|
Post by dj on Jun 25, 2009 10:07:31 GMT -5
By the way I know I'm a little too proud of my ability to prognosticate, and I would like to pass this along:
I would not be one bit surprised if eventually it comes out that he had carried on with this Argentinian woman LONG before a year ago. Call me cynical. :-)
His story is that he met her casually at a conference eight or nine years ago. After a casual meeting, they became close friends because for whatever reason she instantly felt comfortable enough to confide in him about whether or not to divorce her husband.
He then is "dear friends" with this woman he bumped into at a conference, and after seven years of this, boom they fall in love to their shock and amazement.
Doesn't that story sound a little, I don't know, "sanitized"?
This guy who is so "family values" kept in touch for over half a decade with a woman in Argentina whom he met randomly at a conference, and they shared deeply personal confidences right from the start?
Sounds to me that he met a woman with whom he wanted to keep his options open. Even if they didn't act on their attraction until last year, they responded inappropriately to it by getting super cozy from the start.
Emotional intimacy is NOT AN ACCIDENT. You must make an effort, and apparently he did.
If you care about your wife and kids and the integrity of your family you don't put yourself into the position of that level of closeness to another woman. He was "emotionally cheating" the whole time.
Getting that wrapped up in the details of each others' lives long distance, to the point where you suddenly find yourself in love, involves a whole series of conscious decisions along the way. You can't honestly say you didn't know where it was ultimately leading.
I just can't quite buy the "innocent beginnings" angle of his version of events.
|
|
CM
Rookie
Posts: 0
|
Post by CM on Jun 25, 2009 10:44:37 GMT -5
The moral issue is one thing and it unfortunately happens on both sides. But what DJ has pointed out are the political issues of importance.
Reports are his wife asked him to move out of the house two weeks ago, he did not. She had to know where he went. I wonder why would he go to Argentina? He could not have possibly though he could make such a trip and fool everyone. His mental status must be questioned - is he capable of running a state? Politically he may survive an affair but his actions beyond the affair speak to some real instability and judgment. He is up for reelection in 2010 it would be a good time to step aside and get his live back together.
|
|
|
Post by johng on Jun 25, 2009 12:48:54 GMT -5
The moral issue is bad enough, but did he abandon his post? I don't know the law, but his whereabouts was unknown for five days, and he was for all intents and purposes incommunicado. Pretty irresponsible. And Maria must be pretty hot to go to Argentina to be with her. And did the taxpayers pay for the trip? Taxpayer expense not withstanding - YES America loses everytime one of our elected representatives goes afoul and it becomes worse with the coverage - good or bad coverage! Our young people are very confused from all the "examples" thrown at them by such high level officials. Bill Clinton made "Oral Sex" not Sex and Hillary abandoned all common sense for her own Political Stature by standing behind him! Chelsea has even carried this "None of your business" theme into the last election and while I agree it is no one's business but theirs, they chose to make it America's business at the time! IMO this is a continuim of the 60's style life that paved the road of total Degradation in our society and it has just been perfected by many to the level of JDredd's comment - Ho Hum "another one - wake me when its over". The damage is done, it is deep and I don't know what it will take to recover because a "Few Morally Stedfast" can not overcome the masses of malcontent!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jun 25, 2009 17:03:46 GMT -5
Being a malcontent is a dirty job but someone has to do it.
|
|
|
Post by johng on Jun 25, 2009 18:27:39 GMT -5
Being a malcontent is a dirty job but someone has to do it. I was referring to your comment, not your being! I quit the one liner game at rogers so give me substance...
|
|
|
Post by dj on Jun 25, 2009 18:30:05 GMT -5
The moral issue is bad enough, but did he abandon his post? I don't know the law, but his whereabouts was unknown for five days, and he was for all intents and purposes incommunicado. Pretty irresponsible. And Maria must be pretty hot to go to Argentina to be with her. And did the taxpayers pay for the trip? IMO this is a continuim of the 60's style life that paved the road of total Degradation in our society and it has just been perfected by many to the level of JDredd's comment - Ho Hum "another one - wake me when its over". It has ALWAYS been this way. This didn't begin with the 60's. It didn't begin with the 20's. It didn't even begin with another decade of hedonism, the 1870's. It has ALWAYS been. If you want to blame the 60's how do you explain the 1980's? The 80's were by many standards somewhat repressive and asexual. To put it another way: The cyclical nature of promiscuity and modesty, NEVER affects infidelity. It's always there.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jun 25, 2009 18:48:40 GMT -5
Being a malcontent is a dirty job but someone has to do it. I was referring to your comment, not your being! I quit the one liner game at rogers so give me substance... I hear ya. I'll try, but it's hard work for my pea brain.
|
|
|
Post by johng on Jun 25, 2009 19:11:48 GMT -5
I was referring to your comment, not your being! I quit the one liner game at rogers so give me substance... I hear ya. I'll try, but it's hard work for my pea brain. Just say to yourself, "Corporate America" before each post...that seems to get your juices flowing
|
|
|
Post by johng on Jun 25, 2009 19:17:01 GMT -5
IMO this is a continuim of the 60's style life that paved the road of total Degradation in our society and it has just been perfected by many to the level of JDredd's comment - Ho Hum "another one - wake me when its over". It has ALWAYS been this way. This didn't begin with the 60's. It didn't begin with the 20's. It didn't even begin with another decade of hedonism, the 1870's. It has ALWAYS been. If you want to blame the 60's how do you explain the 1980's? The 80's were by many standards somewhat repressive and asexual. To put it another way: The cyclical nature of promiscuity and modesty, NEVER affects infidelity. It's always there. As I am not old enough to speak before the 60s and I don't materially disagree with you on your position, I find it odd then from that perspective how our collective morality seemed quite nicely in tact prior to the 60s sexual revolution. Maybe our prior generations were better at keeping "personal things" personal and not in everyone's face??? The 60s and 70s burned the under garments and the 80s to present have removed the outer garments such that the unders are worn publicly. Twist it how you may, it has resulted in some serious degradation of our way of life!
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Jun 25, 2009 19:33:31 GMT -5
It has ALWAYS been this way. This didn't begin with the 60's. It didn't begin with the 20's. It didn't even begin with another decade of hedonism, the 1870's. It has ALWAYS been. If you want to blame the 60's how do you explain the 1980's? The 80's were by many standards somewhat repressive and asexual. To put it another way: The cyclical nature of promiscuity and modesty, NEVER affects infidelity. It's always there. As I am not old enough to speak before the 60s and I don't materially disagree with you on your position, I find it odd then from that perspective how our collective morality seemed quite nicely in tact prior to the 60s sexual revolution. Maybe our prior generations were better at keeping "personal things" personal and not in everyone's face??? The 60s and 70s burned the under garments and the 80s to present have removed the outer garments such that the unders are worn publicly. Twist it how you may, it has resulted in some serious degradation of our way of life! Exactly. Things were kept quiet before the mid 60's. The press allegedly knew about Kennedy's affairs, but kept it quiet. In Hollywood, there were as many indiscretions as today, but the studio system kept it under wraps. What has changed is the immediacy of news and most everything is now in the open.
|
|
|
Post by jackoliver on Jun 25, 2009 20:09:17 GMT -5
Update. Gov. Sanford WAS in Argentina, in an extramarital affair. Way to go Republicans. 2nd one in two weeks. First Ensign, now Sanford. No regard for his wife, kids, the people of S. Carolina. Are the Republicans self destructing? Looks like it. Only disgusting and perverted individuals would be celebratory. Butter your own bread for a change buddy. Just for you the Big O sucks just ask Larry Sinclair Just Like Bruce, I shall ignore such baseless attacks. Amazing how he keeps posting such insulting statements. I have better things to do.
|
|
|
Post by jackoliver on Jun 25, 2009 20:17:52 GMT -5
Update. Gov. Sanford WAS in Argentina, in an extramarital affair. Way to go Republicans. 2nd one in two weeks. First Ensign, now Sanford. No regard for his wife, kids, the people of S. Carolina. Are the Republicans self destructing? Looks like it. Only disgusting and perverted individuals would be celebratory. Butter your own bread for a change buddy. Just for you the Big O sucks just ask Larry Sinclair CM Are post like these acceptable? Ive not posted because the dialogue seems to be diminishing.
|
|
|
Post by johng on Jun 25, 2009 20:21:32 GMT -5
Only disgusting and perverted individuals would be celebratory. Butter your own bread for a change buddy. Just for you the Big O sucks just ask Larry Sinclair CM Are post like these acceptable? Ive not posted because the dialogue seems to be diminishing. They are not acceptable so we ignore him rather than feed him fuel.
|
|
CM
Rookie
Posts: 0
|
Post by CM on Jun 25, 2009 21:26:47 GMT -5
Only disgusting and perverted individuals would be celebratory. Butter your own bread for a change buddy. Just for you the Big O sucks just ask Larry Sinclair CM Are post like these acceptable? Ive not posted because the dialogue seems to be diminishing. You are well aware of account disablement, you are not aware of other accounts being disabled. Straight up - I’ve requested and I want more tolerance, micromanagement serves no purpose IMO. Climbing in the mind of the poster and interpret intent is difficult and something moderators need to avoid. Months ago nybound described in detail the definition of a message board; I have never forgotten his/her words. We are a community, in a community we find those we bind with and we find those that repel us, but we all make up the community for good and bad. Personally I prefer the community to chastise those that step over the unspoken line. It is when the community is ignored that moderation should apply. Will that ruffle feathers? - Of course but will we all gain as a result - Well that would be my goal. I can assure personal attacks direct or indirect will continue to have consequences. I gotta tell ya the defining lines are much more difficult than I had imagined. Additionally I said from the beginning this board and its management is a learning experience and mistakes will be made, hopefully the mistakes will not be repeated.
|
|
|
Post by dj on Jun 26, 2009 1:38:38 GMT -5
CM Are post like these acceptable? Ive not posted because the dialogue seems to be diminishing. You are well aware of account disablement, you are not aware of other accounts being disabled. Straight up - I’ve requested and I want more tolerance, micromanagement serves no purpose IMO. Climbing in the mind of the poster and interpret intent is difficult and something moderators need to avoid. Months ago nybound described in detail the definition of a message board; I have never forgotten his/her words. We are a community, in a community we find those we bind with and we find those that repel us, but we all make up the community for good and bad. Personally I prefer the community to chastise those that step over the unspoken line. It is when the community is ignored that moderation should apply. Will that ruffle feathers? - Of course but will we all gain as a result - Well that would be my goal. I can assure personal attacks direct or indirect will continue to have consequences. I gotta tell ya the defining lines are much more difficult than I had imagined. Additionally I said from the beginning this board and its management is a learning experience and mistakes will be made, hopefully the mistakes will not be repeated. I agree, CM, I think you are going about it the right way. I just had a "conversation" over at the 760blog with Christina. I told her that the software allows us to look up comments by person. I told her that often times I can see a comment in the pop-up window which seems to have been deleted in the actual thread. She said they don't "censor" anyone. I asked why all these other comments had been removed from the thread. She said they delete "obscene" messages and threats. I pointed out there was no obscenity in the messages I saw. She said they'll delete "off-topic" comments too... uh, what? Couldn't almost ANY comment fall under this definition? And then she added that perhaps the deleted comments were replies to a thread which itself had been delete. To recap: They censor anything they want.
|
|