Author Topic: Why does it take a SEX scandal to bring down a politician? (Read 1374 times)

Recap · « **Reply #15 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:10:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mace2004

As a general rule Republicans, although far from a perfect party, have historically been far more likely to put right ahead of wrong and the interests of the party.

Really I'd really like to see you quantify this. Please do show us how this is true will you?

I don't engage in someone so blindly partisan as yourself. Try not to be as apparent next time. k thx

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #16 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:10:22 PM »

^^^^^

Talk about reaching. I think we can safely say the Republicans dumped Foley. No one is saying they shouldn't have. What's funny is that the Democrats are throwing a hissy fit and bringing this up at election time, and then there are clowns like you who are spewing a bunch of crap about it, trying to make it bigger than it is.

lukster · « **Reply #17 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:11:14 PM »

The male page was 17 in studds case, that's not of age where I live. The deomcrats defended him which imo nullifies any complaint they might express towards Foley. The republicans will take care of punishing Foley. We don't need any hypocrits involved.

Mace2004 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:15:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Recap
The question is, why do you think one should have anything to do with the other? Have you asked yourself why it matters to you what happened with Stubbs? Are you looking for some type of justification for Foley's actions? Do you think that this all of some type of Democratic political scheme? What has caused you make comparisons to "the other party". Does this somehow let your party off the hook? I just don't get it.

I don't know all the details of the Stubbs case, but I read on Wikpedia he was openly gay, it was consensual, the person was of age, blah blah blah. Stubbs was re-elected because I assume he is from some area where there is a large gay constituency, and guess what, you won't find many gay republicans. I said you won't find many, apparently not that there aren't any. People basically looked at the situation, saw it for whatever it was, and decided that he could still be a representitive of Congress. I don't know, and I don't care.

Now let's examine Foley's case. He was not openly gay, he was making sexual advances (heck if i know how you describe what he was doing) to an underage page etc.. I'm not sure he broke any laws. Like Stubbs, extremely stupid, poor judgement, etc.. So, I ask you once again, why are you deflecting attention away from Foley and onto Stubbs case. What is the big injustice to you and your party from the Stubbs case that somehow relates to the Foley case. I'm cool with just censuring him, and letting the voters vote him out if they want to. Let the chips fall where they lie like Stubbs.

I just don't understand this trend where republicans blame someone else for their own problems, "Foley did it, yea but, but, so did Stubbs!!!" Republicans take responsibility for absolutely nothing. All their time and energy is focused on finding someone other than themselves to blame. You may think I'm defending the Democrats. I'm not, I could care less about them. They are not the ones in control. They are so weak it's not even funny. However, they are going to win it back because it's a two party system, and when the other party screws up so bad then the voters are left with the worse of two evils. See George W.

Evidently you don't get it because you refuse to. I haven't seen any Republican defend Foley. I haven't seen any Republican object to his resignation or suggest he shouldn't have resigned. I haven't seen any Republican point to a Democrat who wants to pork a 17-year-old page and say SEE, they do it to! What I do see is people, myself included, pointing out the hypocrisy of the Democrat Party. Def: Hypocrisy is the act of pretending or claiming to have beliefs, feelings, morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practise.

I see a Democrat Party that, after previously excusing one of it's own members for doing what Foley wanted to do, start screeching that the Republican leadership needs to be shot. Foley is gone. Good ridence. There is no logical reason to attempt to either deflect or make counter accusations REGARDING HIS BEHAVIOR because we all agree it was heineous....so why are Dems still trying to make hay of it? The criticism in this thread is not about a point which most people agree with, it's about a Democrat Party that will screech "oh my god" as if they're shocked and try to bring down the Republicans for political gain. That's fundamentally dishonest and, yes, hypocritical.

midnight Target · « **Reply #19 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:25:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mace2004
Def: Hypocrisy is the act of pretending or claiming to have beliefs, feelings, morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practise.

Quote

In the House, Foley was one of the foremost opponents of child pornography. Foley had served as chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. He introduced a bill in 2002 to outlaw web sites featuring sexually suggestive images of preteen children, saying that “these websites are nothing more than a fix for pedophiles.

Recap · « **Reply #20 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:26:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mace2004
Evidently you don't get it because you refuse to. I haven't seen any Republican defend Foley. I haven't seen any Republican object to his resignation or suggest he shouldn't have resigned. I haven't seen any Republican point to a Democrat who wants to pork a 17-year-old page and say SEE, they do it to! What I do see is people, myself included, pointing out the hypocrisy of the Democrat Party. Def: Hypocrisy is the act of pretending or claiming to have beliefs, feelings, morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practise.

I see a Democrat Party that, after previously excusing one of it's own members for doing what Foley wanted to do, start screeching that the Republican leadership needs to be shot. Foley is gone. Good ridence. There is no logical reason to attempt to either deflect or make counter accusations REGARDING HIS BEHAVIOR because we all agree it was heineous....so why are Dems still trying to make hay of it? The criticism in this thread is not about a point which most people agree with, it's about a Democrat Party that will screech "oh my god" as if they're shocked and try to bring down the Republicans for political gain. That's fundamentally dishonest and, yes, hypocritical.

So, what you are saying is that the Democratic party is hypocrytical and tries to bring down the Republicans for political gain, while the Republican party doesn't do that kind of thing?

Mace2004 · « **Reply #21 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:26:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Recap
Really I'd really like to see you quantify this. Please do show us how this is true will you?

I don't engage in someone so blindly partisan as yourself. Try not to be as apparent next time. k thx

Really, I'm partisan? Don't think I was trying, or care, to hide it. I've lived quite a while and seen quite a few things and, unlike apparently some others, I've learned from my experiences and developed opinions. If that makes me "partisan", good for me, I'll take it as a complement. I'm a conservative, get over it.

Shaky · « **Reply #22 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:31:59 PM »

Exactly MT. Foley was a hypocrite and a pervert, so now he's gone.

Stubbs was a pervert, he stayed until he retired.

Kennedy is a muderer, he's still there.

Byrd is a hypocritical racist, he's still there.

See a pattern?

Mace2004 · « **Reply #23 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:32:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Recap
So, what you are saying is that the Democratic party is hypocrytical, and the Republican party isn't? That's your point?

As I said, the Republican Party has had some of it's own problems but yes, overall, the Democrats since lossing power have offered absolutely nothing but hypocrisy. From their votes regarding the war, from their accusations Bush is creating a new Nazi nation, to claiming the war is about oil, to standing on the floor of the Senate and accusing him of having known about 9/11, ...yeah, I'd say the Dems have either got the collective IQ of a rock or they're hypocrits. You can pick which one.

Recap · « **Reply #24 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:32:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mace2004
Really, I'm partisan? Don't think I was trying, or care, to hide it. I've lived quite a while and seen quite a few things and, unlike apparently some others, I've learned from my experiences and developed opinions. If that makes me "partisan", good for me, I'll take it as a complement. I'm a conservative, get over it.

Wow, well it's nice to meet the only person to "live quite a while and seen quite a few things". It's quite an honor. I guess I havn't lived enough where I blindly defend/follow a specified agenda. Good luck with that.

Mace2004 · « **Reply #25 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:36:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Recap
Wow, well it's nice to meet the only person to "live quite a while and seen quite a few things". It's quite an honor. I guess I havn't lived enough where I blindly defend/follow a specified agenda. Good luck with that.

It's funny how, when you have no legitimate counter argument, you go for gratuitous personal and sarcastic attacks.

midnight Target · « **Reply #26 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:37:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shaky
Exactly MT. Foley was a hypocrite and a pervert, so now he's gone.

Stubbs was a pervert, he stayed until he retired.

Kennedy is a muderer, he's still there.

Byrd is a hypocritical racist, he's still there.

See a pattern?

To your rant?

Recap · « **Reply #27 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:44:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mace2004
As I said, the Republican Party has had some of it's own problems but yes, overall, the Democrats since lossing power have offered absolutely nothing but hypocrisy. From their votes regarding the war, from their accusations Bush is creating a new Nazi nation, to claiming the war is about oil, to standing on the floor of the Senate and accusing him of having known about 9/11, ...yeah, I'd say the Dems have either got the collective IQ of a rock or they're hypocrits. You can pick which one.

Well those sound like some extremes to me. Personally, I thought,

We left Afghanistan too soon.

Never thought of Bush creating a Nazi nation. That one is just weird.

Thought Bush went to Iraq because there was an overall feeling that his Dad didn't finish the job when he had the chance and felt a desire to finish the job.

The war is about oil. As well as about a 1000 other things.

If he knew about 9/11, even being dumb as a stump, he'd done something I think.

Personally, can't stand this administration or the Democrats. I'm probably one of the millions of people who feel like they have noone to represent their ideas. It's called noone is right all the time. It's called compromise. It's called the middle. Right now there are only extremes.

Mace2004 · « **Reply #28 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:44:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
To your rant?

Looks more like a list Midnight but I don't think I'd call Kennedy a murderer. He probably would have gotten off with manslaughter. Byrd may or may not still be a racist but could you see a Republican surviving more than a few days after having been found out to have been a member of the KKK?

Hawco · « **Reply #29 on:** October 06, 2006, 05:46:45 PM »

Republicans do what they are good at, first they have mass denial sessions, then they blame the other side and then the victims, They done it in Katrina remember? so called rapes etc at the superdome stopped them from getting aid in and such, then they replay the same here, denial after denial, blame the democrats oh yes! was all the democrats, they leaked it etc, then they blame the victims, Fact is, the ABC reporter said it was Republicans that leaked it, that of course can easily be denied as it was not corroborated by Fox news.
But yes you are right, Sex can often lead to someones downfall, BUT it's not all doom and gloom for the repubs, Hastert is still clinging to life with Reynolds snapping at his heels.