Email rendezvous entangles GOP state representative

[ishii]

You surely make this a partisan incident, which it is not. Conservatives never were eager to let the private lives of Studds, Ted Kennedy or Barney Frank stay private. Now this is a liberal ploy to air the other party’s dirty laundry? I think not.

Conservatives were also not so eager to oust Vitter or Dan Crane, the IN congressman. So we can just leave this as another example of a representative with no judgment and try to stop making larger partisan blanket statements.

What a joke. Are you going to post a thread that exposes an embarrassing scandal about a liberal Democrat? Of course not. Partisan all the way. As I said earlier, bizarre is the obsessive desire to seek out and publicize embarassing sex scandals for partisan reasons.

Ishii

 

[estesbob]

You surely make this a partisan incident, which it is not. Conservatives never were eager to let the private lives of Studds, Ted Kennedy or Barney Frank stay private. Now this is a liberal ploy to air the other party’s dirty laundry? I think not.

Conservatives were also not so eager to oust Vitter or Dan Crane, the IN congressman. So we can just leave this as another example of a representative with no judgment and try to stop making larger partisan blanket statements.

Actually Beau I think this representatives should resign . Again I find humorous that you are so desperate to rationalize the sexual peccadilloes of prominent Democrat leaders that you evidently spend your days digging through News sites trying to find some Republican with sexual failings regardless of how prominent his position is. I am still waiting for you to comment on the Republican dogcatcher of Bugsplat Idaho who was caught not lifting the toilet seat when he urinated. Why this is obviously far more egregious than having sex with an intern in the Oval Office or seducing a 17-year-old male page.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

What a joke. Are you going to post a thread that exposes an embarrassing scandal about a liberal Democrat?

Probably not. I leave that to others.

Of course not. Partisan all the way.

Nope. That’s a non-sequitur. Deal with the issue.

Sometimes a cigar is a cigar. Pointing out GOP hijinks is not making a partisan statement. Others here are free to treat Democrats and liberals in a similar manner.

As I said earlier, bizarre is the obsessive desire to seek out and publicize embarassing sex scandals for partisan reasons.

Well, if you said it before, it was an inaccurate, irrelevant comment. Probably the same now. It did not improve with age.

… you evidently spend your days digging through News sites trying to find some Republican with sexual failings regardless of how prominent his position is.

I have a few other things on my plate. Why don’t we discuss this incident? It was really a hot topic with the local Hoosiers.

Call it obscure if you want, but don’t say I excused anyone of anything.

Obscurity may be Jesse Jackson rhetoric in Iowa, puppet sexual orientation, a SC politico on the Hispanic work ethic or where Rahm send his kids to grammar school. So I imagine that one should view those topics through the same sort of lens.

 

[ishii]

Probably not. I leave that to others.

I don’t know of any “others” on these forums who post about embarrassing scandals with such single-minded determination as Beau Ouiville.

Nope. That’s a non-sequitur. Deal with the issue.

An absolute joke which I don’t think even you believe. How many Democrat scandals do you start threads on? None. Ergo, this is merely a partisan exercise.

Sometimes a cigar is a cigar. Pointing out GOP hijinks is not making a partisan statement. Others here are free to treat Democrats and liberals in a similar manner.

And sometimes a partisan shill is a partisan shill. Pointing out ***only ***GOP hijinks is being partisan. (But I think you know that).

Well, if you said it before, it was an inaccurate, irrelevant comment. Probably the same now. It did not improve with age.

Absolutely accurate and relevant that it deserves repeating: "bizarre is the obsessive desire to seek out and publicize embarassing sex scandals for partisan reasons"

Obscurity may be Jesse Jackson rhetoric in Iowa, puppet sexual orientation, a SC politico on the Hispanic work ethic or where Rahm send his kids to grammar school. So I imagine that one should view those topics through the same sort of lens.

How do any of those compare with this GOP sex scandal? Your defense is lame indeed.

Ishii

 

[Darryl1958]

You surely make this a partisan incident, which it is not. Conservatives never were eager to let the private lives of Studds, Ted Kennedy or Barney Frank stay private. Now this is a liberal ploy to air the other party’s dirty laundry? I think not.

Conservatives were also not so eager to oust Vitter or Dan Crane, the IN congressman. So we can just leave this as another example of a representative with no judgment and try to stop making larger partisan blanket statements.

I stand by my answer to Sub Rosa, who was the one speaking from a true liberal conscience in the post I quoted. I happen to substantially agree with what was being said there.

Tolerance for homosexuals is either a value that liberals espouse for everyone, or it was never really a liberal value in the first place.

Politics requires partisanship over real and substantial disagreements in values and solutions to socieites problems. Partisanship only becomes crass when one’s purported values get trashed in the process.