Lex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 02:59 PM
Original message |
Will this Foley/Hastert scandal kill the sanctimonious attitude re Clinton |
|
and Monica? This pales by comparison in so many ways anyway.
But it seems to me it might be a bit of a stretch for the Repukes and their sheeple to continue to stay on their high horse about Clinton and Monica now.
:shrug:
|
Catherine Vincent
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Well, going by the repuke callers on cspan the past few days, |
|
they think what Clinton did with Monica was worse. They continue to bring it up. One idiot inferred that Monica was only 16. :eyes:
|
Hugin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
14. Yeah, the comparison was covered on NPR this morning also... |
|
A crowning moment of stupidity.
|
Fresh_Start
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |
2. unfortunately not unless there was phyical contact made |
|
freepers don't see it as an issue because it was pseudo-sex-abuse, not real sex.
|
Debi
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
10. Even though Foley was one who wanted to put stricter protections |
|
on the internet for kids who had sexual predators proposition them? :eyes:
|
stopbush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message |
laylah
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:03 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Not a chance in hell. n/t |
crim son
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:04 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Nope. You've probably read/heard that comparisons |
|
are desperately being made between Clinton's Lewinsky and Foley's page. I thought it was hilarious that Hannity tried to bring up something that happened in 1983 as a means of making Mr. Catheter's cybersex look like business as usual.
|
Pacifist Patriot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:05 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Not if Hannity is any yardstick. In fact, he's... |
|
already reduced her from 22 to 19 at the time.
|
peace13
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:05 PM
Response to Original message |
7. They invented the high horse |
|
and after the dust settles will not remember who Foley was. Remember first and foremost, the sheeple do not think!
|
Lex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Well, at least the Dems will have something to shake back in their faces |
|
even if they have twisted around in their small little brains that it was perfectly okay for Foley to hit on pages and have cyber-sex with them, etc.
|
peace13
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
MrCoffee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:23 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I don't fixate on my own genitals the way they fixate on the Big Dawg's.
|
TankLV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:25 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Surely you jest. Even NOW they are making the comparisons... |
|
They don't even know the concept of hypocricy...
|
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
15. They have to make them now, they are in defense mode |
|
It will be different when it calms down again, in that they will be glad for a break from defending on this and avoid raising the issue. For how long is hard to say of course. See how Harold Ford handled it this morning: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2321263
|
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:27 PM
Response to Original message |
13. No doubt it will tend to calm their instinct |
|
to bring up sex scandals of any kind for at least the 5 years.
|
sarge43
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:35 PM
Response to Original message |
16. No, they need Clinton |
|
As Voltaire said about God, if he didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him. They cannot take responsibility for their actions, so blame Clinton. I won't be surprised that when this Repug nightmare is finally over and they're whining and moaning amid the wreckage, they'll blame Clinton for allowing them to take power in the first place.
:popcorn:
|
GreenTea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:36 PM
Response to Original message |
17. You still believe repugs are fair mined, and think for themselves? |
Lex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
18. No, but that's not the point. The point is that they know we have |
|
Edited on Thu Oct-05-06 03:40 PM by Lex
something to shake back in their faces when they get on their high horse about Clinton.
I don't expect their learning curve to be too good on this however, but at least the Repukes have a sex scandal in their own column now. I, for one, will not hesitate to mention it when they start whining about Clinton and Monica.
|
aquart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 04:51 PM
Response to Original message |
|
If Monica hadn't given Clinton blowjobs, none of this would be happening. It's all Clinton's fault.
|
Lex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-05-06 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
20. Including global warming too. nt |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 09th 2024, 11:10 PM
Response to Original message |