sundevil777 94 #26 May 1, 2007 QuoteYou consistently confuse having high standards with trumpeting that you have high standards. You consistently confuse the failure of an individual with the failure of the organization/group. From the many replies to my posts, one would think that the dems claim to adhere to absolutely no standards. Or perhaps that the dems would refuse to admit to any standards so that they can never be guilty of breaking them. The standards of which I refer do not have to be morality/bible related. I am talking about instances where dems are forgiven, even applauded by their own party for transgressions that get a repub booted out by their own party.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
hairyjuan 0 #27 May 1, 2007 impeachment prodeedings were initiated against bill for lying about a blowjob. BOY GEORGE is as much a war criminal as hitler, or saddam.we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively wishers never choose, choosers never wish Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #28 May 1, 2007 The use of DU is horrible, I agree. I think both dem and repub presidents have condoned its use, isn't that right?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
billvon 2,425 #29 May 1, 2007 >I am talking about instances where dems are forgiven, even applauded >by their own party for transgressions that get a repub booted out by their >own party. And vice versa. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #30 May 1, 2007 Quote It is worse to have high standards for others that you can't be bothered to attain yourself. Like Al Gore's environmental standards/preaching. 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
sundevil777 94 #31 May 1, 2007 QuoteWhat you call high standards, your morality, others call nonsense. Some would seek to make prostitution legal, perhaps you would. Perhaps the Dem party would like to make the legalization of prostitution a part of their platform, but I think not. So, I think it reasonable that the dems should hold a standard that if a high ranking public official of the dem persuasion is caught buying sex, the party should seek their removal from office, or at least condemn the individual in very harsh terms. I don't think they would do that, which is exactly what I mean by them being the party of lower standards.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
Lindsey 0 #32 May 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat you call high standards, your morality, others call nonsense. Some would seek to make prostitution legal, perhaps you would. Perhaps the Dem party would like to make the legalization of prostitution a part of their platform, but I think not. So, I think it reasonable that the dems should hold a standard that if a high ranking public official of the dem persuasion is caught buying sex, the party should seek their removal from office, or at least condemn the individual in very harsh terms. I don't think they would do that, which is exactly what I mean by them being the party of lower standards. You're right. I don't think either party (Dem or Rep) is going to try to make prostitution legal. However, while some individuals fiercely condemn him who would dirty himself with the filth of a whore, others (who also may believe that prostitution is wrong, kind of) don't get quite so worked up over the issue, because after all it's really not that big of a deal.... The first (the one with the *higher*, some would say, moral standards), when caught fucking the prostitute, is the one ya' just can't trust because he's a fraud. Doesn't matter which party he represents--he's a L O S E R! And honestly, I'd bet he's the one of the two more likely the be screwing the prostitute in the first place. As far moral standards being "nonsense," these are the issues that come immediately to mind.... Embryonic stem cell research Women's reproductive choice Gay rights The high moral ground of these virtuous politicians isn't anything but a pile of cow muck, imho. It's nonsense. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #33 May 1, 2007 Quote Quote It is worse to have high standards for others that you can't be bothered to attain yourself. Like Al Gore's environmental standards/preaching. Absolutely... (attached image from Newsbusters GaggleMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,425 #34 May 1, 2007 >Some would seek to make prostitution legal . . . Uh, you do realize that prostitution IS legal in some places, right? >So, I think it reasonable that the dems should hold a standard that if a >high ranking public official of the dem persuasion is caught buying sex, >the party should seek their removal from office, or at least condemn the >individual in very harsh terms. ?? Where has the democratic party come out against prostitution where it is practiced legally? Are you making stuff up again? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #35 May 1, 2007 Quote and wish to tell EVERYONE how to live their lives.... Um, both sides tell everyone how to live their lives in different ways. That is all.Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #36 May 1, 2007 Quote You're right. I don't think either party (Dem or Rep) is going to try to make prostitution legal. This interests me. You should start another thread to discuss.Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #37 May 1, 2007 Quote >Some would seek to make prostitution legal . . . Uh, you do realize that prostitution IS legal in some places, right? Uh, yes I know that. Of much more importance is whether you think it is really a victimless crime, even where legal, and if you think it should be legal. Quote >So, I think it reasonable that the dems should hold a standard that if a >high ranking public official of the dem persuasion is caught buying sex, >the party should seek their removal from office, or at least condemn the >individual in very harsh terms. Where has the democratic party come out against prostitution where it is practiced legally? How did I imply that they were? QuoteAre you making stuff up again? I think a moderator should refrain from being so rude.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
billvon 2,425 #38 May 1, 2007 >How did I imply that they were? "Perhaps the Dem party would like to make the legalization of prostitution a part of their platform, but I think not." They have not come out against it as part of their platform, therefore are not hypocrites if they fail to condemn those who use prostitutes. If they had, then your statement would make sense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #39 May 1, 2007 Quote>How did I imply that they were? "Perhaps the Dem party would like to make the legalization of prostitution a part of their platform, but I think not." They have not come out against it as part of their platform, therefore are not hypocrites if they fail to condemn those who use prostitutes. If they had, then your statement would make sense. I thought my point was obvious, that they very definitely favor it remaining illegal, at least at a national, party leadership level. Is there any doubt about that?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
sundevil777 94 #40 May 1, 2007 Quote They have not come out against it as part of their platform, therefore are not hypocrites if they fail to condemn those who use prostitutes. If they had, then your statement would make sense. That's some funny reasoning. Let me try an analogy. Because the dems have never come out in favor of sex with underage/very young subordinates/clerks/pages, then failing to give the boot to those that do is not hypocritical. If the dems want to claim that territory as not technically hypocritical, then it is all theirs to have without complaint. 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
billvon 2,425 #41 May 1, 2007 >I thought my point was obvious, that they very definitely favor it remaining illegal . . . Like I said - where did you see that? (It may well be true, but I have never, ever seen such a position listed in any democratic platform statement.) >Because the dems have never come out in favor of sex with underage/very >young subordinates/clerks/pages, then failing to give the boot to those >that do is not hypocritical. I think perhaps you misunderstand the meaning of "hypocritical." "Hypocritical" does not equal "bad." A senator who does not care about underage sex one way or another (and has never spoken for or against it) is not a hypocrite if he has sex with an underage person. He is, of course, a criminal and a pedophile. If, however, he creates legislation penalizing sexual predators, and then BECOMES a sexual predator himself, then he IS a hypocrite. See the difference? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #42 May 1, 2007 Quote Let me try an analogy. Oooo. This is fun. Let me try one too. Since skydivers have never come out against mass murder of left-handed, blond-haired double amputees by drowing them in melted ice cream, you can't claim hypocrisy if a skydiver is found guilty of this crime. Oh wait. That's NOT hypocrisy. It's murder, and probably many other bad things as well, but by the very plain and ordinary definition of hypocrisy, it's not THAT. Those definitions of words are kinda frustrating aren't they? Edited to add: Damnit bill! First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #43 May 1, 2007 QuoteIf, however, he creates legislation penalizing sexual predators, and then BECOMES a sexual predator himself, then he IS a hypocrite. Actually (and this is a fine point) this wouldn't strictly be hypocrisy either. The two actions (predating and opposing predation) would have to be more or less simultaneous. It's not hypocritical to change your mind. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #44 May 1, 2007 Of course I agree with you about the definition of hypocrisy. I did not say they were hypocritical in this thread, you assumed that was what I meant. I just said that they had low standards. See the difference? But to not care enough about a transgression to do anything meaningful about it to a high ranking member of an organization does indeed imply that it is OK with them. See the similarity? 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
billvon 2,425 #45 May 1, 2007 >The two actions (predating and opposing predation) would have to be more or less simultaneous. OK. To be more precise, if you are chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, and regularly propose laws/guidelines to prevent predation, and you are simultaneously sending predatory messages to underage pages, that would qualify as hypocrisy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,425 #46 May 1, 2007 >But to not care enough about a transgression to do anything >meaningful about it to a high ranking member of an organization does >indeed imply that it is OK with them. Are you OK with canopy-collision fatalities? Since you haven't done anything meaningful about them, should we assume you are? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #47 May 1, 2007 Quote>The two actions (predating and opposing predation) would have to be more or less simultaneous. OK. To be more precise, if you are chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, and regularly propose laws/guidelines to prevent predation, and you are simultaneously sending predatory messages to underage pages, that would qualify as hypocrisy. Absolutely, that is why he was booted by his own party, compared to similar incidents by high ranking members of the other party. See the similarity and difference?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
sundevil777 94 #48 May 1, 2007 Quote >But to not care enough about a transgression to do anything >meaningful about it to a high ranking member of an organization does >indeed imply that it is OK with them. Are you OK with canopy-collision fatalities? Since you haven't done anything meaningful about them, should we assume you are? That is a crappy analogy. In effect you're saying, "We don't boot out a member for soliciting prostitution because we haven't formally opposed it." If that is the territory the dems want to claim as their own...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
jakee 1,257 #49 May 2, 2007 Quote Of much more importance is whether you think it is really a victimless crime, even where legal, Um, if it's legal, it's not a crime at all. DuhDo you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #50 May 2, 2007 Quote Quote Let me try an analogy. Oooo. This is fun. Let me try one too. Since skydivers have never come out against mass murder of left-handed, blond-haired double amputees by drowing them in melted ice cream, you can't claim hypocrisy if a skydiver is found guilty of this crime. Oh wait. That's NOT hypocrisy. It's murder, and probably many other bad things as well, but by the very plain and ordinary definition of hypocrisy, it's not THAT. Those definitions of words are kinda frustrating aren't they? Edited to add: Damnit bill! Oooo this is fun. I get to point out the distinction between low standards and hypocrisy. Actually it is not so much fun, it should be obvious.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
