Protect our Children

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Put away the sackcloth, stop eating the locusts, come in from the wilderness, and stop acting as if people who disagree with you are hopeless nitwits or morally suspect.

Nobody defended Foley wiht the age of consent being 16. I said that is was not a legal issue. Hastert should not resign. This is a country where you are innocent until proven guilty. The blame for this man's sorry life and morals lie solely with him. Noone else can be held responsible for his actions. Certainly not Hastert.

The demons always want somebody (republican) to resign. Yet in the wake of any scandal, they never demand their own to do the same.

The demons are in and around the wicked. Foley is still a ******.

[CCTAU 3,351]

Put away the sackcloth, stop eating the locusts, come in from the wilderness, and stop acting as if people who disagree with you are hopeless nitwits or morally suspect.

Nobody defended Foley wiht the age of consent being 16. I said that is was not a legal issue. Hastert should not resign. This is a country where you are innocent until proven guilty. The blame for this man's sorry life and morals lie solely with him. Noone else can be held responsible for his actions. Certainly not Hastert.

The demons always want somebody (republican) to resign. Yet in the wake of any scandal, they never demand their own to do the same.

The demons are in and around the wicked. Foley is still a ******.

As I have repeatedly said. We a....g....r........ugh...ugh

I can't say it.

Newt explains it:

Wednesday, Oct. 4, 2006 9:08 p.m. EDT

Newt Gingrich: Hastert Should Not Resign

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said his successor, Dennis Hastert, appropriately handled the aftermath of a scandal involving a Florida congressman and salacious, explicit instant messages to underage male pages.

Gingrich dismissed a call for Hastert's resignation by The Washington Times, a conservative newspaper whose editorial page editor is Gingrich's former press secretary, Tony Blankley.

"I do not agree with that, and I think it's very premature and very inappropriate," said Gingrich, who was in Lexington to give a speech to the University of Kentucky's Sanders-Brown Center on Aging Foundation.

Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., abruptly resigned Friday after news reports surfaced that he sent inappropriate instant messages to teenage boys who once worked as House pages.

House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Hastert told him last spring that a Louisiana page's complaint about Foley had "been taken care of."

Gingrich, a Republican who represented a district in Georgia, said it appeared Hastert did all he could by sending another congressman to confront Foley about the charges. Beyond that, Gingrich said, the information he had at the time wasn't "actionable."

"You look him in the eye," Gingrich said. "You say, 'This is dangerous. It's inappropriate. You can't do it.' And, in this case, we now know that U.S. Rep. Foley lied. Now, when you catch him in the lie, you then take stronger action. But until you catch him, you can't presumptively do that."

Gingrich suggested there is a double standard that Republican scandals reflect badly on all Republicans while Democratic scandals, such as Bill Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky, don't affect other Democrats. He also questioned the timing of the release of the information, just a few weeks before the midterm elections.

Even if there was suspicion about Foley, Gingrich said, there is little that could have been done legally.

"You just had the Democrats vote against wiretapping for the purpose of getting terrorists, but it's OK to wiretap for the purpose of getting Republicans?" he said. "I don't understand the double standard."

As a freshman member of Congress in 1983, Gingrich took a hard line approach against two congressmen who were accused of having sexual relationships with congressional pages. Gingrich tried to get the congressmen forced out of office, but the House voted to censure them instead.

He said treatment of the Foley situation is a testament to how far the country has come in child protection cases.

"The mood was that it was almost a joke," Gingrich said. "I'm glad the House, in fact, is taking this much more seriously. I think it's a healthy sign for the country that we realize that these kinds of behaviors are dangerous and that we are prepared to protect young people."

[TexasTiger 13,053]

Yet another pissy rant, I see.

Again, here's where you're wrong. I cannot find an insult cast your way in this thread before you referred to my "pissy" thoughts on your original post

You're wrong. My original post on this thread had no comment at all. Just a link. Raptor complained that it wasn't even a message. The title of the thread was the title of the website I linked to. People were free to reach their own conclusions. In fact, I didn't post any comment at all until you made your pissy little comment.

I referred to your comment as pissy, which I think is an apt description. Is that a personal insult, or a comment on a particular comment? Frankly, it is the rare individual on this board who has never rendered a pissy comment. I know I have, and if you could step back from your oversized ego for a moment, you might admit, at least to yourself, that you have, too. Not that big a deal.

I don't know. Maybe you took "myopic" that way, even though that's an apt description of your short-sighted partisan approach on what is really an institituional problem in the halls of Congress

Apt description of what? Can you quote what I said that supports that characterization on this issue? Just like the Bushbots you reference, you demonstrate the same habit of crafting your imagined opponent's position and then attacking the argument you created instead of responding to what they actually said.

"Disingenuous" basically is an excellent description of your response to my post, given how you obviously relish the idea of having a powerful wedge issue in the hands of the Democrats a scant five weeks before the election

Again, you're putting words in my mouth and attributing them to me. The fact that you believe you can disregard what I actually say just so you can have a straw man to argue with, clearly illustrates your own biases to which I referred. If you had any real interest in a civilized debate of the issues, instead of just using those words as a prop to weave in the insult "contemptible halfwit," you could, and would, have actually responded to my stated position instead of fabricating one for your own purposes:

My position is to let the truth come to light and let the chips fall where they may. Dem, Repub, I don't care. Any one preying on kids needs to be found out and dealt with

I couldn’t have been more clear. BTW, Foley's transgressions won't cost Republicans. The grossly negligent way the leadership has handled it might, but if a Dem is doing the same thing, I wouldn't want that person to be out there another second undetected, no matter what the political consequences.

However, there's a big difference between a vigorous debate of the issues and simple name calling

Uh huh. And you've demonstrated throughout this thread that you’re adept at vigorously debating imaginary foes and engaging in more sophisticated name calling. My congrats.

You're the one who chose to descend into this territory, not me

Said with all the conviction and utter delusion of the most fanatical Bushbot.

As far as a being a hypocrite, I defy you to find an instance of hypocrisy on my part

See above.

Your problem is that once I disagree with you, you automatically lump me in with the Bushbots

On what did we disagree? You weren't responding to any position I took. You were just being pissy.

In fact, we have often largely agreed, and in the past, when we have disagreed, it has been respectful. No reason why can't again.

Again, when you cannot defend your position, you seem to think that a shrill denunciation will do the job nicely

Again, defend what position? The one you attributed to me? We weren't really arguing over any "position."

And, quite frankly, I am disturbed by the present regime's profligate spending, reckless adventures (I was against the incursion into Iraq WAAAAAYYY long before it became unpopular), and flirtation with the religious right

"Flirtation?"

Further, I am amazed that you cannot ackowledge a basic point that I keep making: Hastert should resign for this shocking ethical lapse

Talk about disingenuous. That mock indignation is truly touching. And incongruent. On the one hand, you accuse me of going off on a "hair-trigger" partisan rant, and then you chide me for not loudly demanding Hastert's resignation? Make up your mind, brother.

This has gotten tiring. Respond if you wish, I think I'm done.

War Damn Eagle.

**attempted to fix the screwed up quote boxes - TIS**

/I have a migraine headache now/

[otterinbham 0]

You are done, indeed. You couldn't rebut me. Just a loose collection of shrill ad hominem arguments to cover your retreat. I win.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

You flatter yourself. You're just the typical Republican with a better vocabulary. You have the key hallmark sign of a Republican, which was the point of the thread-- hypocrisy. (the website I linked to illustrated that key characteristic). You were the first to hurl the petty insult in this exchange and now you try to act above it all.

Such a shame. I had wanted to think you were as truly independent as you strive to appear.

Actually I'm an independed who cast his first vote for Bush's daddy in the 1980 primary, and the Republican, John Anderson, running as an independent, in the general election. In 2000, I voted for McCain. Granted, I have been particulary disgusted with the Republicans lately, but they are the ones running things. There's a communist party in America that I vigorously disagree with, but they don't control the levers that impact my life, so I don't waste much time scrutinizing them. I guess that is hard for you to understand. Or maybe you do, but you don't want it to get in the way of your own petty insults. I'll readily admit that I lean toward the Democrats mostly by default. I'm not thrilled with them, the Republicans have become sooo bad, they are the ones who concern me the most.

Again, here's where you're wrong. I cannot find an insult cast your way in this thread before you referred to my "pissy" thoughts on your original post. I don't know. Maybe you took "myopic" that way, even though that's an apt description of your short-sighted partisan approach on what is really an institituional problem in the halls of Congress. "Disingenuous" basically is an excellent description of your response to my post, given how you obviously relish the idea of having a powerful wedge issue in the hands of the Democrats a scant five weeks before the election. However, there's a big difference between a vigorous debate of the issues and simple name calling. You're the one who chose to descend into this territory, not me.

As far as a being a hypocrite, I defy you to find an instance of hypocrisy on my part. At no point in this entire thread, or in the history of my postings on this forum have I taken a position that isn't consistent around a single thought: Namely, that both parties are deeply flawed and too blind to their narrow self-interests to effectively govern this country. In fact, you have lauded me in the past when I took your side on an issue. Your problem is that once I disagree with you, you automatically lump me in with the Bushbots. That is uninformed on your part, and actually is good demonstration of the central problem in this country--The lack of a middle ground in any political debate. In fact, I'm certain several other strident Republicans on this forum would state exactly the opposite of my political beliefs, having crossed swords with me on an entire spectrum of issues. Again, when you cannot defend your position, you seem to think that a shrill denunciation will do the job nicely.

Actually, our voting is fairly similar. I voted for Bush in 1980 and worked for the Anderson Campaign in Birmingham for three months (Remember the Shelby Finance office on 2nd and 21st that acted as its headquarters?). I also voted for McCain. And, quite frankly, I am disturbed by the present regime's profligate spending, reckless adventures (I was against the incursion into Iraq WAAAAAYYY long before it became unpopular), and flirtation with the religious right.

Further, I am amazed that you cannot ackowledge a basic point that I keep making: Hastert should resign for this shocking ethical lapse. Period. Instead, you blunder on like some lunatic, as if you were the sole guardian of the true and righteous flame. Put away the sackcloth, stop eating the locusts, come in from the wilderness, and stop acting as if people who disagree with you are hopeless nitwits or morally suspect.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

You are done, indeed. You couldn't rebut me. Just a loose collection of shrill ad hominem arguments to cover your retreat. I win.

Hey Otter! Just wanted to thank you for affirming my assessment of you upthread. I appreciate you clearing up any lingering doubt I may have had about it's accuracy. BTW, my comparison of you with Raptor was strangely prescient. Your reply above is almost identical to ones I have received from him.

One question I'm left with is where the hell did you get the number 454?

Have a great weekend!

[Bottomfeeder 244]

How about a little gas for the fire?

"He didn't want to talk about politics," the page said. "He wanted to talk about sex or my penis," the page said.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/1..._more_form.html

Sick puppies those GOPers'. What was that about "Republican Values?"

[AURaptor 1,128]

How about a little gas for the fire?

"He didn't want to talk about politics," the page said. "He wanted to talk about sex or my penis," the page said.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/1..._more_form.html

Kinda funny to see the Dems over react to all this. The mistake they're making is easy to understand. The Dems are viewing this as their payback 'sex scandal', which is what they think brought down Clinton. It isn't.

Clinton lied and lied again to keep from admitting he had done anything wrong. That's why, when the facts came out, we all were forced to hear the excessive details. However, in this case, the story's already 'out' there. Foley is gone, done, out of office. What crime did he committ ? That remains to be seen in full, but as yet, nothing of a physical nature. And now there's growing evidence that Foley was the target of pranksters, who initiated all this.

What it all comes down to, is the Dems still don't have any real policy ideas or answers, and are simply using this as a diversion. The story is already dying on its on merrit, or lack there of, but the Dems and the media are determined to make this issue a virtual dead Bernie, carrying it all the way up 'til election time.

Good luck w/ that.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Kinda funny to see the Dems over react to all this. The mistake they're making is easy to understand. The Dems are viewing this as their payback 'sex scandal', which is what they think brought down Clinton. It isn't.

Clinton lied and lied again to keep from admitting he had done anything wrong. That's why, when the facts came out, we all were forced to hear the excessive details. However, in this case, the story's already 'out' there. Foley is gone, done, out of office. What crime did he committ ? That remains to be seen in full, but as yet, nothing of a physical nature. And now there's growing evidence that Foley was the target of pranksters, who initiated all this.

What it all comes down to, is the Dems still don't have any real policy ideas or answers, and are simply using this as a diversion. The story is already dying on its on merrit, or lack there of, but the Dems and the media are determined to make this issue a virtual dead Bernie, carrying it all the way up 'til election time.

Good luck w/ that.

I don't see it as payback. I believe anyone who does what he did should serve time in prison regardless of party affiliation. I just see the cartoon and political satire surrounding the story as priceless.

Be a christian first, then an American.

[otterinbham 0]

You are done, indeed. You couldn't rebut me. Just a loose collection of shrill ad hominem arguments to cover your retreat. I win.

Hey Otter! Just wanted to thank you for affirming my assessment of you upthread. I appreciate you clearing up any lingering doubt I may have had about it's accuracy. BTW, my comparison of you with Raptor was strangely prescient. Your reply above is almost identical to ones I have received from him.

One question I'm left with is where the hell did you get the number 454?

Have a great weekend!

If you're going to quit the thread, then quit the thread, TT. But coming back to dish out a bunch of vague comments and more insinuations is more your style.

By the way, AURaptor and I disagree on any number of issues, but at least we're polite about it. As far as my similarity to him in reply...Given your incoherent rants, it seems to be the only logical thing to say.

[AURaptor 1,128]

I don't see it as payback. I believe anyone who does what he did should serve time in prison regardless of party affiliation. I just see the cartoon and political satire surrounding the story as priceless.

Be a christian first, then an American.

Many,if not all, rabid Libs bring up Lewinsky when talking about this issue. It's clear that they see this as 'payback'. That's why so many get their jollies out of posting explicit details per the Foley IM's , etc. Foley is out of office, and I'm glad for it. What ever criminal activity he may have committed remains to be seen. If he's just a sick, twisted perv, that alone does not mean he deserves jail time. Ya gotta be charged with and then found guilty of a specific crime first. The cartoon is as misguided as it is hypocritical. From Democrats Gerry Studds( having sexual relations w/ a male page, and remaining in office ) to Barney Frank ( gay lover running a male prostitution ring out of his DC condo ), it's far more than the pot calling the kettle black. Those 2 stayed in office, while Foley resigned immediatly after the story broke. At least he did the right thing by resigning, unlike the 'values ' burdened Democrats mentioned.

Be free first.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

You are done, indeed. You couldn't rebut me. Just a loose collection of shrill ad hominem arguments to cover your retreat. I win.

Hey Otter! Just wanted to thank you for affirming my assessment of you upthread. I appreciate you clearing up any lingering doubt I may have had about it's accuracy. BTW, my comparison of you with Raptor was strangely prescient. Your reply above is almost identical to ones I have received from him.

One question I'm left with is where the hell did you get the number 454?

Have a great weekend!

If you're going to quit the thread, then quit the thread, TT. But coming back to dish out a bunch of vague comments and more insinuations is more your style.

By the way, AURaptor and I disagree on any number of issues, but at least we're polite about it. As far as my similarity to him in reply...Given your incoherent rants, it seems to be the only logical thing to say.

What I'm going to quit doing is wasting significant amounts of my time trying to reason with you since you clearly have no desire to do so. I took the time to rationally address your points and it proved pointless to do so. Looking back, I have often agreed with what you posted, but you have never really discussed much here. You issue statements. I sometimes agree with your statements, but discussion rarely ensues with you. This thread has really shown you in greater dimension.

You and Raptor disagree politely. That's a good one. Thanks for humor!

[TexasTiger 13,053]

I don't see it as payback. I believe anyone who does what he did should serve time in prison regardless of party affiliation. I just see the cartoon and political satire surrounding the story as priceless.

Be a christian first, then an American.

Many,if not all, rabid Libs bring up Lewinsky when talking about this issue. It's clear that they see this as 'payback'. That's why so many get their jollies out of posting explicit details per the Foley IM's , etc. Foley is out of office, and I'm glad for it. What ever criminal activity he may have committed remains to be seen. If he's just a sick, twisted perv, that alone does not mean he deserves jail time. Ya gotta be charged with and then found guilty of a specific crime first. The cartoon is as misguided as it is hypocritical. From Democrats Gerry Studds( having sexual relations w/ a male page, and remaining in office ) to Barney Frank ( gay lover running a male prostitution ring out of his DC condo ), it's far more than the pot calling the kettle black. Those 2 stayed in office, while Foley resigned immediatly after the story broke. At least he did the right thing by resigning, unlike the 'values ' burdened Democrats mentioned.

Be free first.

Got a list of a few of those "many, if not all, rabid Libs"? I haven't heard that, so I'm just curious.

[AURaptor 1,128]

I don't see it as payback. I believe anyone who does what he did should serve time in prison regardless of party affiliation. I just see the cartoon and political satire surrounding the story as priceless.

Be a christian first, then an American.

Many,if not all, rabid Libs bring up Lewinsky when talking about this issue. It's clear that they see this as 'payback'. That's why so many get their jollies out of posting explicit details per the Foley IM's , etc. Foley is out of office, and I'm glad for it. What ever criminal activity he may have committed remains to be seen. If he's just a sick, twisted perv, that alone does not mean he deserves jail time. Ya gotta be charged with and then found guilty of a specific crime first. The cartoon is as misguided as it is hypocritical. From Democrats Gerry Studds( having sexual relations w/ a male page, and remaining in office ) to Barney Frank ( gay lover running a male prostitution ring out of his DC condo ), it's far more than the pot calling the kettle black. Those 2 stayed in office, while Foley resigned immediatly after the story broke. At least he did the right thing by resigning, unlike the 'values ' burdened Democrats mentioned.

Be free first.

Got a list of a few of those "many, if not all, rabid Libs"? I haven't heard that, so I'm just curious.

Check out the mb's over at Democratunderground or turn on CNN

[TexasTiger 13,053]

I don't see it as payback. I believe anyone who does what he did should serve time in prison regardless of party affiliation. I just see the cartoon and political satire surrounding the story as priceless.

Be a christian first, then an American.

Many,if not all, rabid Libs bring up Lewinsky when talking about this issue. It's clear that they see this as 'payback'. That's why so many get their jollies out of posting explicit details per the Foley IM's , etc. Foley is out of office, and I'm glad for it. What ever criminal activity he may have committed remains to be seen. If he's just a sick, twisted perv, that alone does not mean he deserves jail time. Ya gotta be charged with and then found guilty of a specific crime first. The cartoon is as misguided as it is hypocritical. From Democrats Gerry Studds( having sexual relations w/ a male page, and remaining in office ) to Barney Frank ( gay lover running a male prostitution ring out of his DC condo ), it's far more than the pot calling the kettle black. Those 2 stayed in office, while Foley resigned immediatly after the story broke. At least he did the right thing by resigning, unlike the 'values ' burdened Democrats mentioned.

Be free first.

Got a list of a few of those "many, if not all, rabid Libs"? I haven't heard that, so I'm just curious.

Check out the mb's over at Democratunderground or turn on CNN

In other words, you can't name any of the many or most, right?

[Tiger Al 0]

I don't see it as payback. I believe anyone who does what he did should serve time in prison regardless of party affiliation. I just see the cartoon and political satire surrounding the story as priceless.

Be a christian first, then an American.

Many,if not all, rabid Libs bring up Lewinsky when talking about this issue. It's clear that they see this as 'payback'. That's why so many get their jollies out of posting explicit details per the Foley IM's , etc. Foley is out of office, and I'm glad for it. What ever criminal activity he may have committed remains to be seen. If he's just a sick, twisted perv, that alone does not mean he deserves jail time. Ya gotta be charged with and then found guilty of a specific crime first. The cartoon is as misguided as it is hypocritical. From Democrats Gerry Studds( having sexual relations w/ a male page, and remaining in office ) to Barney Frank ( gay lover running a male prostitution ring out of his DC condo ), it's far more than the pot calling the kettle black. Those 2 stayed in office, while Foley resigned immediatly after the story broke. At least he did the right thing by resigning, unlike the 'values ' burdened Democrats mentioned.

Be free first.

Got a list of a few of those "many, if not all, rabid Libs"? I haven't heard that, so I'm just curious.

Check out the mb's over at Democratunderground or turn on CNN

In other words, you can't name any of the many or most, right?

Right.

[AURaptor 1,128]

In other words, you can't name any of the many or most, right?

Hyping up the sex issue

Former Clinton aide Paul Begala didn't try to hide his glee. "Part of (Foley's) thing was, 'What do we tell the children?'" he told The New York Times. "Apparently, we'll tell them in a sexually explicit e-mail."

Democrats bringing up Clinton/Lewisnky

...New Hampshire Democrat Congressional challenger - Carol Shea-Porter, for one, says she was "incredibly disappointed" by Clinton's admitted affair with Lewinsky, "but there is one big difference. Bill Clinton was not fooling around with a 16-year-old, and to try to pretend they are one and the same is another Republican outrage." Lewinsky was 21 at the time of her affair with the former President.