Author Topic: Another perv congressman? (Read 21170 times)

Paddy · « **on:** August 27, 2007, 02:41:04 PM »

This time it's a Senator. WTF is up with these guys? Do they think this is the old Roman Empire? OTOH, why did he plead guilty if all he did was tap some guy on the foot???

Maybe we do need term limits. undecided

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347/

El Tejon · « **Reply #1 on:** August 27, 2007, 02:42:51 PM »

Hmmm, wonder if the Left will be defending his "lifestyle?" rolleyes

wooderson · « **Reply #2 on:** August 27, 2007, 02:52:10 PM »

In terms of gay men being allowed to live without fear? Yes.
In terms of gay men being able to get a quickie in the men's room? No.

In terms of this particular man with apparent gay interests having a viciously anti-gay record (in line with the rest of his party)? Hmm, lemme think.

The Rabbi · « **Reply #3 on:** August 27, 2007, 03:48:34 PM »

Darn.
He was one of the staunchest pro-gun crowd in Congress.

Balog · « **Reply #4 on:** August 27, 2007, 04:19:15 PM »

Quote from: The Rabbi on August 27, 2007, 02:48:34 PM

Darn.
He was one of the staunchest pro-gun crowd in Congress.

My thoughts exactly, until I read he was a big Romney supporter. What's up with that?

wooderson · « **Reply #5 on:** August 27, 2007, 04:26:37 PM »

Idaho has a huge Mormon population.

Wizzo · « **Reply #6 on:** August 27, 2007, 04:27:32 PM »

Quote from: The Rabbi on August 27, 2007, 02:48:34 PM

Darn.
He was one of the staunchest pro-gun crowd in Congress.

Yes. And an NRA Board of Directors member too (still is, I believe).

Paddy · « **Reply #7 on:** August 27, 2007, 04:28:17 PM »

Quote

Idaho has a huge Mormon population.

Which means what in the context of this discussion? Huh?

??

Balog · « **Reply #8 on:** August 27, 2007, 04:35:12 PM »

Romney is Mormon.

Standing Wolf · « **Reply #9 on:** August 27, 2007, 05:08:43 PM »

Quote

My thoughts exactly, until I read he was a big Romney supporter. What's up with that?

Romney is to integrity as AIDS is to health.

RocketMan · « **Reply #10 on:** August 27, 2007, 05:15:05 PM »

Democratic Rep. Barney Frank was given a pass when his "boyfriend" was found to be running a male prostitution ring out of Frank's home.
Sen. Craig will be forced to resign.

Nitrogen · « **Reply #11 on:** August 27, 2007, 10:24:21 PM »

Quote from: RocketMan on August 27, 2007, 04:15:05 PM

Democratic Rep. Barney Frank was given a pass when his "boyfriend" was found to be running a male prostitution ring out of Frank's home.
Sen. Craig will be forced to resign.

Frank was shown to be unaware of what was going on in his house while he was away.
Besides, Frank is openly gay, and supports rights for gays. I can respect that.

I have a hard time respecting a closet case that rails against gays, then turns out to be one; no matter what his stance on guns is.

RocketMan · « **Reply #12 on:** August 27, 2007, 10:46:47 PM »

Quote from: Nitrogen on August 27, 2007, 09:24:21 PM

Frank ~~was shown~~ claimed to be unaware of what was going on in his house while he was away.

Fixed it for you.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #13 on:** August 28, 2007, 02:41:12 AM »

Quote from: wooderson on August 27, 2007, 01:52:10 PM

In terms of this particular man with apparent gay interests having a viciously anti-gay record (in line with the rest of his party)?

Now that I'm done laughing, I wonder if you could explain what constitutes a "viciously anti-gay record." I mean, not just "anti-gay" but viciously "anti-gay."

wmenorr67 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 28, 2007, 02:43:23 AM »

Quote

Now that I'm done laughing, I wonder if you could explain what constitutes a "viciously anti-gay record." I mean, not just "anti-gay" but viciously "anti-gay."

Maybe he uses anti-gay pit bulls. grin

Manedwolf · « **Reply #15 on:** August 28, 2007, 03:38:19 AM »

This guy was looked at with the congressional page thing before, denied any involvement.

Now he's caught likely doing the gay cruising thing in public restrooms. Of course, it's "all a misunderstanding". Riiiiight.

Just...Ew. I don't care what party someone is, that's just...EW. Tongue

Antibubba · « **Reply #16 on:** August 28, 2007, 07:45:28 AM »

Quote

"At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions," he said. "I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

Uh huh. Sure.

Quote

I have a hard time respecting a closet case that rails against gays, then turns out to be one; no matter what his stance on guns is.

Nitrogen nails it.

roo_ster · « **Reply #17 on:** August 28, 2007, 08:24:08 AM »

Quote from: wmenorr67 on August 28, 2007, 01:43:23 AM

Quote

Now that I'm done laughing, I wonder if you could explain what constitutes a "viciously anti-gay record." I mean, not just "anti-gay" but viciously "anti-gay."

Maybe he uses anti-gay pit bulls. grin

LMAO.

The sick puppy (Sen Craig, not his anti-gay pitbulls) has got to go. Sex in public places, especially dog-nasty public restrooms, is unacceptable behavior.

I am not overly concerned about the dichotomy of his voting record and his penchant for unseemly behavior with other men. Lots of folks do what they know is wrong. At least he is not so calloused as to think it right and advocate for it.

MechAg94 · « **Reply #18 on:** August 28, 2007, 09:33:21 AM »

Well, he was dumb enough to plead guilty. Not what I would expect from a politician.

Was he anti-gay or just anti-gay-marriage?

Pew pew pew · « **Reply #19 on:** August 28, 2007, 09:37:49 AM »

Quote from: jfruser on August 28, 2007, 07:24:08 AM

LMAO.

The sick puppy (Sen Craig, not his anti-gay pitbulls) has got to go. Sex in public places, especially dog-nasty public restrooms, is unacceptable behavior.

I am not overly concerned about the dichotomy of his voting record and his penchant for unseemly behavior with other men. Lots of folks do what they know is wrong. At least he is not so calloused as to think it right and advocate for it.

So you're not at all concerned about hypocrisy in your politicians?

wmenorr67 · « **Reply #20 on:** August 28, 2007, 09:44:30 AM »

Quote

So you're not at all concerned about hypocrisy in your politicians?

I thought that was requirement #1 to be a politician.

roo_ster · « **Reply #21 on:** August 28, 2007, 09:53:36 AM »

Quote from: Pew pew pew on August 28, 2007, 08:37:49 AM

Quote from: jfruser on August 28, 2007, 07:24:08 AM

LMAO.

The sick puppy (Sen Craig, not his anti-gay pitbulls) has got to go. Sex in public places, especially dog-nasty public restrooms, is unacceptable behavior.

I am not overly concerned about the dichotomy of his voting record and his penchant for unseemly behavior with other men. Lots of folks do what they know is wrong. At least he is not so calloused as to think it right and advocate for it.

So you're not at all concerned about hypocrisy in your politicians?

Not as much as many on the left are, who consider it to be one of only two sins left worth excoriating. The other sin being insufficient kowtowing to Designated Victim Groups.

It is not a positive attribute, IMO, but better than having the likes of Craig advocating for what is wrong. The preferable situation is for congresscritters to both act and advocate for what is right.

I once read somewhere, "Hypocrisy is the compliment vice pays to virtue." I think that refers to folks who are gone far enough to do what is wrong, but know it as wrong and have the shame to try to keep it under wraps. A worse situation is someone who does what is wrong but does not understand it to be so and advocates for what is wrong.

I am still waiting for the example of "viciously anti-gay record" and how it differs from a "non-viciously anti-gay record."

wmenorr67 gets in the best cynical quip of the day.

MechAg94 · « **Reply #22 on:** August 28, 2007, 09:58:26 AM »

Hey, this is his personal life. His personal life shouldn't matter. How dare you judge him!! angel

wmenorr67 · « **Reply #23 on:** August 28, 2007, 10:01:27 AM »

Hey jfruser,

I have to disagree with you about what is worse. I say it is worse to know something is wrong and continue to support that wrong doing. If someone does something that they don't know is wrong there is a chance for them to change once the wrong is pointed out.

roo_ster · « **Reply #24 on:** August 28, 2007, 10:18:15 AM »

wmenorr67:

I think we are starting with different assumptions. I believe it is your contention that the person simply does not know what is wrong due to ignorance. Correct?

My assumption is that the person is not ignorant, has been made aware of it, and yet continues to advocate for what is wrong.

News:

Author Topic: Another perv congressman? (Read 21170 times)

Paddy

Paddy