Well...now...look what we have here...you have brought the church into politics. Which is something that "I" do not accept.

Is the question, "should we trust someone who has had an affair" or should the question be "should we trust any politician?"

In a High School civics's class, the question came up, "was it a matter of class distinction that accepted relationships out side the matrimonial boundaries?" Most of the class voted that it was.

Now, I did go to a very influential (monetarily) school...I think I was the only one that didn't belong to the Country Club. But I found that very interesting.

Then I thought about when people die...when a man in a low income family dies you will see the widow weeping and wailing...and for a good cause ...where is that grocery money gonna come from now?

But when a rich man dies, you only see the widow dabbing at her eye with her hankie. Either she is on some good pharmaceuticals or she knows there is an insurance policy and there will be groceries.

SO...beating around the bush (excuse the pun!)...upper class seems to accept this practice of immorality more then the middle and lower class.

ME...I say keep religion in the church ...point no fingers at anyone because who can throw the first stone? I do not condone affairs and I do not trust politicians. But, I do believe that this issue is a morality issue that should be decided in the church not the government.

Men (not all) have cheated since the beginning of time and will probably continue to do so.

Most cheaters are liars and most politicians are liars. So, why is everyone so surprised? Do the math...

I have NOT heard anything negative about Obama and being a cheater...My roommate told me tonight he (Obama) was a Communist. I tried not to laugh in her face...but I don't think I did a very good job of it.

When just last month she told me he was a Muslim. And if he was...which I do not believe him to be...does he not get the privilege, living in America, to worship whom ever he wants.

Well...there you go...I have gone off the subject again.

John McCain...adulterer

John Edwards...adulterer

Two rich boys who do what what they want regardless of who it hurts. They are not my hero's. And there is no difference!

See ya' in the funny papers...

Southern smiles and world peace,

Sharon

The Baby Boomer Queen~

An adulterous affair is wrong, no matter how you spin it. McCain is just as guilty as Edwards. Whether or not McCain's affair sould end his political career is an entirely different issue.

I don't believe that this affair is different than McCain's in principality. However, the media has a very strong recency bias (afterall, it is called News) which makes this affair much more "newsworthy" at this particular time.

So, the fact that John Edwards affair has been revealed much more recently than John McCain's does make it a better candidate for news coverage, but at the end of the day it's a case of infidelity that further solidifies popular opinion that politicians can not be trusted.

We know that there are differences in ages, outcomes, and situations. But there is no difference when it comes to the fact that most men like the idea of sleeping around - especially if they think they can get away with it (even if they won't openly admit it).

Why should a politician's career be at stake when he cheats on his wife? Aren't these indiscretions private matters? I'm sure that most would find this situation morally reprehensible, but is it not absurd that government affairs hinge on such trivial matters?

I wouldn't worry about Edwards's career either. First, he's made two failed bids for the presidency - why should we assume that he had a future anyway? And even if he does want to make another go at it, he could just wait for this affair to die down and run later. Let's not forget that McCain's gotten through it and Bill Clinton got through it - twice - in his first bid for the presidency.

Time and place is the only difference I see between them although I may make a slight concession in McCain's case due to the fact that his was not just a case of him "sleeping around." Despite the tight time distinctions that were made, he did divorce his wife, married Cindy and it looks as though they've lived happily ever after, so to speak. On the other hand, John Edwards' affair was just that. He was married to Elizabeth then and still is. Whether or not his roving was motivated by pure lust or a misguided reaction to his wife being diagnosed with cancer, I don't know. Fear can make us do many things we wouldn't ordinarily do under other circumstances.

For all intents and purposes, however, there is no difference between the two adulteries. The world was a very different place thirty years ago. The age of fiber optics was not in place and news traveled a bit more slowly. People also reacted differently than they do today. Back then you were appalled at this type of behavior and could hardly believe this could be the "norm." We didn't thrive on hearing all the gory details of such behavior. Today we eat this stuff up with a spoon and are shocked if someone in the spotlight hasn't committed adultery and want to hear and know all there is to hear and know about the subject and suspects!

The Edwards affair has also been revealed at a time when the possibility of his becoming VP of this nation might have been right around the corner. This will, of course, dash any hope he had of gaining such an office now but in the long run I don't believe it will hurt him in the least. It hasn't hurt McCain in the long run and it won't hurt Edwards either.

The argument that always comes up involves trust and morality in our Presidents or those holding high office. Can they be a good President, Senator, Congressperson and be an adulterer or adulteress? My answer is, YES they can and do perform the duties of their office to the best of their ability even though they may be considered morally corrupt on a personal level. I don't think one has anything to do with the other and I don't think it should.

Watching Sean Hannity argue it's okay to dump the wife because McCain was a POW was nauseating. That type of infantile thinking would thereby justify immoral activity of all types because of one's "Experiences". Imagine -- "I ran that kid over because I was in an abusive relationship 25 years ago," or "I just killed dog because my cousin died tragically at age 18." What a crock.

Sure, Edwards was wrong. But so was -- and is -- McCain

It is a hard line to draw between the activities of the public lives of our elected leaders and their private lives and how the two influence or affect the other. In the case of extramarital relationships or affairs, there is the glaring danger of allowing religious values or precepts to overlap too far into the realm of our political systems and the people involved in them.

However, at the root of the McCain affair and the John Edwards affair is honesty. At a certain point, it can be easy to resort to jotting these affairs and the criticism they've garnered to an American fetish for pushing religious (particularly Christian) values onto our politicians and our political process. However, when a leader, whether in a business, family, or in politics, publicly denies an allegation charged against them (affairs, illegal financial practices, etc., etc., etc.), and is found guilty or later confesses to committing the deed or deeds, their integrity and transparency as responsible leaders in our society has to be seriously questioned and reconsidered.

I know that we're all human and that mistakes will always be made. But, as long as we allow these denials and controversies (however slight they may seem in the larger scheme of things) to persist, we only foster in a ethic of dishonesty in our public sector and risk losing whatever we have left of truthfulness and authenticity in our political process or our business practices.

The alleged affairs of John Edwards and John McCain respectively present very complex and nuanced issues to the ethical standards to which we hold our political figures. I think the careers of both men (and all other politicians at that) are to be scrutinized on the basis of one principle: honesty.

It is the same but with it being clse to the electio nthey would rather downplay it plus McCain has always been called a good guy that does no worng. Yeah right after all those ads on tv he is someone who likes to thorw below the belt so he can get his poit across. No suprise sice almsot everyone who is rich or famous has a affair or two.

Here's a treat! Check out the blow-up that occurs when this same debate flairs on Fox News.

It is not different however, it does not affect their policy making. I do not care what the public official does in his private life as long as it does not affect his oath of office and his decisions on policies.

Senator McCain and Senator Edwards each made mistakes but it is not up to us to judge them based on their personal lives. We should judge them based on their voting record.

there is no difference. an affair is an affair no matter what day it, time it is. i think it is a slap in the face for his ex.

refuse to respond