SupaFan and Red: To summarize my argument, since I don't have time to address everything said. 1) No he isn't our current President. But his behavior now is still representative of him as a President. Also, he still represents our country, in many ways, as a face. He is out there speaking, writing a book, debating, etc...So, IMO, the way he presents himself and carries himself is very important. 2) So, anytime I have an outrage about something, I have to post it? I really hate slow drivers, but I haven't posted anything about that...My lack of posting about the Foley situation has more to do with my lack of time spent on this part of the forum. Plus, I'm embarrassed for my party. Why would I post something about something very damaging to my party? I've already said it is atrocious, why does it matter that I didn't create a new post about it??? 3) Lastly, I have googled MANNNNY a married woman. Never have I done it at the dinner table while completely ignoring her husband. That would be straight up low. And even worse for someone who has the burden to be a face of our country until he dies. And also, no I didn't see the segment live. I don't have to. My brother saw it and I read the article. His humor or laughing about it doesn't change the story. He still told it as it happened,not as a "haha, funny man" joke...
it isnt really important, and even if it was, he certainly hasnt done anything weird or bad at all. you are talking about a talk-show anecdote here. cmon, its nothing. and if i had been clinton i would have ignored the husband as well. he is a dumbass.
So you pretty much admit the only reason you post about one "slimeball" and not another is because of their politics. Got it. It kind of has everything to do with it. Kutcher was joking about the situation. It's hard to tell if he was being serious or not. I don't think he was saying that literally Clinton never spoke to him and pretended he didn't exist. I think telling the story like that is funnier though. The context from your article leaves alot to be desired.
For dude to dump Brittney Murphy for Demi conclusively proves that he's brain dead. I mean, Bruce Willis' seconds?????
Also not to mention that he could walk into any bar or any restaurant and nail any hot girl in the place...And yet he sticks with a 45 year old mom of three...
Like I said.... But maybe there's more that we don't know about... Maybe ol' Demi's got a helluva monkey grip, eh? :hihi:
Care to share exactly what they covered up? Did they cover up a crime by Foley or just another immoral act by a politician? A dem can have sex with a 17 y/o male page and gets only a reprimand by the democratic leadership. A dem can abuse his presidential powers by having sex with a 23 y/o female intern and it's no big deal to dems. If we are talking about morals here, isn't that a double standard? Foley is scum, no doubt. Dems have had their share of scums, but they openly supported their scums. When republicans do it, it's a cover up and they should resign their leadership positions. Politics as usual....
They certainly covered up another immoral act by a politican . . . who just happened to be from their party and ponied up a major contribution about that time. The FBI is investigating. Certain preditory behavior is indeed a crime. Example? Did the Democratic leadership do their job and reprimand this person when they found out or did they hush it up in an election year, hoping it wouldn't be discovered? If the Republican leadership had reprimanded Foley there would be no problem for Hastert and his party. Who said it's no big deal. He lied and got impeached. It was a scandal that cost the Democrats the 2000 election. Al Gore still ain't speaking to Clinton. But it was consentual sex with an adult female. The reason the current scandal strikes so hard is that it was preditory homosexual behaviour involving minors. If it costs the republicans the 2006 elections, like Clinton, they have only themselves to blame. Monicagate was a major Washington scandal in 1999 but Clinton is no longer in office and that incident is history. This is the big Washington scandal of 2006 and it is a current and newsworthy event. Where is a double standard? It's not about being a scumbag. Is there an example you can give us of Democratic leadership failing to protect minors in their charge by taking no action on reported abuses for several years? If there is then I condemn it, too. Either way it does not absolve Hastert and his staff of serious ethical misbehavior. To quote George Will, there is a problem in this administration of lack of accountability for failures. Rumsfeld forced the generals to follow his Iraq plan instead of their plan and the whole Iraq episode has been a disaster. But Rumsfeld has not been held accountable. A covert CIA agent was leaked and no one was held accountable, despite the Presidents promise to do so. "Good Job Brownie" is the only adminsration official who was a actually held accountable for his failure. Now Hastert is not being held accountable for his failures in this scandal. The voters make decisions based on perceptions such as these. It is indeed "politics as usual".
