 |
|
|
|
 |
Krypton
83.798 g/6.022x10^23

Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Texas
|
|
|
Oct-07-2007 17:37
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
MisterOpus1
Grumpy Old Fart

Registered: Dec 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
|
|
Re: Re: Novak: Republicans KNEW about Craig's habits and did nothing
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
wtf is the party supposed to do about Craig if they knew he was closeted ghey? run him out of the Beltway with torches and pitchforks? where would your indignation be then if he had never gone to the bathroom in Minnesota? |
Being a closeted ghey is one thing, and no I wouldn't expect the Republican party to do anything about that alone. However, practicing lewd behavior in bathrooms, should have raised some red flags long ago, don't you think?
I also do find it interesting to consider the thought of these GOP Congressmen who own the high ground and teach us all about moral values yet fail to acknowledge one of their own practicing behaviors that is anything but moral in their eyes - i.e. being married with kids and being a regular at lewd behavior, let alone lewd homosexual behavior.
| quote: | | real sleazy paring with Mark Foley btw. thats politics i guess. |
Let's see - one practices lewd homosexual behavior in airport bathroom stalls,
the other practices homosexual behavior with his pages.
If we are to believe Novak's word, in both instances members of the GOP, including top ranking members with Foley, were well aware of this behavior.
| quote: | | ...and "gay rights" is actually "gay marriage" so lets not sleaze it up some more by paring that with the indecent adventures of closeted gay men for the sake of pure partisanedship. it's offensive to homosexuals everywhere. |
Please.
I've argued this many times before. When there are rights taken away from individuals because of the preference of sex between two consenting adults, you could call it anything you like. I don't care if the word "marriage" is there or not. If gays want that word there for their own sake then I'll leave that fight up to them.
The rights, however, such as over 1,049 benefits that our government allows heterosexual married couples but does not give to consenting homosexual relationships/marriages, is exactly what I would argue needs to be given.
| quote: | ...and all of a sudden Novak is your best friend |
Hardly. But I will concede, as do most of us libruls, that he has the connections inside the GOP and in Administrations that run very deep. I think you would agree with that, wouldn't you?
___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...
|
|
Oct-07-2007 21:22
|
|
|
 |
 |
MisterOpus1
Grumpy Old Fart

Registered: Dec 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Novak: Republicans KNEW about Craig's habits and did nothing
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
long time ago? like when? where did Novak ever say people knew he liked to troll bathrooms? Novak implied that the party suspected he might be in the closet. thats it!
youre the one spinnin the theories. |
Parsing words again, Q? Let's see again what Novak said:
| quote: | | And it was not just a homosexual relationship. It was this weird conduct. They didn’t do anything about it." |
Soooo, what do you surmise the "weird conduct" implied?
Dancing naked with his canary to the oldies?
Juggling the heads of helpless decapitated baby kittens?
What do you think Novak was implying here? What kind of weird behavior has Craig demonstrated as of late? Are you suggesting it's not appropriate for Novak and his audience to tie that weird lewd bathroom behavior to him mentioning the Repubs. knowing of his weird behavior in the past?
| quote: | | morality is not specific to a political party. lewd behavior, straight or gay, is not specific to a political party nor is it the party's motif. |
On the surface of that argument I can't help but agree. However, agreeing in full would be to agree to erase the GOP's morality religious base that is so closely tied to the political scheme of your party. I'm sorry, but I can't play along with that historical mind-erase with you this time. Your party has owned the anti-gay rights issue to the core.
And by the way, correct me if I'm wrong but Craig's behavior wasn't just immoral, was it?
Seems that you're deliberately avoiding the fact that is was also ILLEGAL. Remember that little interesting nugget of ethical lapse?
| quote: | | it only applies when one party uses it as instances to embarass the other one. that's it's only value at the shallow end of the political pool. so enjoy. |
Just stop. Your defense is becoming silly here. When a man carries the morality flag around while voting consistently against gay rights and benefits and then gets busted for homosexual acts IMMORAL and ILLEGAL lewd behavior, one doesn't need an opposing party to embarrass the guy. His contradictory actions and rhetoric did that all on his own.
Hell, you had guys like Barney Frank standing up for him. Don't tell me about opposing parties taking advantage of this when you had the gayest of the gay Democrats standing up for the guy. Jesus.
___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...
|
|
Oct-07-2007 23:01
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:55.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|