If you intresting in sport Buy trenbolone and Buy testosterone enanthate you find place where you can find information about steroids
  • Resources

  • Book of the Month

  • Shopping on Amazon? Use this search box and support Dangerous Talk at the same time.
  • Blog Directories

    blog search directory Religion Top Blogs
  • AdSense

Politicians Should Not Make Sex Tapes

Politicians should not make sex tapes. I think we need to add that to the Constitution or something. It appears that former presidential candidate John Edwards may have made a sex tape with his “videographer,” Rielle Hunter. I know she was supposed to video tape his every move and everything, but I think she might have taken the job description too literally.

I just am glad this guy didn’t become President and then have this tape come out. Normally, I couldn’t care less if a politician is having sex outside of marriage. He or she could video tape it and stick it up on one of the many porn equivalents to YouTube for all I care. I don’t really even care how kinky it might be. Aside from the “wow” factor, it doesn’t necessarily affect the politician’s job in my opinion.

However, like in the case of Republicans Vitter, Craig, Ensign, Sanford and Democrat Spitzer and now Edwards, if the politician goes around bragging about what a great family man he is and how everyone else should be as holy as he is, than that politician needs to go down. John Edwards now joins the crew of political hypocrites.

Personally, I can’t wait to watch the Edwards tape, not because I want to actually see the tape, but because I want to be able to say, “I saw the tape.” I bet Edwards is a bit of a diva in the bedroom too. He probably has a mirror nearby to make sure his hair doesn’t move out of place.

If Bill and Hillary Clinton came out with a sex tape, I wouldn’t be so hostile. We all know Bill is a lady’s man and while we might be shocked that the tape was with Hillary, neither of them have played the “holier than thou” card. And if a Clinton tape didn’t have Hillary, we wouldn’t be shocked at all. While Bill and Hillary claim to have a marriage, I don’t think they ever preach about how great their marriage is and how everyone else should be just like them.

For the most part, unless a politician goes out of their way to push some kind of family values agenda or preach about their holier than thou family, I don’t really care what they do behind closed doors. I don’t think there should be a sexual litmus test for public office. In fact, I think the dirtier and kinkier our politicians are the better they will probably be. Don’t get me wrong, cheating is a bad thing but as long as it doesn’t impact the job it shouldn’t be a deal breaker.

Just think of all the great Presidents we have had who have cheated. Thomas Jefferson and John F. Kennedy are just the two that come to mind the quickest. Ben Franklin wasn’t a President, but he certainly was a powerful politician who had a pretty strong kinky side (although he surprisingly probably didn’t cheat on his wife).

These days, when someone is interested in running for office, the first thing they have to think about is whether or not they ever had kinky sex which an ex-lover may bring to the public light. Have they ever cheated or even flirted with someone other than their spouse? I am against the sexual litmus test and the politicians who play the sexual purity game only to get caught with their pants down… sometimes even on video tape.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
  • Azadeth

    I rather think that politicians should not make sex…at all. There’s a way to prevent the hypocrisy and also make us all a little less nauseated.

    • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

      So you would rather have a sexual prude than a liberal minded kinkster?

  • http://shaunphilly.wordpress.com ShaunPhilly

    I wonder how many politicians are swingers. I wonder if any have some sort of polyamorous arrangement. I wonder if any of the situations ever caught by the media have been situations like this and they had to play it off as an affair because that is more acceptable than swinging or polyamory to most people.

    • Tomk1ns0n

      Jack Ryan was into swinging and when it became public thanks to the scum-bags in Barrack Obama’s Senate campaign, mainly David Axelrod, he dropped out of the race.

      Clinton may not be a hypocrite for cheating on his wife but he IS a hypocrite to push for broader perjury legislation and then try to avoid it. He’s also more than just a cheater but a sexual harasser and possibly a rapist.

      • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

        A rapist? that is a serious accusation that you are not obliged to back up.

      • http://www.myspace.com/DD_NU4EVER Diana

        Haha, Do I feel hot air coming from the far right…You can’t just call someone a rapist and leave it at that man.Be careful with those random accusations, especially ones so serious.

        • T0mkins0n


          Staks censors my posts, so if he doesn’t publish this I’m sending a copy of it to your own respective websites. I already responded to this once Staks just once and he erased it because he wants me to look bad.

          I’m not a right winger at all. I’ve researched Broaddrick’s claims and I find them credible. Whether you believe her allegations or not it is undeniable that Clinton used thuggery to intimidate and silence women he harassed or had consensual sex with, and nary a word of disapproval from Hillary.

          • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

            Everyone knows that I am notorious for NOT censoring posts unless they are obvious spam. So Tomkinson is such a liar. There is no “Great Tomkinson Conspiracy.” The world does not revolve around you. I never erased anything. Often times links get moved to one of the spam folders and when I see them I approve them. So stop lying your ass off, it just makes you look bad. If I am such a pro-censorship person, why do I even allow you to post at all? You generally lie through your teeth and make accusations you can’t back up. No one cares what you have to say and we are tired of you trolling. I have gotten multiple complaints about you through e-mail, but I go out of my way not to censor or kick anyone off and for my efforts, you have the audacity to accuse me of censoring you? That’s a joke in a half. You were probably drunk and hit the wrong key.

            • T0mkins0n

              I’ve never lied or made an accusation I cannot back up (name one!) including this one. In the past few weeks my posts as Tomkinson have vanished at least 7 times. You’ll notice I posted as Jasby a few entries back and as several variants on “Tomkinson” more recently because that looked like I was trying to hide, I was only trying to post.

              This is not because a single post was removed its because it has happened multiple times. And more recently when I try to post I get “awaiting moderation” messages that never happened before. So if you posted a non-inflammatory response then got an “awaiting moderation” message that never happened previously and then your post was removed would you not conclude you were being censored?

              From now on I’ll be saving screen shots.

              BTW I’d like to see one of these alleged e-mail complaints, I don’t expect the authors name of course but if you or your readers don’t want robust debate they should probably do other things with their time.

              • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

                As I implied, there are two spam folders. One of the spam folders I don’t check and am not even sure how to check yet. The other is for posts which contain links. That one I do check rather often and that is probably what the “awaiting moderation” means. But I almost always approve those posts. I don’t know why your other posts go to the main spam folder, perhaps they are… spam. But that is not a justification for calling me a liar and claiming that I am censoring your posts. Why would I allow some of your posts, but not other posts? Duh, use some fucking common sense. I don’t think you have offered “robust debate” I think you are a troll who throws shit in the wind and then blames everyone else for being shit on. I will once again ask you politely to troll some other blog. But I won’t kick you off. I will also not make this blog about you, so this is the last time I am addressing this publicly. If you want to continue this outside of the blog, I’m up for it.

                • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

                  To reassure the integrity of fellow Dangerous Talkers, I just went into the main spam folder and searched through over 2000 spam messages and saw no legitimate posts… unless “someone” is trying to sell Viagra.

      • Mr. X

        Christopher Hitchens dealt with this topic at length, in his book on the Clintons. His case rested primarily on the accounts of supposed victims…but they’re not easy to dismiss.

        I was too young/oblivious to have an opinion of Clinton while he was in office. But after reading THAT, I now take everything he says with a grain of salt, to put it mildly.

      • Mr. X

        On one hand – if you’re doing things that you feel the need to keep secret, then you shouldn’t be going into politics. Politicians do not get any “private life” to speak of, and everyone ought to know that by now.

        On the other hand – most Americans are just too damned uptight. A swinger (or any other harmless sexual deviant) should be able to openly admit their swinging, and still be able to run for office without it being an issue.

        There – my “feather-weight statement” for the day.

  • Tinman

    More in line with The Clinton family character?

    Haha! These are politicians. What is more in line with their character than hypocrisy ;-)

  • Kat

    They need for all the states to bring back the Alienation of Affection law. “Alienation of Affections” is a tort action brought by a deserted spouse against a third party alleged to be responsible for the failure of the marriage. The defendant in an alienation of affections suit is typically an adulterous spouse’s lover, although family members, counselors, or clergy members who have advised a spouse to seek divorce have also been sued for alienation of affections.

    Alienation of affections was first codified as a tort by the New York state legislature in 1864, and similar legislation existed in many U.S. states in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Since 1935, this tort has been abolished in 42 states. Alienation is, however, still recognized in Hawaii, Illinois, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah
    Of course the courts would be overwelmed with cases. (:

  • http://party-till-you-drop.com Party Boy

    I don’t think anybody should make a sex tape….youtube is a constant threat of exposure lol

  • SmilodonsRetreat

    The only after school program my kid goes to is Mad Science, and I’ve talked to their teachers and seen their work.

    I can’t imagine an atheist letting their child go to any Bible study. Kids just don’t have the critical thinking skills and social stature to deal with indoctrination.

    • http://skepticink.com/dangeroustalk Dangerous Talk

      Of course atheist kids aren’t going to go to Bible Study. But moderate or even right wing Christians will. But this is not even right wing Bible Study. This is far, far right wing extremist Bible Study. One of the things they do is brainwash kids to evangelize other kids. Even kids whose parents are atheists will have friends that might be slightly religious. Those friends are now going to tell your kid that if he or she doesn’t join the Good News Club, he or she will burn in Hell forever. That is pretty scary for young kids to hear. My son is almost 4 and he has no idea about religion. I can’t imagine one of his school friends trying to convert him to extreme Christianity in that way. This is pretty scary.

      • SmilodonsRetreat

        Oh, yeah, I totally agree that it’s scary. I wonder if there’s anything that could counter it. What are the odds that a “critical thinking” after school program would be allowed?

        Part of the lessons we used to do in Biology was a study of food labels and examining them critically. Perhaps combine something like that with a study of TV commercials… and for older kids a look at the claims of politicians on the campaign trail and some work on how to evaluate sources, how to perform good google searches.

        Hmm… now you’ve got me thinking.

        • http://skepticink.com/dangeroustalk Dangerous Talk

          There are a few options here. The first is to educate the general public about these Good News Clubs. The second is to help fund the Secular Student Alliance so that they can continue to create and support High School Freethought groups..But neither of those options really solve the problem. They are just the best we can do.