Third Party & Independents Archives

awesome, we scooped him! Now we can have 9 months of debate about Kerry’s affairs and Bush’s national guard speculations. Our founders must be so proud of us…

I’m a bit miffed that you guys thought I would throw a false rumor out there, when it is a real rumor.

However, it is still a rumor. That is why I covered my “scoop” with oh, I dunno, CONTEXT about how rumors like this can harm a campaign.

This has been in the tabloids for like a week, too.

In the FARK.com thread about this, someone claimed that the alleged dates of infidelity were while Kerry was in between his first and second wives - e.g. there was no infidelty, just potential hanky-panky with an intern.

I suppose we’ll find out.

NPR had an interview with somebody last night where he mentioned that Kerry was quite the player between wives, and seemed to imply that the alleged affair was fairly common knowledge in DC circles, having taken place in 2002. However, the NPR story notes that a young, blonde women was seen leaving his DC home around midnight some evening while Mrs. Kerry was known to be out of town. Supposedly, she was dropping off a resume for a job…

Why does anyone REALLY care about these past issues. I personally only care about what each candidate can bring to the table for our country, i.e. stance on taxes, govt. spending, military philosiphy, education, heathcare, etc..

I do not care what Bush or Kerry did 20 years ago in the Guard, or war protests after a war.

And everyone should no that a candidate messing around on his wife means nothing to the voters. It’s been done in the past and no one cared then, so why should any one care now. It’s a waste of time to dwell on it.

People pick a political party, then since they have made that choice, there personal choice, they get fired up on non issues. If everyone could take their emotions out of it and watch these candidates simply debate the real issues we would see a great election.

Why does anyone REALLY care about these past issues.

Because a man’s history determines his character and his ethics. Yes a man can change, but just as someone who has a resume full of employer terminations, it reflects on the type of person they are. We live in a voyeuristic society that wants to see the dirty laundry of it’s celebrities, and more often than not, the celebrities have plenty of dirty laundry to put on display.

This is still too early for any rational evaluation beyond speculation though, so I’ll shut my yap for another week until I can sort out the details then post a full summary of what I think is going on.

Editor:This Comment SPAMMER was banned and duplicate messages deleted.

Why does anyone REALLY care?

Becuase people that cheat on their wives have to lie to the people they are supposed to be the most honest and devoted to. It demonstrates what kind of person you are. Most people have no respect for a cheat …

How many times have you lied to or disgraced your loved ones today?

Well, with Clark said to be endorsing Kerry, I guess we’ll see. Kerry being a player as a divorced Senator isn’t exactly news, as Heinz Kerry’s Elle article discussed

This article : http://www.elle.com/article.asp?section_id=36&article_id=2340&page_number=1

If these allegations were true, how about this quote:
As if on cue, the topic turns to Hillary. “I don’t think I could have coped so well. I would’ve been like psheww!” She makes a gunshot noise. “I used to say to my husband, my late husband, ‘If you ever get something, I’ll maim you. Not kill you, just maim you.’ And we’d laugh, laugh, laugh.”

She says she has never once, in either of her marriages, worried about infidelity. “I never have. Not for one day. Because what I expect of them, they have a right to expect of me. Maybe I’m into 18-year-olds.”

Will someone please name a politician who has neither lied nor stretched the truth either while campaigning or while in office? As long as he or she can get the job done, I don’t care about personal foibles. If we insist on putting our politicians under a magnifying glass, no sane individual would ever run for office.

Getting mentioned in Fark sure will get us some kind of attention. I just hope the quality of the site overcomes the expectations of having scooped Matt Drudge. You know, it would be rather nice, SoL, if we were to be made aware of just who it is or what it is that lead you to this bit of information.

It would be of great value, I think, to those of us who have grown skeptical of internet sources like Drudge.

You know, it would be rather nice, SoL, if we were to be made aware of just who it is or what it is that lead you to this bit of information.

A friend told me. I keep my sources confidential unless they explicity request otherwise.

Sol, if you want to use the past to destroy a man, well then by all means have at it….but you can’t have it both ways.

When questions about Bush’s past cocaine use was brought up, he shrugged it off, saying that was his past…before he found Jesus….

If Kerry had any sort of cocaine use in his past, the RNC would be jumping up and down for joy, painting him as some degenerate crack-head running the country just to bring more blow across our borders….

My point, which I realise is sometimes hard to see, is that Republicans get all upset when the Democrats resort to using tried and true conservative tactics…

Personally…An affair is not something I really care to delve into, especially if the President wants us to overlook his cocaine use.

Yeah, like Dick Cheney and company have NEVER lied to the American public.

You all need to do some research on the originator of Neo-Con philosophy, Leo Strauss (Strauss believed and explicitly stated that deceit is a necessary part of leading).

Of course, it’s not all bad news for Kerry.

1. Great scoop, congratulations.
2. National Enquirer has it on the stands late today.
3. Big media has yet to report it even though it is supposedly THEIR story, leaked by a pissed off reporter who didn’t like the fact that his/her story was being killed by the suits.
4. It matters because character matters. If I lie to my wife I’ll lie to anyone.

Do journalism a favor and write to Drudge Report asking them to either cite their sources or take down the notice of exclusivity. Include links to the Watchblog.com site.

Howard,

Chances are very good that Kerry never cheated on his wife. He just enjoyed his bachelorhood more than some.

Chances are good that Kerry cheated on his wife, and is now trying to cover it up. When he fired his campaign manager, he probably never dreamed he would get stabbed in the back by the same man.

If he would just come out and admit it, be honest, it might even make him more popular. A coverup is death to a campaign.

Why doesn’t Dubya just pull a “Ronnie,” and go the usual “the Public will forgive ANYTHING route”? All he has to do is come out, all contrite and serious, and say, “Look, I was drinking hard back in 1972. I blacked out for six months, and can’t remember anything. I honestly don’t remember if I ever reported to the Alabama National Guard or not. I’m sorry, and I promise to never do anything like that again. Praise Jesus.”
That should get him completely off the hook for being AWOL, if he actually was, that is. The same strategy probably won’t work so well for going to war with Iraq. Then again, it might.

Of course he did, many men and women do!

Be interesting to see how this plays out. As long as it is “plain old adultery”, and remains a rumor, I don’t see this being a fatal blow.

Kerry should count his lucky stars that Arnold Schwarzenegger came along. That really sealed the precedent that even pretty rowdy sexual behavior isn’t a career-killer until someone drags you into court.

To quote Michael Franti, “I don’t give a f*ck who they’re screwing in private, and want to know who they’re screwing in public.”

It seems to me that screwing over millions of people, sending over our people to die in a foreign land, making the world hate us, creating the biggest deficit in history, and loading the pockets of your friends is a bit worse then something you stupidly did 30 years ago.

It’s crazy. I think people want a leader that is really good at covering up their past to create a false image of themselves is more important then finding a good leader.

If true, this affair is disturbing for several reasons. The first, obviously, is infidelity. Most men who cheat on their wives will cheat other people too. I know no presidential candidate who keeps all his promises or tells the truth all the time, but I expect them to at least keep the promise they made to their wives and to stay true to them. I still believe to be a good president, one needs to be a good man.

The second troubling reason is the girl’s age and her position as an intern for him.

People are quit to discount the significance of Kerry’s alleged transgression by pointing the finger at Bush. This tactic is used all too often in politics. “My guy did do this, but so what, his opponent did this.” Any logic professor will tell you that’s faulty reasoning. Besides, Bush’s alleged drug use was done when he was a young man. If he had done drugs while he was Governor of Texas — then he’d have a big problem.

Democrats still have the opportunity to choose their man. John Edwards, anyone?

It’s interesting that people can pick up so much about a rumor about a Democrat, yet when a woman files a sexual lawsuit against a Republican like Dubya, then dies, the press is oddly quiet about it. Some liberal media, huh?
For anyone who wants to read about many affairs by Republicans, including the Bush clan, I detail many of them on my site at http://www.geocities.com/jacksonthor/knowrsex.html

People need to get off the sex thing. A lot don’t seem to care that G.W. LIED about wmd’s and continues to make excuses. The mainsream press report just over 500 troops dead when it is more like 1200. Wake up people! This is another right wing smear.

Think an ongoing affair while married is “bad”? How about leaving your “buddies” in Vietnam, still under fire, while you sit down with Hanoi Jane and give aid and comfort to our enemies. Oh well, I guess lying to your spouse would be okay then. Wake up America, do the research on the new mass marketed “war hero”.

Amen Jeremy.
First of all, this is just a rumor. Second of all, even if it is proven to be true, in the grand scheme of things is it all that important what happens in a person’s personal life?
Look at it this way, GWB claimed to be a man of high moral character, and it is becoming obvious that he or his administration lied to the American people and sent soldiers to die for this lie.
Secondly, Can’t we have just one election that is about real issues rather than who did what to who and when they did it?

Oz-

It is established fact that both George H. W. Bush and Bob Dole (not to mention Kennedy, etc.) had affairs, and I think that they are both fairly honorable men. I am not saying one person’s trangressions excuse another’s, but if you really believe that an adulterer can’t be trusted than you are obligating yourself to distrust a lot of prominent politicians.

You also need to remember that this is still just a rumor. No woman has come forward and said there was an affair.

Important point -

According to Timothy Noah of Slate, the woman in question was NOT HIS INTERN. She was an intern for AP.

Missing the point eh? I am sure that many people, myself among them, do not care who does what with whom. I am also pretty sure that as this campaign develops, if Kerry does win the nomination, the country will start to look in depth at:

His arguably very un-American activities immediately after his discharge from the navy. ALL while persons were still under fire, and in captivity (read his words from his Senate appearance) from a determined enemy of this country.

His extremely liberal voting record (almost 100% in step with Ted Kennedy).

His “flip flops” on many issues, seeming to change according to whom he is addressing.

HIS “special interests” (C’mon, does anyone really believe that a guy who spent 20 years in Washington doesn’t have his own deals with this devil) while different from those of GWB, are still very large lobbies on their own (like trial lawyers, teachers unions, etc).

And finally, and yes most irrelevantly, he uses the same hair guy, Christophe, who Bill and Hillary used to hold air traffic for. Sorry, just don’t trust a guy who spends $150.00 for a trim and claims to represent the common man.

Look for yourselves into this candidate. There is a large volume of information (yep, delete anything the Republicans OR Democrats say about him and make up your own mind(s)) on his record.

Oh, one final thought, how come when one party throws out an outrageous comment, Like AWOL, it is considered “a fair question” by the media, but when the other party, or it’s hacks, digs and releases information that may be damaging to the credibility of the opposing candidate, it’s a “smear tactic”. Good for the goose?

I agree with many of the previous bloggers, keep to the issues, who cares who sleeps with whom, who cares if a piece of paper or record gets lost from 30 years ago. I care about who can best lead the country in a time of war.

Kerry, I dont’ think so. Hey Edwards, don’t quit just yet.

The current ‘name’ being floated around in UK media is “Alex Polier”. And she’s in Kenya right now…

For the record, statistically, most people (men and women) will cheat on their spouses. Not that most people are qualified to be president, but that it’s not in reality an extraordinary lapse of character. It’s just an ordinary lapse of character.

Also, it’s none of our business - what happens in a marriage is private. An extension of this privacy idea is that we should not judge a person’s character based on their fidelity in marriage. Who knows what’s going on between them? We never will.

With regards to the Lewinsky affair, Clinton only showed ONE character flaw of significance: it wasn’t his infedelity, but his lack of discretion about it, his inability to control his most private secrets. A president getting caught cheating reflects a less than solid level of control over his own inner circle, which we all know was absolutely true of Clinton. So, yeah, his only sin in my mind was getting caught.

-Cf

Kerry responds to allegations as reported in Breaking News where the following appears:

But when asked about the issue on MSNBC radio show, Imus in the Morning, Senator Kerry said today: “There is nothing to report, nothing to talk about. There’s nothing there. There’s no story.”

Y’all want a character debate? Then everybody’s disqualified. We’re all sinners. We’ve all fallen from grace. But we all did it in some kind of context, and many of us sought redemption for that. The stone throwing mobs of public moralism, however, have no care for the truth of these people’s actual lives, only concern for distracting people from the side of the politician’s morality that really affects us.

If someone here was to bring up a challenge to Kerry’s character based on specific legislation and policy decisions rather than generalized political dislike, then It’d be a character debate worth having. But this? This is crap most of us were tired of six years ago. I don’t want to know what Kerry’s doing in his personal life, thank you very much.

Imus said something like, “So there’s this stuff on Drudge…” and BEFORE IMUS COULD FURTHER EXPLAIN, Kerry says “No! There’s nothing there! No!” or something similar. The point is that he adamantly answered a NON-QUESTION:he purposesly cut off Imus before a direct question could be formulated.

What a weasel. I’m waiting for him to shake his finger at us! I did not have…

Weasel? He answered the question without letting the rumour get mentioned on national television.

Druge, watchblog, buzzflash, etc. are all news junkies information and rumour outlets. For the rumour to appear on these sources is one thing, but if it is totally unfounded in fact, then it is criminal to let the media pick it up. Read slate’s sarcastic article for how the media justifies running unfounded rumour stories.

The WEASEL is Rush Limbaugh: He’s not speaking to the average drudge reader, but instead to Joe-six-pack. The way he ran the story implied that the major media was holding back on this story to protect Kerry. So if it runs, that proves his “they wanted to be second” theory, and if it doesn’t run, that proves there is a conspiracy to elect Kerry. If the story has no legs, then Rush will forget about it, and all the dittoheads will now have this sense that the media is covering up for this sex fiend.

The important considerations in choosing a Presidential nominee should be a candidate’s positions on the issues and a candidate’s character, not the candidate’s private sexual life. The latter may be a consideration for the candidate’s spouse, but should not be for the general voting public.

However, there are a few problems with that simplistic formulation. One obvious problem is that many voters believe that the question of whether a candidate cheated on his spouse goes directly to the issue of character. Many, perhaps even most, voters may not consider it a big deal (or may grade it on a sliding scale depending upon how recently it happened and other related factors). But a significant portion of the electorate will consider it a HUGE deal and will refuse to vote for a candidate who cheats and lies about normally-private matters such as sex.

The second problem is that John Kerry has marketed himself based on his “electability”. And exit polls confirm that this has indeed been driving his primary election victories. So if Kerry suddenly becomes less electable FOR ANY REASON (fair or not), it undercuts the major rationale of his campaign.

If the charges that Kerry cheated on his wife turn out to be false, I don’t think it will hurt him much or seriously reduce his electability. If those charges turn out to be true, the scandal will definitely damage him with enough voters that his electability will be called into question. And it then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. That’s what he gets for making the PROCESS (electability) a major issue rather than concentrating on substantive policy matters.

The third problem is that Kerry appears to be denying the scandal rumors (I say “appears” since it depends on how you parse his comments on IMUS). A cover-up will destroy a candidate even more surely than the originally charges, if the charges are true and can be substantially proven. Kerry had an opportunity to admit to a sexual escapade and apologize, but he chose not to do so. So he better be innocent, or he better hope that there’s no blue dress or equivalent evidence. Otherwise he’s toast.

The Kerry Rumor has no similarity to the Bush AWOL story. A similar rumor is that Bush failed to “show up” to his Alabama National Guard physical, which suspended him from flight status because he knew that the Air National Guard implemented a drug testing policy to their physical that year which Bush knew he would fail to due to his ramped cocaine use. The evidence is circumstantial but there is more evidence to Bush’s Drug use than Kerry’s alleged affair. Bush himself since the 2000 election refuses to answer any questions about his personal life prior to 1974. Therefore before the lunatic right wing web sites start on Kerry, I think they should spend some time analyzing their own hypocrisy.

Great job at scooping the scoopster. It irks me when the big companies take stories without crediting the source, but it is just as bothersome when its done on a local level. Keep up the good work and I’ll post my platform on your site soon. thanks bill wyatt, Republican candidate for President