Cristiano

The threats from the McCain campaign did not stop the Enquirer from moving forward with their story on Sarah Palin's alleged affair with her husband's business partner.



Enquirer ‘reveals’ Sarah Palin’s alleged lover | A+E Interactive

For those doubting the Enquirer's credibility - they were dead on about John Edwards, in spite of months of denials.

Why is it important, it is her personal life, right? When you are running on a platform of family, small town American values, morality, blah blah blah, yeah, the sheer hypocrisy of it does matter.

__________________
"At least he died doing what he loved most - blogging on the Huffington Post" - 30 Rock

* slu stuff *

Asher Bertrand

__________________

Sarah Nerd

This circus act keeps getting better.

__________________

www.SarahNerd.com
http://www.your2ndplace.com/sarahnerd

Vivianne Draper

It mattered for Clinton
It mattered for Gary Hart
It should matter for Palin but somehow I'm sure the family matters folks will rationalize it.

__________________

Cristiano

I am more concerned that apparently Britney has moved back in with K-Fed. Demi Moore on the other hand could use the 15 extra pounds, she was looking like Skeletor.

Cristiano

I love this part for some reason, it is just so, something:

Siobhan OFlynn

I'm sure that they'll spin it that after she realized the error of her ways, she found God and her marriage was EVEN STRONGER than before! Praise Jesus!

__________________

Sarah Nerd

Like the Alaskan version, of Billy Jo got so mad at Darrel that he smashed up the moonshine distillery.

Siobhan OFlynn

So trashy?

Cristiano

Yes, that is the word I was looking for.

Colette Meiji

They have been wrong before too. They have been wrong and settled lawsuits before, If I remember correctly.

Siobhan OFlynn

I can't wait til McCain gets elected and kicks it. Sarah and her trashy brood will have the presidential limo up on concrete blocks before you can say "Jerry Springer."

Then, they'll be planting daisies in discarded toilet bowls out on the lawn, right next to the giant tractor tire painted white and filled with dirt to plant a victory garden.

Teeny Leviathan

I personally blame the Russians. They can see her house, right?

Siobhan OFlynn

Not very often, though. I tend to believe The Enquirer. The Examiner....not so much.

Colette Meiji

Not very Often Wrong? or not very often sued?

Its hard to know how often they are wrong since a lot of their stories are just dirt that the "dished on" don't do anything about.

Vengence Opus

she fucked McCain?

i was wondering how this whole mess happened.

__________________


“If you're losing your soul and you know it, then you've still got a soul left to lose.” ~ Charles Bukowski

Siobhan OFlynn

I'm actually being serious here. For years The Enquirer has printed stories long before the mainstream news picks up on it. They don't have the same "well-respected" reputation to worry about, so they will take a story and run with it. Many medical breakthroughs are reported in The Enquirer way before the New England Journal of Medicine reports it, because The New England Journal of Medicine has to wait until all the studies are in until they print it.

Yes, the Enquirer can be wrong, but really big stories like this and the story about John Edwards, I tend to believe. And remember, the absolute defense against libel is the truth. The McCain campaign can threaten law suits all they want, but if the truth is that she did have an affair, they will look like idiots if they take it to court.

Cocoanut Koala

Now wait. You might imagine I would take you up on this, and yes, I'm going to.

In my view, either affairs matter or they don't. (And I think they do, to some extent.)

They do not matter more for people who believe in family, and/or small town American values, than for those who don't, and let's face it - every last politician who runs for office CLAIMS to believe in family and those same values listed as supposedly small towns ones and claims to be religious.

There is zero way you can stand there and tell me that it is less hypocritical of some other politician - say, Kennedy (any Kennedy) - to have an affair as it would be for Palin (if it is true that she did, and I haven't read the article, but I have read about this relationship before).

Or that it would be less hypocritical of, say, Clinton to have had an affair than it would be for Palin to have had an affair. And I'm talking about the female Clinton, never mind Bill! (A nice guy, but decidedly lusty.)

I've been on the stick end of this argument as a Christian, and that's how I know it sucks. If you are a Christian, you must be perfect or you are scum. MORE scum than a non-Christian who does the same act. (Maybe that would extend to other religions, such as Judaism, also, but we never hear about that on these forums.) If you're not Christian, though, then it supposedly doesn't matter what you do.

This is the same thing we all went around about regarding her pregnant daughter, really. Apparently, you can't have a pregnant daughter if you are religious, or profess to strong family values, or that means you're damaged, or a hypocrite. Or the pictures of her teenagers giving each other the finger, or whatever, as if that is some huge scandal.

Again, that's holding higher standards for those who profess to being religious, or having strong family values, than you would hold for others.

And again, it applies to all politicians in any case.

Or - maybe it really comes down to those who are CONSERVATIVE must be perfect.

Because they ALL run on the platform of family, religion, God, baseball, mom and apple pie - all politicians in the U.S. Whether they are Catholic or Baptist or whatever.

Because let's face it: How wonderful was it when Edwards was caught out? Not wonderful. How would it be if Obama were caught having an affair? (Or even having had one years ago.)

NOT wonderful, I can tell you that. Because a great deal of his appeal has to do with his strong family life, and his professed religious and family values, and his morality. A huge amount of our judgment of his character is based on perception of these qualities he has.

So you tell me, what would be so much more okay about him having an affair than Palin? Cause I just wouldn't be able to see it.

I would be horrified if I discovered he had been playing around on his wife.

(Course Obama is a man, so it would be more accepted on that score, which is outrageous in itself, but that's another story.)

So I'd like to know just why it is that someone who is conservative - or religious/Christian - has to be more infallible than everyone else.

Others have said, and said here, and perhaps I have said here, that being Christian doesn't mean you are perfect. It means you try to be. But then, so do those who aren't religious.

It's like a get out of jail pass free card, actually: "Well, I never said I was Christian, so it doesn't matter if I have an affair." Or, "Well, that Christian isn't really THAT religious, so it's not as bad if he has an affair."

My point is this: Either affairs matter or they don't, whether you are Christian or Hindu or atheist, or conservative or moderate or liberal.

What gets me about what you are saying is you are acting like they don't ALL have perfect-looking families, and aren't ALL church-goers, and don't ALL profess to have family values, cause they all do.

You don't like Palin - that's fine. But I'm tired of people who are Christian (or conservative) being held to higher standards than others (along with their children), then given more contempt if they don't always maintain those standards, while others can do the same acts and somehow that's supposed to be more okay.

The religious person who has an affair is no more terrible than the non-religious person who does; and the conservative who has an affair is not a bit more terrible than the liberal person who does, in my view. All it means, imo, is that they are all human.

coco

__________________

RandoymRandt

Matters.

If you are a public figure, this matters, because no matter if "YOU the Public Figure" think they matter or not, the press does, and people clearly will, so yes, they matter.

The rest of the argument on religion, and sex of the person, etc, are distractors to the discussion. Red herrings, so to speak?

If you work at Taco Bell and you're banging the burrito maker, good on ya, your circle of responsibility is yours and yours alone.

__________________
~I believe in love and being released from the tyranny of sim lines.~

Serenity

Totally matters!

I mean when Bill Clinton had an affair with a subordinate, an INTERN, he did what any other CEO in America would do and step down from his office before he got fired for sleeping with a subordinate.

Oh... wait. He didn't.

In fact only after he lied did he get impeached but left in office.

Gee... I guess affairs don't matter.

Heh.

Either way, is this a bad place to suggest that Cris start a "bash Palin/ McCain" subforum to PRS? I mean I appreciate it's kinda politically related but it'd make the forum a lot easier to navigate if the constant rehashing of "McCain is teh ebil" were all in one place.

Serenity

__________________
"I don't care, I'm still free; you can't take the sky from me."

Cocoanut Koala

The Enquirer, in my experience of reading it, is rarely wrong.

The few times they have been (I think it was them with the Carol Burnett thing), we know it because they have been sued and apologized.

But they are right a great deal more often than they are wrong, and very often scoop the main stream media.

Having said that, it's also important to look at what the stories in this and other scandal sheets actually SAY. Headlines are often misleading. (As in the case of US Magazine, with their headline of "Sex, Lies, and Scandal," which led you to believe there would be evidence in the article, which actually said - if I'm recalling correctly - something more along the lines of, "She is having problems with allegation of sex and allegations of lies and scandal of that sort.")

Ditto this Enquirer piece: I will have to read it, but they frequently print the story from another source - a friend, or whatever - but someone who is willing to go on the record and swear to the truth of their statement. (And that's when the source is actually named.)

I was offered a job by the Enquirer long ago, and I remember that they said that (at that time at least), they required all interviews to be tape recorded. In general, they aren't liable for whether the people they are interviewing are being truthful, but only whether they have accurately reported what those people say.

coco

RandoymRandt

Serenity, that's another Red Herring. It mattered, what happened in response to the fact that clearly it mattered is not the issue. Once it's on the radar, it's on the radar, no taking it back.

Be careful of the Red Herrings...they bite!

Briar Bing

Coco, maybe you should be talking to Ken Star? Or the scads of conservatives who had a fit and spending millions investigating when Clinton was pulling his shenanigans?

Not all left of center people excused him (or Ted Kennedy for that matter). I know I haven't. Further, both those democratic families are proclaimed to be quite religious.

Generalizing doesn't help when there are plenty of examples of hypocrisy on both the left and right.

Briar Bing

Maybe Cris can start a masochists forum.

Siobhan OFlynn

I haven't forgotten or forgiven Clinton either. I would have been much more forgiving if he'd just said "Yeah, I got a blow job, what's it to you? Fuck off." But lying about it made it a thousand times worse.

He could have been one of the greatest Presidents ever.