View Full Version : Ladies and Gents, start your Pundits!
Kaeos
10-04-2006, 05:34 PM
Time to whip up some fervor over politics here folks. Do we constantly need to talk about movies!?!?!? What kind of site is....oh....nevermind.
But really we never spew politics anymore. Let's hear from the shooting gallery eh?
Dr. Oxycontin himself -Rush Limbauh
I’m just thinking out loud here. What if somebody got to the page and said, you know, we want you to set Foley up. We need to do a little titillating thing here. Keep it and save it and so forth. How would you get a kid to do that? Yeah, who knows? You threaten him or pay him. There’s any number of ways given the kind of people that we’re dealing with and talking about here.
Liberal Anti -Limbaugh Ed Shultz:
Kirk Fordham said today that he alerted the House Speaker Dennis Hastert's office two years ago about worrisome conduct by former Rep. Mark Foley with teenage pages
Kirk Fordham told The Associated Press that when he was told about Foley's inappropriate behavior toward pages, he had "more than one conversation with senior staff at the highest level of the House of Representatives asking them to intervene."
Fordham said the conversations took place long before the e-mail scandal broke and at least a year earlier than members of the House GOP leadership have acknowledged
Fox News Talk Nobody Pundit Spencer Hughes:
Is Spencer supposed to feel sorry for Foley because he was molested by a clergyman? Spencer thinks Foley is a pervert because he chose to be and not because he was molested as a teen. By Foley making these claims, isn’t he insulting every person who has been molested and gone on to live a productive life?
Actually Spencer was a bit too distracted today to really talk about the scandal here was his top story today...no joke
Spencer is throwing a party for South Park’s 10th Birthday! Spencer is ready to break out his dancing shoes to celebrate Trey Parker and Matt Stone’s stroke of genius! If the listeners are lucky (and beg a little) they might even hear Spencer’s solo of Happy Birthday! :rolleyes:
Sirius Radio Talker (70's leftover) Alex Bennett:
Will the Bob Woodward book indicating that Condi Rice knew about an Al Qaeda attack prior to 9/11 get the Bush administration to admit they knew more? Will the new Colin Powell biography indicating his doubts about the Bush strategy in Iraq during his time in the Bush Administration force a withdrawal policy in Iraq? Will majority Leader Hastert resign for not doing anything after being told of the Mark Foley intern email scandal? Will the Democratic party be able to maximize all this muck and win the November election and turn the House and Senate?
Fox Pitbull John Gibson:
Now they say no one in Hastert's office was aware of the sexual nature of the e-mails until they appeared in the press.
I don't think that's good enough.
Here's why:
If a congressman is under investigation on the complaint of a minor, that congressman's leadership should know what it is about and, frankly, I don't think they would have involved all those people and taken the step of confronting Foley if they did not know what was in those e-mails. It doesn't make sense. You go after a congressman on the word of a minor and you don't know what it's about? Come on.
Did somebody think they could hide behavior like this until after an election? With Dems looking for anything to nail any Republican officeholder? Who could be that dumb?
Besides, had Hastert and Boehner given Foley the boot when they first heard of this, the congressperson who replaced him would be running strong for re-election.
As it is now, it's a disaster and that has to be the fault of the House leadership.
One of my BIGGEST complaints about this is the LITANY of blatant erroneous items displayed on Fox in the last 2 days:
1) 3 - count them 3 times during Tuesday's broadcasts, Fox, while displaying images of Foley "mistakenly" displayed a (D) for Democrat next to Foley's name on the discription below the images. Mistake? or subtle attempt to rally up "their" core viewers "See them damn Demo-crats is a buunch of queers" :rolleyes: Fox does not acknowlede the error.
2) While allowing 2 opposite strategists - one Dem and one GOP debate the Haster cover up scandal, the no name GOP strategist twice states (lies) that Democrats are calling for Haster to step down. FLASE. None. Not 1 Democrat has called for him to resign. Not 1. The Washington Times, a conservative paper, Conservative groups and Roy Blunt (R) have made that call. The host never challenges this statement as false.
3) About Roy Blunt. On John Gibson's show, a field reporter speaks of how Roy Blunt is essentially throwing Haster under the bus by saying if he'd been elected speaker this never would have happened. The field reporter twice refers to Blunt as the "Minority Whip". FALSE He is a "MAJORITY Whip" Again, the error goes unchallenged. Again, is Fox trying to conviently make a mistake to stir up their base? Or are they just that stupid?
In my 8.5 hours of driving today I got to listen to A LOT of talk radio and news. All day long I have listened to the Righty's try deperately to paint all the problems they have right now on the Democrats. Who, for once are actually getting it right! They are sitting back, quitely calling for a sensible investigation and letting the Republicans collapse into civil war.
Space Tycoon
10-04-2006, 06:02 PM
Goodness, you've really put some work into this post.
Well, not all conservatives are making excuses for Foley. Check out Bay Buchanan's rip into the Republican House leadership (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFFPEi0Uklo) a couple of days ago.
Civil war, indeed.
.
rappites
10-04-2006, 06:55 PM
I do not talk politics because I do not know enough to talk about it.
I have no idea the true meaning of Republican, Democrat, Liberal and or Conservative. I do not call myself any of them.
I have the belief of no matter who you put in office it will never change. The president is a puppet who needs 433 admin assistants to tell him what to do and how to wipe his ass.
But, I will read your posts and maybe I will learn something.
DarkJedi
10-04-2006, 07:02 PM
You won't learn much from our posts, Rapps. Nobody ever does. Strike that, you will learn more about the posters, just not any insight into one party or another. You will get to see undercurrents of dislike people have for each other due to their politics. We used to have booming political discussions from both sides a few years back but after a while, the hostility turned into a cancer and the cancer started eating away at some of the people involved in the political arguements. Like you say above, it's usually the same from both sides. Their all full of it. It's either endless bickering or everyone from one political majority talking to one another about how "evil & idiotic" the other side is..It can be insightfull but more often then not, it's usually just both sides trying "one-up" the other with a play of words while neither side smell anything foul coming from their end of the World beliefs.
As soon as I saw K was trying to stir up some political drama, I started shaking my head. Every time we start talking politics, ST turns me on, the rabid Christian righties piss me off, and the socialist lefties piss me off. We stop being so nice to each other, and instead start hating one another and hate coming here, because we are all so tense about the next big argument.
Bar Rule- No politics and NO RELIGION. I think if it's going to be allowed, then it has to be polite. Unfortunately, the topic at hand is not a polite topic. Foley should fucking be in jail, not resigning his position. Everyone who heard about Foley's behavior and did nothing should be resigning and apologizing to those pages. I don't care what party they've aligned themselves with. Their non-action makes them accessories to molestion and corruption of minors.
I agree Kah.... I don't care what party Foley represents, he was in a position of power and he used that power to stalk teenage boys who depend, in part, on him for references. That is inexcusable.
I am also sick and tired of people using their pasts to justify their behavior. So the man was molested, and now it comes out he's gay. Does that mean that every person who was molested and/or gay should be pinned as potential perverts? The man made a decision to act on impulses he knew were illegal, even if he didn't believe them wrong. This is not the kind of person we want in office... not on either side of the floor.
DarkJedi
10-04-2006, 08:53 PM
I agree on the Bar Rule, Kah...and I also agree on politicians trying to wiggle each other out of trouble. If this dude Foley did these things, he should be treated like the stalking pedaphile that he is and should be punished accordingly(in other words NOT ENOUGH..we need new Pedaphile laws....as one comedian said recently "I have a rehabilitation program that is guaranteed to work for pedaphiles. Here it is: Six Feet Under."... That certainly works for me on the whole issue of some sick predator molesting kids. Just because he wears a suit and pushes an political agenda doesn't make him less a monster if he's guilty. In fact, it makes him more a monster.
Kaeos
10-05-2006, 04:51 AM
As soon as I saw K was trying to stir up some political drama, I started shaking my head. We stop being so nice to each other, and instead start hating one another
Well, for sure I didn't want to stir up any of that, I promise. It seemed to me that most agressive poster - the one that did turn it personal and attack people while inviting attack...is gone.
I probably just spent too much time emersed in the whole damn thing yesterday while driving and I figured everyone here would have the same basic opinions on the whole debacle.
I think there is enough awareness among the most seasoned old timers here that it needs to be a civil dicsussion, not a tirade of accusations and attacks. We can all play nice, I think.:D
While I tend to lean more left of center on most things, I do find myself often thinking more like a social conservative. I guess that makes me a Liberal-Cervative. I think in general, and I agree with Jedi, none of these jackass's knows what's best for the country. Neither party has a solid plan for making the country better, they are all focused on 1 thing - gaining and maintaining power for their side. The country's interests are lost along the way.
One last thing, then I'll shut up and we can let this thread die if need be for the sake of peaceful co-existance.
I urge everyone here and anyone who reads this post to do 2 things:
1) Take a good hard look at who your voting for. Not their party affiliation, not their campaign speaches, take a look at who they are. Where they came from and what kind of life they have lead so far.There are a lot of new candidates coming up to replace the tired of generation of Kennedys and Hasters and Spectors and Polosis who have been in power waaaay too long. Look how Lieberman got is ass handed to him in his home district by an up start no name. Watch how Haster will be smacked around by a union caprenter in his home state. These are vital young people with new ideas and they need to be elected. Find a candidate that you believe in and vote your concience. Not your party. If that person happens to be in your chosen party line, then good.
2) And this is the important one. Register Independent. I'm serious. Like I said, vote with your concience. Follow your beleies and your heart on who the best person is, but make that sumbitch work for it. Far too long the 2 parties have had the country conveniently chopped up into segments and labeled red and blue. One of the biggest contributing factors to this is voter regsitration statistics. Republicans don't spend a lot of time campaigning on issues in NY becuase they "know" it's a "blue" state. So they run attack adds and cross their fingers for the best.
I'm sure elsewhere, it's the same story with the Dems. They don't bother putting out any real ideas on how to make things better in "red" states. They just run attack ads and hope for the best.
If the multitude of campaign commitees across the nation see all of the sudden that voters are registering Independent, it will scare the shit out of them and they will be forced to find a way to reach voters in a real way. If they all of sudden see that people are not lining up rank and file anymore, they will see that people are sick of the party line and if they want to survive in the political arena, they are going to have to work for it.
Nuthin but love ya'll. Props to my Canadian Cine-Peeps representin' Noth-side. Word to the Constitution. PEACE!:jump2:
Well, for sure I didn't want to stir up any of that, I promise. It seemed to me that most agressive poster - the one that did turn it personal and attack people while inviting attack...is gone.
It's not that anyone gets personal. It's just that politics are so close to one's heart, that people tend to take it personally when you disagree with their ideals.
It would be nice if we had the opportunity to vote outside the box. Unfortunately, until all campaign dollars come from the government (which means equal, set amount), the candidate with the most money to blow will likely win, as is often the case now.
neglet
10-05-2006, 06:46 AM
I'm just enjoying the political circus on this one (since it's unlikely Foley actually broke any laws), and all the delicious, delicious, irony.
However, it's also very sad that people will pay more attention to a sex scandal than to issues like the war and the growing deficit, which might actually affect the lives of them and their children.
Bokchoi Cowboy
10-05-2006, 07:33 AM
(since it's unlikely Foley actually broke any laws)
It is very likely he did, if he sent any message, printed or e-mailed, or even spoke to a minor in an inappropriate manner. Most all states have at least a law on the books covering "annoying minors" or "lewd and lascivious statements made to minors", which fall under the misdemeanor category. In my opinion, this guys should be investigated and charged as anyone else who does the same thing. If he gets any special treatment due to his "position", I am sure the feces will hit the rotary blades....
Intelligent_Design
10-05-2006, 07:42 AM
It is very likely he did, if he sent any message, printed or e-mailed, or even spoke to a minor in an inappropriate manner. Most all states have at least a law on the books covering "annoying minors" or "lewd and lascivious statements made to minors", which fall under the misdemeanor category. In my opinion, this guys should be investigated and charged as anyone else who does the same thing. If he gets any special treatment due to his "position", I am sure the feces will hit the rotary blades....
The only thing that would make this more interesting would be if Foley got caught the the "Perverted Justice" Creep Sweep on Dateline NBC.
Bokchoi Cowboy
10-05-2006, 07:46 AM
The only thing that would make this more interesting would be if Foley got caught the the "Perverted Justice" Creep Sweep on Dateline NBC.
That would have been sweet justice!
neglet
10-05-2006, 07:56 AM
It is very likely he did, if he sent any message, printed or e-mailed, or even spoke to a minor in an inappropriate manner. Most all states have at least a law on the books covering "annoying minors" or "lewd and lascivious statements made to minors", which fall under the misdemeanor category. In my opinion, this guys should be investigated and charged as anyone else who does the same thing. If he gets any special treatment due to his "position", I am sure the feces will hit the rotary blades....
I thought most laws were related to actual solicitation, so if he had gone beyond "talking dirty" to trying to set up meetings (like on the "Perverted Justice" sweeps), that would be a crime. Or maybe I should say felony, not crime. He may very well have committed a misdemeanor; as you say, it depends on the local law and in which jurisdiction the offense was determined to have been committed.
Kaeos
10-05-2006, 08:09 AM
I thought most laws were related to actual solicitation, so if he had gone beyond "talking dirty" to trying to set up meetings (like on the "Perverted Justice" sweeps), that would be a crime. Or maybe I should say felony, not crime. He may very well have committed a misdemeanor; as you say, it depends on the local law and in which jurisdiction the offense was determined to have been committed.
One more thing no one here has touched on, what is the law in Florida and/or/ Washington and/or Lousianna covering "Age of Consent"
Pedifilia and Child Predator laws tend to address minors under the age of 15 or 16. These pages were from what I understand at least 16 or 17.
Don't get me wrong, it's still creepy and it's definately misconduct given the position, but it may not necessarily be a crime.
Bokchoi Cowboy
10-05-2006, 09:06 AM
I thought most laws were related to actual solicitation, so if he had gone beyond "talking dirty" to trying to set up meetings (like on the "Perverted Justice" sweeps), that would be a crime. Or maybe I should say felony, not crime. He may very well have committed a misdemeanor; as you say, it depends on the local law and in which jurisdiction the offense was determined to have been committed.
The ways these laws are written, you are technically guilty and punishable of those crimes by simply making statements such as "Hey Jakester-junior, suck my (insert favored body part here)". Whether or not someone would be arrested for doing this in most cases is arguable.
Solicitation is another area of law entirely. What I am talking about is that children, or minors, are protected from lewd language....period. In this case, there are multiple violation of laws that could be charged: The lewd and lacivious language, annoying/molesting a minor (speech is considered a molest: it does not have to be a "hands-on" event), and soliciting a minor are probably the best bets. If he sent e-mail or used a phone to do this and used federally owned computers and telephones, there are several other laws under US Code Title 24 that he would be in violation of as well. It can go on and on......
Bokchoi Cowboy
10-05-2006, 09:08 AM
Pedifilia and Child Predator laws tend to address minors under the age of 15 or 16. These pages were from what I understand at least 16 or 17.
STATE AGE
Alabama 16
Alaska 16
Arizona 18
Arkansas 16
California 18
Colorado 15
Connecticut 15
D.C. 16
Delaware 16
Florida 16/18 (bill pending)
Georgia 16
Hawaii 14
Idaho 14
Illinois 16/17
Indiana 16
Iowa 18
Kansas 16
Kentucky 16 - [1]
Louisiana 17
Maine 16
Maryland 16
Massachusetts 16/18
Michigan 16
Minnesota 16
Mississippi 16 - [2]
Missouri 17
Montana 16
Nebraska 16
Nevada 16
New Hampshire 16/18
New Jersey 16/18
New Mexico 17
New York 17
North Carolina 16
North Dakota 18
Ohio 16
Oklahoma 16
Oregon 18
Pennsylvania 16
Rhode Island 16
South Carolina 14/16
South Dakota 16
Tennessee 18
Texas 17
Utah 16/18
Vermont 16
Virginia 15
Washington 16
West Virginia 16
Wisconsin 18
Wyoming 16
Puerto Rico 18
FOOTNOTES:
[1]Age 16 if the man is 21 or older.
[2]If the female is over 12, the status applies only to virgins.
Nostromo
10-05-2006, 10:08 AM
Bloomberg for President!
neglet
10-05-2006, 10:16 AM
Bloomberg for President!
You know, I actually got polled on this a couple of weeks ago. First I was asked a whole series of questions about would I vote for an Independent, who would I choose between Hillary and Giuliani and Bloomberg or Hillary and McCain and Bloomberg, etc etc.
Then there were a whole bunch of questions about what I thought about the UN, especially some new building or addition in New York City. That was pretty peculiar, since I don't live there.
Nostromo
10-05-2006, 02:04 PM
You know, I actually got polled on this a couple of weeks ago. First I was asked a whole series of questions about would I vote for an Independent, who would I choose between Hillary and Giuliani and Bloomberg or Hillary and McCain and Bloomberg, etc etc.
Then there were a whole bunch of questions about what I thought about the UN, especially some new building or addition in New York City. That was pretty peculiar, since I don't live there.
Check it out. N
Read this article first.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110008666
Followed by:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23320
and conclude with ...
http://www.nysun.com/article/37674
sickness
10-05-2006, 02:50 PM
Here's my take on all this:
I'm glad to see something worth sticking actually stick to Republicans. They've been given a pass for far too long and it shows. Their initial response to this quagmire was what has become typical of them: "oh, it's nothing" or "not my fault." Luckily, the people aren't buying the snake oil this time and the majority members are now willing to stab each other in the back for their own survival. That is the high sign of a party in total chaos and complete fear that they could actually lose their precious majority if they're doing it 5 weeks before an election. I've been saying for a while, and I still believe it, that it will probably take losing the majority of one or both houses of Congress to refocus the party to an agenda that actually serves the nation and not their incumbencies.
On the other hand, I'm totally frightened by how explosive this is. In a matter of days, we've seen the Republican party go from total unity to dog-eat-dog and that scares the shit out of me. It makes me wonder about the possibility of whether or not we could see a massive swing to the left in Congress, perhaps a 2/3 majority. While it would be nice to see the White House have to bend a little bit and listen to the near half the country that has never fully approved of them in 6 years, I would hate to see the administration completely castrated. Too much power one way or the other is a bad thing as the last half-decade has shown us. All I want is some balance in government. It makes everyone a lot more open to the idea of listening to the other party.
Nostromo
10-05-2006, 04:14 PM
Here's my take on all this:
I'm glad to see something worth sticking actually stick to Republicans. They've been given a pass for far too long and it shows. Their initial response to this quagmire was what has become typical of them: "oh, it's nothing" or "not my fault." Luckily, the people aren't buying the snake oil this time and the majority members are now willing to stab each other in the back for their own survival. That is the high sign of a party in total chaos and complete fear that they could actually lose their precious majority if they're doing it 5 weeks before an election. I've been saying for a while, and I still believe it, that it will probably take losing the majority of one or both houses of Congress to refocus the party to an agenda that actually serves the nation and not their incumbencies.
On the other hand, I'm totally frightened by how explosive this is. In a matter of days, we've seen the Republican party go from total unity to dog-eat-dog and that scares the shit out of me. It makes me wonder about the possibility of whether or not we could see a massive swing to the left in Congress, perhaps a 2/3 majority. While it would be nice to see the White House have to bend a little bit and listen to the near half the country that has never fully approved of them in 6 years, I would hate to see the administration completely castrated. Too much power one way or the other is a bad thing as the last half-decade has shown us. All I want is some balance in government. It makes everyone a lot more open to the idea of listening to the other party.
Precisely. And that is why Bloomie up the middle is so appealing. He is beholdent to no one and, he's not a whack job like Perot. N
Kaeos
10-05-2006, 04:18 PM
I seriously hope there is a major change on the horizon politically in this country.
I can't help but imagine that for the next few dacades the parties will just intensify their efforts to get people impeached, or fired, or sensured.
I fear it's going to become one big scandal exposed after another, after another after another. All they seem to care about is catching one another in a crime.
Again, we need fresh new ideas and younger people running this country. The grimey old gas bags of yesteryear need to move out and make way.
Space Tycoon
10-05-2006, 05:45 PM
President Chuck Hagel, 2008. (http://hagel2008.blogspot.com/) Has a nice ring to it.
DarkJedi
10-05-2006, 06:20 PM
Imagine the conspiracy theories of voting machines if he was elected. :D
Perot was not a whack job. We would've been a lot better off... whatever. No use talking about "coulda beens" when Perot was a "never was".
I'm disgusted by the fact that this scandal has any party affiliation tied to it at all. I'm disgusted by the arguments about which party has the most to lose, or which party did the most wrong. The kids are the ones who suffered. Maybe these bastards in Washington should be worrying about that instead of whose careers are going down the shitter. Fuck. :romy:
Space Tycoon
10-05-2006, 06:59 PM
Every time we start talking politics, ST turns me on...
YES! Still got it... :cool:
Yes, but do you really want what I've got?
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e164/kahlancypher/1087185359_l.jpg
It could be contagious.
Space Tycoon
10-05-2006, 07:55 PM
Who could say no to that invitingly dangled tongue?
And the addition of your... friend... adds new possibilities to the mix as well. :eyebrow:
Bokchoi Cowboy
10-05-2006, 08:59 PM
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e164/kahlancypher/1087185359_l.jpg
I am SO going to have fun with this....
*
sickness
10-06-2006, 04:19 AM
Yes, but do you really want what I've got?
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e164/kahlancypher/1087185359_l.jpg
It could be contagious.
An Asian chick growing out of your tongue is contagious? Is that a bad thing? You could just cut her off and get a few stitches and then you have an instant friend out of the deal. :D
sickness
10-06-2006, 05:16 AM
Perot was not a whack job. We would've been a lot better off... whatever. No use talking about "coulda beens" when Perot was a "never was".
I'm disgusted by the fact that this scandal has any party affiliation tied to it at all. I'm disgusted by the arguments about which party has the most to lose, or which party did the most wrong. The kids are the ones who suffered. Maybe these bastards in Washington should be worrying about that instead of whose careers are going down the shitter. Fuck. :romy:
They weren't worried about it the kids involved when it wasn't public knowledge. Why should that change? The kind of people who become politicians (as well as actors, CEO's and the like) are the kind of people who never grew out of the sociopathic "me" attitude formed in kindergarten. Expecting them to feel anything for anyone else and actually do something because it's right and they can have a positive impact on someone else is like expecting the world to spin the opposite direction.
I know. Unfortunately, the kind of people we actually want in politics would never run because they are too humble.
Jakester
10-06-2006, 05:53 AM
Okay, I think Foley should have resigned because there are harassment issues as well as possible abuse of power issues (and we probably don't want our representatives being all nasty with their subordinates), but I don't see what all of the rest of the fuss is about wrt to the boy's age.
He was 16 -- that's the age of consent in DC. Not only that, it was just dirty talk, not any actual sexual acts. So....when did talking dirty to someone who appears receptive (or at least not showing signs of being offended) and is of legal age become a crime?
Again, the ONY thing I have a problem with is the people who are reacting to him having inappropriate conversations with "young boys." The boy in question was...again, of legal age of concent to have sex, but we've no indicationt hat any sex even took place, just some racey talk.
sickness
10-06-2006, 06:31 AM
As per the age of consent list earlier in this thread, the boy was not old enough to give consent in his home state. So far, the messages I have seen have all been "can't wait till you get back here" and "let's have dinner next time you're here and we'll go back to my place and see what happens", etc., and took place over the internet while he was in his home state. Those don't seem very innocent. Under legislation sponsored by Foley, since the AOC in Louisiana is 17, that is a crime, regardless of what the AOC is in DC.
Also, anyone know if the AOC in DC has steps like in certain states? California has a stepped system where it is consensual for a 19-year-old to have sex with a 16-year-old but AOC becomes 18 if you are 20 or older.
rappites
10-08-2006, 08:04 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/us_congress
I do not know what to say. :ohwell:
Kaeos
10-09-2006, 06:10 AM
I know what to say.
Rep. Jim Kolbe needs to be disciplined along with everyone else who knew and did nothing. He could have and should have gone to the House ethics committee with what he saw. Period.
Of course as a Republican Kolbe proably said nothing for fear of having his neck force pinched by Darth Cheney. :smirk: No one breaks rank until it's politically necessary.
vBulletin® v3.6.3, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.