feedback.pdxradio.com » Politics and other things

Another family values Republican goes down in flames

(69 posts)
  • Started 2 years ago by Vitalogy
  • Latest reply from missing_kskd

  1. Vitalogy

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 5,280

    "The Craigslist Congresman"

    A married congressman from upstate New York resigned suddenly Wednesday after a scandal erupted over emails and a shirtless photo supposedly sent to a woman in response to a Craigslist dating ad.

    The controversy erupted when Gawker reported that a Maryland woman had sent in emails supposedly written by Lee in response to a dating ad that she had placed on Craigslist. Gawker said the ad had asked: "Will someone prove to me not all CL men look like toads?"

    In response came emails from a man representing himself as a divorced lobbyist younger than Lee's actual age of 46. The woman responded.

    Gawker published a shirtless photo that he had taken of himself, flexing his muscles. One of the emails described him as a "fit fun classy guy." Gawker said the emails were sent from a Gmail account that Lee confirmed to be his own.

    Gawker said the flirting ended when the woman concluded after an online search that Lee had lied. She then sent the material to Gawker.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41498568/ns/politics-capitol_hill/

    Posted on February 9, 2011 - 07:53 PM #
  2. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,670

    Hard start for these guys. Here's another very interesting bit of information on health care. Turns out, it's kind of expensive!!

    http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=07850068-AFC0-ED92-53EA9C2351E5D53A

    Gotta love those family values.

    http://gawker.com/#!5755071/married-gop-congressman-sent-sexy-pictures-to-craigslist-babe

    "Financially and emotionally secure men to apply" --woman posting Craigslist personal.

    Posted on February 9, 2011 - 08:12 PM #
  3. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,763

    He should have just switched parties instead of quitting.

    Posted on February 9, 2011 - 10:46 PM #
  4. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,670

    Why?

    Nobody in the Democratic party wants the guy. Sure, he could claim "not family values", and that works somewhat, but then he's still stuck on "screw the little guy", which is a FAIL.

    Better he quit.

    Posted on February 9, 2011 - 11:14 PM #
  5. edselehr

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 2,489

    This guy's smart enough to get himself elected, and still he somehow thought this wouldn't blow up in his face?

    Or maybe it's because the egos of some of these guys know no bounds...

    Posted on February 9, 2011 - 11:34 PM #
  6. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,763

    Nobody in the Democratic party wants the guy.

    I know you didn't intend for this to be humorous, but I've always considered the Democrat Party as a melting pot of non-Republicans or "everybody else" -- nobody is ever denied acceptance into the party. He must be a pretty big FAIL if we don't want him contaminating our melting pot.

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 01:22 AM #
  7. When you let your brain reside at the head of your Penis, this is what you get...

    And this is also what DIVORCE is for...which of course has its own political, social and financial consequences , especially for a " family values " party like the Republican Party.

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 08:18 AM #
  8. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 9,551

    HYPOCRITES!!!!!!!

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 01:16 PM #
  9. Broadway

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,938

    HUMANS!!!!!!!--

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 03:00 PM #
  10. Retard. See above.

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 04:17 PM #
  11. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 9,551

    Broadway.... Your side lambasted Clinton for YEARS and still does to this day!

    That's a HYPOCRITE!!!!!!

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 10:27 PM #
  12. Broadway

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,938

    >>lambasted Clinton
    Only because he was the most shameful President ever.

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 10:46 PM #
  13. "Only because he was the most shameful President ever."

    For getting a blow job from Monica? How many people are DEAD today because of the war Bush started in Iraq?

    Posted on February 10, 2011 - 11:21 PM #
  14. There’s Broadway making my point once again. Inadvertently, of course.

    Point one for the dim in the room. Yes I’m speaking to you, B. The only reason anyone cares about the news story is the politician in question ran on a platform of moral superiority. The hypocrisy of the position, not his actions themselves, are why this is a news story. There’s no double standard at work. I.e. if you spend an inordinate amount of your public life lazily and disingenuously bleating about relative moral and social issues, and are then caught engaging in the very behavior you’ve been excoriating, you will be laughed at.

    And point two, it’s only in the dippy, intellectually incurious, logically challenged, hypocritically tone deaf, holier than thou, bible thumping reaches of the far right that one could somehow equate receiving a blow job from a fat chick with bad governance.

    Personally, I like my presidents as someone whom might seek out a blow job or a bottle of scotch. They’re provably less likely to start a war for no good reason that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

    When the Broadway’s of the world start giving a fuck about things that actually matter I’ll cease believing their craniums are full of tapioca.

    Posted on February 11, 2011 - 12:44 PM #
  15. Alfredo_T

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,191

    Or maybe it's because the egos of some of these guys know no bounds...

    My sentiments exactly.....

    Posted on February 11, 2011 - 02:20 PM #
  16. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 9,551

    Come on Broadway.... DUHbya started Iraq because God told him too and his administration fucked America into the WORST recession since the GREAT DEPRESSION. That's worse than getting a BJ from ANY fat ugly bitch any day!

    Wake the F up!

    Posted on February 12, 2011 - 02:45 PM #
  17. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,763

    Damn, if Bush was able to stuff an intern in a closet for excitement, he might have been able to get his mind off those imaginary WMDs and this country would be rolling in dough right about now.

    Posted on February 12, 2011 - 09:20 PM #
  18. So if someone preaches family values, and then fails to live up to them, he doesn't get a second chance? No room to make a mistake, repent, start over?

    And this failure means what? That family values are a bad thing to aspire to? That they are a bad thing to encourage?

    Can't a smoker say that smoking is bad for your health? Failing to live up to a message doesn't make the message wrong.

    But at least this fellow apologized and quit. It wasn't a resume enhancer as it might have been in a different party.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 02:01 AM #
  19. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,763

    So if someone preaches family values, and then fails to live up to them, he doesn't get a second chance? No room to make a mistake, repent, start over?

    If he's legislating morality, nope. He gets it straight up his ass like he's been doing to other people.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 02:29 AM #
  20. And what morality was he legislating?

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 02:31 AM #
  21. The only legislation I could find that he was pushing was about aircraft safety.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 02:38 AM #
  22. Brianl

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,629

    KJCR - the outrage is this: the Republican Party, as presently constituted, is the party, as a general rule, that runs on a platform of higher moral standards. A religious platform. Anti-gay rights. Asking us to refrain from vices, etc.

    When it's someone who pounds the pulpit for these, and is outed as being in a same-sex relationship, or cheating on their spouse, or what have you, we're going to call it out.

    John Edwards got completely lambasted from ALL sides in this forum, and deservedly so. That said, he never once ran on a platform of higher moral standards.

    It's the hypocrisy of the right when it comes to this that we will continue to call attention to.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 07:43 AM #
  23. Broadway

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,938

    >>runs on a platform of higher moral standards
    A platform/lifestyle that we all should "run" on--

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:37 AM #
  24. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,670

    Oh, so we should all be anti-gay, for example?

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:53 AM #
  25. It works for Broadway and the GOP.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 10:51 AM #
  26. So what morality is the Republican party actually trying to legislate?

    Going to Church? No smoking? No sex before marriage? Be kind to animals?

    What is the particular "moral legislation" that we're talking about?

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 07:21 PM #
  27. edselehr

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 2,489

    KJCR: This is the party platform, right off the Republican Party website (Try "the Google" sometime - it's kewl!)

    (truncated for brevity)

    Reublican Party Values

    Preserving Our Values

    ...a set of ideals that speak to the highest aspirations of humanity. From its own beginning, the Republican Party has boldly asserted those ideals, as we now do again, to affirm the rights of the people under the rule of law.

    Upholding the Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms

    ...Gun ownership is responsible citizenship, enabling Americans to defend themselves, their property, and communities ... We urge immediate action to review the automatic denial of gun ownership to returning members of the Armed Forces who have suffered trauma during service to their country. We condemn frivolous lawsuits against firearms manufacturers, which are transparent attempts to deprive citizens of their rights ... We recognize that gun control only affects and penalizes law-abiding citizens, and that such proposals are ineffective at reducing violent crime.

    Ensuring Equal Treatment for All

    ...Our commitment to equal opportunity extends from landmark school-choice legislation for the students of Washington D.C. to historic appointments at the highest levels of government ... We ask all to join us in rejecting the forces of hatred and bigotry and in denouncing all who practice or promote racism, anti-Semitism, ethnic prejudice, or religious intolerance. As a matter of principle, Republicans oppose any attempts to create race-based governments within the United States ... we reject preferences, quotas, and set-asides, whether in education or in corporate boardrooms ... We support efforts to help low-income individuals get a fair shot based on their potential and merit, and we affirm the common-sense approach of the Chief Justice of the United States: that the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating.

    Protecting Our National Symbols

    ... Old Glory should be given legal protection against desecration. We condemn decisions by activist judges to deny children the opportunity to say the Pledge of Allegiance in public school.

    Freedom of Speech and of the Press

    We support freedom of speech and freedom of the press and oppose attempts to violate or weaken those rights, such as reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

    Maintaining The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life

    ...the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity and dignity of innocent human life ... We must protect girls from exploitation and statutory rape through a parental notification requirement. We all have a moral obligation to assist, not to penalize, women struggling with the challenges of an unplanned pregnancy. At its core, abortion is a fundamental assault on the sanctity of innocent human life ... We salute those who provide them alternatives, including pregnancy care centers, and we take pride in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives ... Respect for life requires efforts to include persons with disabilities in education, employment, the justice system, and civic participation. In keeping with that commitment, we oppose the non-consensual withholding of care or treatment from people with disabilities ("Terry Schiavo" -ed)

    Preserving Traditional Marriage

    Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives ... Children in homes without fathers are more likely to commit a crime, drop out of school, become violent, become teen parents, use illegal drugs, become mired in poverty, or have emotional or behavioral problems ... Unbelievably, the Democratic Party has now pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which would subject every state to the redefinition of marriage by a judge without ever allowing the people to vote on the matter. We also urge Congress to use its Article III, Section 2 power to prevent activist federal judges from imposing upon the rest of the nation the judicial activism in Massachusetts and California.

    Safeguarding Religious Liberties

    Our Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion and forbids any religious test for public office, and it likewise prohibits the establishment of a state-sponsored creed. The balance between those two ideals has been distorted by judicial rulings which attempt to drive faith out of the public arena. The public display of the Ten Commandments does not violate the U.S. Constitution and accurately reflects the Judeo-Christian heritage of our country. We support the right of students to engage in student-initiated, student-led prayer in public schools, athletic events, and graduation ceremonies, when done in conformity with constitutional standards.

    We affirm every citizen’s right to apply religious values to public policy and the right of faith-based organizations to participate fully in public programs without renouncing their beliefs, removing religious objects or symbols, or becoming subject to government-imposed hiring practices. Forcing religious groups to abandon their beliefs as applied to their hiring practices is religious discrimination ... we urge reasonable accommodation of religious beliefs in the private workplace. We deplore the increasing incidence of attacks against religious symbols, as well as incidents of anti-Semitism on college campuses.

    There's more. You can look it up for yourself...I assume.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 08:13 PM #
  28. So this is "legislating morality"?

    Abortion laws are simply about justice, unless laws against murder are also "legislation of morality." The right to bear arms is already in the Contstitution.

    To me, "legislating morality" would mean making laws forcing a particular religion or practice. I don't see in what way someone is not free to be immoral, considering the post above.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 08:26 PM #
  29. Andrew

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 3,749

    KJCR-LP: Abortion laws are simply about justice, unless laws against murder are also "legislation of morality."

    Murder laws protect the lives of human beings. We do not all agree that a 5-day old blastocyst consisting of about 100 cells is a "human being" as many pro-lifers insist.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 08:56 PM #
  30. So then you are ok with laws that protect the embryo?

    Very few women have abortions involving blastocysts.

    We have some common ground then?

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:17 PM #
  31. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,670

    I think we should be asking the GOP about those jobs they ran on, not abortion, or gay rights, or guns.

    When we are all working and productive, those things are perfectly fine civics to discuss.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:24 PM #
  32. I wish the abortion debate would go away, but as long as people keep slicing and dicing embryos and fetuses, it won't. It's just too horrible an injustice for many of us to look the other way, and put money first, though in this case I might make an exception, since with Democrats and Obama we will be in the toilet with many more years of their enlargements of government and government power, so I could see putting off the debate until a good conservative Republican President and Senate are elected in 2012, though the abortion rights extremists will be pushing thier pro-abortion agenda politically, so it will have to be opposed...

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:34 PM #
  33. " I wish the abortion debate would go away, but as long as people keep slicing and dicing embryos and fetuses, it won't."

    You can at least understand why I would call that a lie, right?

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:36 PM #
  34. No, I can't understand why you would call that a "lie" because it isn't a lie. I truly wish I could look the other way. It's a burden to be pro-life. But it's one I have to bear, because otherwise it means I'm perfectly ok with babies being killed in the womb, which I'm not.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:38 PM #
  35. Your first line - and I felt comfortable taking that line out as a summation of one of your goals - stated a desire to stop the debate. Do you think that was unfair? Did I cherry pick or parse your words? Is there something else you said that would change my mind about my reaction to it?

    Your quote reads as if abortion was illegal, the debate would go away. To say nothing of the choosing to use " slicing and dicing " to evoke an emotional response. And it dismisses the era of the debate that took place before Roe V Wade. As if everything was fine before that ruling.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:45 PM #
  36. No, I didn't mean a desire to stop the debate. I mean I wish it wouldn't be there at all. And I wish I personally could take it off the table regarding political discussions. But it can't be because from my perspective it involves an horrific injustice, and I can't look the other way. And so what if I want to evoke an emotional response? If babies are being killed, then damn right someone ought to be emotional about it!

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:57 PM #
  37. Hmmm. I'll give that some thought.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 09:58 PM #
  38. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 7,200

    Its funny how the liberals in general and Vitalogy in particular bring up every failing of a Republican but when it was about Slick getting his willy taken care of the response was "What he does in his private life doesn't matter"

    Talk about hypocrites.

    BTW, I don’t support what this guy or what Clinton did. They were both in the wrong.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 10:43 PM #
  39. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,670

    Well, I think Clinton was in the wrong, but I also think he didn't run on purity, and the problem wasn't something that was anywhere near worth the effort spent on it.

    Republicans do run on purity, and do work to legislate morality for others, while not actually leading by example.

    Under a social liberal, being human, or making a mistake, or making a poor choice is simply a poor choice, with the only discussion being effective resolution of it.

    Under a social conservative, one's options are very limited, and that constraint on life is costly. To see the ones asserting that authority acting above the law they forced on others just is ugly.

    Nobody likes do as I say and not as I do asses. There can be no real respect in that scenario.

    I think this is harder for social conservatives because they seek that moral authority, feeling best when moral choices are made for them, and see the act as validation for why that authority should exist, where a social liberal just sees somebody who made a bad call, otherwise a fine person.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 10:57 PM #
  40. missing_kskd

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 11,670

    It's like the basic rule that the loudest anti-gay Republicans, are highly likely to be gay as hell. It's laughable, if it were not so damn criminal, trying to criminalize who people are, just so they can entertain some self-denial, and illusion of purity.

    That's the worst man. There is no respecting people that fucked up. They are incapable of being the very moral authority they desire and try to force onto others.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 10:59 PM #
  41. skeptical

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 4,763

    Skybill sez: Its funny how the liberals in general and Vitalogy in particular bring up every failing of a Republican but when it was about Slick getting his willy taken care of the response was "What he does in his private life doesn't matter"

    Talk about hypocrites.

    Its funny how skybill keeps making this same remark over and over again even though KSKD has explained this to him God knows how many times since, well, not long after Bush was appointed president the first time.

    Posted on February 17, 2011 - 11:35 PM #
  42. So I still don't see what particular legislation that republicans are introduction that is forcing their morality on someone.

    And I see nothing wrong with having a moral ideal, even if I can't live up to it all the time. That doesn't make me a hypocrite, but means that I'm frail and need help, and need to try again.

    A divorced man can still proclaim that divorce is not good, an alcoholic can proclaim that drunkenness is bad, a thief can proclaim that it's wrong to steal, etc. etc. The morality of the messenger doesn't necessarily invalidate the message itself.

    So if Republican Congressman Smith is caught in bed with Republican Congresswoman Jones, then any good legislation they advocate is suddenly meaningless? That any of their previous statements about the sanctity of marriage are no longer valid because they committed adultery?

    Proving that someone is a hypocrite only proves that someone is a hypocrite. It proves nothing about the validity of the positions they represent.

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 12:03 AM #
  43. "I wish the abortion debate would go away, but as long as people keep slicing and dicing embryos and fetuses, it won't."

    If you think outlawing abortion will stop it, you're wrong. Fact is that it would probably increase it. And the health and lives of women would be put at risk. And a good many of those folks who call themselves pro-life are also against contraception and teaching teens how to protect themselves, so in fact they may be a cause of abortion.

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 12:04 AM #
  44. Why did this guy quit? I don't see where he did anything wrong. So he took a picture of himself and emailed to a lady. His wife is really angry, so what? BFD, I don't get it.

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 12:10 AM #
  45. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 7,200

    Really! It's just a picture of him without a shirt. He probably cuts his grass in the summer without a shirt.

    Agreed. NBFD.

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 12:14 AM #
  46. I totally agree too. This is something that could have been dealt with and then move on. Not worth quitting over. Unless there was more and worse that would have followed...

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 12:33 AM #
  47. Andrew

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 3,749

    KJCR-LP: So then you are ok with laws that protect the embryo?

    Like the majority of Americans, I'm OK with some restrictions after the first trimester. I don't know when life actually begins. In the first trimester, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the pregnant woman.

    Very few women have abortions involving blastocysts.

    And very few women have late term abortions aka "partial birth abortions" - but that didn't stop your side from pursuing legislation to ban them without an exception for the health of the pregnant woman. What about you - support exceptions for life/health of the pregnant woman for late term? Support exceptions for rape and incest?

    We have some common ground then?

    Do we?

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 01:02 AM #
  48. Andrew

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 3,749

    KJCR-LP: No, I can't understand why you would call that a "lie" because it isn't a lie. I truly wish I could look the other way. It's a burden to be pro-life. But it's one I have to bear, because otherwise it means I'm perfectly ok with babies being killed in the womb, which I'm not.

    Are you OK with pregnant woman being killed in back alleys by amateur abortionists again if abortion is made illegal again? This will happen again and thousands of women - living adults and teens, not embryos - will again be maimed and killed every year. How will you bear that burden?

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 01:05 AM #
  49. You give women the "benefit of the doubt" in the first trimester?

    The benefit of the doubt for what? That maybe it's not a baby, just depends on what they believe?

    Why not give the benefit of the doubt to the "thing" being killed? The mom still gets to live.

    Abortion rights for rape and incest? Do you think people are less than human if they were conceived by rape or incest? Should we round them up and banish them somewhere?

    What is the reason to oppose abortion? Because it unjustly kills a human person. How is it therefore just to kill an innocent baby because of the crime of the father?

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 01:08 AM #
  50. NoParty

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 9,551

    KKCR-LP, you want to cut Government spending but who is going to pay for all the kids that can't be payed for? It's okay to pay for YOUR programs though...
    You want to protect the kid before it's born but after it is then the kid on it's own...

    Posted on February 18, 2011 - 01:17 AM #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.