Hey Rob... How does it look under the Democrat Bus?

Dixie said:
I'll present this to you once again... Just tell me, exactly HOW were republicans supposed to unseat a popular six-term elected representative, based on the emails alone? I don't see it! There is no crime or unethical behavior in sending overtly-friendly emails to people, dufuss! You simply can't overturn the "will of the people" based on your paranoid homophobia, which is exactly how it would have been played by the media and Dems, had Hastert acted on the emails alone.
Click to expand...


And i'll tell you again retard that I never said they should have unseated him. I don't care what you idiots do. The only thing I said was that it is obvious to me that the emails were creepy and the product of someone trolling for kids.

I know that our elected reps are retarded though so I can't have expected them to see this.
 
I know that our elected reps are retarded though so I can't have expected them to see this.

My point is, it doesn't matter if they "saw this" or not. Unless you have some sort of tangible evidence of actionable unethical behavior (as in the IM's) you really can't just unseat an elected representative. All these calls for republican leadership to resign because they failed to act, are bogus, because there was nothing to act upon, unless being gay is now a crime.
 
unless being gay is now a crime.
//

If many in the right wing had their way it would be, and I believe it is in some states, whose laws have not yet been overturned.
 
uscitizen said:
unless being gay is now a crime.
//

If many in the right wing had their way it would be, and I believe it is in some states, whose laws have not yet been overturned.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see a link. Plus the SCOTUS ruled such laws to be unconstitutional....
 
yep, but suck laws are still on the books, Not about being gay per sie, but against the sex acts that gays indulge in. In reality the same thing.

I did mispell such, but decided to leave it that way ;)
 
Last edited:
Dixie said:
I know that our elected reps are retarded though so I can't have expected them to see this.

My point is, it doesn't matter if they "saw this" or not. Unless you have some sort of tangible evidence of actionable unethical behavior (as in the IM's) you really can't just unseat an elected representative. All these calls for republican leadership to resign because they failed to act, are bogus, because there was nothing to act upon, unless being gay is now a crime.
Click to expand...


I haven't called for them to resign. I think unethical, scandal plagued Republicans should stay in office.
 
Blackflag said:
I haven't called for them to resign. I think unethical, scandal plagued Republicans should stay in office.
Click to expand...

Yep, I sure wish Rove's assistant had not resigned because of that Abramhoff hoopla ;)
Ney is hanging in there after pleading guilty to corruption charges though :) Way to go Ney :clink:
 
AGAIN DIxIe, what does this have to do with being Gay, everyone would have had the same reaction had Foley been sending the same emails to 16 year old GIRLS!
 
Look moron, I've already explained it to you several times in this thread alone, why are you continuing to argue the point? It doesn't matter whether the page was a male or female, the emails sent by Foley were not indicative of pedophilia, and wouldn't have been, regardless of the gender of the page. Do you really want to establish this criteria for throwing people out of Congress? What is going to happen when Republicans point to some totally innocuous and harmless friendly email sent by a Democrat to a page, and insist that the Democrat relinquish his/her seat? Are you going to be "okay" with that when it happens? Something tells me you won't, particularly since your party doesn't seem to have a problem with Congressmen having actual sex with pages!

Can't you understand? We don't get to throw people out of their duly-elected seats in Congress, based on an over-friendly email! If Foley were emailing them, propositioning for sex or something, then you have a viable ethics violation and something actionable, as it stood, they didn't have this, they had Foley sending gay emails to young men, being "gay friendly" with them, and nothing more. Had republicans acted on what they had, the very FIRST charge made by Democrats, would have been that the Republicans are homophobes, and just wanted to get rid of the gay guy. You know this is true, you know I have a valid point, yet you continue to try and paint an argument that shouldn't even be dreamed up.
 
uscitizen said:
Careful Dixie you are running off right wing Christians with that kind of talk. After all the guy is gay ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, and we know that ALL Christians HATE Gays! Which is precisely why Democrats think Republicans should have booted a six-term Congressman, because they discovered he was gay. Fortunately Republicans have the Democrats to remind them how intolerant and bigoted they are.

I'm really glad we've established this new guideline for booting people out of Congress... Now, when we disclose the cordial and friendly emails from Nancy Pelosi to a former female page, we can immediately boot her ass out of Congress on the presumption that she is guilty of being a pedophile. It's a relief to know, we don't really need any actionable evidence, just suspicion alone is enough. Ahh ha!... there's a "red flag" she said she liked her pretty smile! Buh-Bye, Nancy!

Seriously, you need to really think about the parameters and criteria you are trying to establish here, I don't think you really want to go down this road, because it can get real ugly fast.
 
Seriously, you need to really think about the parameters and criteria you are trying to establish here, I don't think you really want to go down this road, because it can get real ugly fast.
//

It already has, You are posting on it ;)
 
uscitizen said:
Seriously, you need to really think about the parameters and criteria you are trying to establish here, I don't think you really want to go down this road, because it can get real ugly fast.
//

It already has, You are posting on it ;)
Click to expand...


Yeah, I know, it is ugly watching me hand your ass to you. My advice would be to not look. If you just have to put your ass out there for me to take off, the best thing you can do is look the other way and save yourself the ugliness. Of course, the smartest thing to do, would be to just shut the fuck up and move on, but then, you're not all that smart.
 
Yeah, I know, it is ugly watching me
//

Got that right! Just glad I only have to read your typing. Gay guys are always after my ass Dix, why would you be any different ?
 
uscitizen said:
Dixie is Gay, that is why he is so upset about the Foley issue.
Click to expand...

It's amusing to me, how you guys seem to think it's an insult to insinuate someone is gay. I've seen several comments with that motive, and it's indicative of bigots who believe homosexuality is something to be shunned.

It doesn't really bother me, I've been mistaken for gay before, as my line of work is dominated by gay people. If I were gay, I would be offended, as it would seem awfully bigoted and intolerant of those who continually use it as an insult or slam.
 
Being Gay is ok, Dixie, I am proud of you that you are able to come out of the closet that way. Just don't talk about my ass all the time ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top