My last word on McGreevey, I still admire him, but since so many of you

[tnhatesbush]

don't I will not say anything else on the subject. No one has the right to judge him until any of you have walked in his shoes.... CASE CLOSED.

[eaprez]

1. whatever he did or didn't do, what ever he is or isn't.....

...I think its a damn shame that ANYBODY has to hide who they are. Minimally you have a wife who someone married under false pretenses who has wasted years of her life and kids who have to go through this under the glare of the media. All because he wasn't free to be who he is. If his wife had no clue and he married her and created children because of his lack of courage -- then there's no way I'd ever admire him. If he was confused -- he should have gotten clear rather than bringing the burden of his confusion onto someone else.

[NavajoRug]

6. His wife is part of the problem . . .

She knew exactly who he was and what she was getting into.

The one who will pay the heaviest price for this is that child of theirs, who was nothing more than a prop for his 2001 campaign. There aren't any words to adequately describe the kind of @ssholes who would do that to a child.

[Kahuna]

13. The wife and child were a prop. I always got that impression...

even though I never thought that he was gay.

[johnfunk]

2. McGreevy showed real class and dignity today

... and it still smells like a set-up to me -- a slew of phony "scandals" followed by a sexual indiscretion. Sound familiar? It's called Sexual McCarthyism.

Time to out a few ReTHUGlicans, as far as I'm concerned -- and not just the gay ones.

Hope a few of the hookers coming to NYC are bringing hidden cameras...

[merh]

3. I agree with you!

Well said.

[NMDemDist2]

4. just sorry he didn't come out clean, instead of amidst a scandel

other than that, I like the guy fine

Just remember when they bash us on "gays" we fight back with this little jewel (see post #1)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x62868

which would you rather have in high office? a gay man or a child abuser?

[johnfunk]

14. Republicans prefer child abusers. Remeber Phil Giordano?

Read this if your memory needs refreshing.

[West Coast Democrat]

5. You've started 3 threads about McGreevey that I know of.....

Is it really necessary?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[West Coast Democrat]

8. Give me a break!

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blue-Jay]

12. No, you give ME a break!

hahahahaha!

Learn that in debate class, Skippy?

[wurzel]

9. The problem is the sexual harassment suit. Get it?

If it wasn't for that no one would care whether McGreevy was gay or not. You seem to have an axe to grind.

[JustJersey]

11. I hate this "don't judge" stuff

By your logic, we can't judge murderers if we haven't experienced what they have. McGreevey betrayed the public trust by appointing his lover to a government job for which he was unqualified. That, my friend, is "case closed"