Republican Senator - family values!

[Shogun]

I guess there are two ways to read his comment. I construe it to mean that the identification of additional Republican "perverts" (ala Foley, Craig, Haggard (sp?), etc) will impair the chances of the Republicans in 2008.

One could, I suppose, read this to imply that he thinks all Republicans are perverts. However, this seems like an overly inflammatory interpretation of what he wrote. In addition, it would be so silly a statement (and obviously untrue) that I doubt very strongly that this is what he meant.

This is backed up by the fact that in a post just a few inches down the thread, he states "And of course....a minority of republicans are perverts...." He also states "Clearly, all republicans are not perverts."

Indeed, polish the turd, homey! Give a good Wax on, Wax off!

 

[ReillyT]

Hey, you can take my word for it or you can reread the postsings from the local known conservatives who are busy telling you the exact same thing. If you are too dense to see how this is the exact same thing as when you jumped on the bandwagon dogging Gunny about christian haters then so be it. .

I didn't jump on Gunny about Christian haters (that I can remember). In fact, I have only a vague idea of what you are talking about. Maineman didn't make a statement that the whole republican party are perverts; he pointe out the hypocrisy of one member of Congress and its electoral implications.

ReillyT wrote: "First, I don't bitch about private interests at all, because I think that is just part of the game. This is purely hypothetical."

hey, it was YOUR hypothetical. Don't cry on my shoulder if I answered you a little too clearly.

What the hell are you talking about? You mentioned me bitching about lobbying money. I was just pointing out that this is a hypothetical and I don't bitch about lobbying money.

Yet, did YOU point it out with such excitement as you have shown in THIS thread? Indeed, why speak up about corruption in your own party when there is a gay republican to focus on?

If this were a thread about Jefferson, I might have added to it, although I doubt it, as it is clear he is corrupt and I don't have much to add on the point. I didn't start this thread. However, I do think that the facts speak for themselves (as I pointed out) and that Craig is a hypocrite. If you don't think he is a hypocrite, feel free to respond on that point.

HA! Are you familiar with the word Rationalize? Is it conducive to relevant conversation to drag up Byrd's sheeted past? Say, for someone giving lessons on hypocricy you sure were quick to play down the reality of a current dem with a klan history.. gee, you aren't doing so because of your similar team jersey, are you?

I didn't play it down so much as point out the actual distinction. Were Craig to have come out of the closet (without getting arrested first) and said that while he once believed homosexuality was wrong and preached against it, he had changed his views and no longer felt it were a sin, that is not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is saying one thing while doing another. It is not saying and doing one thing, and then changing your mind, and commence saying and doing something else.

yea, unless they were in the klan or CORRUPT.. after all, there are gay republicans to unmask!.

Once again, I am not sure what you are talking about. I don't think that Byrd is currently a hypocrite, because he appears to preach one thing, and vote the same way in Congress. I agree that Jefferson is corrupt. I think Craig is a hypocrite. What is inconsistent about this?

fair game that YOU would post a thread fishing for a little instigated messageboard fun or would that not interest you as much as finding out that a republican is *gasp* gay?!

I didn't start this thread. Further, I am only interested that Craig is gay/perverted/whatever because it is so inconsistent with what he preaches. I was however, put off by your holier than thou attitude.

And, if that was the tone of the original post then this thread wouldnt have seen this many pages. As it is, the poster knew he was slinging shit and you are defending it with every trick in the book.


Hey, why don't you take a play out of Edwards book and label me as a bush fundy conservative rove lover. I'm sure believing as much will help explain away the objectivity of my posts.

I reread a couple of time what Maineman posted. He never said that all Republicans are perverts. How do I know this? Perhaps I was clued in when he wrote "Of course, all Republicans are not perverts."

I am defending it with "tricks?" Pray tell, what are these "tricks?"

I am not going to label you a conservative. I think you are a bit of moron, but not necessarily a conservative one.

 

[ReillyT]

Indeed, polish the turd, homey! Give a good Wax on, Wax off!

Wow... your rhetorical skills are really coming along.

 

[ReillyT]

Shogun,

You might not like that it is news that Craig got arrested from propositioning an undercover cop in a bathroom. You may feel that this just lowers the discourse. You may not think that his hypocrisy is important. However, apparently, lots of people (including Maineman and myself) think his actions and his hypocrisy are important.

How do I know this?

One clue is that the GOP is urging the Senate Ethics committee to take a look at this.

Another is that presidential candidate Romney said the following:

"It reminds us that people who are elected to public office continue to disappoint, and they somehow think that if they vote the right way on issues of significance or they can speak a good game that we'll just forgive and forget."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/29/craig.arrest/index.html

Why exactly do you think that this story is of no significance?

 

[Shogun]

LAME.

dude, if you are going to play ball at least bring your A game.

 

[ReillyT]

LAME.

dude, if you are going to play ball at least bring your A game.

You are indeed a rare wit.

Yesterday, I was annoyed with you. Today, I am just tired.

You want middle ground. Fine. Tell me what it is you think, and we can always discuss it.

Is it generalizations that you have a problem with? That would be simple. I don't think the generalization in question was even made. If you do, we have a simple interpretative disagreement. We can just agree to disagree.

Is it calling out hypocrisy in general?

What exactly is this conversation we are having about?

 

[Shogun]

Shogun,
You might not like that it is news that Craig got arrested from propositioning an undercover cop in a bathroom. You may feel that this just lowers the discourse. You may not think that his hypocrisy is important. However, apparently, lots of people (including Maineman and myself) think his actions and his hypocrisy are important.
How do I know this?
One clue is that the GOP is urging the Senate Ethics committee to take a look at this.
Another is that presidential candidate Romney said the following:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/29/craig.arrest/index.html
Why exactly do you think that this story is of no significance?

it's a knee jerk reaction. Republicans will take the offically proper steps and in three weeks you wont even remember the arc of this story. That is, until you feel like antagonizing your political antithesis. Do you hound the log cabin republicans with this much zeal? I tellya, nothing will make the dems more popular than crusading to throw any gay republican out of the closet because of a misdomeanor charge! Hell, if only there were corrupt as hell politicians in the democratic party hiding money in their freezer to get your panties all riled up... if only corruption were as paramount as, uh, a republican homosexual.

ps, did it blow your mind to see presidential candidates making an effort to pipe in with les than 6 months until the next election? WOW. It's like poprocks on the brain, isnt it?

 

[maineman]

it's a knee jerk reaction. Republicans will take the offically proper steps and in three weeks you wont even remember the arc of this story. That is, until you feel like antagonizing your political antithesis. Do you hound the log cabin republicans with this much zeal? I tellya, nothing will make the dems more popular than crusading to throw any gay republican out of the closet because of a misdomeanor charge! Hell, if only there were corrupt as hell politicians in the democratic party hiding money in their freezer to get your panties all riled up... if only corruption were as paramount as, uh, a republican homosexual.

ps, did it blow your mind to see presidential candidates making an effort to pipe in with les than 6 months until the next election? WOW. It's like poprocks on the brain, isnt it?

you don't get it that it is not Craig's "gayness" that is at issue, it is his hypocrisy.

Log cabin republicans are not hiding in a closet while simultaneously bashing gays.

 

[ReillyT]

it's a knee jerk reaction. Republicans will take the offically proper steps and in three weeks you wont even remember the arc of this story. That is, until you feel like antagonizing your political antithesis. Do you hound the log cabin republicans with this much zeal? I tellya, nothing will make the dems more popular than crusading to throw any gay republican out of the closet because of a misdomeanor charge! Hell, if only there were corrupt as hell politicians in the democratic party hiding money in their freezer to get your panties all riled up... if only corruption were as paramount as, uh, a republican homosexual.

ps, did it blow your mind to see presidential candidates making an effort to pipe in with les than 6 months until the next election? WOW. It's like poprocks on the brain, isnt it?

Are you slow? Why do you keep bringing up Jefferson? What does he have to do with anything? He is a corrupt politician. No one is arguing this point.

You seem to be under the mistaken apprehension that I am deeply troubled by the Craig matter. I am not. I never even heard of the man before yesterday. However, I see nothing wrong with it being pointed out that he is a hypocrite, and that this story has electoral implications.

Yesterday, when Jillian pointed out that Republicans thought this was a story as well, you asked for a link. I provided you with a link. You are not even going to say thank you???

 

[Shogun]

You are indeed a rare wit.
Yesterday, I was annoyed with you. Today, I am just tired.
You want middle ground. Fine. Tell me what it is you think, and we can always discuss it.
Is it generalizations that you have a problem with? That would be simple. I don't think the generalization in question was even made. If you do, we have a simple interpretative disagreement. We can just agree to disagree.
Is it calling out hypocrisy in general?
What exactly is this conversation we are having about?

at least two people (conservatives) in the body of this thread stated otherwise. You may not want to let the criticism get to close to a frat bro but the effect of his posts were still the same. All you've been doing is trying to justify his post. which, is about as new from partisan sidelining as dirt.


by now i'm having fun watching who on the left side of the field has me pegged as rush limbaugh in disguise. I'm proving that there really is very little difference between partisan assholes on the right and partisan assholes on the left. While busy gnashing teeth and fighting over that last scrap of political viability the nation has gone to shit and it's not just because some neocons won an election. What if such energy were put into finding solutions and compramises instead? Find out why Ben Franklin wanted specific rules for his Junta and why he became such a celebrated stateman.

 

[ReillyT]

at least two people (conservatives) in the body of this thread stated otherwise. You may not want to let the criticism get to close to a frat bro but the effect of his posts were still the same. All you've been doing is trying to justify his post. which, is about as new from partisan sidelining as dirt.


by now i'm having fun watching who on the left side of the field has me pegged as rush limbaugh in disguise. I'm proving that there really is very little difference between partisan assholes on the right and partisan assholes on the left. While busy gnashing teeth and fighting over that last scrap of political viability the nation has gone to shit and it's not just because some neocons won an election. What if such energy were put into finding solutions and compramises instead? Find out why Ben Franklin wanted specific rules for his Junta and why he became such a celebrated stateman.

That was very insightful... and touching as well. Really, I am deeply moved.

What is your argument again? Seriously, just try to explain what you want to happen - what you are unhappy about.

Are you unhappy with his post? Why exactly? Is it the effect on the reader more than the intent of the poster that matters?

Do you think that pointing out hypocrisy is just counter-productive?

What are you saying?

Daddy can't make it better until you tell him where it hurts.

 

[Shogun]

you don't get it that it is not Craig's "gayness" that is at issue, it is his hypocrisy.
Log cabin republicans are not hiding in a closet while simultaneously bashing gays.

so, log cabin republicans are not voting against their lifestyle just because they may be out ofthe closet? uh... sure, dude. So, would you like to elaborate on the necessary criteria for gay republicans to jump through before they can leave your opinion of hypocricy? Should they cease to recieve any more MISDOMEANORS or is this only applicable to elected officials whose homosexuality all of a sudden becomes a pawn on your political chess board?


indeed, tolorant. I suggest a nice scary uniform when you take the torches and pitchforks out hunting for gay elected republicans... maybe burn a rainbowed flag or something. Why realize the role of his constituants regarding his platform when there is a gay republican zorro to unmask?

 

[ReillyT]

by now i'm having fun watching who on the left side of the field has me pegged as rush limbaugh in disguise.

Well, take heart little camper. I don't have you pegged as a conservative. You might not be that bright, but I have no reason to think that you are conservative.

 

[Shogun]

Are you slow? Why do you keep bringing up Jefferson? What does he have to do with anything? He is a corrupt politician. No one is arguing this point.
You seem to be under the mistaken apprehension that I am deeply troubled by the Craig matter. I am not. I never even heard of the man before yesterday. However, I see nothing wrong with it being pointed out that he is a hypocrite, and that this story has electoral implications.
Yesterday, when Jillian pointed out that Republicans thought this was a story as well, you asked for a link. I provided you with a link. You are not even going to say thank you???

because you want your litle quest in this thread rationalized despite your admitted total silence when it comes to bullshit in your party. ESPECIALLY considering the weight of his crimes versus a misdomeanor.

Remind me again in three weeks why this story fell off the face of the earth after the lefty version of ken starr's publicity fest runs itself out.

 

[ReillyT]

so, log cabin republicans are not voting against their lifestyle just because they may be out ofthe closet? uh... sure, dude. So, would you like to elaborate on the necessary criteria for gay republicans to jump through before they can leave your opinion of hypocricy? Should they cease to recieve any more MISDOMEANORS or is this only applicable to elected officials whose homosexuality all of a sudden becomes a pawn on your political chess board?


indeed, tolorant. I suggest a nice scary uniform when you take the torches and pitchforks out hunting for gay elected republicans... maybe burn a rainbowed flag or something. Why realize the role of his constituants regarding his platform when there is a gay republican zorro to unmask?

I am going to keep trying to get through to you, because... gosh darnit... I think you can learn. Don't let those naysayers get you down. Together, we can climb this mountain.

Gay is not the issue. Hypocrisy is the issue.

Say it with me now.

Gay is not the issue. Hypocrisy is the issue.

You can do it.

 

[Shogun]

That was very insightful... and touching as well. Really, I am deeply moved.
What is your argument again? Seriously, just try to explain what you want to happen - what you are unhappy about.
Are you unhappy with his post? Why exactly? Is it the effect on the reader more than the intent of the poster that matters?
Do you think that pointing out hypocrisy is just counter-productive?
What are you saying?
Daddy can't make it better until you tell him where it hurts.

Reread the thread and pick out where the conservatives have told you exactly what I figured they would if you are looking for a lesson you can rely on. This thread wasn't started just to rail on one politician and was called on such sentiment in the second post. You can tapdance around that all you want but, if you reread Gunny's thread I mentioned earlier, you'll see that there really ins't anything new under the sun for those who are hellbent on insisting that their own shit is a diamond encrusted gold turd.

OR, I guess you could ignore the reality of their posts and keep rationalizing with the stamina of sean hannity at a freedom concert.. Your call.

 

[ReillyT]

because you want your litle quest in this thread rationalized despite your admitted total silence when it comes to bullshit in your party. ESPECIALLY considering the weight of his crimes versus a misdomeanor.

Remind me again in three weeks why this story fell off the face of the earth after the lefty version of ken starr's publicity fest runs itself out.

First, what is my quest?

Please explain to me how I am "totally silent" on the Jefferson issue when I say, for the third or fourth time, that the man is corrupt. How many ways and times must I say this before you acknowledge that I keep saying this. Are you slightly touched?

Corruption is a big issue. It just doesn't happen to be the issue in this thread. It also isn't necessarily the same thing as hypocrisy.

 

[ReillyT]

Reread the thread and pick out where the conservatives have told you exactly what I figured they would if you are looking for a lesson you can rely on. This thread wasn't started just to rail on one politician and was called on such sentiment in the second post. You can tapdance around that all you want but, if you reread Gunny's thread I mentioned earlier, you'll see that there really ins't anything new under the sun for those who are hellbent on insisting that their own shit is a diamond encrusted gold turd.

OR, I guess you could ignore the reality of their posts and keep rationalizing with the stamina of sean hannity at a freedom concert.. Your call.

Once again... moving.

I feel your passion.

So your problem is what?

You think that Maineman was generalizing in that first post?

You think he was picking a fight?

Is this it? Do we have winner?

Just let me know so that I can be clear.

Here. Just finish the sentence. "Maineman was wrong to [insert here] because it [insert here]."

 

[Shogun]

Well, take heart little camper. I don't have you pegged as a conservative. You might not be that bright, but I have no reason to think that you are conservative.

Your opinion of my intellectual capacity is about as relevant as dog leash on a grizzly bear. For a guy whose moral compass tells him that elected republican homosexuals are fair game to unmask over a misdemeanor with the excitement of archie bunker at a lynching you are maybe a little too quick to call anyone slow.

 

[Shogun]

I am going to keep trying to get through to you, because... gosh darnit... I think you can learn. Don't let those naysayers get you down. Together, we can climb this mountain.
Gay is not the issue. Hypocrisy is the issue.
Say it with me now.
Gay is not the issue. Hypocrisy is the issue.
You can do it.

so, you bring the inquisition to every other republican charged with a misdemeanor? no? only the gay ones who you think can become political capitol because their constituants NEED to know that they voted for a gay man? Indeed, you are the next ghandi.