT'S how they're different.
    • thatsmyaibo, on 08/09/2008, -11/+5I agree...but so would Obama. Say hello to higher taxes, more expensive energy, less small businesses and even more wiretapping and war. Face it, we are screwed for 4 more years no matter who wins. People are in love with Obama's personality, he offers no change.
      • antipoet, on 08/09/2008, -2/+5Bah, do a little research. Taxes don't change for anyone except the top 1% under Obama. I am SURE that article has come up at least three times here on Obama-digg.
      • thatsmyaibo, on 08/09/2008, -4/+3Bah, do more research. Higher taxes will affect small business owners who won't be able to pay employees anymore or could halt operations altogether leaving it open to major corporations.
      • KJSatz, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2thatsmyaibo merlin484 was saying McCain = *****, Edwards = not *****...nothing about Obama. Obama is not involved in this story.

        Obama will be better for the economy than McCain, who will just listed and follow blindly the same bitches who got us in this situation.
      • antipoet, on 08/10/2008, -0/+1I did a little more research and discovered that Obama's plan is actually to cut taxes for most families. According to the fact-check page on his site, 95%. AND you mention small business, he claims to want to cut capital gains taxes for their owners to 0!

        http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stat ...

  • wonderlandpr, on 08/08/2008, -10/+50When the media uncovered the McCain team members who kept that blonde woman from McCain due to concerns about the candidate, McCain said he wouldn't talk about it, and the media let him alone.

    If this was Obama...we'd see YouTube reruns for months.

    Edwards, though worthy of condemnation, will be bashed til he can't find a way to support his family, while McCain, who DID cheat on his sick wife, was so close to the blonde lobbyist that his team played interference, can deny a comment, and that's the end of it. Something stinks here.
    • motivatedmama, on 08/08/2008, -4/+6Excellent point.
    • PolishLogic, on 08/08/2008, -16/+9What the ***** are you talking about? Have you seen the front page of Digg? It's nothing but pro-Obama and anti-McCain stories.....from major media sources as well as blogs like Kos, HuffPo, and Think Progress.
      • pintomp3, on 08/09/2008, -3/+10funny you have examples of blog but no examples of "major media sources".
      • PolishLogic, on 08/09/2008, -5/+5Funny, you don't know that ABC, Wall Street Journal, CNBC, Washington Post and the like are major media sources.
    • tkstock, on 08/09/2008, -8/+5May I propose that the media left it alone because there was nothing to the story?

      If they had caught McCain coming out of a hotel room with her, that would be something else. BTW, according to McCain's friends, John was separated from his wife for all intents and purposes (but still living together) when he met Cindy.

      To be honest, I lived with a girl for one year after we broke up - it was a convenience. We were still on friendly terms, and even went so far as to see other people while we were still living together. I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised if it was a similar situation in the McCain household at the time.
      • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2Yes, I know. I read your post a couple comments up.
    • dmh11686, on 08/09/2008, -4/+3But McCain didn't cheat with the blond lobbyist. The media left McCain alone, because they could see that there was nothing to the story. Most of the media left Edwards alone, except the National Enquirer, until he confessed.
      For example, CNN didn't even report on the story until today.
    • Biller13, on 08/09/2008, -4/+1Because that story was a lie if you didn't realize that. If the same thing happened to Obama they would have treated it in the same fashion, dismissing it once it was proven false.
      • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2No, it would be like the Muslim thing. There would still be media outlets *cough*Fox News*cough* claiming he had an affair, even if he didn't.
    • jabberwolf, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2GOOD POINT...

      But was Mccain running for any office at the time?
      Wasnt he a POW coming back from war?

      Make the comparisons : then get back to us.
    • evelynvesta, on 08/10/2008, -1/+1Yep something stinks. The media is giving McNasty a free pass, like they did for Bush before it became indisputably apparent he RUINED the country. And even then they didn't turn on the heat about that like they should. WHY? Because corporate America bought and paid for Bush and they own the media too!
  • barbiesnow, on 08/08/2008, -16/+37Why is the media protecting John McCain..not one of them has mentioned his affair with Cindy while he was still married to Carol yet I hear the words, dispicable, hypocrite, deplorable etc. etc. Why the double standard? I am so sick of the media's (corporate) protection of McCain and the absolute bombarding of Obama with the very minor details...under a magnifying lens..People say they don't know enough about McCain, that is because the media can't get beyone him being a POW,,,I won't even say war hero, because, he wasn't.
    • KDX200rider, on 08/09/2008, -16/+4"The media protecting McCain"? You must have missed the part where he is a Republican, the vast majority of the media are Democrat, the DO NOT protect Republicans.
      • pintomp3, on 08/09/2008, -0/+10right, the corporate media are so liberal. that's why the owners of MSNBC profit from war contracts.
      • antipoet, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2Because it makes many people feel just a little bit better about themselves to be able to go off on a public figure for the wrongs they've done. It'll probably blow over just as fast as it blew in.
    • TinternAbbot, on 08/09/2008, -2/+1They mentioned it back in the day, when it was news.
  • IbbyIbby, on 08/08/2008, -16/+17Great article. Cenk Ugyur is great political commentary.
    Original Article
    http://digg.com/politics/How_is_John_McCain_s_Affa ...
  • PolishLogic, on 08/08/2008, -32/+24Where is the double standard? Dozens of ***** stories from a ***** load of major news organizations were plastered all over Digg a mere two or three months ago.....about an affair that happened 30 years ago. Hello, the Edwards story broke last week, and it stewed on the Inquirer's site for over a week before major media touched it.

    You call McCain senile? Holy *****. Your all either senile or have a phenomenal selective memory.
    • MommaKatz, on 08/09/2008, -7/+2no, the Edwards story broke last winter, actually relatively close to when the story of Vicky Iseman and McCain, which wasn't just about an affair but impropriety in her lobbyist activities on behalf of McCain, with while they were having an affair. McCain has a record of having extramarital affairs, he chooses to lie, deny or avoid the truth and gets a pass. Edwards meets it head on with his family and gets crucified. Talk about your selective amnesia PolishLogic - you've a helluva case of it!
      • PolishLogic, on 08/09/2008, -4/+4Last winter the Edwards story was pure speculation...much like the Iseman affair (which has still not been proven beyond NYT speculation as far as I've seen).

        McCain's prior affairs are no secret, haven't been for quite some time. Edwards kept this one under pretty good wrap until he was caught red-handed by the Inquirer.

        I'm sure in your world I do have a case of selective amnesia. It's a shame that your world is not reality.
      • dan222555, on 08/09/2008, -3/+5"Edwards meets it head on with his family and gets crucified."
        Are you kidding me? He admitted the affair to his wife in 2006 then both he and his wife lied about it all the way up until now. Then when he's caught red-handed he finally owns up to it. That's meeting it head on?
  • Shiftgood, on 08/09/2008, -15/+8Who cares?! want to see some real news!? obviously some people on digg dont want you to read this story (200+ fast diggs and no front page)

    http://digg.com/world_news/Massive_US_Naval_Armada ...
    • diemunkiesdie, on 08/09/2008, -4/+6If we are about to attack someone, why are you warning them by sticking it on the front page? Shhhhhhh!
  • KDX200rider, on 08/09/2008, -21/+14Was McCain's "affair" proven?
    • sulthernao, on 08/09/2008, -8/+8I'd consider his marriage to Cindy "proof".
    • mummbleswers, on 08/09/2008, -7/+10He didn't have the balls to fess up. Edwards was late to do it, but better late than never.
    • MrTito, on 08/09/2008, -5/+9Yes.

      http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la- ...

      Highlights:

      "John McCain was 42; she [Cindy] was 24. During the next nine months, he would fly to Arizona or she would come to the Washington area, where McCain and Carol had a home."

      "McCain did not sue his wife for divorce until Feb. 19, 1980, and he wrote in his court petition that he and his wife had "cohabited" until Jan. 7 of that year -- or for the first nine months of his relationship with Hensley."

      "McCain obtained an Arizona marriage license on March 6, 1980, while still legally married to his first wife."
      • dan222555, on 08/09/2008, -2/+1There's a difference between two individuals who decide to cut off their relationship and start seeing people before the formality of it is through and someone who is unfaithful to his wife while they're still in a relationship and then lies about it multiple times.
      • SIRBERUS, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2@dan... so you're saying McCain didn't really cheat on his wife and his wife was ok with it? She waited for him while he was a prisoner and she was coping with her accident. From everything I've read, from every angle (including McCains) his ex-wife, whom he cheated on, was nothing but a great woman. He is a scumbag. As is Edwards.
      • dan222555, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1"so you're saying McCain didn't really cheat on his wife and his wife was ok with it?"
        I'm saying the two separated and then McCain went on to see other people. That's how McCain has spoke of the situation and I'll take him at his word. Do you have any evidence to suggest it went any other way?
      • IpecacNeat, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1I'll admit, McCain's incident isn't as bad as Edward's, but it was still a dick move. Carol was in an accident, and then he runs off with some arm candy. He could have shown some more compassion. I think both of these "men" are scum.
    • DaDrake, on 08/09/2008, -7/+4Actually no it hasn't been. John McCain divorced and remaried quickly... which suggest they had a strong relationship, but there isn't any actual proof of it. On the other hand, Edwards has to deal with pictures (which showed he lied about his where-abouts) and bank records. There is "suggestive" evidence but really none.

      Also notice how the NYT published this front page, even tho most of the article was hearsay .... and they ignore the Edwards story for weeks (when it had MUCH more credibility).
  • jorichter, on 08/09/2008, -13/+14They're both dicks.
  • Badandy127, on 08/09/2008, -35/+29omg HuffPo stfu.
  • mach32, on 08/09/2008, -27/+19it's different because digg's little poster boy got caught with his pants down.
    • Jareth86, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3I was under the impression that Ron Paul was Digg's poster boy?
  • Rich711, on 08/09/2008, -22/+12Did he pimp his wifes cancer out as a measure of his own character while running for president? You liberals will make excuses for any so long as they keep leaning left.
    • UglyBunny, on 08/09/2008, -4/+3We're not making excuses, we're just pointing out the fact that John McCain had an affair with similar circumstances.
      • sq2shooter, on 08/09/2008, -3/+2Nice. The equivalent of but Clinton...
  • easy4lif, on 08/09/2008, -26/+18Huffington carp article strikes again!

    and he came clean, My guess, cause he's getting the VP slot.
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2Offered VP immediately after a sex scandal breaks? Not a chance in hell.
    • dan222555, on 08/09/2008, -2/+2"My guess, cause he's getting the VP slot."
      Really....that's your guess? Are you that ***** stupid?
  • pintomp3, on 08/09/2008, -12/+17because it's ok when someone "the party of values" does it. larry craig and david vitters haven't stepped down either.
  • alphonseragusa, on 08/09/2008, -11/+18For the 54th millionth time...
    ...FALSE LEFT/RIGHT PARADIGM.
  • tpearl, on 08/09/2008, -25/+4McCain is a war hero..............which means he gets a free pass. Sorry Mr. Edwards...you fail.
  • Rezisluh, on 08/09/2008, -21/+10most of you diggers suck. your partisan bs is one of the ingredients in the destruction of the u.s.

    Face it, edwards is a lying POS. now is the time to shut your pie holes, instead you say, mccain, did blah, blah, blah.

    yeah i'm voting for obama, but the democratic party sucks just as much as the republican party. i wish we could have a 2 or 3 new political parties that would take over the house, the senate and the white house.
    • UglyBunny, on 08/09/2008, -2/+3Yes, we say McCain did blah blah blah because he is the presidential nominee for the Republican Party. John Edwards isn't going anywhere -- his scandal isn't national news.
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -1/+4I've been listening to conservative talk radio today, and they've been going on ad nauseum about the affair and basically saying that it makes him the devil incarnate. Given this reaction I don't think it's unfair to question how McCain's (or any of the countless other Republicans') affair was any different. If they can't demonstrate a difference then by their own logic McCain is unfit to lead.

      Personally I care very little about who McCain, Edwards, or anybody else is sleeping with. Obviously it's not a positive character trait, but I consider it a private matter and we'd have probably lost at least half of our great leaders if monogamy was a requirement to serve. I just hate the "family values" parties' pompous, holier than thou, hypocritical attitude.
      • Rezisluh, on 08/09/2008, -2/+0first of how many "true great leaders have there been?" give me a break.

        second of all, his actions demonstrate a weak character. yes there are plenty of republican examples you can give and many have but that was the point of my comment.

        it's time to stop to this tit for tat ***** and deal with the real issues.

        i see i got dugg down. so i guess my comment was self fulfilling prophecy. most diggers suck.
  • norman619, on 08/09/2008, -5/+39They are the same. They are none of our business.
    • Phoenyx, on 08/09/2008, -8/+4If politician lies to and betrays the person they supposedly have their most intimate relationship with for purely selfish reasons, why should I, who that politician doesn't know at all, trust them?
      • norman619, on 08/09/2008, -0/+6Their personal lives aren't our busyness. I guess you would be fine with your employer looking into your love life and making decisions about your employment there on what he finds. They are people like you and I. As long as they didn't do anything illegal it's really none of our business.
      • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -2/+2It's none of our business because it doesn't effect the job.
    • spankaccount, on 08/09/2008, -3/+1"They are none of our business."

      I hope the Democrats think this way and put Edwards front and center at the national convention. Please oh please oh please!!!
  • dwninjungleland, on 08/09/2008, -13/+5I was wondering about how the left wing propaganda machine was going to spin this...
    I wonder what they were saying about Giuliani's affair before this Edwards' story happened?
  • chukd, on 08/09/2008, -15/+14I am so sick of this moral leadership *****. I hate to break this to you all but NO POLITICIAN CAN BE CONSIDERED A MORAL LEADER!!!!!! A politician lies, manipulates and whatever else they can to get elected. These are not the acts of a moral person. This is why the Republican sex scandals hurt the Republican's more than the Democrats. The Republicans pretend to "care" about family values and have the audacity to run on the idea.

    Addressing the Bill Clinton comment in the article. The difference is President Clinton was UNDER OATH in a court of law. Our system of justice and laws is built on the idea that people will be punished if they are not honest while giving testimony in a court case. It is called perjury. Where I see no problem with Bill Clinton getting a blow job or whatever, he broke the law when he lied under oath. He swore to uphold the constitution when he took his oath of office, then he undermines the justice system. It was wrong. Bill Clinton did a lot of great things for this country but he screwed up by not telling the truth under oath. It is the same for any politician that lies under oath.
    • queenbee93, on 08/09/2008, -0/+8"It is the same for any politician that lies under oath."

      Which is probably why both Bush and Cheney repeatedly refuse to testify under oath--it is good that they know their own limitations when it comes to being honest.
  • sockpuppets, on 08/09/2008, -5/+27I cheated on myself last night.
    • BradBrown, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3Did you chew your arm off afterward?
    • crowbarred, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1a hand shandy doesnt count my friend
  • saitama, on 08/09/2008, -10/+4Either "different to" or "different from". There is no "different than".
    • UglyBunny, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2On the subject of "different from", "different than", and "different to"

      "These three have been usage items for many years. All are Standard and have long been so (different to is limited to British English, however), but only different from seems never to meet objections: She is different from her mother in many ways. He feels different from the way he did yesterday. You look different from him. Different than has been much criticized by commentators but is nonetheless Standard at most levels except for some Edited English. Consider She looks different than [she did] yesterday. He’s different than me (some additional purist discomfort may arise here). You look different than he [him]. The problem lies in the assumption that than should be only a subordinating conjunction (requiring the pronouns that follow to be the nominative case subjects of their clauses), and not a preposition (requiring the pronouns that follow to be the objective case objects of the preposition). But Standard English does use than as both preposition and conjunction: She looks different than me is Standard and so is She looks different than I [do]. And with comparative forms of adjectives, than occurs with great frequency: She looks taller [older, better, thinner, etc.] than me [than I do]. Still, best advice for Formal and Oratorical levels: stick with different from."

      by Kenneth G. Wilson (1923–). The Columbia Guide to Standard American English. 1993.
      from http://www.bartleby.com/68/37/1837.html
      • saitama, on 08/11/2008, -1/+1The Collins Cobuild Bank of English gives the prepositional distribution after "different" as follows:

        "from" "to" "than"
        U.K. writing 87.6 10.8 1.5
        U.K. speech 68.8 27.3 3.9
        U.S. writing 92.7 0.3 7.0
        U.S. speech 69.3 0.6 30.1

        http://www.cobuild.collins.co.uk/

        So it depends: would you rather sound like an American, or would you rather be correct?
      • UglyBunny, on 08/24/2008, -0/+1American English is a distinct dialect of English. Get over it.
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1While "different from" might be preferred (and "different to" is almost exclusively British) there is nothing categorically wrong about "different than". http://www.bartleby.com/68/37/1837.html
  • altgeeky1, on 08/09/2008, -13/+8McCain's still a maverick... he cheats on his sick wife with an actual woman. How old fashioned, in an age where his peer republicans are having gay bathroom sex, pedophile intern boy sex, or bringing gay prostitutes into the White House, overnight.

    Back on the question posed here, Democrats don't blame women for being single moms, or getting divorced. There are plenty of conservatives with traditional values, but they're not shoving their fake views into everyone's holes.
  • Redlobo, on 08/09/2008, -11/+11He made a promise and an oath to his wife, friends, and family before God. He broke that oath and promise when he cheated. He still might be have the characteristics of a great leader, but I would question his integrity, and honesty. If he can break one oath so easily with his wife, why should I trust him to follow the Presidential Oath of Office. Once a cheater, usually always a cheater.
    • bjornski, on 08/09/2008, -2/+5Are you talking about McCain?
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -2/+10I'm sorry, were you talking about McCain or Edwards?
    • atmenterprises, on 08/09/2008, -2/+1Clinton or Edwards?
    • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1You can trust him in office because most world leaders leaders don't look that good in a two-piece, so we don't have to worry about him ***** any of them.
  • elister, on 08/09/2008, -4/+10As a citizen of Washington State, I could care less what John Edwards does, he doesn't represent the interests of my state. Seems it should only be important to those who live in North Carolina. If you don't live in NC, then it really shouldn't be important to you.
    • atmenterprises, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1Well he was a one-term Senator, so North Carolinians really don't care either. Except that he's on the state's dole for a position at UNC Chapel Hill.
  • ammundsen, on 08/09/2008, -8/+2This article makes a false claim without proof or thought. Any leader who has an affair does rule differently.

    First off if you lie and cheat to your family you will most certainly do it to the strangers you rule over. Now, sure, just about all of our politicians lie and cheat even if they arent having affairs. But once there is proof of an affair then there can be no pretense of honesty.

    Second, cheating and other immoral activities can cause someone to be compromised and blackmailed. We dont need people making decisions who are beholden to the people that have the dirt on them.

    Finally, for the record both Edwards and McCain are minor pieces of trash in the book of history. They dont deserve to be linked to truly important historical figures like Alexander or Genghis Kahn.
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3"Now, sure, just about all of our politicians lie and cheat even if they arent having affairs. But once there is proof of an affair then there can be no pretense of honesty."

      But things are better if there is a "pretense" of honesty?
    • Speed, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1We already know the dirt, so how can it be used as blackmail?

      Also, I really hope you aren't implying Alexander or Genghis Khan were good leaders. Khan raped and murdered countless villages. We don't WANT our politicians linked to those two, unless you enjoy being enslaved.
      • ammundsen, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1I didnt mean to imply they were good people. Only that they were important to history.

        The sad thing is I think our politicians use these guys more as models than any of our better early founders.
  • kylere, on 08/09/2008, -4/+12Who said it was different?
    • scoottie, on 08/09/2008, -3/+2whoever is so blind in following their party like lemmings
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -2/+4The point is that if there is no difference then all the conservative pundits shot their candidate in the back today when they viciously attacked Edwards.
  • smitty1e, on 08/09/2008, -11/+9The amount of public lying in McCain's case was substantially lower.
    From a moral standpoint, that could be seen as a slightly different arrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic.
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2What? All of McCain's friends, family, and colleagues (including the Reagans) were shocked when they found out about McCain's divorce.
  • BMan12, on 08/09/2008, -3/+7You make vows when you get married. Theoretically, it was your choice to get married to that specific person. If you can't even remain faithful to that one person, how can anyone expect you to promote the best interests of the entire country?
    • EtherGnat, on 08/09/2008, -0/+3That would be the ideal, but if you make it a hard and fast rule you'd lose out on a lot of great leaders; Jefferson, Wilson, and Roosevelt among them. Nobody is perfect, and I'm not willing to exclude half the population for an incident that doesn't really affect me directly.
  • ancientshoes, on 08/09/2008, -16/+11buh...buh...buh...MCCAIN!
  • KonstPskov, on 08/09/2008, -3/+37Today, Georgian troops have killed thousands of civilians!
  • outbackpaul, on 08/09/2008, -19/+12Digg is full of a bunch of damn liberal MF's. When the double standard is in your favor I don't see that DUGG here by LIBERALS!!!!
  • ramup, on 08/09/2008, -23/+17The liberals are just being asshats here on digg,they can't stand Johnny boy got busted today so they are stirring *****.Dems are clearly the hypocrites.
    • blackxspot, on 08/09/2008, -6/+4How are Dems the hypocrites when Edwards did exactly what McCain did, and yet Republicans are giving Edwards ***** for it and don't see anything wrong with McCain doing it.

      FAIL.
    • Springdaddy, on 08/09/2008, -1/+4Dems had a rough day today.
  • merlin5, on 08/09/2008, -19/+15Its differant because Edwards has always been a vain, self absorbed, sycophant. As if he was ever fooling anybody, what a laugh. He probably deliberately leaked this to blunt all the homosexual innuendo stemming from his metro-sexual look. And don't anybody try to tell me McCain is vain. (eeesh)
  • jerbaker, on 08/09/2008, -6/+2If what he did in his private life effected his policies, I'd be all for removing him from public office. If, on the other hand, it only AFFECTED his policies, then I wouldn't.
    • NJank, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1effect an effect
      http://xkcd.com/326/
    • JrtD, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1It could well have made an enormous difference with his policies. If his private behavior alienates enough voters, we could have another Republican president (and McCain sure isn't going to advocate for Edward's policies).

      It doesn't matter if you or I don't care about his private behavior. It matters if enough others care and change their votes. It was WAY too risky for Edwards to cheat on his wife and lie about it.

      Edwards gambled using chips on the table that don't belong to him. He gambled health care, the economy and every other issue that Democrats and Republicans handle differently. Bill Clinton gambled the same things with Monica Lewisky and his subsequent lies, and he gave the 2000 election to the Republicans because of it.

      Thankfully, Edwards lost the primaries and now has no chance of being VP (he was my first choice for VP -- until today). We got lucky this secret didn't come after Edwards was a nominee or VP pick.

  • fdsarawr, on 08/09/2008, -8/+18I normally wouldn't digg a huffington post article. However I've been saying this ever since Bill Clinton. Cheating on your wife DOES NOT effect the way you govern your country. We should have a single president in there...then he/she can get laid by whoever he/she wants without punishment.
  • StephieMay, on 08/09/2008, -3/+12Very good article... I didn't know half this... Interesting. I don't really feel that he could be any less of a leader just because of an affair... his personal life should be his personal life only.
  • lechechocolate, on 08/09/2008, -14/+9Another grand article by HUFFPO--stay classy! (sarcasm)
  • se7endaytheory7, on 08/09/2008, -18/+9Obama is having an affair also. With his EGO.
  • akchrs, on 08/09/2008, -4/+6Brian Williams opens up NBC Nightly News with "John Edwards cheats on his wife then lies about it"
  • scoottie, on 08/09/2008, -14/+11there is no difference. but clinton cheated on his wife and is still considered a good president by some



    more huffingtonspam.com
    • atmenterprises, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2Some. Not all. Certainly not me.
  • crackberri, on 08/09/2008, -15/+4There is nothing wore than cheating on your dying wife…………

    Typical Democrat
    • eviephenomena, on 08/09/2008, -2/+4Typical democrats cheat on their dying spouses??

      Cheating isn't limited to one party or the other. As much as we would like to think that only a certain kind of person stoops to cheating, the truth is that people from all walks of life have screwed up. I don't think it automatically makes you a bad person, just someone who did a bad and stupid thing.
    • arvvvs, on 08/09/2008, -1/+2Newt Gingrich
  • Bannedx5, on 08/09/2008, -21/+16Huffpost spam. Buried.
    • marike, on 08/09/2008, -3/+4Why is it spam? It's not spam just because it's not written from a point of view that you can relate to.
  • smashv2, on 08/09/2008, -9/+12Edwards cheated on his wife before she was diagnosed actually. Check the dates.

    So that's how it's different.
    • dan222555, on 08/09/2008, -2/+4When it inevitably comes out that he fathered the child that argument won't fly anymore.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 118 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.