• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Jfk: Wtf? (1 Viewer)

wackestmc

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
190
Reaction score
0
Location
Hell.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Alright, so Clinton got a blowjob, right? As soon as people found out, everyone was on the bandwagon to criticize, hate, and attack him for being unfaithful and dirty.

John F. Kennedy pranced around in a full blown affair with Marylin Monroe, and what do we get? "JFK The Hero." "Marylin Monroe, the symbol of beauty in the 50's."

Now I'm not talking legislation here. Obviously, Clinton was impeached and shut down politically due to his lies under oath. JFK obviously made the ffair public business and never lied about it.

But, on a moral side, what's with all the flack Clinton got? I'm not saying he should have not been the cause of a scandal, but there's something wack here. Clinton had a one time offense on oral sex, JFK was sleeping around with a presidential slut, and all you ever hear about JFK is how great of a leader he was. Yeah, adulterers really represent the face of American heroism. Now Clinton, you say his name and all you get is how dirty he was, how adulterous it was.

I don't condone either of their actions, and I understand the legislatial reasons behind Clinton's impeachment, but I don't think it's fair to call Clinton a scumbag if we refuse to look at America's heroes and apply the same ethics to their lives.
 
wackestmc said:
Alright, so Clinton got a blowjob, right? As soon as people found out, everyone was on the bandwagon to criticize, hate, and attack him for being unfaithful and dirty..


But it was Marylin Monroe...;)

mm25.jpg




monica lewinsky = Not Marylin Monroe........:mrgreen:

monica_lewinsky.jpg
 
Presidents and people who garnered admiration were, back then, beyond reproach. Didn't matter how many knew, no one told. Rock Hudson was gay, everyone knew it in Hollywood, but to his adoring fans, he was the American dream guy. FDR also had a long term mistress and it's been said his wife, Eleanor was at least Bi.
JFK had numerous affairs, was a very physically sick man (addison's disease, bad back, etc), but what mattered was the public persona-any whisperings were kept to whispering.
 
True, our society has now become a scandal/gossip/celebrity dirt MACHINE. I'd like to see JFK under the same sort of scrutiny public figures have nowadays, he'd probabally be ripped apart.
 
Back in the day, ppl were more concerned with the compitance of the president then what he was doing in his bedroom, or hotel room. The dems also dominated the congress back then contrasting with 1997 where the repubs were looking for anything to lash out against the democratic president.

But then what matters most is that this is Marylin Monroe, not Monika lewinski:mrgreen:
 
jfuh said:
Back in the day, ppl were more concerned with the compitance of the president then what he was doing in his bedroom, or hotel room. The dems also dominated the congress back then contrasting with 1997 where the repubs were looking for anything to lash out against the democratic president.

But then what matters most is that this is Marylin Monroe, not Monika lewinski:mrgreen:

I don't think this is necessarily true. Look at the affair of Ingrid Bergman with Roberto Rossellini in the '50s. It was a major scandal and Bergman's career in America was essentially ended because of the public outrage. I think there was an agreement, implicit perhaps, that the media would actually protect the president from scandal, whether out of respect or patriotism or ethics or something else. Certainly this agreement no longer stands.
 
mixedmedia said:
I don't think this is necessarily true. Look at the affair of Ingrid Bergman with Roberto Rossellini in the '50s. It was a major scandal and Bergman's career in America was essentially ended because of the public outrage. I think there was an agreement, implicit perhaps, that the media would actually protect the president from scandal, whether out of respect or patriotism or ethics or something else. Certainly this agreement no longer stands.
Dirty laundry sells for sure now. We have non-celebrities not only as celebrities but making scandalous headlines as well.
Ingrid Bergman left her husband and older child for Rosselini-getting pregnant before they got married. And, being an actress was not held to the same standard. However, it has been rumored that the actress, Loretta Young, had gotten pregnant back in the late 30's, early 40's (by Clark Gable no less), went to Europe for 8 months and came back with, supposedly, an adopted daughter. The daughter later verified that she was indeed born of Ms. Young, but it's not really known if Gable was the father.
It would appear that the old MO in regards to 'scandal' was women were open to it, men of stature were not. The old double standard that women were supposed to be virtuous, but men of course weren't, I suppose....
 
ngdawg said:
Dirty laundry sells for sure now. We have non-celebrities not only as celebrities but making scandalous headlines as well.
Ingrid Bergman left her husband and older child for Rosselini-getting pregnant before they got married. And, being an actress was not held to the same standard. However, it has been rumored that the actress, Loretta Young, had gotten pregnant back in the late 30's, early 40's (by Clark Gable no less), went to Europe for 8 months and came back with, supposedly, an adopted daughter. The daughter later verified that she was indeed born of Ms. Young, but it's not really known if Gable was the father.
It would appear that the old MO in regards to 'scandal' was women were open to it, men of stature were not. The old double standard that women were supposed to be virtuous, but men of course weren't, I suppose....

Of course, you are probably right. But as the president goes, I do think extra care was taken with his image in years past. For example, the treatment of FDR and his disability.

That's an interesting story about Loretta Young.....never heard that one.
 
mixedmedia said:
I don't think this is necessarily true. Look at the affair of Ingrid Bergman with Roberto Rossellini in the '50s. It was a major scandal and Bergman's career in America was essentially ended because of the public outrage. I think there was an agreement, implicit perhaps, that the media would actually protect the president from scandal, whether out of respect or patriotism or ethics or something else. Certainly this agreement no longer stands.
Had a feeling someone would bring up Bergman.
I think there was much less concern however about such matters. Competance was of a much greater concern then anything else.
The repubs make a "contract with america" that says what exactly? Then we have Abramoff, Delay, Rove (dirty politics expert), Cheny, Bush. Competance? HArdly, just fire anyone that disagrees. That sounds more like a dictatorship then a democracy. But I don't blame these ppl, I blame the ppl that elected these loosers. How could you be so blind?
Also there's the personal respect that many women held back then, I say this with the utmost respect, women then did not kiss and tell. As was the case given earlier of Young. Today It's all about selling.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom