NationStates Jolt Archive

Seriously? Why is the republican party so loaded with creeps, pedos, and all around jerks? Is it just me, or is there a vast majority of repo scandal material so readily available, while the only thing they seem to be able to trot out about dems is Clinton (who had consentual sexual relations with a a woman in her twenties), or some other non-scandalous thing...

And, please don't give me that BS about Chapaquitic, or you'll just get bitch-slapped with Laura Bush's own version (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3910b26e685a.htm) of that particular drunk driving incident.

Chapa-who?

Liberals crack me up! :D I could ask the same about the Democrats. ;)

The degradation of power. The democrats have suffered it too. The clean water goes in and the contaminated goes out.

hmmmmm if this thread can stay open long enough for me to make a serious reply

just some points

1) all politicians suck

2) all parties have good eggs and bad eggs.

3) there are more republicans in congress and the administration than there are democrats so even if both parties have the same precentage of bad eggs, there are numerically more republicans

4) the party in power is always more prominent in its abuse of power--gotta HAVE power to abuse it

5) if you want to hold onto power, you cant be purging your bad eggs, what if that seat goes to the democrats when the people find out what he's been doing?

the republicans have ARRANGED their power in congress such that the good and bad fall on them harder than on the democrats. when tom delay was speaker of the house he made a rule that if lobbyists want to get cooperation from the republicans they can ONLY give money to republicans. so when the abramov scandal broke it was a completely republican problem. not because democrats are better but because they were denied the chance to participate in this corruption. compare this to the enron scandal where enron gave money to everyone regardless of party. both parties were guilty so neither were called to account.

Seriously? Why is the republican party so loaded with creeps, pedos, and all around jerks? Is it just me, or is there a vast majority of repo scandal material so readily available, while the only thing they seem to be able to trot out about dems is Clinton (who had consentual sexual relations with a a woman in her twenties), or some other non-scandalous thing...

And, please don't give me that BS about Chapaquitic, or you'll just get bitch-slapped with Laura Bush's own version (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3910b26e685a.htm) of that particular drunk driving incident.

Shorter version of what Ashmoria said: Democrats are currently clean because there was no point in bribing them in recent years---they had no pull because the Republican party shut them out of every substantive Congressional decision, and why bribe someone who can't do shit for you?

Because the DNC blows.

Seriously? Why is the republican party so loaded with creeps, pedos, and all around jerks? Is it just me, or is there a vast majority of repo scandal material so readily available, while the only thing they seem to be able to trot out about dems is Clinton (who had consentual sexual relations with a a woman in her twenties), or some other non-scandalous thing...

And, please don't give me that BS about Chapaquitic, or you'll just get bitch-slapped with Laura Bush's own version (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3910b26e685a.htm) of that particular drunk driving incident.

Umm...except the police report said she wasn't drinking.

And she didn't leave the scene of the accident, go home, not tell the police, etc.. It's really not the same at all. Accidents happen.

However, the real reason that the GOP sucks so much, is that democrats blow. It evens out the balance of power. And also explains why D.C. is so windy (OK, now I'm being a smartass).

Because the DNC blows.

Damn, you beat me to it. Missed it by *this* much.

Seriously? Why is that politics is so loaded with creeps, pedos, and all around jerks? Is it just me, or is there a vast majority of political scandal material so readily available, while the only thing they seem to be able to trot out about each other is -insert not so scandalous thing-

And, please don't give me that BS about one party being more ethical then the other. They are both equally corrupt and dirty

Fixed.

Fixed.

Fixing quotes is getting old fast.

well, when you explicitly set yourself up as the party of crooks and racists there really isn't much else to expect

Fixing quotes is super fun!!!

Oh yeah?

Fixed.

Now now, look at the OP, and don't put word in my post. If I had wanted to say that I would have. But, I didn't. As far as the whole party in power thing goes, the GOP has been a bane to america far longer than the last 12 years. Or did Iran-contra, etc. escape everyone's attention?

well, when you explicitly set yourself up as the party of crooks and racists there really isn't much else to expect

But enough about Mayor Koch and the democrats, how do you feel about the GOP?

Oh yeah?

Yeah.

As far as the whole party in power thing goes, CONSERVATIVISM has been a bane to america far longer than the last 12 years...

Beat ya to it Z...

But enough about Mayor Koch and the democrats, how do you feel about the GOP?

hey, i'm not going to deny that there are plenty of crooks and racists in the dems. they just don't go around proclaiming such to be their base of support.

But enough about Mayor Koch and the democrats, how do you feel about the GOP?

Jerk. You are at this moment embodying the title of this thread.

Take your burnt biscut and move to the end of the line.

Now now, look at the OP, and don't put word in my post. If I had wanted to say that I would have. But, I didn't. As far as the whole party in power thing goes, the GOP has been a bane to america far longer than the last 12 years. Or did Iran-contra, etc. escape everyone's attention?

Let's not forget all the bad things Dems have done. Most of them voted to go into Iraq, voted FOR the patriot act...don't forget the vietnam war was a democrat thing. So was, korea, and ww1. Both parties are equally horrid. You get the Dems in office and they will do the same thing as the republicans. Why? Because we as americans are dumb asses and we elect dumb asses.

Now now, look at the OP, and don't put word in my post. If I had wanted to say that I would have. But, I didn't. As far as the whole party in power thing goes, the GOP has been a bane to america far longer than the last 12 years. Or did Iran-contra, etc. escape everyone's attention?

If you're defending the dems, "whose got the worst secret war" is not a game you want to play.

But enough about Mayor Koch and the democrats, how do you feel about the GOP?

Well, at least you didn't trot out Byrd like most of them do. I'll give you credit for that much. But hey, the Republicans still have George "Macaca" Allen and Trent Lott and Haley Barbour and, until he died, Strom Thurmond, and a whole host of others.

But hey, look at the numbers. African-Americans vote over 90% of the time with Democrats. Are you saying they're stupid for doing so? Hispanic Americans are still a majority with Dems, and I think that's going to go up after all the immigration bashing over the last six month or so. What was that about racist Dems again? Hmmm?

hey, i'm not going to deny that there are plenty of crooks and racists in the dems. they just don't go around proclaiming such to be their base of support.

He did.

Beat ya to it Z...

As I have said, it doesn't matter which side it is. They are both not worthy of being in office, as they are both as corrupt as each other. We only notice the GOP corruption now because they are in power. IN 10 years, lets say the Dems control everything, we will be on here complaining about how corrupt they are.

Yeah, GOP members like Mel Reynolds, Gerry Studds, Wayne Hays, John Young, Fred Richmond, Brock Adams, Barney Frank, Gus Savage, and Daniel Inouye.

G-A-S-P! Are you suggesting that power corrupts?

It's not like the Republicans are all baby-eating, tax-cheating, kiddie-fuckers. A few get in the headlines and it takes a week of repetition before the stories go away. Newsflash! American history is replete with government scandals. The party in power is usually the biggest target but that doesn't mean that the other is made up of angels. Don't forget the bribe-guy caught on tape. And what's this I hear about Harry Reid? There are many more like these. On both sides of the fence. But you have to keep in mind that those individuals and their actions do not represent their party's values. Stop playing the blame games and assuming guilt by association. Cut the mudsling and just say what you want, and for the wrath of Foamy, be honest about it.

Well, at least you didn't trot out Byrd like most of them do. I'll give you credit for that much. But hey, the Republicans still have George "Macaca" Allen and Trent Lott and Haley Barbour and, until he died, Strom Thurmond, and a whole host of others.

But hey, look at the numbers. African-Americans vote over 90% of the time with Democrats. Are you saying they're stupid for doing so? Hispanic Americans are still a majority with Dems, and I think that's going to go up after all the immigration bashing over the last six month or so. What was that about racist Dems again? Hmmm?

No, I don't think they are stupid for doing so. I think they are voting the national platfrom which they believe favors them. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. (Though reasonable people could disagree how well it has worked).

I do take issue with the idea that on an individual basis that democrats are any different to republicans per se. They are quite willing to play the racism card when it suits them, especially locally. Witness moynihan's 'benign neglect'.

The plain fact is that both parties fail to police themselves in respect of the ideals they hold out.

Why does the GOP suck so much??
Because the DNC blows.
I don't know if I prefer the taste, or the smell of absolute mind-numbing stupidity in the morning.

G-A-S-P! Are you suggesting that power corrupts?

It's not like the Republicans are all baby-eating, tax-cheating, kiddie-fuckers. A few get in the headlines and it takes a week of repetition before the stories go away. Newsflash! American history is replete with government scandals. The party in power is usually the biggest target but that doesn't mean that the other is made up of angels. Don't forget the bribe-guy caught on tape. And what's this I hear about Harry Reid? There are many more like these. On both sides of the fence. But you have to keep in mind that those individuals and their actions do not represent their party's values. Stop playing the blame games and assuming guilt by association. Cut the mudsling and just say what you want, and for the wrath of Foamy, be honest about it.

What exactly is it that you hear about Harry Reid? That he didn't report the transfer of land from his personal holdings to a LLC, even though it made absolutely no difference in the money he made on the deal or the taxes he paid? Or that he spent some campaign funds on a party because his lawyer said it was okay for him to do so, but in order to avoid the hint of impropriety, he paid it back out of his own pocket? Or did you hear a bullshit, right-wing version of those stories? I suspect the latter. :rolleyes:

I had no idea the Star Tribune (endorses almost nothing but DFL candidates) was a right-wing bullshit spewer.

The point is that career politicians are usually untrustworthy and it's not just the Republicans and a guilt by association is wrong. That's stereotyping. And it's wrong.

Sandy Berger, Gary Condit, Daniel David Rostenkowski, Melvin Jay Reynolds, Charles Coles Diggs, Jr., James C. Green, Frederick Richmond, Neil Goldschmidt, Alcee Lamar Hastings, Mario Biaggi, Mary Rose Oakar, David Giles, Lena Swanson, Abraham J. Hirschfeld, Albert G. Bustamante, James Guy Tucker, Jr., Walter Rayford Tucker, William McCuen , Joseph Kolter

I had no idea the Star Tribune (endorses almost nothing but DFL candidates) was a right-wing bullshit spewer.

The point is that career politicians are usually untrustworthy and it's not just the Republicans and a guilt by association is wrong. That's stereotyping. And it's wrong.

Not the paper--the AP reporter who wrote the story. Solomon is his name, and his AP editors ought to be ashamed for letting the story through.

As for guilt by association, in general you're right, but here's the thing--the Republican leadership in the House is the really corrupt bunch. DeLay, Hastert, Boehner, Reynolds, Shimkus, Cunningham (before he went to jail), Ney (before he went to jail, too)--they're crooked and they're the leaders. So what does it say about the other members of the party that they endorse these people as their leadership? That's accessory, in my mind, and it would be if the Dems were in power as well. If you don't tell your crooked leadership to knock it off, or if you don't try to get them out of power, then you're as guilty as they are.

As for guilt by association, in general you're right, but here's the thing--the Republican leadership in the House is the really corrupt bunch. DeLay, Hastert, Boehner, Reynolds, Shimkus, Cunningham (before he went to jail), Ney (before he went to jail, too)--they're crooked and they're the leaders. So what does it say about the other members of the party that they endorse these people as their leadership? That's accessory, in my mind, and it would be if the Dems were in power as well. If you don't tell your crooked leadership to knock it off, or if you don't try to get them out of power, then you're as guilty as they are.

See, I agree with this totally. And I would like to see voters act on this more often. If your guy tacitly supports the douche three states over, then punish him at the polls.

Nothing wrong with that.

See, I agree with this totally. And I would like to see voters act on this more often. If your guy tacitly supports the douche three states over, then punish him at the polls.

Nothing wrong with that.
And that's the argument I've been making in various threads here--a vote for a Republican for the House of Representatives is a vote for Dennis Hastert as Speaker. A vote for a Republican for Senate is a vote for, well, I don't know who'll be Majority leader once Frist retires--maybe Trent Lott--but it's for continued Republican domination of the Senate.

Okay, the case is easier to make for the House. ;)

Sandy Berger, Gary Condit, Daniel David Rostenkowski, Melvin Jay Reynolds, Charles Coles Diggs, Jr., James C. Green, Frederick Richmond, Neil Goldschmidt, Alcee Lamar Hastings, Mario Biaggi, Mary Rose Oakar, David Giles, Lena Swanson, Abraham J. Hirschfeld, Albert G. Bustamante, James Guy Tucker, Jr., Walter Rayford Tucker, William McCuen , Joseph Kolter

Wow, how far back did you go for that list of names? I see Goldschmidt on there so it has to go back at least 20 years. If you have to go back that far for just that many names you are in SERIOUS trouble.

Wow, how far back did you go for that list of names? I see Goldschmidt on there so it has to go back at least 20 years. If you have to go back that far for just that many names you are in SERIOUS trouble.

And wasn't Condit cleared of everything but the affair? Pretty weak to include him.

Wow, how far back did you go for that list of names? I see Goldschmidt on there so it has to go back at least 20 years. If you have to go back that far for just that many names you are in SERIOUS trouble.

Of course ignoring that the majority of names and convictions are from the mid to late 90's.

I guess DNC members being convicted of everything from child rape to soliciting a minor to tax fraud to hiring a hitman makes the DNC heads and tails above the GOP, right?

Try again.

And wasn't Condit cleared of everything but the affair? Pretty weak to include him.

He was, in fact. Chandra Levey's body was found, and death was ruled an accident. Though I must admit that I thought he did it too. But, that's why we have autopsies.

Of course ignoring that the majority of names and convictions are from the mid to late 90's.

I guess DNC members being convicted of everything from child rape to soliciting a minor to tax fraud to hiring a hitman makes the DNC heads and tails above the GOP, right?

Try again.

Weak sauce man. Why you gotta hit like a girl??

Weak sauce man. Why you gotta hit like a girl??

Oh, and now the personal attacks. I guess pulling the skeletons out of the DNC's closet isn't kosher in a DU thread. Wait, we're not in DU.

Oh, and now the personal attacks. I guess pulling the skeletons out of the DNC's closet isn't kosher in a DU thread. Wait, we're not in DU.

What does DU have to do with you hitting like a girl?

And that's the argument I've been making in various threads here--a vote for a Republican for the House of Representatives is a vote for Dennis Hastert as Speaker. A vote for a Republican for Senate is a vote for, well, I don't know who'll be Majority leader once Frist retires--maybe Trent Lott--but it's for continued Republican domination of the Senate.

Okay, the case is easier to make for the House. ;)

No, you are right. The current crop of house republicans have done nothing that I agree with for the most part. All they've managed is to show that they are just as pork-barrely and corrupt as the last crop of dems. (And actually, for the things I care about - banking and financial regulation and whatnot - they have shown they are just as lackwitted as the other side. Really, the key point with both parties is that goldman sachs wields an inordinate amount of power. But I digress).

What ticks me off is this 'lesser of two evils' mentality. I'm sick of it. I am tired of the emotional blackmail &c. It's simply not enough to say: "yes I'm crap, and will continue to be crap, but the other side is even worse". If that is the best possible option we are doomed anyway and might as well not bother. The best thing that could happen to american politics is a viable third party. Failing that, a regular spell in minority for both of the two majority parties.

What does DU have to do with you hitting like a girl?

What does "hitting like a girl" have to do w/ the myriad of felony convictions DNC members have had over the years.

I guess Gerry Studds doesn't count anymore even though he actually had sex w/ congressional pages.

See, I agree with this totally. And I would like to see voters act on this more often. If your guy tacitly supports the douche three states over, then punish him at the polls.

Nothing wrong with that.
And that's just the sort of thing you shouldn't do. Vote for someone because you agree with him personally. Voting against a republican because you don't like the Republican 2 towns over is wrong. I thought I just got through explaining that. It's guilt and punishment by association. There's a reason we don't decimate anymore, an idea called personal responsibility. You look for the guilty party rather than perform a group punishment. If you support voting against a guy because of the action of someone else beyond your reach then you are supporting collective punishment over personal responsibility.

And I pity you.

He was, in fact. Chandra Levey's body was found, and death was ruled an accident. Though I must admit that I thought he did it too. But, that's why we have autopsies.

her death was ruled an accident? i missed that. what do they think happened?

What does "hitting like a girl" have to do w/ the myriad of felony convictions DNC members have had over the years.

I guess Gerry Studds doesn't count anymore even though he actually had sex w/ congressional pages.

[throwing water on the angry ape]Other than the fact that his contraversy happened more than 30 years ago (in 1973)?[/throwing water on the angry ape]

[throwing water on the angry ape]Other than the fact that his contraversy happened more than 30 years ago (in 1973)?[/throwing water on the angry ape]


Yay, he can focus on one or two names out of the list of over a dozen. I guess all those other convictions of sexual misconduct, tax fraud, solicitation, etc. just don't count. I guess having sexual relations w/ pages has become LESS acceptable now? I guess a DNC candidate being convicted of child rape in 2000 doesn't count?

It's so cute how you stick your fingers in your ears when it comes to those. Just keep resorting to personal attacks. Shows how strong your defense is.

[throwing water on the angry ape]Other than the fact that his contraversy happened more than 30 years ago (in 1973)?[/throwing water on the angry ape]

And wasn't a felony. And didn't result in a conviction. But other than that, you know...

And that's just the sort of thing you shouldn't do. Vote for someone because you agree with him personally. Voting against a republican because you don't like the Republican 2 towns over is wrong. I thought I just got through explaining that. It's guilt and punishment by association. There's a reason we don't decimate anymore, an idea called personal responsibility. You look for the guilty party rather than perform a group punishment. If you support voting against a guy because of the action of someone else beyond your reach then you are supporting collective punishment over personal responsibility.

And I pity you.

They associate voluntarily. Therefore group punishment is absolutely called for. And if I am personally appalled by the republican two towns over, and the present incumbent has taken no actions against him, then I absolutely no longer agree with his politics. So I should vote him out.

And that's just the sort of thing you shouldn't do. Vote for someone because you agree with him personally. Voting against a republican because you don't like the Republican 2 towns over is wrong. I thought I just got through explaining that. It's guilt and punishment by association. There's a reason we don't decimate anymore, an idea called personal responsibility. You look for the guilty party rather than perform a group punishment. If you support voting against a guy because of the action of someone else beyond your reach then you are supporting collective punishment over personal responsibility.

And I pity you.

You are responsible for the company you keep, and you are responsibility for the actions of your leadership. If you don't stand against them when they do wrong, you are culpable, and every Republican who didn't stand against the DeLay corruption is culpable. Et cetera. Et cetera.

Try to spin it how you like, it doesn't change the facts in this case. Accessory to a crime is still a crime.

And wasn't a felony. And didn't result in a conviction. But other than that, you know...

Gotcha, so having sex w/ a page was OK then, but not now.

I guess a DNC candidate being convicted of child rape in 2000 doesn't count?

If you're talking about Giles, he was convicted a full 10 years after he was OUT of government. And, Goldschmidt was out longer than that. Niether of them was desperatly clinging to power like the current GOP. Try again, ya noodle armed sissy! LOL ;)

Gotcha, so having sex w/ a page was OK then, but not now.

Did I say it was right? Not at all. Even though it was consensual, it was more than disturbing. But illegal? Nope. And chances are what Mark Foley did wasn't illegal either, even if you stretch the new Walsh law to try to make it fit. But you're the one who was throwing around words like "felony conviction." You ought to watch what you type a little more closely.

You are responsible for the company you keep, and you are responsibility for the actions of your leadership. If you don't stand against them when they do wrong, you are culpable, and every Republican who didn't stand against the DeLay corruption is culpable. Et cetera. Et cetera.
Oh I get it. If my neighbor down the street kills someone I'm just as responsible for the murder as he is because I didn't stop him from thrusting the knife. It doesn't matter that I didn't know about it until the story hit the papers, I'm just as responsible because I lived on the same street and wasn't constantly watching him to make sure he wouldn't commit a crime.

Oh I get it. If my neighbor down the street kills someone I'm just as responsible for the murder as he is because I didn't stop him from thrusting the knife. It doesn't matter that I didn't know about it until the story hit the papers, I'm just as responsible because I lived on the same street and wasn't constantly watching him to make sure he wouldn't commit a crime.Nice straw man--got a factory to make those?

If you were standing next to your neighbor when he had the knife and were in a position to stop him, then yes, you're as guilty as he is. That's the analogy here, whether you like to admit it or not. It's not like Delay was subtle about his corruption. Or Ney. Or Cunningham. It's been talked about for years, and no Republican challenged him. There's personal responsibility, and then there's the allegiance you owe to society as a member of the governing class. Remember that.

Oh I get it. If my neighbor down the street kills someone I'm just as responsible for the murder as he is because I didn't stop him from thrusting the knife. It doesn't matter that I didn't know about it until the story hit the papers, I'm just as responsible because I lived on the same street and wasn't constantly watching him to make sure he wouldn't commit a crime.

There is such a thing as a conspiracy you know. In a similar fashion, if your neighbor hung out in your house all the time talking about stabbing someone and he was serious and you didn't try and stop him or talk him out of it, you would bear some responsibility for the death you know. I'm not talking legal responsiblity of course, just morally. And wouldn't it be fair for other people to judge you because of that?

Oh I get it. If my neighbor down the street kills someone I'm just as responsible for the murder as he is because I didn't stop him from thrusting the knife. It doesn't matter that I didn't know about it until the story hit the papers, I'm just as responsible because I lived on the same street and wasn't constantly watching him to make sure he wouldn't commit a crime.

If you benefited from his commission of this murder and didn't tell anyone, you are guilty, yes.