sundevil777 94 #26 October 5, 2006 Now that we know the kid was 18 at the time of the IMs, do you think the dems would force him out of office? Now it is just a matter of sexual harrasment, I guess.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #27 October 5, 2006 QuoteThis supports what I've said for a long time. When the Dems corrupt, someone has a mouthful of c**, but whne the Repubs corrupt someone is dead, some money is missing / missappropriated, elections are defrauded, or the likes. Vince Foster Dan Rostenkowski White House Coffees and Lincoln Bedroom sales Chinagate Walter R. Tucker Jim Traficant Robert Torricelli William Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #28 October 5, 2006 Why forget Ted Kennedy and Gary Condit?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,129 #29 October 5, 2006 QuoteNow that we know the kid was 18 at the time of the IMs, do you think the dems would force him out of office? Now it is just a matter of sexual harrasment, I guess. What if it started prior to him turning 18 and continued on until after he was 18? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,406 #30 October 5, 2006 >Now that we know the kid was 18 at the time of the IMs, do you think >the dems would force him out of office? Like I said before, if you want to know what the dems would do if they were in power and one of their own was caught doing something like this - check out what the republicans are doing. Not because that's representative of what anyone beleives, but because they want to get re-elected. This whole "my side is pretty good and the other side are a bunch of sick, perverted pigs" thing leads to unrealistic expectations from politicians. Politicians are politicians first and republicans or democrats second. If they really, truly believed that peeing on the Constitution would get them re-elected, the line would form just outside the National Archives. And if republicans were in power when that happened, they'd be first in line. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #31 October 5, 2006 You are forgetting the topic of this thread. Bottom line, he has resigned, and is under investigation. What if's abound. Instead of adding to speculation why don, you discuss the actual topic?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,129 #32 October 5, 2006 First you say this: QuoteBottom line, he has resigned, and is under investigation. What if's abound. Then you say this: Quoteof adding to speculation why don, you discuss the actual topic? maybe you failed to notice that the actual topic of this thread is a "what if". Maybe you meant to reply to the original poster of this thread? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #33 October 5, 2006 It is that if he was a democrat, would his party force him to retire? Yes or no."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,129 #34 October 5, 2006 This day and age: Yes. Now prove me wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #35 October 5, 2006 QuoteThis day and age: Yes. Now prove me wrong. Yeah what he said... and quit digging up crap from ancient history to show how evil the dims are to make your "proof". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 94 #36 October 5, 2006 Quotequit digging up crap from ancient history to show how evil the dims are to make your "proof". Your orders carry no weight here. I started this thread, it is obviously about speculation, predicting what would happen "if". How else to make that prediction except by looking at history, especially if it is recent, not ancient history? If the kid was 18, then there is no difference from Clinton, except that Foley's advances weren't accepted.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,129 #37 October 5, 2006 QuoteIf the kid was 18, then there is no difference from Clinton, except that Foley's advances weren't accepted. Since we are in the what if thread (contrary to whta some people seem to think): What if it started prior to the kid being 18? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #38 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuoteThis supports what I've said for a long time. When the Dems corrupt, someone has a mouthful of c**, but whne the Repubs corrupt someone is dead, some money is missing / missappropriated, elections are defrauded, or the likes. Vince Foster Dan Rostenkowski White House Coffees and Lincoln Bedroom sales Chinagate Walter R. Tucker Jim Traficant Robert Torricelli William Jefferson The list is 50 or more names long and has been debunked in so many ways. Are you saying Ken Starr would uncover the great BJ debacle, but overlook so many alleged murders? Paaalleeeeeeeeesse Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,406 #39 October 5, 2006 >What if it started prior to the kid being 18? Depends on what happened. Keep in mind we've only seen a few sets of IM's at this point. Sexual predation laws generally make a distinction between trying to lure a minor into having sex and just flirting. For example: "you have a great body" - probably not illegal (although inappropriate of course.) "let's get together sometime and check out those legs" - generally considered predation. Planning to meet a minor for sexual purposes is illegal in many states. He's resigned, so I think it's probably time to let a local DA handle it from here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Steel 0 #40 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuoteIf the kid was 18, then there is no difference from Clinton, except that Foley's advances weren't accepted. Since we are in the what if thread (contrary to whta some people seem to think): What if it started prior to the kid being 18? What if the advances from Clinton to Monica Lewinsky started when she she was under 18? Guess since there is no proof of that, it doesn't matter. Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted for exchanging dirty emails. In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent, its at the time that they show up to meet with the presumed child. So I guess what we have here is a list of 10 Democrats that actually DID break the law and a Democratic leadership that basically didn't care. On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law but did something enough below Republican standards that he felt he had to imediately resign. Oh and then there is Democrats who couldn't give a rats ass about anything other than getting elected trying to jump on the attack band wagon. This is funny because with their disgusting track record they would be doing themselves a favor by just keeping quiet, as the attacks coming from fellow Republicans would not be laughable, as they are when coming from Democrats.If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass. Can't think of anything I need No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound. Nothing to eat, no books to read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,406 #41 October 5, 2006 >Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted >for exchanging dirty emails. ---------- Jefferson County, Ohio Girl Helps Police Make Arrest Posted Wednesday, September 27, 2006 ; 09:32 AM Burgettstown, Pa. man now behind bars. Story by Steve Mazure Email | Bio David Boyce of Burgettstown, Pa., is charged with importuning, stemming from allegations he solicited sex from a 15-year-old girl he met online. The girl was actually an under-cover police officer. Police set up the sting after a real 15-year-old told police she and Boyce had suggestive conversations. ------------- >In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors >to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken >and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent Actually it is. It's illegal to use the internet (or a phone, or the post office) to set up a meeting with a child for purposes of sexual contact. > On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law . . . Let's let the DA decide that. I suspect he is more familiar with sex predator laws (and the facts of the case) than you are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NCclimber 0 #42 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteThis supports what I've said for a long time. When the Dems corrupt, someone has a mouthful of c**, but whne the Repubs corrupt someone is dead, some money is missing / missappropriated, elections are defrauded, or the likes. Vince Foster Dan Rostenkowski White House Coffees and Lincoln Bedroom sales Chinagate Walter R. Tucker Jim Traficant Robert Torricelli William Jefferson The list is 50 or more names long and has been debunked in so many ways. Are you saying Ken Starr would uncover the great BJ debacle, but overlook so many alleged murders? Paaalleeeeeeeeesse Debunked? It seems you missed my (seemingly obvious) point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NCclimber 0 #43 October 5, 2006 Quote>Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted >for exchanging dirty emails. ---------- Jefferson County, Ohio Girl Helps Police Make Arrest Posted Wednesday, September 27, 2006 ; 09:32 AM Burgettstown, Pa. man now behind bars. Story by Steve Mazure Email | Bio David Boyce of Burgettstown, Pa., is charged with importuning, stemming from allegations he solicited sex from a 15-year-old girl he met online. The girl was actually an under-cover police officer. Police set up the sting after a real 15-year-old told police she and Boyce had suggestive conversations. ------------- >In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors >to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken >and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent Actually it is. It's illegal to use the internet (or a phone, or the post office) to set up a meeting with a child for purposes of sexual contact. > On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law . . . Let's let the DA decide that. I suspect he is more familiar with sex predator laws (and the facts of the case) than you are. You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police took him into custody." It's kind of a key detail. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,406 #44 October 5, 2006 >You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police >took him into custody." >It's kind of a key detail. Nope. It's not illegal to arrive anywhere. It IS illegal to solicit sex from a minor over the internet. His arrival there just establishes that he was really intending to go through with it. If they had raided his house and taken his computer, they could have gone to court with the evidence they had. But it would have been a lot tougher, because the guy could claim "Hey, I thought it was my pal Joey who likes to pretend he's a 15 year old girl! We do this all the time. I wasn't really going to _go_ there." Having him arrive there negates that possible defense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Steel 0 #45 October 5, 2006 Quote>Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted >for exchanging dirty emails. ---------- Jefferson County, Ohio Girl Helps Police Make Arrest Posted Wednesday, September 27, 2006 ; 09:32 AM Burgettstown, Pa. man now behind bars. Story by Steve Mazure Email | Bio David Boyce of Burgettstown, Pa., is charged with importuning, stemming from allegations he solicited sex from a 15-year-old girl he met online. Police set up the sting after a real 15-year-old told police she and Boyce had suggestive conversations. ------------- The girl was actually an under-cover police officer. When the head moderator posts rubbish as you just did here is why ussually I avoid posting. Am I to believe that you really misunderstood what I said or that you were just trying to distract attention to the point being made. What part are you missing? AFTER the 15 year told police about suggestive conversations, the police set up a sting. In other words exactly what I said they need to go further than just an email, they need to prove that he would actually meet this individual. ================================= >In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors >to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken >and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent Actually it is. It's illegal to use the internet (or a phone, or the post office) to set up a meeting with a child for purposes of sexual contact. --------------------------------- Up until now you have dug up a case proving that its not. You have shown us that its enough to get the police to setup a "sting" to try to catch people actually doing something illegal. Maybe in the future a law will be written to convict people based on instant messages or emails but as of now there isn't. Try again... > On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law . . . Let's let the DA decide that. I suspect he is more familiar with sex predator laws (and the facts of the case) than you are.If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass. Can't think of anything I need No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound. Nothing to eat, no books to read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NCclimber 0 #46 October 5, 2006 WOW! Are you serious? LOL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Steel 0 #47 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuote. You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police took him into custody." It's kind of a key detail. Ofcourse he left it out. That way he could get people who are just wanting to agree with him to follow blindly. That actually proves my original point. Spin like this is why I find this forum a waste of time. It kind of reminds me of when he was trying to equade a dying marine's heroic act to a healthy terrorist strapping a bomb to himself. I mean I can't believe he really believes what he is posting. I think he is far to intelligent to believe such nonesense. But he is extremely partisan. There is no escaping that.If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass. Can't think of anything I need No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound. Nothing to eat, no books to read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,406 #48 October 5, 2006 >But he is extremely partisan. There is no escaping that. Coming from you - that made my day! Thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #49 October 5, 2006 Quote>You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police >took him into custody." >It's kind of a key detail. Nope. It's not illegal to arrive anywhere. It IS illegal to solicit sex from a minor over the internet. His arrival there just establishes that he was really intending to go through with it. which is pretty flimsy proof. Last week Dateline did a nice long hour on it, with plans to do a second half. In one case, the guy parked down the street and then took off, and was still arrested. And the '13 year old girl' they were meeting was no where near that age. If they kept their mouths shut and just said they were there to talk, and then see what happens, I have trouble with convicting based on online banter. Maybe these guys are scumbags, but basically we're talking about thought crimes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #50 October 5, 2006 On the main question - the big difference is that you can be gay in the Democratic Party and not be labeled a child chasing deviant by default. Now it may actually have been true for this guy...but it's almost immaterial to the GOP. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Amazon 7 #35 October 5, 2006 QuoteThis day and age: Yes. Now prove me wrong. Yeah what he said... and quit digging up crap from ancient history to show how evil the dims are to make your "proof". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #36 October 5, 2006 Quotequit digging up crap from ancient history to show how evil the dims are to make your "proof". Your orders carry no weight here. I started this thread, it is obviously about speculation, predicting what would happen "if". How else to make that prediction except by looking at history, especially if it is recent, not ancient history? If the kid was 18, then there is no difference from Clinton, except that Foley's advances weren't accepted.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,129 #37 October 5, 2006 QuoteIf the kid was 18, then there is no difference from Clinton, except that Foley's advances weren't accepted. Since we are in the what if thread (contrary to whta some people seem to think): What if it started prior to the kid being 18? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #38 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuoteThis supports what I've said for a long time. When the Dems corrupt, someone has a mouthful of c**, but whne the Repubs corrupt someone is dead, some money is missing / missappropriated, elections are defrauded, or the likes. Vince Foster Dan Rostenkowski White House Coffees and Lincoln Bedroom sales Chinagate Walter R. Tucker Jim Traficant Robert Torricelli William Jefferson The list is 50 or more names long and has been debunked in so many ways. Are you saying Ken Starr would uncover the great BJ debacle, but overlook so many alleged murders? Paaalleeeeeeeeesse Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,406 #39 October 5, 2006 >What if it started prior to the kid being 18? Depends on what happened. Keep in mind we've only seen a few sets of IM's at this point. Sexual predation laws generally make a distinction between trying to lure a minor into having sex and just flirting. For example: "you have a great body" - probably not illegal (although inappropriate of course.) "let's get together sometime and check out those legs" - generally considered predation. Planning to meet a minor for sexual purposes is illegal in many states. He's resigned, so I think it's probably time to let a local DA handle it from here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steel 0 #40 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuoteIf the kid was 18, then there is no difference from Clinton, except that Foley's advances weren't accepted. Since we are in the what if thread (contrary to whta some people seem to think): What if it started prior to the kid being 18? What if the advances from Clinton to Monica Lewinsky started when she she was under 18? Guess since there is no proof of that, it doesn't matter. Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted for exchanging dirty emails. In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent, its at the time that they show up to meet with the presumed child. So I guess what we have here is a list of 10 Democrats that actually DID break the law and a Democratic leadership that basically didn't care. On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law but did something enough below Republican standards that he felt he had to imediately resign. Oh and then there is Democrats who couldn't give a rats ass about anything other than getting elected trying to jump on the attack band wagon. This is funny because with their disgusting track record they would be doing themselves a favor by just keeping quiet, as the attacks coming from fellow Republicans would not be laughable, as they are when coming from Democrats.If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass. Can't think of anything I need No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound. Nothing to eat, no books to read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,406 #41 October 5, 2006 >Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted >for exchanging dirty emails. ---------- Jefferson County, Ohio Girl Helps Police Make Arrest Posted Wednesday, September 27, 2006 ; 09:32 AM Burgettstown, Pa. man now behind bars. Story by Steve Mazure Email | Bio David Boyce of Burgettstown, Pa., is charged with importuning, stemming from allegations he solicited sex from a 15-year-old girl he met online. The girl was actually an under-cover police officer. Police set up the sting after a real 15-year-old told police she and Boyce had suggestive conversations. ------------- >In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors >to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken >and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent Actually it is. It's illegal to use the internet (or a phone, or the post office) to set up a meeting with a child for purposes of sexual contact. > On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law . . . Let's let the DA decide that. I suspect he is more familiar with sex predator laws (and the facts of the case) than you are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #42 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteThis supports what I've said for a long time. When the Dems corrupt, someone has a mouthful of c**, but whne the Repubs corrupt someone is dead, some money is missing / missappropriated, elections are defrauded, or the likes. Vince Foster Dan Rostenkowski White House Coffees and Lincoln Bedroom sales Chinagate Walter R. Tucker Jim Traficant Robert Torricelli William Jefferson The list is 50 or more names long and has been debunked in so many ways. Are you saying Ken Starr would uncover the great BJ debacle, but overlook so many alleged murders? Paaalleeeeeeeeesse Debunked? It seems you missed my (seemingly obvious) point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #43 October 5, 2006 Quote>Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted >for exchanging dirty emails. ---------- Jefferson County, Ohio Girl Helps Police Make Arrest Posted Wednesday, September 27, 2006 ; 09:32 AM Burgettstown, Pa. man now behind bars. Story by Steve Mazure Email | Bio David Boyce of Burgettstown, Pa., is charged with importuning, stemming from allegations he solicited sex from a 15-year-old girl he met online. The girl was actually an under-cover police officer. Police set up the sting after a real 15-year-old told police she and Boyce had suggestive conversations. ------------- >In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors >to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken >and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent Actually it is. It's illegal to use the internet (or a phone, or the post office) to set up a meeting with a child for purposes of sexual contact. > On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law . . . Let's let the DA decide that. I suspect he is more familiar with sex predator laws (and the facts of the case) than you are. You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police took him into custody." It's kind of a key detail. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,406 #44 October 5, 2006 >You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police >took him into custody." >It's kind of a key detail. Nope. It's not illegal to arrive anywhere. It IS illegal to solicit sex from a minor over the internet. His arrival there just establishes that he was really intending to go through with it. If they had raided his house and taken his computer, they could have gone to court with the evidence they had. But it would have been a lot tougher, because the guy could claim "Hey, I thought it was my pal Joey who likes to pretend he's a 15 year old girl! We do this all the time. I wasn't really going to _go_ there." Having him arrive there negates that possible defense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steel 0 #45 October 5, 2006 Quote>Moreover, when was the last time someone was convicted >for exchanging dirty emails. ---------- Jefferson County, Ohio Girl Helps Police Make Arrest Posted Wednesday, September 27, 2006 ; 09:32 AM Burgettstown, Pa. man now behind bars. Story by Steve Mazure Email | Bio David Boyce of Burgettstown, Pa., is charged with importuning, stemming from allegations he solicited sex from a 15-year-old girl he met online. Police set up the sting after a real 15-year-old told police she and Boyce had suggestive conversations. ------------- The girl was actually an under-cover police officer. When the head moderator posts rubbish as you just did here is why ussually I avoid posting. Am I to believe that you really misunderstood what I said or that you were just trying to distract attention to the point being made. What part are you missing? AFTER the 15 year told police about suggestive conversations, the police set up a sting. In other words exactly what I said they need to go further than just an email, they need to prove that he would actually meet this individual. ================================= >In case you are not aware, when law enforcement poses as minors >to catch child predators, the inditement occurs after the law is broken >and that is NOT at the time the email or instant message is sent Actually it is. It's illegal to use the internet (or a phone, or the post office) to set up a meeting with a child for purposes of sexual contact. --------------------------------- Up until now you have dug up a case proving that its not. You have shown us that its enough to get the police to setup a "sting" to try to catch people actually doing something illegal. Maybe in the future a law will be written to convict people based on instant messages or emails but as of now there isn't. Try again... > On the otherhand we have a Republican that DIDN'T break the law . . . Let's let the DA decide that. I suspect he is more familiar with sex predator laws (and the facts of the case) than you are.If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass. Can't think of anything I need No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound. Nothing to eat, no books to read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #46 October 5, 2006 WOW! Are you serious? LOL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steel 0 #47 October 5, 2006 QuoteQuote. You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police took him into custody." It's kind of a key detail. Ofcourse he left it out. That way he could get people who are just wanting to agree with him to follow blindly. That actually proves my original point. Spin like this is why I find this forum a waste of time. It kind of reminds me of when he was trying to equade a dying marine's heroic act to a healthy terrorist strapping a bomb to himself. I mean I can't believe he really believes what he is posting. I think he is far to intelligent to believe such nonesense. But he is extremely partisan. There is no escaping that.If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass. Can't think of anything I need No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound. Nothing to eat, no books to read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,406 #48 October 5, 2006 >But he is extremely partisan. There is no escaping that. Coming from you - that made my day! Thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #49 October 5, 2006 Quote>You left out "When he arrvied at the rendezvous location, police >took him into custody." >It's kind of a key detail. Nope. It's not illegal to arrive anywhere. It IS illegal to solicit sex from a minor over the internet. His arrival there just establishes that he was really intending to go through with it. which is pretty flimsy proof. Last week Dateline did a nice long hour on it, with plans to do a second half. In one case, the guy parked down the street and then took off, and was still arrested. And the '13 year old girl' they were meeting was no where near that age. If they kept their mouths shut and just said they were there to talk, and then see what happens, I have trouble with convicting based on online banter. Maybe these guys are scumbags, but basically we're talking about thought crimes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #50 October 5, 2006 On the main question - the big difference is that you can be gay in the Democratic Party and not be labeled a child chasing deviant by default. Now it may actually have been true for this guy...but it's almost immaterial to the GOP. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
