Mark Sanford was a very vocal and outspoken critic of President Clinton calling for his resignation.smockers83 wrote:As soon as I first heard this story that he had disappeared, I knew immediately that he didn't just disappear. What solidified it was the fact that he's done it before. Hmm, peculiar? I guess now it makes sense to everyone in SC.
On top of him, there's a guy in Congress that admitted to an affair with a staff member.
The Republican party is becoming the Roman Catholic priest sex scandal of yesteryear.
In my opinion neither.heliochrome85 wrote:what is a bigger threat to the sanctity of marriage? Gay marriage or the Republican party?
Smockers,The Republican Party has been no stranger to sex scandals. With the likes of Larry Craig, Mark Foley or Dan Burton they have been knee deep into scandals.smockers83 wrote:The Republican party is becoming the Roman Catholic priest sex scandal of yesteryear.
Dude you know I live Kabobs. You mention skewer and that is all I can think about!heliochrome85 wrote:oh bud. you guys never miss an opportunity to skewer a democrat. i mean socialist. i mean liberal.
I think its high time that people in this country realize that neither political party nor any politician should be a role model of virtue. Regardless of how en/through/exclusionary they are. It's also high time that libs, the press and polemicists like Howie, realize the way you destroy a political party is not to go after their sexual transgressions. This methodology hasn't worked for the Republicans and sure hasn't worked for the Democrats.heliochrome85 wrote:All I know is that it is high time for the country to realise the GOP is not the party of morals any more.
Finally, Howie posts something worthy of the pixels on my screen.telcoman wrote:The Republicans just need to stay out of peoples personal lives and bedrooms and concentrate on providing good governance and stop worrying about who is marrying whom.
Put Bill Clinton against any Republican in a national election and he would win hands down.Cold_Zero wrote:HmmmmNorth Korea threatens the US with nuclear war and the press is obsessed with the Gov. of South Carolina's love affair. How convenient.
I do have to say that guys like Bill Clinton, John Edwards and Elliot Spitzer are the epitome of the true defenders of the sanctity of Marriage.
telcoman wrote:What he did with Monica although poor judgement, brought the whole issue of oral sex out in the open among sexually active teens.It prevents unwanted pregnancy and abortions.
We have Elliot Spitzer in NY and Jim McGreevy in NJ.audtatious wrote:He should step down. You don't preach about a set of values that you yourself are breaking. nuff said.
Telco, your thoughts on all the Dem scandals? I was actually going to post a thread about this but knew you would do it for me.
Not really, but I do have concerns over the "alleged" voter fraud in the city of Chicago on the part of Daley and in the state of Texas thanks to Lyndon Johnson. Then there's the ties to the Giancana crime family and the union votes he delivered. On a side note, that Kennedy Family Curse is a beast isn't it? I wonder if Ted thought he'd last so long.telcoman wrote:Kennedy was a great president. Does anyone really care about the rumors about him and Marylyn Monroe?
And the same story on my end, its his personal life. I do have a problem with his going on air and outright lying to the American public and later having the audacity to debate the meaning of the word is. If he'd have owned up to it on the front end or said "Its none of your business" I'd never would have had a single problem with it.telcoman wrote:Same with President Clinton. It is the right wingnuts that keep bringing it up over his indescretion with Monica. It was two hetrosexual adults having consentual sex. It was a personal and Hillary matter.
In the spirit of Lewinsky they can purchase a cigar when they're 18.szhosain wrote:I guess the boys get to have fun, but what about the teen girls needs?
Z
No, you've got it all wrong, Z.szhosain wrote:
So, the Democratic solution to teen sex problem is to encourage fellatio?
I guess the boys get to have fun, but what about the teen girls needs?
Z
Somehow, I knew this was going to come up when you made your first comment. Howie, I suspect your not that all concerned with the backlash of Republicans being caught in sex scandals. No, I have a feeling that is just an attempt to “just make them go away!” Why does it bother you so much that one religious group or political party attempts to stand up for certain moral issues? Maybe because you hope if they just go away, what they say won’t be right? I find it interesting, my boss is a ****sexual and he does not get bent out of shape on this issue. No his distain is pointed at his fellow ****sexuals that get loud and boisterous about the issue. I guess he doesn’t feel like he has to be married to his boyfriend, because I married my girlfriend. But hey, he seems a happier than most people. *shrug*telcoman wrote:The big difference in their scandals and the other democrats is they do not stand up preaching against gay rights and other personal sex issues.
Sex scandals have been going on for a long time in many countries. In Europe it hardly matters. If the religous right would just STFU about it it wouldn't be such a big issue in the press whenever a Republican gets caught.
Yep.telcoman wrote:They still don't get it that the majority of Americans do not accept their BS in trying to get into the personal lives of Americans and do not practice what they preach.
You can but why would anyone need a machine gun or an assault rifle?AZhitman wrote:
Like the Dems telling me I can't own a gun..
You can hire the best qualified. You just cannot discriminate.AZhitman wrote:
Like the Dems telling me I can't pick and choose who I hire.
So you don't believe in fair and balanced?AZhitman wrote:
Like the Dems telling me I should be subjected to "equal time" on talk radio.
Are you referring to hate speech? Why would you want to use it?AZhitman wrote:Like the Dems telling me I can't use derogatory terms to describe someone who's "different" from me.
Not exactly! Only those earning over $250k and rolling back the Bush tax cuts that benefited his very wealthy friends.AZhitman wrote:
Like the Dems telling me I make too much money and I need to be taxed at a higher rate than some slob who won't get out of bed in the morning.
You as a responsible parent need to be responsible to monitor what your children are not only watching on TV but also what web sites they visit.The government has no business in censorship.AZhitman wrote:Like the Dems telling me that my kids should be subjected to smut on prime-time television.
That argument has been going on since the first emission rules went into effect over 30 years ago. California cleaned up their air and many oftheir rules have been adopted by other states as well as the federal government.AZhitman wrote:Like the Dems telling me that my car is "destroying the environment".
Like the Dems telling my kids they can't ride their ATV's in the desert because it's "destroying a natural habitat".
Agreed, get the F government out of people's bedrooms and who they can marry and live withAZhitman wrote:
I agree. Get the F outta my private life.
Because he wants one. Who cares unless he uses it for purpose of a crime? Criminals have access to them anyway because they don't care to follow the law.telcoman wrote:
You can but why would anyone need a machine gun or an assault rifle?
What if he only wanted to hire white people to work for his private company?telcoman wrote:You can hire the best qualified. You just cannot discriminate.
From who's perspective? There are far more AM radio listeners who want to listen to one style of viewpoint and not the other, why is it "fair" to punish them in order to put on shows that have little listeners? It's a fact that Dem radio fails because they don't have a listener base.telcoman wrote:So you don't believe in fair and balanced?
Freedom of speech? "Hate speech" is very subjectivetelcoman wrote:Are you referring to hate speech? Why would you want to use it?
Show me where only "his very wealth friends" benefited and others did not. From your assertion there are no "very wealthy" Democrats that benefited from the policy and as we all know that is BS then what you stated it total crap.telcoman wrote:Not exactly! Only those earning over $250k and rolling back the Bush tax cuts that benefited his very wealthy friends.
Unless it has to do with God or pro-life and then you would have a hissy fit. Standard hypocritical perspectivestelcoman wrote:You as a responsible parent need to be responsible to monitor what your children are not only watching on TV but also what web sites they visit.The government has no business in censorship.
Get rid of marriage all together. Those who wish to be "married" can go to a church of their choice and do it.telcoman wrote:Agreed, get the F government out of people's bedrooms and who they can marry and live with
Why would you need to marry another man?telcoman wrote:
You can but why would anyone need a machine gun or an assault rifle?
What if my business clientele (let's say, a restaurant) prefers only Black waiters. I HAVE to hire a Chinese person? That's stupid. STUPID.telcoman wrote:
You can hire the best qualified. You just cannot discriminate.
Nope. Fair is for pansies.telcoman wrote:So you don't believe in fair and balanced?
Why not? Why can't I?telcoman wrote:Are you referring to hate speech? Why would you want to use it?
I'm not his friend.telcoman wrote:Not exactly! Only those earning over $250k and rolling back the Bush tax cuts that benefited his very wealthy friends.
Ah, but it's ok for them to demand "fair & equal"? Bullcrap.telcoman wrote:You as a responsible parent need to be responsible to monitor what your children are not only watching on TV but also what web sites they visit.The government has no business in censorship.
No they haven't. You have NO idea what you're talking about.telcoman wrote:That argument has been going on since the first emission rules went into effect over 30 years ago. California cleaned up their air and many oftheir rules have been adopted by other states as well as the federal government.
I am NOT responsible for it. Quit demanding things of me. Stay out of my private life!!!telcoman wrote:We are all responsible for cleaning up this planet for the next generation.
Wait. What?telcoman wrote:Agreed, get the F government out of people's bedrooms and who they can marry and live with
Telcoman
When is he ever NOT in a pinch?dusred wrote:
I like how you like to change the topic whenever you get in a pinch.
Howie, either support your position or sit quietly while the men talk.telcoman wrote:Oh Matt
Back to the original topic.
That's "good writing"?telcoman wrote:One of the reasons the dailykos is such a great website is they have many people that can write very well,Here is a brief portion for you
I sure don't and I'm sure the majority of "Republicans" do not assume as such either. Just like I'm sure the majority of "Democrats" do not assume those labled as Republicans are all bible thumping "wingnuts".heliochrome85 wrote:we've all known for years now that the guy, while lovable, is a bit of a kook. let him spin his wheels, but dont assume he speaks for all of us.