Topic: The Sins John Edwards Did Not Commit | |
---|---|
John Edwards did not lie to get America into a war that has cost more than 4,000 American lives.
John Edwards did not commit acts of torture that violate the Geneva Conventions, American laws and commonly accepted standards of decency. John Edwards did not commit massive acts of violation of the FISA law that involve thousands of counts of spying on Americans in violation of federal law. John Edwards did not slander war heroes such as John Kerry and Max Cleland in the mindless pursuit of power. John Edwards did not claim pre-emptive power to initiate wars without authorization, nor did John Edwards claim the power to issue pieces of paper that would negate a thousand American laws that he chose not to faithfully execute. John Edwards did not claim executive privilege in the most outrageous, extra-legal manner in order to cover up major wrongdoing and probable criminal acts by multiple members of his administration. John Edwards's sin hurt one very good woman and good kids, which is an unpardonable wrong. John Edwards will not issue pardons for crimes that did grave damage to the nation. http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16383 |
|
|
|
So, what's your point????
|
|
|
|
Well I am greatfull Edwards wasnt the front runner as this episode would have handed the nomination to that insane old man masqueradeing as a republican.
|
|
|
|
Edited by
BobbyJ
on
Sun 08/10/08 10:10 AM
|
|
I think what John Edwards does in his personal life is none of our business. If most people weren't so intent to judge others personal lives, neither Clinton or Edwards would have felt the need to lie about their personal lives.
|
|
|
|
Could someone enlighten me as to the substantive points in this thread?
|
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president.
|
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. |
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. |
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. So you are suggesting it was a coincidence you titled this thread "The Sins John Edwards Did Not Commit" and then simultaneously mentioned the sins of another, presumably the sitting president? Grow up. |
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. So you are suggesting it was a coincidence you titled this thread "The Sins John Edwards Did Not Commit" and then simultaneously mentioned the sins of another, presumably the sitting president? Grow up. |
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. So you are suggesting it was a coincidence you titled this thread "The Sins John Edwards Did Not Commit" and then simultaneously mentioned the sins of another, presumably the sitting president? Grow up. So you're saying you're not referencing Bush in the first post? |
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. So you are suggesting it was a coincidence you titled this thread "The Sins John Edwards Did Not Commit" and then simultaneously mentioned the sins of another, presumably the sitting president? Grow up. |
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. |
|
|
|
Do you honestly think it is any different between a Dem or a Rep as to cover ups in the White House? As for sins, it seems the Dems are more good at getting caught with their pants down (or off).
|
|
|
|
Do you honestly think it is any different between a Dem or a Rep as to cover ups in the White House? As for sins, it seems the Dems are more good at getting caught with their pants down (or off). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Foley |
|
|
|
all fox new can talk about now is john Edwards. well at least john Edwards like women. not like must republicans.
|
|
|
|
It s just a nice way to remind all the good people on Mingle that John Edwards sins are nothing compared to the ones of our sitting president. You do not justify bad behavior by referring worse behavior. Even if that's so, then what is the point of thread? According to you now, this topic has much more to do with the imperfections of Bush and his administration rather than the moral failure that is John Edwards. So what was the point? |
|
|
|
They are just trying to justify the Dems party.
|
|
|
|
Once known as a crusader against child abuse and exploitation, Foley resigned from Congress on September 29, 2006 after allegations surfaced that he had sent suggestive emails and sexually explicit instant messages[1] to teenaged boys who had formerly served and were at that time serving as Congressional pages.[2][3] As a result of the disclosures, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement opened investigations of the messages to find possible criminal charges.[4] The House Ethics Committee has also opened an investigation into the response of the House Republican leadership and their staff to earlier warnings of Foley's conduct.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Foley |
|
|