.....And, this dude's into DRESSIN'-for-the-part(y) (http://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_Pressured_resignation_in_another_GOP_1031.html )!!!!!!!!!!

.....And, this dude's into DRESSIN'-for-the-part(y) (http://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_Pressured_resignation_in_another_GOP_1031.html )!!!!!!!!!!


just wait and see how many repubs on THIS board come out and defend this... bunch of hypocrites. I'm sure Rush and Hannity will spin this somehow. When will the supporters of the GOP open their eyes and see??

just wait and see how many repubs on THIS board come out and defend this... bunch of hypocrites. I'm sure Rush and Hannity will spin this somehow. When will the supporters of the GOP open their eyes and see??
I'm not a Republican, but I'll defend this guy -- I see nothing wrong with either homosexuality or (voluntary) prostitution, so I don't see anything wrong with what he did.

As a conservative I don't thinka person's sex life is anyone else's business. I am surprised that Shaman and MeskDXB think it is their business. Both seem to think that being a homosexual is something to be ashamed of.

Tell me, Shaman and MeskDXB, why would the man need defending. What has he done wrong? What is wrong about being a homosexual? Maybe we should criminalize homosexuality. Would that make the two of you happy?

I'm not a Republican, but I'll defend this guy -- I see nothing wrong with either homosexuality or (voluntary) prostitution, so I don't see anything wrong with what he did.
Agreed. Why is this even an issue? It's none of our business with whom this guy has sex or if he's paying for it.

It's none of our business even if he is not paying for it.

It's none of our business even if he is not paying for it.
I never said otherwise.

just wait and see how many repubs on THIS board come out and defend this... bunch of hypocrites. I'm sure Rush and Hannity will spin this somehow. When will the supporters of the GOP open their eyes and see??
I think I've figured-out why so many of these two-faced whack-jobs hide-out in the Republican Party! That's where most o' them ARE!!!

I mean....Hell!.....how many fisherman do you see, in the middle o' I-95??!!! :drive:

I'm not a Republican, but I'll defend this guy -- I see nothing wrong with either homosexuality or (voluntary) prostitution, so I don't see anything wrong with what he did.
I'd like to see him make that justifiication, to the others, in God's Own Party. :thumbs:

I think you might be mixing conservatives with neo-conservatives. I have very little in common with neo-cons.

Actually I'm more a Classical Liberal, Borg.
As a conservative I don't thinka person's sex life is anyone else's business.
Your bipolar's showing. :rolleyes:

Actually it is your homophobia that is showing. You seem overly concerned with other people's sexual leanings, especially if they lean toward gay.

You also don't seem to know how closely Classical Liberals and Conservatives (not Neo-Conservatives but Conservatives are philosophically. Perhaps you should spend less time posting homophobic posts and more reading about political philosophies.

Tell me, Shaman and MeskDXB, why would the man need defending. What has he done wrong? What is wrong about being a homosexual? Maybe we should criminalize homosexuality. Would that make the two of you happy?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm......let's seeeeeeeeeeee.......

*

"Elected to the state House of Representatives in 2004, Curtis has voted like a fiscal and social conservative. This spring, he voted against domestic partnerships for gay and lesbian couples. Last year, he opposed a gay rights bill that banned discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation (http://www.spokesmanreview.com/tools/story_breakingnews_pf.asp?ID=12142)."

*

Gee.....I'd expected your psychic, abortion-counseling capabilities would have precluded you from asking such questions......you know....since your one o' those nationwide Morality-Monitors.

Lemme guess.....Hypocrisy is different, in your eyes, right? :thumbs:

Your post shows how little you know about my political philosophy, Shaman, but then you seem to know so little about so many things.

Your post shows how little you know about my political philosophy.....
.....And, your consistancy! We certainly shouldn't overlook your consistancy!! :rolleyes:

So you admit you don't know. That's okay Shaman Allforums is a big place and there is even room for people like you.

So you admit you don't know.
I guess that'd be dependent on which (of you) we're talkin'-about. :rolleyes:

I'm not going to get into a personal slam fest with a homophobe, Sharman. The fact that you dislike homosexuals and feel it is somehow, if not a crime at least something worthy of condemnation is something you will have to deal with personally. I do applaud your efforts to try to deflect attention from your views though.

As a conservative I don't thinka person's sex life is anyone else's business. I am surprised that Shaman and MeskDXB think it is their business. Both seem to think that being a homosexual is something to be ashamed of.

Tell me, Shaman and MeskDXB, why would the man need defending. What has he done wrong? What is wrong about being a homosexual? Maybe we should criminalize homosexuality. Would that make the two of you happy?


Nice spin! you know the issue is not homosexuality!! The issue at hand is hypocrisy!! You guys just spin spin spin and don't even know it!!

I'm not going to get into a personal slam fest with a homophobe, Sharman.
What....you don't have your local, Republican-congressman's e-mail address???

As a conservative I don't think a person's sex life is anyone else's business. I am surprised that Shaman and MeskDXB think it is their business......why would the man need defending? What has he done wrong? What is wrong about being a homosexual?

Why, nothing at all!

Does anyone in this country dare say a word of criticism to a Republican politician over a matter of a homosexual encounter?!?!?!?! Why, nothing could be more preposterous!

It's only a Federal offense, and the greatest crime against humanity the world has ever seen when an e-ville Democrat has naughty, naughty sex.

You know; such as if, hypothetically, a Democratic politician were to --gasp!!!, the horror!!!!--- ever have private, consensual sex with a woman other than his wife.

THEN, by Gawd, according to untold millions of Conservatives in this nation, that politican is to be regarded as a horribly degenerate pervert and sex fiend. He MUST be impeached and driven from office.

It's only Right.

Would you care to name these people who would be aghast or are you satisfied to simply make unverifyable blanket statements as you usually do, Freethnker? Who posting here would be aghast? Who posting here seems inordinately concerned with people's sexual proclivities?

Would you care to name these people who would be aghast ..........

Oh bullshit. How fucking disengenuous can you be, if you deny that the RightWingers in this country wanted Clinton's head on a platter over the Lewinski matter?!?!?

Back when it occured, a huge segment of the RightWing faction in this country was apoplectic over Clinton's infidelities, calling him everything from "pervert" to "rapist".

Virtually every Rightwinger I ever heard make mention of the subject of Bill Clinton having sex with Ms Lewinski was talking about how wrong it was and how he was a bad person. There would never have BEEN an impeachment had not the conservative sheep in this country been clamoring SO loudly and incessantly for it.

If you deny that there was widespread dissaproval among the Right over who Clinton was having sex with and angered calls for his impeachment, you are living a fantasy.

Virtually every Rightwinger I ever heard make mention of the subject of Bill Clinton having sex with Ms Lewinski was talking about how wrong it was and how he was a bad person.
.....And, then KARMA bit 'em in-the-ass (http://www.salon.com/news/1998/09/11newsb.html)!!!! :spank:

people who cheat on theri wives are bad people, don't you agree?

people who cheat on theri wives are bad people, don't you agree?
I think people who launch Wars of CHOICE, to maximize their personal-income, are WORSE!!!

people who cheat on their wives are bad people, don't you agree?

:rolleyes:

I could not care less who is cheating on their wife, when it comes to governing the nation. It is of zero concern to me.

What DOES have a great deal of significance for me is when our political leaders do something that actually affects me in my day to day life......like concocting a huge pack of LIES and duping the Amerian Public in order to foment an illegal and disastrous war and charging the taxpayers --incuding me-- hundreds of billions of dollars and getting thousands of young men killed for nothing.

Using the word "bad" to describe those guilty of perpetrating such a murderous, greedy, heinous act does not come within a million miles of describing how truly despicable they are.

[Freethinker]Oh bullshit. How fucking disengenuous can you be, if you deny that the RightWingers in this country wanted Clinton's head on a platter over the Lewinski matter?!?!?[/quote]

Talk about being disengenuous, Freethinker......Bill Clinton was a serial sexual harrasser as testified to by numerous women including Willey and Flowers among others. Bill Clinton used the power of his office to seduce an underling. Bill Clinton lied under oath in a court of law thereby committing perjury. It wasn't about a simple blowjob and blue dress.

[Freethinker]Bill Clinton lied under oath in a court of law thereby committing perjury. It wasn't about a simple blowjob and blue dress.


We've talked about this before. Any man would lie about a blowjob under oath!! That was the whole point. They (repubs) wanted to get Bill in a situation where he would HAVE to lie!! Any man would about cheating on this wife. Of course it was wrong to cheat in the first place. But we are talking about the lying under oath part.

people who cheat on theri wives are bad people, don't you agree?

but people who pay for sex aren't right?

I think people who launch Wars of CHOICE, to maximize their personal-income, are WORSE!!!

Great job of completely changing the subject, you hack.

Talk about being disengenuous, Freethinker......Bill Clinton was a serial sexual harrasser as testified to by numerous women including Willey and Flowers among others.

Ok. I don't care. It had zero effect on my life. They were grown women. They could have simply said "no".

Bill Clinton used the power of his office to seduce an underling.

:rolleyes:

By all accounts, Lewinski was a VERY willing participant.

Bill Clinton lied under oath in a court of law thereby committing perjury.

And if B*sh were ever --as he should be-- placed under oath and asked about the craven, dishonest acts he has perpetrated, he'd have to lie --yet again-- about the campaign of lies he and his cohorts concocted to fool the gullible populace into going to war........or else he'd have to stand accountable for fomenting that war.

In terms of harm to the nation, on a scale of one to a hundred, lying under oath about a sexual liason rates a 1 with me........while lying the county into a war rates a 99.

Ok. I don't care. It had zero effect on my life. They were grown women. They could have simply said "no".

At least two of they said they did say no and Clinton didn't take no for an answer. Maybe you are one of those who doesn't think no means no and women who say no really want it. I happen to be in the camp that believes that when a woman says no it means no.

And if B*sh were ever --as he should be-- placed under oath and asked about the craven, dishonest acts he has perpetrated, he'd have to lie --yet again-- about the campaign of lies he and his cohorts concocted to fool the gullible populace into going to war........or else he'd have to stand accountable for fomenting that war.

In terms of harm to the nation, on a scale of one to a hundred, lying under oath about a sexual liason rates a 1 with me........while lying the county into a war rates a 99.

I'd like to see Bush under oath, but you can't prove it's a lie until he confesses or Cheney and others "out" him... until then, you have a theory... and you are entitled to it.

Great job of completely changing the subject, you hack.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......I assummed the subject was still "bad people".

No, but you blatantly changed the subject. You want me to quote you? Stick to the argument or GTFO.

I agree people make a big deal about it but when it is a person that speaks out against homosexulity and then gets caught it is funny. And in this case kinky! He was married right! GOP=Grab Our Penises

I'd like to see Bush under oath, but you can't prove it's a lie until he confesses or Cheney and others "out" him... until then, you have a theory... and you are entitled to it.

It is no "theory". The Downing Street memos prove that he lied. The past circumstances prove that he lied about it, whether he admits it under or oath or not.

GOP=Grab Our Penises

So now we all know you watch The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

Why can't cheating on your wife AND starting illegal wars be bad? Why do you have to give a pass to the womanizer in chief to make the illegal war for oil that much worse?

No, but you blatantly changed the subject. You want me to quote you? Stick to the argument or GTFO.
<Groan> :rolleyes:

You really do need to keep better track of the sequence of things, here.

I was responding to:

people who cheat on theri wives are bad people, don't you agree?

Begone, worm.......... :rolleyes:

Why can't cheating on your wife AND starting illegal wars be bad? Why do you have to give a pass to the womanizer in chief to make the illegal war for oil that much worse?
Easy!

I compare body-counts!!

Why can't cheating on your wife AND starting illegal wars be bad? Why do you have to give a pass to the womanizer in chief to make the illegal war for oil that much worse?

Because a Washington politician lying about "womanizing" has ZERO effect on me or my life..........while a Washington politician fomenting a disastrous war based on lies WILL have an effect on me by increasing the tax burden on Americans, by making this country despised and feared throughout the rest of the world, and COULD be the seed that sets off a much wider conflict, such as WWIII.

just wait and see how many repubs on THIS board come out and defend this... bunch of hypocrites. I'm sure Rush and Hannity will spin this somehow. When will the supporters of the GOP open their eyes and see??

He has a record of always voting against gay rights of course. That's what makes it bad. It's the fact they put on this big act for the religious right, and maybe for their wifes too, (he's married.) And he's a cross-dresser too. :eek:

but people who pay for sex aren't right?
Right, as long the person being paid for sex hasn't been coerced into doing so.

Right, as long the person being paid for sex hasn't been coerced into doing so.

its against the law!!

its against the law!!
It shouldn't be.

I'm sure Rush and Hannity will spin this somehow. When will the supporters of the GOP open their eyes and see??

Never.

ugh.. the egoism in this thread is killing me.

ugh.. the egoism in this thread is killing me.
egoism, huh?

I'll bet you really dazzle your Elementary-school-mates, with such big, grown-up words. :thumbs:

Another Republican, (with a wife), another bathroom::eek:

Florida State Representative Bob Allen has been found guilty of attempting to solicit homosexual sex in a public restroom in Florida. Prosecutors are asking for jail time when he is sentenced.

Another Republican, (with a wife), another bathroom::eek:

Florida State Representative Bob Allen has been found guilty of attempting to solicit homosexual sex in a public restroom in Florida. Prosecutors are asking for jail time when he is sentenced.
Out of curiosity, was he soliciting (sex in a public restroom), or was he soliciting sex, while in a public restroom?

egoism, huh?

I'll bet you really dazzle your Elementary-school-mates, with such big, grown-up words. :thumbs:
Mr. Shaman, the anti-Foolsworth. If those two ever met, the resulting explosion would blow the Earth into Lego-sized pieces.

Mr. Shaman, the anti-Foolsworth.

True.

But then, to me, about the only requirement necessary for a human being to be an **anti-Foolsworth** is that they be somewhat sane and conversant with the English language.

Out of curiosity, was he soliciting (sex in a public restroom), or was he soliciting sex, while in a public restroom?
I guess that depends on what the definition of soliciting is. :rolleyes:

I can't believe this is his first-shot, at such behavior....but, ya' gotta admit.....he must have one Hell of a campaign-team, to keep his extracurriculars outta the equation!!

Only in Bizarro Bushworld. :rolleyes:

Mr. Shaman, the anti-Foolsworth. If those two ever met, the resulting explosion would blow the Earth into Lego-sized pieces.
....Only if you consider swatting-a-gnat an explosion. (Although, the gnat might think so.) :rolleyes: