WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Cindy McCain Caught Cheating on J-Mac!

[Don Vito Corleone]

Oh dear. I really feel bad for McCain (assuming the rumors about HIS affair were false). He's had a hard month.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: palehorse
In this case, McCain's choice of an immoral wife calls his own judgment into question -- similar to his poor choice of Palin as a running mate. As it was with Clinton in the 90's, I simply refuse to support any "representative" who demonstrates patterns of poor or immoral judgment.

Hell, in my line of work, adultery would cost me my clearances, my job, my retirement, and I'd more than likely be brought up on charges. I would expect the same of any public servant, especially those in such powerful positions.

In this case, as I said above, John should demonstrate some good judgment, for a change, and just ditch the bitch.

Morality only exists because some people decided that certain acts were unacceptable. Killing other humans? Unacceptable. Cheating on your wife? Unacceptable. Coveting your neighbor's oxen? Unacceptable. Eating meat on the sabbath? Unacceptable. Whatever the particular moral case is, that sense of "morality" is a social construct invented by man to prevent people from engaging in activities that they would otherwise engage in. If, for example, no one wanted to kill anyone else, we wouldn't bother saying "well, murder is immoral" because it would never happen. Notice there's no morality associated with jamming a red-hot poker up your own ass; no one wants to do that, so we don't bother telling them it's immoral to get them to stop.

Seeing as the growth of morality originated to stop people from doing things that they'd like to do, it's no wonder that so much of morality (and religious morality in particular) is tied to sex. Don't have sex with your relatives, don't have sex with the same sex, don't have sex with multiple people, don't have sex with anyone but your wife, don't have sex with someone else's wife, don't have sex with animals, don't have sex in public, don't have oral sex, don't have anal sex... We wouldn't have to have these as moral codes (or laws, depending on where you are) if people didn't want to fuck.

Really, what it boils down to is that morality is a code designed to control behavior. Sometimes it can be good (thou shalt not kill is a pretty good moral standard, I think). Other times, it's a bit asinine (like that filthy smut in the book of Leviticus). But I happen to think that attempting to control people sexually is bound to fail. Look at what happens when you try to force people to repress their sexuality (both gay AND straight); you get sex scandals like Craig, Clinton, Foley, Edwards, Spitzer, Mahoney, and so many others. I, personally, don't find sex to be immoral. Obviously, there are exceptions (rape is a fairly obvious one), but as a whole, I wouldn't give two shits if the entire house of representatives had a nine day orgy to kick off the legislative session. All I care about is job performance.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Well said Atomic.

 

[dmcowen674]

People stay out of the bedroom unless you are invited.

Yes, I even mean that for Republicans, how do you know J Mac has working equipment?

She's entitled to a hard one.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
Oh dear. I really feel bad for McCain (assuming the rumors about HIS affair were false).

He's had a hard month.

Actually it may not be hard and that could be the problem.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
People stay out of the bedroom unless you are invited.

Yes, I even mean that for Republicans, how do you know J Mac has working equipment?

She's entitled to a hard one.

I love the saying "Republicans want to shrink the size of government so small it just fits in my bedroom"

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: TallBill
Indeed. I don't care who the President is sleeping with or really anything at all about their personal lives unless it affects their performance. ...

That.

I don't care who Bill "slept" with, I don't care who Newt slept with, I don't care who Edwards or Spitzer or Palin -- remember the Enquirer story on her? -- or Cindy McCain slept with. I'm not married to any of them, and as long as they aren't persecuting others for their relationships (the hypocrisy factor) and as long as there's no evidence the relationship is causing an abuse of taxpayer money or government power, it's really none of my business. If their respective spouses choose to string them up by their short hairs, more power to them, but it's not anyone else's place to pass judgment.

 

[Polish3d]

Unrelated but funny:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...ZCOQtI&feature=channel

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: TravisT
When did the Enquirer become a credible news source? lol

When have they been wrong?

 

[wwswimming]

Originally posted by: palehorseAs it was with Clinton in the 90's, I simply refuse to support any "representative" who demonstrates patterns of poor or immoral judgment.

speaking of poor or immoral judgment - how about the supposedly pro-life George W. Bush ?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: palehorse
In this case, McCain's choice of an immoral wife calls his own judgment into question -- similar to his poor choice of Palin as a running mate. As it was with Clinton in the 90's, I simply refuse to support any "representative" who demonstrates patterns of poor or immoral judgment.

Hell, in my line of work, adultery would cost me my clearances, my job, my retirement, and I'd more than likely be brought up on charges. I would expect the same of any public servant, especially those in such powerful positions.

In this case, as I said above, John should demonstrate some good judgment, for a change, and just ditch the bitch.

Morality only exists because some people decided that certain acts were unacceptable. Killing other humans? Unacceptable. Cheating on your wife? Unacceptable. Coveting your neighbor's oxen? Unacceptable. Eating meat on the sabbath? Unacceptable. Whatever the particular moral case is, that sense of "morality" is a social construct invented by man to prevent people from engaging in activities that they would otherwise engage in. If, for example, no one wanted to kill anyone else, we wouldn't bother saying "well, murder is immoral" because it would never happen. Notice there's no morality associated with jamming a red-hot poker up your own ass; no one wants to do that, so we don't bother telling them it's immoral to get them to stop.

Seeing as the growth of morality originated to stop people from doing things that they'd like to do, it's no wonder that so much of morality (and religious morality in particular) is tied to sex. Don't have sex with your relatives, don't have sex with the same sex, don't have sex with multiple people, don't have sex with anyone but your wife, don't have sex with someone else's wife, don't have sex with animals, don't have sex in public, don't have oral sex, don't have anal sex... We wouldn't have to have these as moral codes (or laws, depending on where you are) if people didn't want to fuck.

Really, what it boils down to is that morality is a code designed to control behavior. Sometimes it can be good (thou shalt not kill is a pretty good moral standard, I think). Other times, it's a bit asinine (like that filthy smut in the book of Leviticus). But I happen to think that attempting to control people sexually is bound to fail. Look at what happens when you try to force people to repress their sexuality (both gay AND straight); you get sex scandals like Craig, Clinton, Foley, Edwards, Spitzer, Mahoney, and so many others. I, personally, don't find sex to be immoral. Obviously, there are exceptions (rape is a fairly obvious one), but as a whole, I wouldn't give two shits if the entire house of representatives had a nine day orgy to kick off the legislative session. All I care about is job performance.

So you'd have no problem with a 42 year Congressman fucking his son, his sister, and the family dog -- just as long as he doesn't allow it to effect his work on the Hill!?? ALLLLRIIGHTY THEN... got it.

I'm sorry, but I'll keep my morality... and yes, that does make me better than you.

Originally posted by: wwswimming

Originally posted by: palehorseAs it was with Clinton in the 90's, I simply refuse to support any "representative" who demonstrates patterns of poor or immoral judgment.

speaking of poor or immoral judgment - how about the supposedly pro-life George W. Bush ?

I no longer support him either. He and Clinton both brought shame and dishonor to the office of President -- for different reasons.

Try to keep up...

 

[Mr. Lennon]

lol that picture looks like it was taken at 15k ISO or something lol.

 

[Lanyap]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: aphex
I feel bad for Mac if this turns out to be true.

Dude (dudette?) John and Cindy have been in a sham marriage for many years. They haven't lived together for many years. It is a continuing marriage of a convenience for both of them. It's a marriage in name only.
I don't think John cares at all what Cindy does. And vice-versa.
All Cindy wanted was to come to Washington as First Lady.

how do you know... any of this?

You obviously missed the NYT hit piece that Techs posted awhile back.

Mrs. McCain, 54, describes herself as her husband?s best friend, though for the last two decades they have mostly lived apart, she in Arizona, he in Washington.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...key=y&keyword1=jeweler

 

[Dissipate]

I wouldn't be surprised at all if these pictures were real. All of these political candidates and their spouses are whores for money, sex and power. Look at Edwards, fucking some woman while his wife is suffering from cancer. These political whores will do whatever gets their rocks off, all the while smiling and looking good for their photo ops. Absolutely disgusting. Real good role models.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
People stay out of the bedroom unless you are invited.

Yes, I even mean that for Republicans, how do you know J Mac has working equipment?

She's entitled to a hard one.

[/quote]

Does that mean men are entitled to a wet one?