Bush supporters' aftermath thread II

Yeah, me and tens of millions of other decent Americans who think the U.N. is a terrorist organization, which it has become. Too bad the only thing you read is A2K snood. You might learn something if you only took a moment to try.

oh brother...

he said she said - who's gay, who isn't - who ran a prostitution ring, who didn't...blablabla

Can anyone tell me WHY Foley is a low life scum? Anyone?

Foley abuses children.

End of **** discussion!

Stradee wrote:

oh brother...

he said she said - who's gay, who isn't - who ran a prostitution ring, who didn't...blablabla

Can anyone tell me WHY Foley is a low life scum? Anyone?

Foley abuses children.

End of **** discussion!

According to all reports,Foley did NOT have any kind of sexual relationship with any of the pages.

He sent some e-mails and some IM's,but he did NOT actually have any kind of sexual encounter with them.

While it was stupid,it does not constitute abuse.

If one is in a position of authority over someone else, it can be construed as abousive if you make any kind of sexually suggestive advances, because the object of your advances does not have the resource to answer you on equal ground.

Anyone who has ever worked in a business with an EEO or EO office of any kind would know that.

snood wrote:

If one is in a position of authority over someone else, it can be construed as abousive if you make any kind of sexually suggestive advances, because the object of your advances does not have the resource to answer you on equal ground.

Anyone who has ever worked in a business with an EEO or EO office of any kind would know that.

So,you do consider what Bill did to Monica as sexual abuse,even though she consented?

It isn't what I would consider abusive that is important, but what the basic laws of sexual harrassment and abuse in the workplace say... besides, when Foley started up with those pages they were below age 18, and Monica was 22.

As I understand it,Foley did not send those e-mails while the page was in Washington,but did it after the page left.

I think you're not well informed. He started flirting with them when they were on the hill, and continued with more intensity when they left...

Foley started asking for a pic after the page went home,and after Katrina hit LA.
Apparently,thats where the page was from.

There may be more then what we have been told,but based solely on what I have heard so far,what Foley did was stupid,but not criminal.

You guys almost have to defend this in some way, I guess, but we both know what the answer would be if you were asked if you had one, would you want your 16-year-old boy to work for Foley, don't we?

mysteryman wrote:

snood wrote:

If one is in a position of authority over someone else, it can be construed as abousive if you make any kind of sexually suggestive advances, because the object of your advances does not have the resource to answer you on equal ground.

Anyone who has ever worked in a business with an EEO or EO office of any kind would know that.

So,you do consider what Bill did to Monica as sexual abuse,even though she consented?

It isn't what I would consider abusive that is important, but what the basic laws of sexual harrassment and abuse in the workplace say... besides, when Foley started up with those pages they were below age 18, and Monica was 22.

As I understand it,Foley did not send those e-mails while the page was in Washington,but did it after the page left.

I think you're not well informed. He started flirting with them when they were on the hill, and continued with more intensity when they left...

Foley started asking for a pic after the page went home,and after Katrina hit LA.
Apparently,thats where the page was from.

There may be more then what we have been told,but based solely on what I have heard so far,what Foley did was stupid,but not criminal.

You guys almost have to defend this in some way, I guess, but we both know what the answer would be if you were asked if you had one, would you want your 16-year-old boy to work for Foley, don't we?

Precisely.

Barney Franks had a prostitution business running out of his own apartment and used his Congressional influence to help out his "roommate" who was ramrodding it, and he was rewarded with much influence, prominance, and lucrative committee appointments by the Democrats. He is still in the House.

...

The double standard is again stunning.

The so-called Barney Frank affair

Republicans love to remind people that as Frank's gay partner for a time , Stephen Gobie, told The Washington Times, he (Gobie) ran a prostitution ring out of Frank's Washington, D.C., apartment and that Frank was aware of his operation.

As The Guardian reported on August 30, 1989, Frank actually "asked the House ethics committee ... to investigate his relationship with" Gobie:

...

As the July 20, 1990, CSOC report concluded (Page 18):

'Based upon information obtained under subpoena and sworn testimony, the Committee concludes that the weight of the evidence indicates that Representative Frank did not have either prior or concomitant knowledge of prostitution activities involving third parties alleged to have taken place in his apartment. ... Representative Frank's landlords ... submitted sworn testimony contradicting Mr. Gobie's assertion. ... The Committee, therefore, further concludes that no further action is warranted.'

In fact, the report did not conclusively determine whether Gobie was even using Frank's apartment for "prostitution activities." The report repeatedly notes that Gobie's purported evidence that he had been conducting a prostitution ring collapsed under scrutiny. The committee noted that several of Gobie's claims were "repudiated by sworn testimony" from other individuals (Page 18). For example: Not only have Representative Frank's landlords, Colonel and Mrs. James Daugherty, submitted sworn testimony contradicting Mr. Gobie's assertion, Mr. Gobie's assertion has also been rendered questionable by the fact that his claims of call-forwarding service were contradicted by the telephone company.

http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/about/gopcorruption.html

Liberating Ourselves
By Paul W. Schroeder
Ending U.S. participation in the no-win war in Iraq would be a kind of victory.

He Wrote the Book on Torture
By James Bovard
War by Other Means: An Insider's Account of the War on Terror by John Yoo

Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the Omnipresent Enemy
John Mueller
From Foreign Affairs, September/October 2006

Summary: Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable -- but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.

John Mueller is Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University and the author of "The Remnants of War." He is currently writing a book about reactions to terrorism and other perceived international threats that will be published early next year.

Quote:

Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the Omnipresent Enemy
John Mueller
From Foreign Affairs, September/October 2006

Summary: Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable -- but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.

John Mueller is Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University and the author of "The Remnants of War." He is currently writing a book about reactions to terrorism and other perceived international threats that will be published early next year.

link here

Foxfyre wrote:

Precisely.

Barney Franks had a prostitution business running out of his own apartment and used his Congressional influence to help out his "roommate" who was ramrodding it, and he was rewarded with much influence, prominance, and lucrative committee appointments by the Democrats. He is still in the House.

...

The double standard is again stunning.

Foxy foxy foxy.

Quote:

The so-called Barney Frank affair

Republicans love to remind people that as Frank's gay partner for a time , Stephen Gobie, told The Washington Times, he (Gobie) ran a prostitution ring out of Frank's Washington, D.C., apartment and that Frank was aware of his operation.

As The Guardian reported on August 30, 1989, Frank actually "asked the House ethics committee ... to investigate his relationship with" Gobie:

...

As the July 20, 1990, CSOC report concluded (Page 18):

'Based upon information obtained under subpoena and sworn testimony, the Committee concludes that the weight of the evidence indicates that Representative Frank did not have either prior or concomitant knowledge of prostitution activities involving third parties alleged to have taken place in his apartment. ... Representative Frank's landlords ... submitted sworn testimony contradicting Mr. Gobie's assertion. ... The Committee, therefore, further concludes that no further action is warranted.'

In fact, the report did not conclusively determine whether Gobie was even using Frank's apartment for "prostitution activities." The report repeatedly notes that Gobie's purported evidence that he had been conducting a prostitution ring collapsed under scrutiny. The committee noted that several of Gobie's claims were "repudiated by sworn testimony" from other individuals (Page 18). For example: Not only have Representative Frank's landlords, Colonel and Mrs. James Daugherty, submitted sworn testimony contradicting Mr. Gobie's assertion, Mr. Gobie's assertion has also been rendered questionable by the fact that his claims of call-forwarding service were contradicted by the telephone company.

http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/about/gopcorruption.html

Now you see why we have to keep tabs on you folks.

The Boston Globe, among others, called on Frank to resign, but he refused. The House Ethics Committee recommended Frank be reprimanded because he "reflected discredit upon the House" by using his congressional office to fix 33 of Gobie's parking tickets. Attempts to expel or censure Frank failed; instead the House voted 408-18 to reprimand him. [6] (http://www.congressionalbadboys.com/Franks.htm)

You may wish to believe you could live with somebody for months or years and not know that somebody was running a business out of your apartment. Most people instinctively know that isn't credible. But I didn't say Frank was doing the prostitution ring. He was reprimanded by the House for helping out the guy who was.

As the July 20, 1990, CSOC report concluded (Page 18):

'Based upon information obtained under subpoena and sworn testimony, the Committee concludes that the weight of the evidence indicates that Representative Frank did not have either prior or concomitant knowledge of prostitution activities involving third parties alleged to have taken place in his apartment. ... Representative Frank's landlords ... submitted sworn testimony contradicting Mr. Gobie's assertion. ... The Committee, therefore, further concludes that no further action is warranted.'

Some people say the foxfyre is running a dope ring out of her garage(or allowing others), some people say.

Bush in a Snit

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Monday, October 16, 2006; 12:52 PM

The notion that President Bush is not just in denial -- but is petulantly in denial -- is taking on greater credence thanks to two recent Washington Post stories.

One describes Bush's seemingly inexplicable confidence that Republicans will maintain control of both houses of Congress in the upcoming elections. He doesn't even seem to have a backup plan.

"The question is whether this is a case of justified confidence -- based on Bush's and Rove's electoral record and knowledge of the money, technology and other assets at their command -- or of self-delusion. Even many Republicans suspect the latter. Three GOP strategists with close ties to the White House flatly predicted the loss of the House, though they would not do so on the record for fear of offending senior Bush aides."

"'Forty-three has now repudiated everything 41 stands for, and still he won't say a word,' a key member of the elder Bush alumni said. 'Personally, I think he's dying inside.' . . .

"'Everyone knew how Rumsfeld acts,' another key 41 assistant said. 'Everyone knew 43 didn't have an attention span. Everyone knew Condi (Rice) wouldn't be able to stand up to Cheney and Rumsfeld. We told them all of this, and we were told we don't know what we're doing.'"