Hannity and Colmes duke it out over Edwards/McCain Infidelity
Why is there a double-standard? Why do either side of the political spectrum try to excuse their candidate after he/she had committed a wrongful act?
Yes, Bill Clinton is to be ashamed for his affair with Lewinsky.
Yes, John Edwards is to be ashamed for his affair with Rielle Hunter.
So if McCain committed an act of infidelity, why is that being ignored? If Giuliani did the same thing, why is that being ignored?
How can Hannity excuse McCain's act because of his POW ordeal and that McCain "wasn't the same person when he got back, for a short period of time?"
Hannity told Powers, “You can’t possibly understand, nor can any of us, what it would be like to be in a POW camp for five and a half years, never knowing if you’re gonna get out, getting your bones broken every day and tortured and then think you’re gonna be the same person.”
Powers answered, “Sean, how can you make a case like that? ...He was dating Cindy McCain while he was married to somebody else. He had the capacity to date her but he can’t be with his wife? That if you’re a POW, you can cheat on your wife?”
Hannity said, “You know what? He wasn’t the same person when he got back, for a short period of time. And why can’t you understand and put that in context?”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I just cannot believe that reasoning. So if I was a prisoner of war for a number of years, does that mean I can get away with anything after coming back? Does that mean I can commit an act of murder, infidelity, embezzlement, and stealing, and use the POW argument to make up for it?
Folks are not questioning McCain's patriotism, but it seems that if we bring up McCain's infidelity, then his defenders are saying we are questioning it? How can they be linked?
Do they think we are that naive and stupid?
Comments