The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux) - Page 116

wendybeth · 10-03-2006, 12:08 PM

Oh, stop this nonsense. I am not going to get into a silly-assed blaming match yet again. He did what he did, and that's that. Here's some more of what Foley did, fresh from CNN:

Former Rep. Mark Foley allegedly interrupted a vote on the House floor in 2003 to engage in cyber-sex with a former page, ABC News reports.
cnnPreloadImages('http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.5/ceiling/nav.rt.end.bg_over.gif');

Not Afraid · 10-03-2006, 02:09 PM

I hearby announce that the 2 party system has been changed. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party are no more. Instead, politicians will be placed in 2 new parties.......The Corrupt Party and The Evil Party. It just makes more sense this way.

Moonliner · 10-03-2006, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

placed in 2 new parties.......The Corrupt Party and The Evil Party.

Wouldn't that be more of a one party system?

Not Afraid · 10-03-2006, 02:25 PM

Well, you can come up with better party names.

Nephythys · 10-03-2006, 03:52 PM

Dems-
The Cut & Run Party
The "It's America's Fault" Party
The Doom & Gloom Party
The Class Warfare Party
The Race Card Party
The Dead Voter Party

Repubs-
The Head in the Sand Party (especially on illegal immigration)
The Coward Party (for never standing up for their beliefs)
The Turn-Coat Party (for running as conservatives and changing stripes in office)
The Big Gov't Party (wait- that would be both parties)
The Big Spending Party (yea, that is both too)
The Wilting Party (because they always lose steam when you want more from them)

Meh!

Gemini Cricket · 10-03-2006, 04:32 PM

No one's asked the most important question of all:
Will Mark Foley be at Gay Days at Disneyland or not?

wendybeth · 10-03-2006, 07:22 PM

Probably not- he's too busy figuring out who else to blame. (Right now it's Alcohol and Catholics, but I'm sure there will be yet another excuse shortly).

What ever happened to personal accountability?

innerSpaceman · 10-03-2006, 07:35 PM

In truth, this is an inappropriate-acts-with-minors incident, but I can't help feeling there would not be as much gut-level outrage if Foley had been flinging the innuendo and sexual come-ons to teenage girls.

Alex · 10-03-2006, 07:42 PM

I agree with that. The opening line in today's San Francisco Chronicle article today was (approximately) "the last thing the Republican Party needs right now is a homosexual pedophilia scandal."

My first thought was "is the homosexual part really all that relevant?" Would it be less of a problem if it had been a heterosexual pedophila scandal. I'll leave to others to argue whether sexual interest in 16/17 year olds is really pedophilia (I know clinicly it isn't, but most people don't use the word clinicly).

I also caught The Daily Show last night and while it was pretty funny, I thought it was also unfair in its deregarding of Studds as a relevant precedent (where a 37 year old Rep actually had sex with a page and ultimately nobody really that it that big a deal).

Having now seen some of the explicit stuff I was also surprised to learn that the boy seemed to be at least somewhat participating in the banter (not that this makes it any more appropriate).

Prudence · 10-03-2006, 08:34 PM

Actually, I would personally be more outraged if it were teenage girls, but that comes from my own experience of having been a teenage girl and being aware that sex was a particularly potent (har) way for girls to gain or lose power.

And I assume the homosexual part is relevant because it's a hot political issue. It's hard to argue that it's true love and pure and you'll get married and live together 'til death do you part when you're advocating legislation prohibiting that marriage because such relationships are unnatural and leading to the destruction of society.

10-03-2006, 12:08 PM	#1
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	Oh, stop this nonsense. I am not going to get into a silly-assed blaming match yet again. He did what he did, and that's that. Here's some more of what Foley did, fresh from CNN: Former Rep. Mark Foley allegedly interrupted a vote on the House floor in 2003 to engage in cyber-sex with a former page, ABC News reports. cnnPreloadImages('http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.5/ceiling/nav.rt.end.bg_over.gif'); __________________
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 02:09 PM	#2
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	I hearby announce that the 2 party system has been changed. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party are no more. Instead, politicians will be placed in 2 new parties.......The Corrupt Party and The Evil Party. It just makes more sense this way.
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 02:25 PM	#4
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	Well, you can come up with better party names.
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 03:52 PM	#5
Nephythys Yeah, that's about it- Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In a state of constant crap to get done Posts: 2,688	Dems- The Cut & Run Party The "It's America's Fault" Party The Doom & Gloom Party The Class Warfare Party The Race Card Party The Dead Voter Party Repubs- The Head in the Sand Party (especially on illegal immigration) The Coward Party (for never standing up for their beliefs) The Turn-Coat Party (for running as conservatives and changing stripes in office) The Big Gov't Party (wait- that would be both parties) The Big Spending Party (yea, that is both too) The Wilting Party (because they always lose steam when you want more from them) Meh!
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 04:32 PM	#6
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	No one's asked the most important question of all: Will Mark Foley be at Gay Days at Disneyland or not?
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 07:22 PM	#7
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	Probably not- he's too busy figuring out who else to blame. (Right now it's Alcohol and Catholics, but I'm sure there will be yet another excuse shortly). What ever happened to personal accountability? __________________
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 07:35 PM	#8
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	In truth, this is an inappropriate-acts-with-minors incident, but I can't help feeling there would not be as much gut-level outrage if Foley had been flinging the innuendo and sexual come-ons to teenage girls.
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 07:42 PM	#9
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I agree with that. The opening line in today's San Francisco Chronicle article today was (approximately) "the last thing the Republican Party needs right now is a homosexual pedophilia scandal." My first thought was "is the homosexual part really all that relevant?" Would it be less of a problem if it had been a heterosexual pedophila scandal. I'll leave to others to argue whether sexual interest in 16/17 year olds is really pedophilia (I know clinicly it isn't, but most people don't use the word clinicly). I also caught The Daily Show last night and while it was pretty funny, I thought it was also unfair in its deregarding of Studds as a relevant precedent (where a 37 year old Rep actually had sex with a page and ultimately nobody really that it that big a deal). Having now seen some of the explicit stuff I was also surprised to learn that the boy seemed to be at least somewhat participating in the banter (not that this makes it any more appropriate).
	Submit to Quotes

10-03-2006, 08:34 PM	#10
Prudence Beelzeboobs, Esq. Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Gavel - I haz it Posts: 6,287	Actually, I would personally be more outraged if it were teenage girls, but that comes from my own experience of having been a teenage girl and being aware that sex was a particularly potent (har) way for girls to gain or lose power. And I assume the homosexual part is relevant because it's a hot political issue. It's hard to argue that it's true love and pure and you'll get married and live together 'til death do you part when you're advocating legislation prohibiting that marriage because such relationships are unnatural and leading to the destruction of society. __________________ traguna macoities tracorum satis de
	Submit to Quotes