View Full Version : Oh how surprising!
Noleader
10-31-2006, 11:43 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/30/bush.campaigning.ap/index.html
Can't win elections on the facts so he resorts to crying about gay marriage again...
Allison
10-31-2006, 11:51 AM
Oh, how I hate the term activist judges. It makes me want to scream.
Bedpost
10-31-2006, 11:57 AM
but isn't this the most important issue the country is facing? I mean what else is going on that could be of more importance to the nation?
gepper
10-31-2006, 12:00 PM
To bad it is a free nation where people are able to say whatever they want! Or at least that is whay a lot of people say. In his view they are activist. So guess what he isn't telling a lie. To bad people can't accept others?
It's not if he can legally say it or not. It's if he's being honest. No one here is stating that he shouldn't be allowed to say that. They're stating that he shouldn't despite him being allowed to because it's dishonest. Too bad people can't distinguish the difference between what you should be allowed to do and what you should and shouldn't do despite that.
I guess not being able to distinguish those differences is exactly why they feel being allowed to choose abortion equates to wanting abortion, treating prisoners ethically equates to wanting to give tea and crumpets to terrorists, etc.
PoxTheSmall
10-31-2006, 12:32 PM
What I think is funny is that when the corruption in the republican party is brought out, dems are accused of politicising the subject. Then when the elections roll around, Bush puts on his gay marriage hat, that he only seems to wear 2-3 weeks prior to an election, then his whole Iraq hat goes back on for the next 2 years.
gepper
10-31-2006, 12:37 PM
LoL, I think i mentioned it is okay for him to say it if he believes it. Thanks for making my point again?
Never said if it was right or not?
Bedpost
10-31-2006, 12:45 PM
What I think is funny is that when the corruption in the republican party is brought out, dems are accused of politicising the subject. Then when the elections roll around, Bush puts on his gay marriage hat, that he only seems to wear 2-3 weeks prior to an election, then his whole Iraq hat goes back on for the next 2 years.
Just as a side thing that has nothing to do with this, but whenever corruption is brought up about a democrat that's always shot down with that's their personal lives that shouldn't matter.
Not that, that has anything to do with this here. Just that both parties are corrupt
"LoL, I think i mentioned it is okay for him to say it if he believes it. Thanks for making my point again?
Never said if it was right or not?"
Actually you said, "To bad it is a free nation where people are able to say whatever they want!" To which no one was ever stating otherwise, which was my point and what I was talking about. Thanks for making mine.
Edit: oh, and no, it's not ok for the President to make statements based upon his personal opinion and not the facts at hand. I realize it's impossible to eliminate personal biases altogether, but even if the President believed that everyone that doesn't wear socks is a traitor, it's still perfectly legitimate to criticize and be angered by that. He's our representative. That's not very representative of me.
"LoL, I think i mentioned it is okay for him to say it if he believes it. Thanks for making my point again?
Never said if it was right or not?"
The corruption he's talking about isn't personal. While it's unethical to have an affair with a page boy, that's not what he's talking about. He's talking about if it was covered up after it was known by other republicans.
You're right, personal lives shouldn't matter - although most non-Republicans here still think it was a bad thing what Clinton did with or without the lying. The point where it gets bad is where it the kid was underage AND this guy was on a committee to protect underage kids AND it was probably known by other Republicans.
PoxTheSmall
10-31-2006, 01:06 PM
My point is in saying that "it's politicising the issue" for one thing and the other is perfectly fine politics by that same group's thinking.
What's interesting is to see how in a lot of cases, the dems have relented on a pressing of the issue regarding corruption in the republican party whereas you'll see Bush press his limits with the gay marriage issue.
I mean, how much more obvious could you get where you don't give 2 shits about a subject for 2 years and then RIGHT when an election comes around, you start bantering about the issue. How about we talk about Iraq, that's been the subject during non-election times?
Allison
10-31-2006, 01:41 PM
To bad it is a free nation where people are able to say whatever they want! Or at least that is whay a lot of people say. In his view they are activist. So guess what he isn't telling a lie. To bad people can't accept others?
Who is it you think isn't accepting others? Me? Because I hate the term activist judges?
First, whether or not President Bush actually believes what he's saying when he's saying it is pure speculation. Second, given the number of times he's used that term to describe judges who were simply upholding their state laws and constitutions, my own personal speculation is that he's either ignorant, or he's just using the term as a political buzzword to gain votes. Either way, I don't like it.
That's not to say that judicial activism doesn't exist. It does. But this president has thrown that term around so loosely, in cases where it clearly doesn't apply, that he demeans and devalues our judiciary. And in my most humble opinion, that's both dangerous and irresponsible.
gepper
10-31-2006, 02:03 PM
The corruption he's talking about isn't personal. While it's unethical to have an affair with a page boy, that's not what he's talking about. He's talking about if it was covered up after it was known by other republicans.
Not sure how this got into the subject. I didn't even see this in the post. I do believe the Republicans and Democrates are corrupt. I think that in a lot of respects that they are equally guilty for the world we live in. Now for the Elected official that had the relationship with the page. As ugly as that is, and unethical, they are saying that is not illegal(which makes me wonder what is?). Second, from looking at both sides, is it as bad as a Governor who was so jacked up(Putting the State security in the hands of someone who was so unqualified because he slept with him, liing to state about his personal life, cheating on his wife, List goes on and on) and still kept his position so that the Republicans wouldn't get his job. Now certainly I believe both of these, as soon as found out, should have been cut off from the Government and strung like the disgusting men they are. But unfortunatly, their crimes against man and nature will be what Republicans and Democrates will be known for. The Democrate is lucky though, he is now able to do the press rounds and able to twist the facts so that he isn't as ugly as he is.
As for Republicans and Democrates, give me someone that is able to make the right decision that isn't based on what a "party line" has decided before they even vote,
Allison, I wasn't replying to you at all, wasn't worth my time. Now breath, you will be okay.
Allison
10-31-2006, 02:18 PM
Allison, I wasn't replying to you at all, wasn't worth my time. Now breath, you will be okay.
Are you trying to be insulting, or does it just sound that way? I'm honestly curious, because I can't tell.
]LoL[Harm
10-31-2006, 02:34 PM
Usually when someone states "it wasn't worth my time" it is usually condescending in my book of English :). Maybe you just need to be patronized a little more Alli ;).
Allison
10-31-2006, 02:44 PM
You can patronize me anytime, baby!
Bedpost
10-31-2006, 02:46 PM
I have people tell me I'm not worth their time all the time... I'm supposed to take that as an insult?
Mulletious
10-31-2006, 03:01 PM
yes you should , now breath bedpost, you will be okay.
"The Democrate is lucky though, he is now able to do the press rounds and able to twist the facts so that he isn't as ugly as he is."
Yeah, it's not like the Republicans are concentrating on anything about the page boy affair other than getting to the bottom of it and all. Stuff like insinuating that the Democrats were holding onto the info until the election. Democrats are real lucky that they get to manipulate the media like that and the Republicans don't.
gepper
10-31-2006, 03:16 PM
Now this one is worth replying to. I at first believed that the Democrates did hold on to it. I was wrong. The family of the page actually took the messages and gave them to the Congressman's staff. this is the Congressman who got the page in, in the first place. They said that the Congressman was shown messages that weren't as bad as the really bad ones. After not getting anywhere the family or Republican staff went to the media. The media went to confront the Congressman. The Congressman asked the leader of the page department for a closed meeting. After the meeting, the Congressman resigned, came out of the closet, blamed it on beer, and ran. The Democrates complained they weren't in the meeting even though it sounds like the Republican was asking more for advice. The leader of the page department should have kicked his sorry ass out as soon as he heard him. Turns out he might have cared about him as a human being and listened and gave advice.
My advice is that those who tried to cover up, though it sounds like the lead congressman didn't have all the facts, and wasn't shown anything that would be considered even unethical, should be fired.
Last to go back to Bill Clinton, he did bad by the country on his personal ethics. But, those who attacked him from the other side were just as guilty, yes, I am talking about newt gangricht or whatever his fat ass name was.
"My advice is that those who tried to cover up, though it sounds like the lead congressman didn't have all the facts, and wasn't shown anything that would be considered even unethical, should be fired."
If someone raises a concern and bring something questionable (which it was), then you don't say "that's not enough proof." The people who covered it up aren't faulted for not kicking him out then and there. They're faulted for having it brought to their attention and not doing any investigation whatsoever, even going so far as not mentioning it or anything.
But I like how you believe the Republicans didn't have all of the facts without really knowing whether or not they did, and then when no one knew whether or not the Democrats held any evidence, your first thought was they were holding onto it.
Allison
10-31-2006, 05:45 PM
Hmmm ... I guess it was on purpose. Good to know.
ONLY GENDERS WITH A THINGY BETWEEN THEIR LEGS WORTH REPLYING TO.
ONLY GENDERS WITH A THINGY BETWEEN THEIR LEGS WORTH REPLYING TO.
LOL I thought we all have thingys. Some have more than one thingy there from time to time.
^ ignoring because of author's lack of thingy.
Andile
11-01-2006, 05:57 AM
It doesn't surprise me that Bush is raising this flag again. What baffles me is that lots of people stand by it. As if it is any of their business what happens between two consenting adults, whatever the amount of thingies involved is.
Jammer
11-01-2006, 01:07 PM
Is the meat talking again?? What's the world coming to?
No wonder gay marriage is so popular these days...the meat is getting hard to live with! :rolly:
Jammer
Grundy
11-01-2006, 01:12 PM
BEEEF!
vBulletin v3.6.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.