'DU' this 'Tucker' poll! ('DC Madam' topic)

[rec_report]

Should sex lives of elected officials be dissected? --MSNBC's 'Tucker' with Tucker Carlson (video) 11 Jul 2007 The D.C. madam will apparently reveal more names of her clients, but should the sex lives of elected officials be dissected, judged and discussed in the first place? Michael Rectenwald is the founder of Citizens For Legitimate Government.

The poll is on the right-hand side of the page.
-Lori

[wildhorses]

1. done 58/42

help

[deacon]

2. There question is about 7 years too late lol

[Tarheel_Dem]

3. msnbc must be having issues.....

i can't reach the page right now. will bookmark for later. thanks for sharing.

[Vidar]

4. done 64-36

[cui bono]

5. I don't like that poll

My answer is no, unless it's hypocritical or illegal. Otherwise I think it's nobody's business. However, he's asking due to this DC Madame scandal, so of course he's asked it in this way so that people will say no and he'll have an excuse to say this is a non-story, so for that reason I would want to vote yes just to foil him, not because it's what I really believe.

So for me, I'm not sure what you mean by "DU this poll". Which way did you want people to vote?

[rec_report]

13. Tucker has defended David Vitter and criticized the 'DC Madam' for...

releasing her phone records. That's only because Reichwing, hypocritical whackjobs have been (literally) caught with their pants down. Ergo, when I said 'DU this poll,' I meant (in this 'Tucker' context) I would like to see people vote 'Yes, officials are representing the public and their actions should be questioned' *BECAUSE* the same Reichwing, hypocritical whackjobs were all over Bill Clinton like a duck on a June bug but are (now) playing the privacy card.
Cheers,
Lori

[cui bono]

15. Okay, thanks for clarifying. I just can't bring myself to vote yes.

Seems stupid seeing as it's an anonymous poll. :)

[MADem]

17. He's probably scared shitless that his old number over at that WEEKLY STANDARD rag is on that list.

[pwb]

22. The Weakling Standard is what i call that rag.

[orleans]

6. done. 67-whatever. n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. are you guys using IE browser? I've tried everything...

and can't get that page to load, keep getting an error.

[orleans]

10. don't know one browser from the next. try refreshing? (shrug) n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

12. thanks....n/t

[progressoid]

7. Have you seen the video clip?

WOW - it's just dripping with hypocrisy.

Does somebody have a clip of Tucker's exasperation over the blue dress?

[diane in sf]

9. I can't participate in that poll, they don't have an option for "family values"

Repugs--and I would vote to disect their sex lives. Bill Clinton--not so much.

[Marr]

11. Trying to subtley equate this with Clinton. This is about *illegal* acts.

This isn't about an affair, it's about prostitution. I understand that conservatives have a difficult time grasping this concept, but some things are what we call "illegal", meaning they are prohibited by law. Prostitution is one of these things, Tucker.

If a politician buys a car, that is not newsworthy. If a politician *steals* a car, that IS newsworthy. See how that works?

[dEMOK]

14. Done -- I voted NO... n/t

[rec_report]

16. Ok, and in the Clinton era - would you have voted 'yes?' Just curious.

n/t

[PADemD]

18. Done

Yes, officials are representing the public and their actions should be questioned. 71%
No, the policies of public officials are more important, not what they do in their personal lives. 29%

[SalmonChantedEvening]

19. done!

:kick:

[stlsaxman]

20. done- 74% yes

i would naturally vote no on this but Tucker has never been honest with me, so...

and besides, i figure that the holier-than-thou RePigs need to be shown for the power hungry kinky sex crazed religio-fascist hypocrites that they are.

[sinkingfeeling]

21. I voted 'yes', although I really don't think the 'sex lives' of any other person is any of my

business. But I just want Tucker to know that the RW hypos can't let this stuff slide. They're the ones who went after Clinton and now the tables have turned.

[rec_report]

24. sinkingfeeling, you articulated my stance on the issue, when you...

state that you 'really don't think the 'sex lives' of any other person is any of my business.' However, in this situation/instance, we need to expose the Reichwing hypocrisy for the reason you noted: 'They're the ones who went after Clinton and now the tables have turned.'
--Lori

[OregonBlue]

25. I agree and I emailed Tucker while I was at it. The poll misses the point that hypocrits always

deserve to be exposed.

[DainBramaged]

23. Tucker, pandering hack twit who should be using two cans and a string

instead of a TV show. I just watched his bullshit shout down from the show last night on MSNBC. What as asshole, deflect, deny, damage, the Rethuglican credo.

His ratings:

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ (scroll down)25-54 demographic

60,000 viewers

He isn't even reaching the number of people (Nationwide) who take the trains back to NJ every day.

What a flaming douchebag.

Get him off MSNBC, stop polluting the airwaves.

[NaturalHigh]

26. Well, we certainly discussed Clinton's...

I guess everyone else's should be fair game too. While I personally feel "hookergate" is a tempest in a teapot, the Republicans brought it on themselves by obsessing over Clinton's bj.

[cui bono]

27. It's actually not the same thing at all. Clinton didn't break the law.

And especially not while he was making them!