How is John McCain's Affair Different from John Edwards'?

Here's two links, one with video.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/374197_horsey10.html

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/cindy-mccain-as-miss-buffalo-chip/

Roy I am happy you added the HaHa because that is a joke also. He got shot down and survived imprisonment the how we will never know for sure.

Well, actually, there's a newsvine story some time back of how our hero was shot down and saved by a Vietnamese man from drowning in the lake he went down in. Later McCain shunned this man.

I think that article needs to be dug up and reintroduced to the larger public as it shows that McCain is at best dishonorable in how he has treated someone who saved his life!

Having affairs in this society needs to be dealt with. I think people's personal lives should remain just that. The media should be able to peak but not tell. Why?

Anybody remember what I'm forgetting his name right now did? The guy who offered a million dollars to out republicans back a few years ago. He runs has a magazine along the lines of Playboy...

I remember he got someone to resign when he put out his challenge maybe he needs to do it again.

We are human. And the fact that the moral behavior of this country is still ruled aka by Victorians is pretty sad, considering the ribald behavior of most of the country's elites and Hollywood's promotion of sin city behavior.

Mostly devout christians probably think the term Sex Positive means they have AID's.

Yup Larry's the man thanks!

Took a look but this is one area where Newsvine fails, especially for really important articles.

This is the best I could do in terms of describing some of what the article I saw went into. The Newsvine article went into details of about the man that saved McCain.

And here's another link to another sex scandal of John's.

Here's where the animal part comes in. Go look very closely for many days at a community of one of our close species, the Chimpanzee or other ape species. The nuclear family is a royalist institution that has nothing to do with human instinctual drives, not mention the power structures of the patriarchy.

Men and women's basic drives are completely different. Marriage was designed to lock men to women, to keep the species population growing but at the same time destroy tradional ape structures that are more like gangs or tribes. A tribe or gang is far harder control than a single male bound to a pregnant female.

We are supposed to let men roam around during young adulthood and find their perfect mate. Well, that is the ideal, but very few males ever hold to that.

Over seas during major wars, there will be ten's of thousands of prostitutes around those war zones far from the prying eyes of girlfriends and wifes. The things some of us saw in Vietnam still stay in Vietnam, just like the story goes in Vegas.

50% of all marriages end up in divorce in this country. The system is stupid IMHO. Its based on sex negative Victorian behavior. There are way too many people on this planet. We need to break up the Romeo and Julliet BS and realize that no one person can ever really fulfill the complex needs of another person throughout their lives. Bonding with another person isn't a bad thing, but its not the only way we could have organized our relationships.

But, see, Chimpanzees don't have religion!

are you sure?

I'm not even sure we do either, for that matter.

hahahaha. good point.

We need to break up the Romeo and Julliet BS and realize that no one person can ever really fulfill the complex needs of another person throughout their lives. Bonding with another person isn't a bad thing, but its not the only way we could have organized our relationships.

It's unrealistic expectations of ourselves that lead us towards making hypocrites of ourselves, isn't it?

That was also an interesting point you made about the nuclear family being a "royalist institution". Really, it's patriarchal in general. (Some) Men want to know with certainty (or as much certainty as can be managed) who their children are so that they can favor them (with jobs, inheritances, titles, etc.). Imagine how different our society would be if we weren't so hung up on parentage (though figuring out who a child's Mom is tends to be trivial). Then all men would need to take responsibility for all children rather then engaging in childish favoritism.

European royalism and the church are pretty much entwined, should have included them together.

The patriarchal angle is appropriate as well.

A rather interesting model on how to deal with this stuff was developed last century in the Israeli Kibbutz culture, where as soon as a baby was old enough to be weened, it was taken from their parents and put into a very different structured peer-profesional environment. This was very hard on the first generation of women, but after that it became a critical element in breaking down the ownership behavior that adults seem to fall into with children.

That's interesting about the Kibbutzes, energynet. I grew up in a spiritual community, and one of my mother's friends described how, during morning services, mothers would frequently nurse babies who were not their own biological children. There was a sense of communal responsibility. I found that to be beautiful.

The Kibbutz culture in Israel was extremely innovative in terms of child rearing as well as their version of communism, or community living models. The 67 war and TV had dramatic impacts on that culture... I'd read a book about their lifestyle prior to that era, and don't know where it went after TV, but prior to that, it they lived a lot like some of the close to the land religious communities here...

I nearly went into a spiritual community (Hindu) 30 years ago, but backed out of it and got into activism on energy stuff (anti-nuclear) etc...

The Kibbutz culture in Israel was extremely innovative

I don't know all that much about it, but, speaking of TV, I recall seeing something not long ago about how much they've changed in recent years, more closely approaching mainstream society. It's a pity.

I nearly went into a spiritual community (Hindu) 30 years ago, but backed out of it and got into activism on energy stuff (anti-nuclear) etc...

Well, it's tempting (for some of us) to turn our back on society and live a life of contemplation and meditation, focusing on our own spiritual development, but the society at large will improve only if more conscious people follow the path of activism as you have.

It was kind of a tough call at the time, as a lot of folks were wanting to go sit in a cave on the mountain top and contemplate the state of things.

I've had an impact on a few things in the last 30 years, but its a big bad world out there. Satyagraha isn't exactly something people here seem to think very highly of for some reason... :(

I've had an impact on a few things in the last 30 years, but its a big bad world out there. Satyagraha isn't exactly something people here seem to think very highly of for some reason... :(

Hey, isn't Satyagraha another thread? :P They all tend to bleed together after a while, don't they?

Well, service is its own reward. We benefit from performing it, even if the world doesn't embrace it.

Have a lovely weekend, energynet! Say "Hi" to the squirrels for me (I saw a pair chasing each other around and around a tree trunk outside of work the other day).

You too MM!

I hope Scott doesn't mind to much that we got caught in the breeze.

Let's see if this works. Here's some flickr kids...

Thanks!

The SciFi post was an interesting find as well!

As you can see, I'm a bit of a grumpy sci fi guy...

It seems that mostly I go to see the special effects at this point rather than good stories.

Could you clarify abit by what you mean about the Matrix?

Okay got it. I did like the theme it played on, but not the violence. Blockbuster status requires lots of violence for it to be considered.

That's easy. Long ago John McCain decided to take the Blue Pill:

The question then is not about pills, but what they stand for in these circumstances. The question is asking us whether reality, truth, is worth pursuing. The blue pill will leave us as we are, in a life consisting of habit, of things we believe we know. We are comfortable, we do not need truth to live. The blue pill symbolises commuting to work every day, or brushing your teeth.

The red pill is an unknown quantity. We are told that it can help us to find the truth. We don't know what that truth is, or even that the pill will help us to find it. The red pill symbolises risk, doubt and questioning. In order to answer the question, you can gamble your whole life and world on a reality you have never experienced.

We need change, and to deal with what we all face we need a President that sees reality.

No he didn't take the blue pill. He's the one selling the blue pills.

:-

Both?!

I hope Scott doesn't mind to much that we got caught in the breeze. Let's see if this works. Here's some flickr kids...

Darling kiddos!

Kudos, Roy, for that return to topic.

Thanks. I aim to please!