Moral Issues, Cover ups, Foley, Elections
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
wanttorun100
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 4946
Location: Just to the right of Atilla the Hun!
|
| Back to top
|
|
 Posted: 10/06/06 - 11:34 Post subject:
| Wicked Flea wrote: | | wanttorun100 wrote: | | Wicked Flea wrote: | | wanttorun100 wrote: |
shezam they just always come up right before the election
|
You mean like the scare tactics the Republicans use right before elections.
"Code Orange"
| wanttorun100 wrote: |
like sitting on the whole Foley thing till now
|
I'll give you the fake military papers but unless you actually have proof (and a link to it) that the Democrats did sit on the "whole Foley thing" until now then that is just supposition (and desire) on your part.
And on the part of other Republicans. |
 |
What does that mean? |
it means the whole thing turned out to be a old gay guy hitting on a young gay adult
It's pretty much right out of the democratic playbook
they'll never learn
|
|
|
|
|
andydp
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 8122
Location: Upstate NY near Albany
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/06/06 - 11:39 Post subject:
| wanttorun100 wrote: | | Wicked Flea wrote: |
What does that mean? |
it means the whole thing turned out to be a old gay guy hitting on a young gay adult
It's pretty much right out of the democratic playbook
they'll never learn |
Who will never learn ? The American public as a whole ? The party in power ?
One thing people in power (of either side of the aisle) never seem to understand: The higher up you go on the flagpole, the more your @$$ is exposed.
It not out of the "Democratic play book" its out of the Politician's play book. Both sides are guilty.
|
|
|
|
|
Wicked Flea
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 365
Location: Hair of the Dog
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/06/06 - 11:40 Post subject:
| andydp wrote: | Take a look at George Wills' Column:
Fall of Foley doubly bad for GOP
First published: Friday, October 6, 2006
|
Good read.
"Their story, of late, has been that theirs is the lonely burden of defending all that is wholesome. But the problem with claiming to have cornered the market on virtue is that people will get snippy when they spot vice in your ranks. This is one awkward aspect of what is supposed to have been the happy fusion between, but which involves unresolved tensions between, two flavors of conservatism -- Western and Southern."
|
|
|
|
|
Wicked Flea
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 365
Location: Hair of the Dog
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/06/06 - 11:45 Post subject:
| wanttorun100 wrote: |
it means the whole thing turned out to be...
|
"The whole thing turned out to be"
So the whole thing is over?
I don't think so...
"Three more former congressional pages have come forward to reveal what they call 'sexual approaches' over the Internet from former Congressman Mark Foley," ABC News reported late Thursday afternoon.
TIME POLL REFLECTS GOP WORRIES ABOUT FOLEY FALLOUT: Two-thirds of Americans aware of the congressional-page sex scandal believe Republican leaders tried to cover it up - and one quarter of them say the affair makes them less likely to vote for G.O.P. candidates in their districts come November. Those are among the findings of a new TIME poll conducted this week among 1,002 randomly-selected voting-age Americans. The poll suggests the Foley affair may have dented Republican hopes of retaining control of Congress in November. Among the registered voters who were polled, 54% said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic candidate for Congress, compared with 39% who favored the Republican. That margin may be fueled by the rolling scandal over sexually explicit e-mails sent to teenage pages by Republican Representative Mark Foley.
| wanttorun100 wrote: |
it means the whole thing turned out to be a old gay guy hitting on a young gay adult
It's pretty much right out of the democratic playbook
they'll never learn |
Please elaborate on exactly what is right out of the democratic playbook.
Are you saying that Democrats are all old gay guys hitting on young gay guys?
|
|
|
|
|
andydp
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 8122
Location: Upstate NY near Albany
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/06/06 - 14:23 Post subject:
| DCRunningDiva wrote: | I don't think it shows that the party is "not so moral after all" - it shows that this guy isn't moral...and anyone that supports what he did/almost did.
I plan to continue to vote Republican. |
I'm not doubting your sincerity in this Diva but... Don't you feel the Republicans are just giving "lip service" to the moral values issue ? (Bluntly stated: say whatever it takes to get elected) Republicans always say the Dems take the Black vote for granted. Isn't this the same ? They are taking sincere religious people, telling them what they want to hear, then go about acting like, well, Elmer Gantry...
I fully realize no one has a lock on morality but isn't the "moral values" message and the activites we're seeing, and have seen, getting close to "do as I say not as I do ?
|
|
|
|
|
robp
Pyromaniac
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Jul 2002
Posts: 16242
Location: Waiting in line at the beer store...
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/07/06 - 12:34 Post subject:
| andydp wrote: | | DCRunningDiva wrote: | I don't think it shows that the party is "not so moral after all" - it shows that this guy isn't moral...and anyone that supports what he did/almost did.
I plan to continue to vote Republican. |
I'm not doubting your sincerity in this Diva but... Don't you feel the Republicans are just giving "lip service" to the moral values issue ? (Bluntly stated: say whatever it takes to get elected) Republicans always say the Dems take the Black vote for granted. Isn't this the same ? They are taking sincere religious people, telling them what they want to hear, then go about acting like, well, Elmer Gantry...
I fully realize no one has a lock on morality but isn't the "moral values" message and the activites we're seeing, and have seen, getting close to "do as I say not as I do ? |
What's this "they" stuff? One dipsh!t doesn't an entire party make. And even though I feel that said dipsh!t is a vile person it's quite possible he didn't break a single law.
|
|
|
|
|
keltic63
the kilted one
|
|
|
Joined: 17 May 2002
Posts: 8574
Location: under the weather
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/07/06 - 19:13 Post subject:
| robp wrote: |
What's this "they" stuff? One dipsh!t doesn't an entire party make. And even though I feel that said dipsh!t is a vile person it's quite possible he didn't break a single law. |
I won't speak for Andy, but I believe the "they" in his post is referring to Republican leaders (not all Reps) who have courted and wooed the Religious Right/Religious Conservatives. An interesting example would be this: every President has attended church services while in residence at the White House. Every President except George W. Bush, the darling of conservative religious groups like American Family Association, the Christian Coalition, Concerned Women for America, Focus on the Family, etc. Bush does not attend church. Some of those leaders have regular meetings with the president in which they often put pressure on Bush to push through certain legislation in exchange for endorsements form these groups.
|
|
|
|
|
andydp
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 8122
Location: Upstate NY near Albany
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/08/06 - 18:03 Post subject:
Thanks Keltic.
Yes, the "they" refers to the "Big tent" the Republican Party. No, Rob not every Republican is a sleazeball as Foley. (Just as not all Democrats are "pure") I'm trying to make the point they have elevated themselves as true guardians of "moral values", court sincerely religious people and then proceeed to act as if they are above the law.
Issues in the Foley matter are not whether he did anything; its now shaking out to be who knew what, how much and when ? If it was "nothing" then why was the issue kept away from other members of the Page committee ? I may add that one of the IM/emails talks about going to Foley's house for booze. THAT is illegal in all 50 states.
Go take a look at the link I have to George Will's Column above - That is what I am talking about.
You might want to listen to that link I posted about Tom Delay's chief of staff Ed Buckman - now there was a hipocrite if I ever heard of one.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5424662
|
|
|
|
|
DCRunningDiva
Look at me!!! ©
|
|
|
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 9344
Location: Washington DC Metro
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/08/06 - 20:18 Post subject:
| andydp wrote: | | DCRunningDiva wrote: | I don't think it shows that the party is "not so moral after all" - it shows that this guy isn't moral...and anyone that supports what he did/almost did.
I plan to continue to vote Republican. |
I'm not doubting your sincerity in this Diva but... Don't you feel the Republicans are just giving "lip service" to the moral values issue ? (Bluntly stated: say whatever it takes to get elected) Republicans always say the Dems take the Black vote for granted. Isn't this the same ? They are taking sincere religious people, telling them what they want to hear, then go about acting like, well, Elmer Gantry...
I fully realize no one has a lock on morality but isn't the "moral values" message and the activites we're seeing, and have seen, getting close to "do as I say not as I do ? |
I know you didn't mean your comments to be read this way but...Evangelical Christians (note: I didn't say "religious" - there is a difference) aren't idiots. All politicians play "lip service" and the we have to pick the "lesser of two evils."
Don't get me wrong - not all Dems are immoral. I know some very moral Dems. It's just that the issues by the Republican party, in general, are more desirable to Evangellical Christians.
|
|
|
|
|
andydp
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 8122
Location: Upstate NY near Albany
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/09/06 - 08:29 Post subject:
| DCRunningDiva wrote: | | Don't get me wrong - not all Dems are immoral. I know some very moral Dems. It's just that the issues by the Republican party, in general, are more desirable to Evangelical Christians. |
Diva:
Just the results of focus groups. You'll notice, when the elections were done with, the activity for a "Marriage Amendment" to the Constitution died a quiet death by the wayside. Evidently its no longer a problem. The Flag Burning Amendment and the "Keep God in the Pledge" movements seem to have "died down" also.
I'm still saying marketing themselves as the "dauntless defenders of morality" will get them in deep do do when they act not so morally. And as you say, this goes for either party.
Take a look at the link to George Wills' Column I posted Friday. Makes for good reading.
|
|
|
|
|
DCRunningDiva
Look at me!!! ©
|
|
|
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 9344
Location: Washington DC Metro
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/10/06 - 11:34 Post subject:
| andydp wrote: | | DCRunningDiva wrote: | | Don't get me wrong - not all Dems are immoral. I know some very moral Dems. It's just that the issues by the Republican party, in general, are more desirable to Evangelical Christians. |
Diva:
Just the results of focus groups. You'll notice, when the elections were done with, the activity for a "Marriage Amendment" to the Constitution died a quiet death by the wayside. Evidently its no longer a problem. The Flag Burning Amendment and the "Keep God in the Pledge" movements seem to have "died down" also.
I'm still saying marketing themselves as the "dauntless defenders of morality" will get them in deep do do when they act not so morally. And as you say, this goes for either party.
Take a look at the link to George Wills' Column I posted Friday. Makes for good reading. |
Actually, I don't think the things you noted have died down...just the media representation of them. I still get information about both those agendas and the ongoing stand that Evangelicals are taking with regard to them.
I do agree with you that people, in general, who flaunt their morality will one day get burned by it. That is because people who try to live a morally right life get noticed when they do one thing out of line with who they really are. This isn't a political thing - it is a human thing.
In other words, "Mr. X" who is unethical in everything he does gets a "hand slap" for making a minor moral infringement. Conversely, "Mr. Y" who is morally sound on a normal basis and screws up once gets media coverage for years about what a horribly unmoral person he is.
I'm not saying this is the case with this political conversation but I believe it to be the case in general.
None of us has the right to claim we are above moral reproach. We all fail...sometime or another.
|
|
|
|
|
GaRebelRunner
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 1097
Location: Tucker, GA
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/10/06 - 11:52 Post subject:
| DCRunningDiva wrote: | In other words, "Mr. X" who is unethical in everything he does gets a "hand slap" for making a minor moral infringement. Conversely, "Mr. Y" who is morally sound on a normal basis and screws up once gets media coverage for years about what a horribly unmoral person he is.
|
I disagree somewhat with your statement. As long as Mr. Y is not telling others how they should live their lives I don't care one way or the other about his transgressions. But when Mr. Y, as in Rev. Jimmy Swaggert and a few others are caught with their pants down in a brothel or other fine business establishment, it's worthy of bringing the event to the media as they have preached against and judged those who may enjoy that type of entertainment on a regular basis. They have judged and in so doing are being judged by the public.
The same is true for Rev. Charles Stanley of the First Baptist Church of Atlanta which holds no divorced man can be a Deacon in the Church because if they cannot rule their "wife" correctly they don't belong as leaders. When his wife divorced him did he follow his teachings and step down? Certainly not. God's law is apparently different in his case. That is what drives the media to report his hypocrisy.
I never criticize Rev. Billy Graham because he states what he believes the Bible says but he doesn't judge those of who may not believe the way he does or whom perhaps believe God speaks to us a little differently.
Amen.
|
|
|
|
|
DCRunningDiva
Look at me!!! ©
|
|
|
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 9344
Location: Washington DC Metro
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/10/06 - 13:02 Post subject:
| GaRebelRunner wrote: | | DCRunningDiva wrote: | In other words, "Mr. X" who is unethical in everything he does gets a "hand slap" for making a minor moral infringement. Conversely, "Mr. Y" who is morally sound on a normal basis and screws up once gets media coverage for years about what a horribly unmoral person he is.
|
I disagree somewhat with your statement. As long as Mr. Y is not telling others how they should live their lives I don't care one way or the other about his transgressions. But when Mr. Y, as in Rev. Jimmy Swaggert and a few others are caught with their pants down in a brothel or other fine business establishment, it's worthy of bringing the event to the media as they have preached against and judged those who may enjoy that type of entertainment on a regular basis. They have judged and in so doing are being judged by the public.
The same is true for Rev. Charles Stanley of the First Baptist Church of Atlanta which holds no divorced man can be a Deacon in the Church because if they cannot rule their "wife" correctly they don't belong as leaders. When his wife divorced him did he follow his teachings and step down? Certainly not. God's law is apparently different in his case. That is what drives the media to report his hypocrisy.
I never criticize Rev. Billy Graham because he states what he believes the Bible says but he doesn't judge those of who may not believe the way he does or whom perhaps believe God speaks to us a little differently.
Amen. |
Sorry, I meant to say that Mr. Y does flaunt his morality (such as Swaggert). You are absolutely right about that. And, for the record, I am talking about people in the public eye rather than your normal Joe/Jane in regard to media coverage.
My question to you would be this - what if Billy Graham did something immoral (i.e. out of character)? He has led a pretty clean life for all these years and then WHAM! something happens. Should he be "punished" in the media for this one mistake he made?
We will ALL fail given time.
|
|
|
|
|
GaRebelRunner
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 1097
Location: Tucker, GA
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/10/06 - 16:10 Post subject:
| DCRunningDiva wrote: | My question to you would be this - what if Billy Graham did something immoral (i.e. out of character)? He has led a pretty clean life for all these years and then WHAM! something happens. Should he be "punished" in the media for this one mistake he made?
We will ALL fail given time. |
Because Billy Graham has been more to preaching God's word as opposed to passing judgment I suspect there would be a lot of sadness among people, including the media concerning any incident. But I also think we would believe his remorse was sincere and it would not be as much of a media event as Swaggert or others. For example, if Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson were caught in a compromising position I think the media and public would be much harsher simply because they are so judgmental in public of other people.
|
|
|
|
|
andydp
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 8122
Location: Upstate NY near Albany
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 10/10/06 - 16:28 Post subject:
| DCRunningDiva wrote: | | GaRebelRunner wrote: |
I never criticize Rev. Billy Graham because he states what he believes the Bible says but he doesn't judge those of who may not believe the way he does or whom perhaps believe God speaks to us a little differently.
Amen. |
Sorry, I meant to say that Mr. Y does flaunt his morality (such as Swaggert). You are absolutely right about that. And, for the record, I am talking about people in the public eye rather than your normal Joe/Jane in regard to media coverage.
My question to you would be this - what if Billy Graham did something immoral (i.e. out of character)? He has led a pretty clean life for all these years and then WHAM! something happens. Should he be "punished" in the media for this one mistake he made?
We will ALL fail given time. |
I have always said to "judge not lest ye be judged". Its because of his lifetime record of not being judgemental or condemming that I think we all would forgive an indiscretion by Rev Graham and move on. Because in his long life he has stood by his values and never flaunted them. "Mercy triumphs over judgement".
The point is not about individual transgressions (we all do that - we are human). The point is marketing yourself as the "Dauntless Defender of Moral Values". Making it sound like anyone that does not toe the line is destined for eternal damnation, yet winding up being no better than the ones you are condemming. In other words giving "lip service" or going along with what focus groups have told you people want to hear. For Judgement is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy.
|
|
|
|
| |
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
|
|
|
