Here's a quote I absolutely love:

http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/686855.html

"The double standard is shocking," [Matt] Foreman [executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force] said. "We'll throw the closet queer under the bus, but if you see a female prostitute, that's just fine."

 

So there you go. If Craig should be forced to resign, then so should Vitter. Two hypocrites for the price of one corrupt party, I love it!!!Seek help.

 

Anyways, Vitter was never convicted or even accussed of a crime and Pamela Martin and Associate's 'service' hasn't been determined to be a prostitution service (not saying I think or believe that). Plus, Vitter's use of the escort service was before he was a senator.

 

So apples and oranges.

 

If you and others want to do this morality stand across the board then a lot of congress members would be out of their jobs and the beloved William Jefferson Clinton should have resigned as well.

Oh, I think it's you who needs to seek help. Last I checked, Vitter was implicated with the DC Madam, who did engage in prostitution, which, last time I checked, was a crime. This is what you get when you try to be the morality police.

Oh, I think it's you who needs to seek help. Last I checked, Vitter was implicated with the DC Madam, who did engage in prostitution, which, last time I checked, was a crime. This is what you get when you try to be the morality police.

Last time I checked, her service hasn't been convicted of anything.

 

Or are you looking past the legal process and convicting her already?

 

Did you even read my post?

I don't think he should resign. Who cares if he's gay? And he pled guilty to a misdemeanor, not a felony. It isn't a big deal. The fact that he comes across as a hypocrite is more important, but he should not be forced to resign.

 

He should continue to serve in the Senate.

I don't think he should resign. Who cares if he's gay? And he pled guilty to a misdemeanor, not a felony. It isn't a big deal. The fact that he comes across as a hypocrite is more important, but he should not be forced to resign.

 

He should continue to serve in the Senate.

It's an ethics violation because he was presenting himself as a Senator in order to get the sex. It's against Senate rules and thus why he was sent to the Ethics committee. the nature of the crime means nothing

Oh, I think it's you who needs to seek help. Last I checked, Vitter was implicated with the DC Madam, who did engage in prostitution, which, last time I checked, was a crime. This is what you get when you try to be the morality police.

Last time I checked, her service hasn't been convicted of anything.

 

Oy, that's like saying Michael Vick hadn't been convicted on dogfighting charges yet, so who cares about the overwhelming evidence implicating his guilt. Do you even think about what you're saying, or do you have your head so far up your ass that you're out of touch with reality?

Oh, I think it's you who needs to seek help. Last I checked, Vitter was implicated with the DC Madam, who did engage in prostitution, which, last time I checked, was a crime. This is what you get when you try to be the morality police.

Last time I checked, her service hasn't been convicted of anything.

 

Oy, that's like saying Michael Vick hadn't been convicted on dogfighting charges yet, so who cares about the overwhelming evidence implicating his guilt. Do you even think about what you're saying, or do you have your head so far up your ass that you're out of touch with reality?

 

Lol, f***ing stupid ass constitution.

 

I hope you are never a juror.

Oh, I think it's you who needs to seek help. Last I checked, Vitter was implicated with the DC Madam, who did engage in prostitution, which, last time I checked, was a crime. This is what you get when you try to be the morality police.

Last time I checked, her service hasn't been convicted of anything.

 

Oy, that's like saying Michael Vick hadn't been convicted on dogfighting charges yet, so who cares about the overwhelming evidence implicating his guilt. Do you even think about what you're saying, or do you have your head so far up your ass that you're out of touch with reality?

:lol :lol :lol

 

Yeah, sorry I believe in that whole, 'due process' thing. :lol

 

You compared Craig to Vitter. Craig was convicted of a crime as a senator and should resign. Vitter is associated with an escort service that hasn't been convicted of anything. It's not the same situation. Period.

 

I don't know why I bother, you seem to be an imbittered douche who has no idea what you're saying when it deals with something you don't like and make absurd outlandish comments. Quite comical actually, and I'm not the only one on here that feels that way. Quite the opposite.

I don't think he should resign. Who cares if he's gay? And he pled guilty to a misdemeanor, not a felony. It isn't a big deal. The fact that he comes across as a hypocrite is more important, but he should not be forced to resign.

 

He should continue to serve in the Senate.

It's an ethics violation because he was presenting himself as a Senator in order to get the sex. It's against Senate rules and thus why he was sent to the Ethics committee. the nature of the crime means nothing

 

Haha... that's not an ethics violation. It's against Senate rules to present yourself as a Senator to get laid? No way!

 

I think the reason it may be an ethics violation is because he tried to get himself off (by which I mean get himself NOT arrested, not the other kind of "off") by presenting himself as a Senator.

Oh, I think it's you who needs to seek help. Last I checked, Vitter was implicated with the DC Madam, who did engage in prostitution, which, last time I checked, was a crime. This is what you get when you try to be the morality police.

Last time I checked, her service hasn't been convicted of anything.

 

Oy, that's like saying Michael Vick hadn't been convicted on dogfighting charges yet, so who cares about the overwhelming evidence implicating his guilt. Do you even think about what you're saying, or do you have your head so far up your ass that you're out of touch with reality?

:lol :lol :lol

 

Yeah, sorry I believe in that whole, 'due process' thing. :lol

 

You compared Craig to Vitter. Craig was convicted of a crime as a senator and should resign. Vitter is associated with an escort service that hasn't been convicted of anything. It's not the same situation. Period.

 

I don't know why I bother, you seem to be an imbittered douche who has no idea what you're saying when it deals with something you don't like and make absurd outlandish comments. Quite comical actually, and I'm not the only one on here that feels that way. Quite the opposite.

 

 

Do you even read what I say? While you say that the DC Madam hasn't been convicted, I'm saying that she hasn't been convicted YET. Hell, she's already claimed one victim in the form of Randall Tobias, whom I also want off the Duke Board of Trustees for the same reason. Hence the Vick analogy: while there is no conviction yet, it doesn't take a genius to see that there eventually WILL be one, with all that evidence out there. Paying for sex is still a crime, and Vitter has admitted to at least that much.

Oy, that's like saying Michael Vick hadn't been convicted on dogfighting charges yet, so who cares about the overwhelming evidence implicating his guilt. Do you even think about what you're saying, or do you have your head so far up your ass that you're out of touch with reality?

If you take stances like that, why do you hate the Patriot Act or wiretapping? You sound like a member of the Bush administration to me.

 

By the way, Michael Vick entered a guilty plea. So your facts are wrong.

It would seem the State Attorney's Office had a relatively weak case if they allowed him to plead to DOC.

 

 

The biggest problem with these cases is the entrapment factor. Very hard case to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Oh, I think it's you who needs to seek help. Last I checked, Vitter was implicated with the DC Madam, who did engage in prostitution, which, last time I checked, was a crime. This is what you get when you try to be the morality police.

Last time I checked, her service hasn't been convicted of anything.

 

Oy, that's like saying Michael Vick hadn't been convicted on dogfighting charges yet, so who cares about the overwhelming evidence implicating his guilt. Do you even think about what you're saying, or do you have your head so far up your ass that you're out of touch with reality?

 

That's by far the hardest right-wing stance anyone could take. Complete disregard of civil liberties and an overwhelming disregard for constitutional standards, and amendments. Well done.

Oy, that's like saying Michael Vick hadn't been convicted on dogfighting charges yet, so who cares about the overwhelming evidence implicating his guilt. Do you even think about what you're saying, or do you have your head so far up your ass that you're out of touch with reality?

By the way, Michael Vick entered a guilty plea. So your facts are wrong.

Interestingly, that's the part of his post I found so funny.

That's why his statement was so absurd. I'd be embarrassed to have made that post.

I'm sort of in between on how to react to the post-incident interview with the cop. He blatantly said "I don't do those types of things" when the topic of soliciting sex wasn't being discussed. It's pretty interesting how Alberto Gonzales, Michael Chertoff, Rumsfeld and now this Senator have a hard time "recalling" events. Not saying it's impossible to remember a lot of events, but this "incident" happened moments before this interview.

What some people on this board don't get is that Vitter ADMITTED to being involved with the DC Madam:

 

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/...1657766,00.html

Republicans, meanwhile, are tripping over themselves to get away from Craig as yet another scandal risks further depressing their base. The effect of the Craig scandal "will be to intensify their anti-gay rhetoric," said Becky Dansky, federal legislative director at the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, pointing to the contrast between the treatment of Craig and that of Louisiana Senator David Vitter, who admitted to being involved with the infamous D.C. Madam. "Vitter received a standing ovation from his party caucus; Senator Craig is immediately forced out of his committee positions just because of the gender involved in the scandal," Dansky said. "I never thought I'd start to feel a little bit sorry for Senator Craig."

 

So, saying that the DC Madam hasn't been convicted of anything is just parsing words, because, with all the evidence there, it's not a matter of if, but WHEN she gets convicted.

 

Oh, and regarding the Vick thing I said, the "plead guilty" is just as good as a conviction when it comes to the crimes he committed in my book.

You said everyone knows Michael Vick was guilty though he hadn't been convicted. He had already entered his guilty plea when you made the statement. Punto.

 

All of your examples have been in a court of law except Vitter's. Don't see the issue there at all?

I personally could care less if the man is gay, which it certainly seems like he is. However, the GOP says differently. They refuse to let anyone who appears even remotely homosexual near their party, which will continue to hurt them as long as they continue to wage a war against gays. Most of it is because they have to keep the Evangelicals happy, otherwise they're all going to lose their jobs.

 

I can almost guarantee that he will quit his job before he comes out.

I personally could care less if the man is gay, which it certainly seems like he is. However, the GOP says differently. They refuse to let anyone who appears even remotely homosexual near their party, which will continue to hurt them as long as they continue to wage a war against gays. Most of it is because they have to keep the Evangelicals happy, otherwise they're all going to lose their jobs.

 

I can almost guarantee that he will quit his job before he comes out.

 

Anyone that knew anything about Congressmen knew Foley was gay. Being gay wasn't his problem, hitting on interns was, and the GOP won't stand for that.

Since the Democrats stand for an everything is OK as long as it feels good position, a Congressment can actually have sex with an intern and be celebrated for his courage.

Since the Democrats stand for an everything is OK as long as it feels good position, a Congressment can actually have sex with an intern and be celebrated for his courage.

:thumbdown

Anyone that knew anything about Congressmen knew Foley was gay. Being gay wasn't his problem, hitting on interns was, and the GOP won't stand for that.

Since the Democrats stand for an everything is OK as long as it feels good position, a Congressment can actually have sex with an intern and be celebrated for his courage.

Admin the Cable Guy on PCP could say something more eloquent than than

Since the Democrats stand for an everything is OK as long as it feels good position, a Congressment can actually have sex with an intern and be celebrated for his courage.

:thumbdown

 

Actually happened.

Since the Democrats stand for an everything is OK as long as it feels good position, a Congressment can actually have sex with an intern and be celebrated for his courage.

:thumbdown

 

Actually happened.

 

I'm stunned.