Comments on: Only US Congressman Who Admitted to Statutory Rape Dies Suddenly

By: V the K

V the K — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:44:18 +0000

Once again, CLS: 1.) Legal or not, a middle-aged man hitting on a teenager is still a creep and a sleazebag, 2.) Gerry Studds was a creep a sleazebag and a predator because he went much further than IM’s, and never once expressed that he did anything wrong 3.) Crane and Foley were out on their asses when they were exposed. Gerry Studds remained an honored Democrat and hero to the gay left until the end, and Mel Reynolds was pardoned by Bill Clinton. Thus proving, the Democrat party welcomes sex predators while Republicans ditch them.

By: CLS

CLS — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:58:46 +0000

I should have been more clear. Studds was not guilty of statutory rape because the page was above the age of consent. That claim is just false. Nor was he the only congressman who had sex with a page. In fact Congressman Crane, a conservative Republican had sex with a girl, who was actually younger, while she was a page the same year. His was not statutory rape either since she was also above the age of consent. So it is true he had sex with the page but it false to call the page as underage. He wasn’t.

By: CLS

CLS — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:48:21 +0000

Studds was not a child predator. The page was above the age of consent at the time and the page also came out in defense of Studds saying he wanted the relationship. Consenting relationships between two individuals both above the age of consent is not predatory in any sense of the word. There are many reasons to dislike Studds but this was not one of them. Meanwhile the page who got this whole thing going regarding Foley says he never received sexual messages at all. See freestudents.blogspot.com for more information.

By: monty

monty — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 02:25:42 +0000

Thats like saying you missed Bush being awarded his Purple Heart.
Clue for VtK…….it never happened!! LMAO

monty

By: V the K

V the K — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:45:48 +0000

Fill me in, ‘cos I missed monty being outed as a sock-puppet. Rajian’s shtick was to spew Kostard talking points and leftard myths about the political right and pretend they were making some sort of argument. (M)onty’s shtick seems to be simple deranged, incoherent name-calling.

By: monty

monty — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:50:52 +0000

LOL.

I think people are smarter than that and can see how desperate you all have become. Say anything to bring down your opposition, at any and all costs. Use your own soul for collateral, even. Make up stuff as you go along, etc…..

This whole exercise has been so totally enlightning. I’m sure your ethics professor, not to mention your children and partner are so very proud of you for being the stand up and honest guy you think you are.

You all haven’t even got the guts to go “one on one”. Just shows what basic cowards you all are and why you all scattered so quickly when the Foley thing broke. So typical of cowards…….and you prove that much better than I ever could.

You may succeed in drowning me out, at times, but I’m not going anywhere.

monty

By: Michigan-Matt

Michigan-Matt — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:07:17 +0000

That’s ok, monty… as long as folks here know the games you’ve been playing with multiple postings under different names. Sockpuppets are as about welcome here as self-loathing gay hypocrites from the GayLeftBorg. You’ve been outed as a duplicitious, deceitful, dishonest sockpuppet and its time for your latest troll-incarnation to hit the showers.

Time to reinvent yourself.

By: monty

monty — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 18:32:24 +0000

Mish-Mash.

You’ve posted the same tired thing in all the other threads. I guess you’ve taken that dog-earred talking points memo book and are applying the “say it enough and people will believe it” point. Eventually, even you will come to believe it. That sockpuppet game is alway your “last resort”. Though tedious, also amusing.

As I’ve said after all your other whiney, petulant posts…..if that’s all ya got….go right ahead on. Makes me no never mind.

LMAO,
monty

By: Michigan-Matt

Michigan-Matt — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 18:12:31 +0000

monty, you’ve been outed now by Peter H as the lower-case-sockpuppet known as raj/Ian/blah. Wow, you still don’t get it: sockpuppets lack credibility because of their clearly apparent intellectual dishonesty. I thought it was bad you were labeled: tedious without purpose.

It’s amazing that someone with such a high dislike for all things gay, patriotic or conservative should work so hard to avoid blocking –even to engage in multiple monikers to avoid detection.

You have to find another outlet, monty/raj/Ian/blah. Or another name.

By: monty

monty — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 18:06:22 +0000

ah….

Witness:
1) The non-denial.
2) The “set-up” on the return.

Nice!

monty

By: Michigan-Matt

Michigan-Matt — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:44:42 +0000

Brendan at #60 asks rhetorically: “Michigan-Matt, why do you hate so?”

About the only things I “hate” Brendan are mushy vegetables, rain soaked rock climbing equipment and underperforming sports cars.

What are you talking about?

By: just me

just me — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 11:15:56 +0000

So, basically, to the left, morals are bad, sexually molesting underage teens is good.

Uhless of course you are a republican, then morals are still bad, but any violation of those morals makes you worse.

By: V the K

V the K — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 09:41:28 +0000

So, basically, what the leftoid whiners are saying is, it’s okay for the Democrats to harbor sex predators like Mel Reynolds and Gerry Studds because Democrats have no sexual morality. This would seem to imply that, to the left, Mel Reynolds and Gerry Studds did nothing wrong. If so, they should come out and say that.

They also say, it’s not about the sex, it’s about the hypocrisy. Yet, they see nothing hypocritical about attacking people for falling short of a moral code, when they themselves have no morals at all.

So, basically, to the left, morals are bad, sexually molesting underage teens is good.

By: North Dallas Thirty

North Dallas Thirty — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 04:29:12 +0000

Okay. ND-30, I think Pelosi words are disgusting and if I lived in California I would not vote for her–I would not vote for a republican, but I would leave it blank or vote for some 3rd party. Can you say the same about any homophobic republican or do you insisist on living in the republican plantation?

No.

If you think whether or not a person is homophobic is the sole determinant of my vote, you’re sorely mistaken.

I’m glad to see you condemning Nancy Pelosi. She is a homophobe, and worse, she’s a manipulative homophobe, who takes money from gays and then promotes homophobic rhetoric like what she’s spewing now.

But that’s just one of the many reasons for which I will vote against her.

By: jimmy

jimmy — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 04:01:14 +0000

#58. You still don’t get it. The Democrats aren’t obsessed with controlling the sex lives and bodies of everyone according to some particular understanding of morality or religion. That isn’t government’s job. It is the Republicans who have made sex an issue, over and over again, and it is the Republicans that tout tough on sex crime lines, over and over again. So it makes no sense to complain about Democrats not being so concerned with everyone else’s sex lives, (at the level of the Party, not at the level of local police mind you,) because it only highlights the fact that it is the Republicans and it has been the Republicans for quite some time that have been obsessed with sex and controlling sex. (See the post above about how bad sex is among gays, penned by a softer conservative hand, but decidedly still sex-negative.) Foley was on a pulpit about abusing children and he was involved in the very same activities that he was spouting off about. Democrats don’t spout off about sex as much as Republicans….SO it is no wonder why Democrats have been treated differently. Remember: you people framed the Democrats as soulless and immoral. So when Democrats do something “immoral,” it isn’t really newsworthy, is it? But when Republicans, up there breathing the pure stratified air on the high moral road, do something…you BET it is newsworthy.

So stop your whining.

By: jimmy

jimmy — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 03:52:09 +0000

“V the K,” I know the V stands for Victim. But what does the K stand for? I have some ideas.

#51 and #52. Oh, GP is so….clever!! “I’m sorry, Brendan, but GP is merely applying the Democrats’ latest rhetoric on the Foley situation to describe Studds.” What makes this so humorous is that Democrats have been applying the righteous moral standards that Republicans espouse to Republicans in this case. And then you think GP is doing something unique? Not at all. It sounds more like: nanny-nanny-noo-noo.

But the IRONY is that the Democrats don’t run around moralizing about sex like the Republicans do. Instead, they let voters decide who to send to Congress. And Republicans only care when it becomes publicly known that one of theirs is man-handling youngsters. The Party of Values is naked!! And Democrats were having fun with the delicious irony before GP got so clever…with a dead man. Again, tacky.

By: monty

monty — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 02:35:13 +0000

It’s because “Hate” is the first directive on the GOP talking point memo that Mish-Mash and the rest of the pack get every morning.

monty

By: Brendan Flynn

Brendan Flynn — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 02:17:31 +0000

ND-30: “Then it might behoove you to do something about the worst examples thereof — namely, Nancy Pelosi and her hordes. She’s taken every opportunity to scream “child predator” ever since this whole thing started.”

By: Brendan Flynn

Brendan Flynn — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 02:13:11 +0000

“How many other sexual predators are in either Democrat caucus –or for that matter, how about we take a look at the great DrDNCDean’s sex life… it rivals Democrat Strategist DickMorris’ toe fetish with hookers but the good Doctor likes his hookers young, very young. And he likes ‘em 2 at a time when in DC.”

Michigan-Matt, why do you hate so?
Alas, as I read his words, I wondered why he hated so much. I realized that I serve just as the object for his animosity, not its justification, nor its explanation. I hope he will take the time to look within and wonder what it is that makes him hate so.

By: Michigan-Matt

Michigan-Matt — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 02:02:24 +0000

Michigan’s own Democrat-with-a-Conscience, Dale Kildee –a lifelong big D, inner city, UAW-beholden Congressman sitting on the House’s subcommittee that is looking into Foley– got deer-spotted coming out of a closed session… when asked, he left this bombshell for the Democrats:

“There are more allegations about other Congressmen and this inquiry will extend beyond the Foley to others now, to Democrats. These are just allegations. I don’t care to say more.”

Ohh, and for the GayLeftBorg, Anderson Cooper is busy cleaning up his hard drive to get rid of those IMs to twinks… WolfieBlitzer is getting all over this story up on the Hill. Ding, ding, ding… I think that’s MikeRogers’ bell about to get rung.

Watch out Democrats… there’s room for more turkey in the oven before November. Shake and bake at 450 for 30 minutes.