Republican Senator - family values!

[Bern80]

First, I am pointing at Republican hypocrites because they are hypocrites, and their actions call into question their message, which I find asinine to begin with. So you see, I question them and their policy.

These aren't the actions of 'them'. These were the actions of one man. His behavior is suppossed to take away the right of the entire party to use that as a platform? And exactley what part of 'family values' do you find asanine?

Why would you ever think that pointing out hypocrisy is off-limits? What real purpose does turning a blind eye to those of questionable integrity serve?

Because that's not what was done here. These were the actions of one man, ONE MAN. Simply because he's Republican doesn't mean every action he takes is also a trait of all Republicans and their ideals.

This wasn't someone pointing out Repuiblican Hypocrisy. This was someone takeing the actions of an individual and using them generalize a larger a group of people.

 

[ReillyT]

These aren't the actions of 'them'. These were the actions of one man. His behavior is suppossed to take away the right of the entire party to use that as a platform? And exactley what part of 'family values' do you find asanine?

My quote notes that I am talking about Republican hypocrites, whoever and however many there may be. All are fair game. Not all Republicans. All Republican hypocrites. Same goes with Democrats.

As for the family values stuff, frankly, I find the Republican party's selection of values and the emphasis they place on certain values to be both problematic morally, and cynically designed to attain the highest level of political gain. However, that is just me, and is an issue for another day. I know Democrats use the same tactics.

Because that's not what was done here. These were the actions of one man, ONE MAN. Simply because he's Republican doesn't mean every action he takes is also a trait of all Republicans and their ideals.

This wasn't someone pointing out Repuiblican Hypocrisy. This was someone takeing the actions of an individual and using them generalize a larger a group of people.

Agreed. These were the actions of one man. I don't think that Maineman ever said otherwise. He did call attention to the possible effects of multiple cases of serious moral lapses by prominent social conservatives when it comes to the upcoming elections. However, he never said that all Republicans were perverts or morally compromised. Were he to have said this, I would agree with you, but he did not.

 

[Shogun]

"Talk about generalizations, non-sequitors and assumptions. I have never really believed that in the last 20 years, any substantial number of gays do prowl public parks and the YMCA. In fact, I lived in SF and am friends with quite a few gay people, and I am pretty sure they don't cruise public restrooms. However, I still don't understand what this has to do with pointing out hypocrisy, which is what we are really talking about."


riiight.. I suggest you go ask your gay friend all about it then. Make sure to ask him if it is republicans or the male sex drive that influences such excursions. Indeed, I'm still talking about hypocricy too. Unfortunatly, yours and not some easy republican target.


"Pointing out hypocrisy is very different than the shit that Ann Coulter does. If you don't see that, than what can I say? You are a tool."


HA! yea, it took Gunny as long to reach for that ad hominem quiver too! HAHAHA! Yes, it is a SHOCKER to see someone on the left trying to rationalize their own coulter'esque shitty attitude! HAHAHAHA! Geee.. I wonder if Bill OreillyRush feels the EXACT same way about Al Franken... naaawwww.. that can't be true! YOU are the harbinger of all that is correct, right?

I bet calling me a fucking idiot will make your point!

 

[Shogun]

There are always sides. as long as there are differences of opinion as to the proper role for government in society, there will be sides.

I've never assumed otherwise.

Would you like to venture a guess about on the very real difference in reacting like a polorized bastard as opposed to finding common ground?

 

[ReillyT]

HA! yea, it took Gunny as long to reach for that ad hominem quiver too! HAHAHA! Yes, it is a SHOCKER to see someone on the left trying to rationalize their own coulter'esque shitty attitude! HAHAHAHA! Geee.. I wonder if Bill OreillyRush feels the EXACT same way about Al Franken... naaawwww.. that can't be true! YOU are the harbinger of all that is correct, right?

I bet calling me a fucking idiot will make your point!

Once again, if everyone calls you an idiot... what is the common denominator?

Calling you names doesn't make my point. My point stands on its own. Calling you names is just for kicks.

 

[Shogun]

What does "sides" have to do with anything? Are you suggesting that if I am a Republican, I can point out conservative hypocrisy, but not liberal, and vice versa? How about we just turn our heads to hypocrisy all around? Surely it will be a better world if we all just act oblivious to lies and bullshit. The game would be so much cleaner.

not at all, I'm suggesting that if you are a republican and you see a democrat fall down on a non issue that perhaps you would be better served down the road if you were considerate of the FACT that such roadbumps happen in both parties. Obviously you think your own shit doesn't stink. When your house is made of glass I guess you find the largest stones to throw, right?

keep showing me all about that famous lefty tolorance, dude. It's probably not true that you are about as credible in this thread as Pat Robertson preaching about bombing muslims.

What.. two.. three weeks until the right has something on some democrat that puts egg on collective left wing?

 

[ReillyT]

Indeed, I'm still talking about hypocricy too. Unfortunatly, yours and not some easy republican target.

Good. You are coming around. See, pointing out hypocrisy is not such a bad thing. You engage in it yourself.

 

[ReillyT]

not at all, I'm suggesting that if you are a republican and you see a democrat fall down on a non issue that perhaps you would be better served down the road if you were considerate of the FACT that such roadbumps happen in both parties. Obviously you think your own shit doesn't stink. When your house is made of glass I guess you find the largest stones to throw, right?

keep showing me all about that famous lefty tolorance, dude. It's probably not true that you are about as credible in this thread as Pat Robertson preaching about bombing muslims.

What.. two.. three weeks until the right has something on some democrat that puts egg on collective left wing?

Hypocrisy, especially about something that a politician campaigns on, is not a non-issue. It can be found in both Republicans and Democrats and one shouldn't shy from pointing it out. Watch.

Harry Reid is a hypocrite on the domestic surveillance issue. I rightfully think less of him because of it. See no problem. If in three weeks, there is a circumstance that Republicans can call a democrat on, then they should definitely avail themselves of the opportunity.

 

[ReillyT]

keep showing me all about that famous lefty tolorance, dude. It's probably not true that you are about as credible in this thread as Pat Robertson preaching about bombing muslims.

What does tolerance have to do with anything? I am tolerant of alternative sexual lifestyle choices. I am not tolerant of hypocrisy. Why should I be?

 

[ReillyT]

Obviously you think your own shit doesn't stink. When your house is made of glass I guess you find the largest stones to throw, right?

See, you called me a hypocrite again. Good for you. You are in the game. I think you are inaccurate, but if you were accurate, I would be cheering beside you.

 

[Shogun]

"Because your post was rambling, please take my responses in no particular order."

perhaps you can find a misspelled word or a particularly gnarly piece fo grammer to REALLY make your point.. No wonder RSR thrived here.


"First, I am pointing at Republican hypocrites because they are hypocrites, and their actions call into question their message, which I find asinine to begin with. So you see, I question them and their policy. "

oh well, THAT sure is a unique perspective. Gee, tex, you think that anyone on the right feels exactly the same way about your parties message? no? YOU are the sole bearer of of that flame, eh dude?


"You are right, policy can be a reflection of political base. However, for a person with integrity, the political base shouldn't overwhelm personal belief. When one identifies such a circumstance, one has identified a person lacking integrity. This happens to be important to know when one is talking about elected leaders."

HAHA!
Lemme guess.. YOUR side is the ones with all that integrity, eh? hehehehe.
yet, when you find yourself having your ass handed to you because some liberal fucks up....


"With respect to homosexuality, the Phelps family aside, conservative republicans and I won't agree on a whole hell of a lot."

That's too bad for you. It's nice to see that you are willing to keep that tolorant mind of yours open!


"Of course, their views are informed by and erected upon a certain set of moral beliefs. Therefore, it is interesting when one finds that these moral beliefs are in fact a charade."


HA!
yea, THEIRS are a charade while YOURS is the word of... good grief, are you even listening to yourself at this point?



"If Republicans pounce when Democratic leaders fuck up, that is good. They should. It is healthy for the democracy that they do so. I do the same. When the Senate passed the recent legislation permitting warrantless wiretaps, I sent a letter to Harry Reid. I let him know I wasn't happy. I have no problems with a Republican sending him a letter informing him that he is a monumental hypocrite. It is fair game."


Indeed, It certainly is clear how equally detrimental to our society are both wire tapping and... uh... a gay republican busted in a restroom while towing the party line.. indeed. What a pair of potential DISASTERS! Funny, I bet you jacks, joes, and dominoes that you don't say as much in regard to the bill clinton fiasco.. I know I know, so as I say, not as I do.. gotcha.


"Why would you ever think that pointing out hypocrisy is off-limits? What real purpose does turning a blind eye to those of questionable integrity serve?"


a BLIND eye? what, is it a shocker to you to find out that there are gay republicans who vote against gay issues? For real, is this your first day venturing into the world of American politics? You haven't discovered atlantis with this story. Sorry to break it to you. But hey, at least you are showing how tolorant the supporters of dems can be! This was nothing more than "gotcha politics" that you'd be crying about if applied to your side.. not to mention jumping on the bandwagon when Gunny was on the hotspot.

 

[Shogun]

"Actually, she was referring to a gay Republican congressman prowling in a restroom (it is the republican tent under which the republican Senator rests) - not homosexuals in general."


....and I specifically stated as much. Shall I quote myself or can you scroll up? Is this where the strawmen start to fly?


"You see, she is debating the party and the tent, not homosexuality in general. Also, what is the irony of which you speak?
If people right and left keep responding to you that you are nuts.... well, what is the common denominator?"

oh DAMN! you really showed me with that one, lemme tellya! Your internet savvy is so RAW. so EFFECTIVE. For real, I hope that I too can someday make a frustrated ad hominem support and make my case too. You are so 1337 I may just have to watch the matrix tonight to catch up with your internet kung fu.

The irony is found in the tolorance and the quickness to pounce on those like Gunny for doing the EXACT SAME THING that brought to us this thread. If you can't figure that out then, i'm betting, calling be a motherfucker will probably clear it up for you.

DOH!

 

[Shogun]

How about thinking out side the box a bit then? Perhaps starting with the concept of 'sides'. That we have politcal parties at all I believe is half the problem. Yes there will always be people who are more conservative or more liberal, but the fact that right and left have been institutionalized doesn't lend itself well to the greater good. You're right. No one wants to be the first to put away their pistol. Tranlsation: neither side can afford to agree, or say their idea is better than mine, or whatever. It's politically sudicidal.

 

[Shogun]

"Actually Shogun, I find you so full of shit, that I would love to ask you a few questions."

wow. Perhaps you should take a moment to reread Gunny's thread and have yourself one of those dejavu moments when you read his words and compare them with your own. I bet you drift off to sleep thinking of wrastling sean hannity to the death in some mad max beyond thunderdome daydream, eh?


"An elected politician runs on a platform promising to keep the lobbies out of Washington. It is discovered that his campaign was funded by private interest lobbies. Is this relevant? Can we discuss this, or is it merely lowering the dialogue?"

I guess that would depend on WHAT party this politician belongs to and how close you identify with said party. After all, it's big news for you when a republican takes money from a lobby but.. I just.. don't ever see.. you bitch about dems taking the same money from some other lobby... After all, if one politician gets busted with, say, THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN THEIR FREEZER, then it MUST reflect upon the entire political ideology, right?



"An elected politician runs on a platform that promises stricter gun control. It is discovered that he owns a rocket launcher and an AK-47. Is this relevant? Can we discuss this, or is it merely lowering the dialogue?"


Would you assume that everyone who owns a gun has an AK and rocket launcher just because one dude has a pair and, thus, disqualifies the opinions of those who DO have regular ole guns? Better yet, if your scenerio WERE the case would it even matter to the larger gun control dialog beyond your momentary monkeydance poo slinging? No?



"An elected politician runs on a platform of bringing honesty to Washington. It is discovered that he is plagarist. Is this relevant? Can we discuss this, or is it merely lowering the dialogue?"

HONESTY in washington and you use the example of plagerism. good grief. If this man rid washington of ear marks, lobby influence, etc are you telling me that youd be redy to give him das boot because he copied a fucking speach?
By all means, discuss as much if pleagerism is your point issue.. I guess we can ignore and disregard any actual integrity that this person might have brought to the government as long as he is rom your opposite party and, uh, violates a human right like stealing lines from someone else.



"An elected official runs on a platform stressing bringing equality to the masses of invisible in our society. Oooopppsss, turns out he is a member of the Klan. Is this relevant? Can we discuss this, or is it merely lowering the dialogue?"


You tell me. How many Byrd jokes does it take to razzle you? Or the reality of dixiecrats. Praytell, how often shall we bring this stuff up? Before or AFTER the congress sessions ends after a lackluster democratic majority? Just RAISING THE DIALOG when a conservative on this board slaps the shit out of you with a couple pages of Byrd jokes, right?

 

[Shogun]

These aren't the actions of 'them'. These were the actions of one man. His behavior is suppossed to take away the right of the entire party to use that as a platform? And exactley what part of 'family values' do you find asanine?

Because that's not what was done here. These were the actions of one man, ONE MAN. Simply because he's Republican doesn't mean every action he takes is also a trait of all Republicans and their ideals.

This wasn't someone pointing out Repuiblican Hypocrisy. This was someone takeing the actions of an individual and using them generalize a larger a group of people.

 

[Shogun]

Once again, if everyone calls you an idiot... what is the common denominator?

Calling you names doesn't make my point. My point stands on its own. Calling you names is just for kicks.

Your point stands like a quadripelegic on a deep sea fishing adventure.

didn't you mean to say: "Uh, I was just joking! That's it!"

 

[Shogun]

Good. You are coming around. See, pointing out hypocrisy is not such a bad thing. You engage in it yourself.

Yet I'm only talking about yours and not the entire democratic affiliation.


I bet if you stare at the screen long enough you'll understand the difference.

 

[Shogun]

Hypocrisy, especially about something that a politician campaigns on, is not a non-issue. It can be found in both Republicans and Democrats and one shouldn't shy from pointing it out. Watch.

Harry Reid is a hypocrite on the domestic surveillance issue. I rightfully think less of him because of it. See no problem. If in three weeks, there is a circumstance that Republicans can call a democrat on, then they should definitely avail themselves of the opportunity.

when was the last time you posted a thread on www.usmessageboar.com trying to antagonize supporters under the guise of flushing out hypocricy?

my money says you've never done as much because you identify with Reid.. If I am wrong then post a link the such a thread.

 

[Shogun]

What does tolerance have to do with anything? I am tolerant of alternative sexual lifestyle choices. I am not tolerant of hypocrisy. Why should I be?

I guess you can't see the opposing question then, eh? why should others be tolorant of your acceptance of homosexuality while spouting off your OPINION on who is a hypocrit? Did that come too fast at you? Why should you be? Because you don't apply the same standard to your own side.

If you can show me a thread where you have pounced on your own with as much ferver as you would theright then post a link and prove me wrong.

 

[Shogun]

See, you called me a hypocrite again. Good for you. You are in the game. I think you are inaccurate, but if you were accurate, I would be cheering beside you.

I'll remind you since it seems you sport the short bus roadster...

Am I talking about you specifically based on your input to this thread or, say, the entire political affiliation of anyone who agrees with you on a given issue?


VROOOM VROOOOM, buddy!