In the wake of Ted Kennedy’s death, it seems that a type of debate has broken out. Basically, it comes down to why is Kennedy vilified for Chappaquiddick but former first lady Laura Bush isn’t for the death of Michael Dutton Douglas. Personally, I think the differences are obvious.
Kennedy had already been a senator for 7 years. Laura Bush was still in high school.
Laura Bush was found by police to not be under the influence of alcohol. Kennedy claimed that he had not been drinking. Given the Kennedys’ proclivity for partying I seriously doubt that.
Kennedy was married to Joan Kennedy at the time.
Laura Bush didn’t flee the scene.
Kennedy never reported the incident to police.
And Laura Bush at the time didn’t wield any kind of power that could have influenced a police investigation.
And for those of you who think Ted Kennedy’s record should overshadow his ‘indiscretions,’ all I have to say is OJ is in the Hall of Fame but that doesn’t mean he didn’t get away with murder.
The Trench Reynolds Report 
But the bloated mainstream media with it’s generally left leaning (or falling over) agenda will always try to justify their own actions by trying to play the “oh yeah, well what about…” game…typical and not at all unexpected.
LikeLike
and you have the morals of a rat. The guy’s dead. Show a little respect. He didn’t do it on purpose, unlike George W. Bush, who killed thousands of women and children in Iraq.
LikeLike
I give respect to people who deserve it. And you notice you never hear about the women and children that JFK killed in Vietnam?
LikeLike
He deserves it.That said, I can’t believe that anyone would make that comparison. Ridiculous.
LikeLike