Sleaze bag GOP Congressman wants to know: "is your little guy limp…or growing"



thebluetrain

New Member
Jul 31, 2004
1,074
0
0
52
Wurm said:
Studds took the kid to Morocco with full knowledge of the parents I believe, so he didn't technically break any laws. .
LMFAO, typical liberal response. You wouldnt happen to be from Vermont would you? Is Judge Edward Cashman your neighbor? Maybe your from Neverland Ranch?:D

So if the Dems win it'll be because of lies by the media and the Foley, liberal media, smear campaign. Right?
Won't have anything to do with voters making a choice and picking a new direction for the country, Correct?
They'll actually have to come up with some kind of agenda...They'll have to actually back up their impeachment talk and they'll have to convince us all that higher taxes are a good idea...That cutting and running and American defeat is a good idea...
Basically...If the current crop of idiots in the Democratic party find themselves in a Congressional majority...We'll probably see first hand what a collection of ineffective boobs these idiots really are.

I thought privacy of private citizens was more important than any news story.
Hmm...again, libs show blatant disregard for privacy when it serves their own political gains. Privacy only counts for something if you want to use it as a shield to kill babies.

To bad you wont be on YBSB to enjoy the victory party unless W starts arming those bombs soon.
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
thebluetrain said:
LMFAO, typical liberal response.
"Liberal response"? Nope, just the facts.

thebluetrain said:
So if the Dems win it'll be because of lies by the media and the Foley, liberal media, smear campaign. Right?
Wrong. If the Dems win it'll be from the Repigs doing what they've actually done...as in criminal, unethical, immoral behavior. No one has to lie about it, since the facts are there for all to see.

But you'll keep whining that it's the "liberal media" that's out to get them. What liberal media? Most of the larger MSM outlets are owned or operated by Right-Wingers.

So we see once again that the lies are coming from mindless shills like yourself.

thebluetrain said:
Privacy only counts for something if you want to use it as a shield to kill babies.
Or if you want to use it to:

1) torture indiscriminately
2) lock people up with no legal foundation
3) conduct secret energy meetings
4) hide evidence of complicity in any illegal gov't action


thebluetrain said:
To bad you wont be on YBSB to enjoy the victory party unless W starts arming those bombs soon.
For your perusal: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20061001&articleId=3361
 

thebluetrain

New Member
Jul 31, 2004
1,074
0
0
52
LMFAO, U.S. Coast Guard implicated in the Conflict with Iran,
So, according to your article that you posted, the US Coast Guard is going to lead the invasion of Iran.
"The U.S. Coast Guard will be of great value in the event of a conflict with Iran. U.S. Coast Guard can “enter ports that other warships can not.”7 This would be useful in securing bridgeheads of entry for an invasion force into Iran."
Then please explain to me why the US Government spends assloads of money to train US Navy Seals, US Special Forces, Delta Force, and Green Berets only to let the US Coast Guard "lead the invasion of Iran"? LMFAO:D :D :D :D .

You are so BRAINWASHED and you dont even know it. So the US Coast Guard with its 110 foot Cutters and one 25mm and two 50 cal. machine guns mounted are going to "lead the invasion of Iran".

Moderated : LeBleutrain use of abusive language is prohibited.



Wurm said:
"Liberal response"? Nope, just the facts.

Wrong. If the Dems win it'll be from the Repigs doing what they've actually done...as in criminal, unethical, immoral behavior. No one has to lie about it, since the facts are there for all to see.

But you'll keep whining that it's the "liberal media" that's out to get them. What liberal media? Most of the larger MSM outlets are owned or operated by Right-Wingers.

So we see once again that the lies are coming from mindless shills like yourself.

Or if you want to use it to:

1) torture indiscriminately
2) lock people up with no legal foundation
3) conduct secret energy meetings
4) hide evidence of complicity in any illegal gov't action


For your perusal: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20061001&articleId=3361
 

davidmc

New Member
Jun 23, 2004
3,415
0
0
wolfix said:
And you need to explain why Bill Bennett and Newt is in your list.........
errr....gambling perhaps :confused: , seeing as he wrote a book:
Bill Bennett's Bad Bet
The bookmaker of virtues. :rolleyes:
Let's also be honest that gambling would not be our first-choice vice if we were designing this fantasy-come-true from scratch. But gambling will do. It will definitely do. Bill Bennett has been exposed as a humbug artist who ought to be pelted off the public stage if he lacks the decency to slink quietly away, as he is constantly calling on others to do. Although it may be impossible for anyone famous to become permanently discredited in American culture (a Bennett-like point I agree with), Bennett clearly deserves that distinction. \
:)
http://www.slate.com/id/2082526/
 

davidmc

New Member
Jun 23, 2004
3,415
0
0
Wurm said:
And BTW, before the RW Sheep here revert to their typical (and irrelevant) Clinton/Lewinsky comparisons, let's keep in mind that she was a consenting adult, and the fact that it was heterosexual should make at least some of you gay-hater's happy.

Congressional pages are minors, and Rep. Foley's predilection is (gasp!)...homosexual.

It is also coming out that Foley's illegal amour and related shennanigans were apparently known - yet ignored or condoned by - some of the equally repugnant Repig leadership. So it's not just "one bad apple" here, but a pack of rotter's at the core of the GOP.

What's next...Cheney + Osama tag-teaming a llama on the East Lawn?
The only way they will prevail in the upcoming elections is if they have an october suprise. W & **** are insane enough to do it too, not that they hav'nt bogged down/crippled our military already :mad:
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
thebluetrain said:
LMFAO, U.S. Coast Guard implicated in the Conflict with Iran,
So, according to your article that you posted, the US Coast Guard is going to lead the invasion of Iran.
"The U.S. Coast Guard will be of great value in the event of a conflict with Iran. U.S. Coast Guard can “enter ports that other warships can not.”7 This would be useful in securing bridgeheads of entry for an invasion force into Iran."
Then please explain to me why the US Government spends assloads of money to train US Navy Seals, US Special Forces, Delta Force, and Green Berets only to let the US Coast Guard "lead the invasion of Iran"? LMFAO:D :D :D :D .
Your low intelligence level cannot seem to comprehend the fact that a CG ship is much smaller than full-sized warships, hence able to “enter ports that other warships can not.”

DUH.

You are grasping at straws again, but then...that's all you've got to work with.
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
davidmc said:
The only way they will prevail in the upcoming elections is if they have an october suprise.
You're forgetting about Diebold, Sequoia, ES&S, etc. With their e-voting machines they'll throw the elections like they did in Georgia '02, Ohio '04, and other states.
 

davidmc

New Member
Jun 23, 2004
3,415
0
0
Wurm said:
You're forgetting about Diebold, Sequoia, ES&S, etc. With their e-voting machines they'll throw the elections like they did in Georgia '02, Ohio '04, and other states.
thats right. no paper trail. still, the repubs incompetence can not be covered up by crooked voting machines.
 

davidmc

New Member
Jun 23, 2004
3,415
0
0
Here's my 'cut & paste" for the day. It aint' easy but somebody's got to do it :D

GOP Imploding :)

Republicans circle the wagons on Foley scandal
GOP lawmakers seek to defend Hastert, acknowledge leaders’ mistakes

Cancellation, no explanation
Rep. Thomas Reynolds, who heads the House Republicans’ re-election effort, would have been the chamber’s top GOP official on the Sunday talk shows. Booked weeks ago for ABC’s “This Week,” he confirmed his appearance on Wednesday. By Saturday, his office canceled without explanation and arranged for a substitute guest, Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Fla., a network spokeswoman said.

A Reynolds spokesman said the New York congressman had flu-like symptoms. Reynolds, whose district covers a stretch of New York between the suburbs of Buffalo and Rochester, is now trailing his Democratic opponent, Jack Davis, by a 48-33 percent margin, according to a poll conducted by Zogby International for The Buffalo News.

Reynolds has been criticized by Democrats who say he did too little to protect a page from Foley, the Florida Republican who resigned Sept. 29 after the disclosure of his sexually explicit electronic messages to teenage former male pages. Foley is now under investigation by federal and Florida authorities.

The scandal has ignited what has become a political firestorm before the Nov. 7 elections, with the Republican majority in the House and Senate in jeopardy.
 

thebluetrain

New Member
Jul 31, 2004
1,074
0
0
52
Wurm said:
Your low intelligence level cannot seem to comprehend the fact that a CG ship is much smaller than full-sized warships, hence able to “enter ports that other warships can not.”

DUH.

You are grasping at straws again, but then...that's all you've got to work with.
Ok genius, since you still havent figured it out I will figure it out for you since you are obviously struggling with this one.
Do you remember the Israeli ship that entered Lebanese waters and got hit by a Chinese made, Iranian purchased, C-701 Kosar missle in their latest conflict with Hezbollah? Well that warship, the INS Hanit, was 281 feet long and its top speed is 36mph/33knots. The US Coast Guard is using 110ft Cutters in the Persian Gulf and their top speed is 32mph/29knots. Now, using your theory "fact that a CG ship is much smaller than full-sized warships, hence able to “enter ports that other warships can not” is just mathematically stupid. You see, speed would play a very important factor to a vessel entering an Iranian port to secure it. It would be like shooting ducks on a pond, or as Limerickman likes to say, shooting fish in a barrel:D .
I would send in a small group of Navy Seals, under the cover of darkness, in a small rigid hull inflatable boat, capable of very high speeds, and capable of inflicting major damage, to secure any port or bridgeheads. Thats why Democrats should never be allowed to be in charge of the military. They dont have clue.

Now that the lesson has been taught and school is adjourned I have one question for you:
Its 30 days til D-Day, Have you packed your bags for your 1 month vacation to Neverland Ranch?
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
Now we see that bluetrain is suddenly a Naval tactician expert. :rolleyes: Truly, a legend in his own mind.

I'll take exactly zero instruction from you on military matters, Homer. If/when/after you've done what I've done in U.S. Army Intelligence (or similar), come back and maybe we can talk. Well, on second thought...no, maybe not...since your 'Navy Seals scenario' shows how little you understand of tactical planning.

The author wasn't referring to speed per se, but size of the ship, draft, overall mission, etc. But that's missing the main point isn't it? If I wished to argue the minutiae, I would do so with someone who actually knows what they're talking about - and that ain't you.

The fact remains that US naval battle groups are on their way to the Iran region. THAT is what we all should keep our eyes on.

So, we get yet more tangents & distractions from the RW Sheep, BECAUSE they can't seem to face the simple fact that their leaders are criminal, traitorous, despicable sacks of ****.
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
davidmc said:
errr....gambling perhaps :confused: , seeing as he wrote a book:
:)
http://www.slate.com/id/2082526/

And let's not forget Newt "Baby Huey" Gingrich's whoring around on his wife, while at the same time he was the banner-carrier for the Republican "family values" ruse.

Repig voters = dumber than dirt. :rolleyes:
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
BTW - I did a little fact-checking on the Studds matter, and the real difference between the Studds and Foley cases can be expressed in 9 simple statements, based on what we've been told so far about both cases:

1. As far as we know Studds was not forcing his unwelcome attentions on a series of pages, one after the other.

2. No page went to the Democratic leadership asking for protection from Studds, only to be rebuffed and ignored.

3. The Democratic Party did not run on a platform of "righteousness" and anti-homosexuality, while behaving hypocritically in private.

4. The Democratic Speaker of the House did not make statements about the incident that were immediately revealed to be outright lies ... by fellow Democrats.

5. The Democrats did not then begin an orchestrated media campaign to blame the entire problem on ... the Repigs (or the young man, for that matter).

6. Democrats did not take to the airwaves with talking points that were transparent lies.

7. Pro-Democratic writers (there weren't any bloggers then, remember?) didn't violate the privacy of the young man involved and give his name out to the press. They didn't call the young man a "beast" or blame him for Studds' behavior, either. (Have you heard any Repig leaders criticize the bloggers who gave out the young victims' names?)

8. How many times does this need to be said? It's the cover-up, stupid.

9. The Democratic leadership did not protect a predator, conceal his wrongdoing, and allow him to continue his activities in secret...the Repigs did.
 

thebluetrain

New Member
Jul 31, 2004
1,074
0
0
52
I am far from a Naval tactician expert but I have enough sea time to know that a slow warship or cutter leading an invasion on an Iranian port is a sitting duck. You may be correct that US Naval Battle Groups are on their way to the Persian Gulf but Naval Battle Groups have been relieving each other in the Gulf since Desert Storm, nothing new there. In your case though, whether or not a Naval Battle Group is on its way there is only relevant up until Nov 7. :)



Wurm said:
Now we see that bluetrain is suddenly a Naval tactician expert. :rolleyes: Truly, a legend in his own mind.

I'll take exactly zero instruction from you on military matters, Homer. If/when/after you've done what I've done in U.S. Army Intelligence (or similar), come back and maybe we can talk. Well, on second thought...no, maybe not...since your 'Navy Seals scenario' shows how little you understand of tactical planning.

The author wasn't referring to speed per se, but size of the ship, draft, overall mission, etc. But that's missing the main point isn't it? If I wished to argue the minutiae, I would do so with someone who actually knows what they're talking about - and that ain't you.

The fact remains that US naval battle groups are on their way to the Iran region. THAT is what we all should keep our eyes on.

So, we get yet more tangents & distractions from the RW Sheep, BECAUSE they can't seem to face the simple fact that their leaders are criminal, traitorous, despicable sacks of ****.
 

thebluetrain

New Member
Jul 31, 2004
1,074
0
0
52
Wurm said:
BTW - I did a little fact-checking on the Studds matter, and the real difference between the Studds and Foley cases can be expressed in 9 simple statements, based on what we've been told so far about both cases:


1. As far as we know Studds was not forcing his unwelcome attentions on a series of pages, one after the other.

2. No page went to the Democratic leadership asking for protection from Studds, only to be rebuffed and ignored.

3. The Democratic Party did not run on a platform of "righteousness" and anti-homosexuality, while behaving hypocritically in private.

4. The Democratic Speaker of the House did not make statements about the incident that were immediately revealed to be outright lies ... by fellow Democrats.

5. The Democrats did not then begin an orchestrated media campaign to blame the entire problem on ... the Repigs (or the young man, for that matter).

6. Democrats did not take to the airwaves with talking points that were transparent lies.

7. Pro-Democratic writers (there weren't any bloggers then, remember?) didn't violate the privacy of the young man involved and give his name out to the press. They didn't call the young man a "beast" or blame him for Studds' behavior, either. (Have you heard any Repig leaders criticize the bloggers who gave out the young victims' names?)

8. How many times does this need to be said? It's the cover-up, stupid.

9. The Democratic leadership did not protect a predator, conceal his wrongdoing, and allow him to continue his activities in secret...the Repigs did.
The ILGA was found to be Allied with NAMBLA in 1994...

They Obviously Severed their Ties after being Caught.

NAMBLA has Marched with Homosexuals in Parades all throughout the Deviant Liberation.

One Side has, and does Stand with Pedophiles, and it's the Left as a Group...

From Tenured Professors, to Clinical Psychologists who want Pedophilia relabled to "Adult/Child" Sex, much in the same way "Homosexual" became "Gay" so that it would not be so Stigmatized.

Individual homosexual perverts like Foley do not represent Republicans.

And we Denounce and Remove them, not Coddle and Re-Elect them like the DemocRATS did with Studds (D), or let them out of Prison like Clinton did with Reynolds (D), or have Fireside Chats with them like Larry King did Mary Kay Letourneau with her 2nd Grade Victim.

Is it Conservative Judges who let these pedophiles off lightly?...

Is it Conservatives who give them jobs, as Je$$e Jack$on did Mel Reynolds (D) after Clinton let him out of prison?...

There are going to be perverts and pedophiles on both sides in a system as Large as ours...

The Difference is in how they are treated.

That difference is obvious when you look at Studds (D) and Reynolds (D) and Foley (R).

To Deny the Difference, is to Deny Reality.

I am just at a complete loss how so many people can live in a the liberal bubble thinking these aborting, tax raising, slum building, homosexual perversion supporting democrats are such good politicians, while they spend days on end bashing a gay who resigned and did the right thing, something non of them would ever do. Watching Liberals get all indignant over the Foley mess has been quite a sight. Especially since on any given day, they would be very supportive of it.
__________________
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
"a gay who resigned and did the right thing,"?? Yeah, RIGHT!...after how many years of doing the wrong thing and finally getting found out, and how many years of his GOP cronies looking the other way? Foley & the Repigs would still be doing what they do best had the page not outed the *******.
 

davidmc

New Member
Jun 23, 2004
3,415
0
0
Wurm said:
"a gay who resigned and did the right thing,"?? Yeah, RIGHT!...after how many years of doing the wrong thing and finally getting found out, and how many years of his GOP cronies looking the other way? Foley & the Repigs would still be doing what they do best had the page not outed the *******.
Correct. the GOP is the party who courts the religious-right w/ their "family-values" platform. The Dem's don't court the evangelical's. If some of the evangelical's want to vote Democratic, thats their own prerogative but the Dem's don't bend over backwards promising stone-age devolutions in legislation as the Repub's have done :) they are getting their "just deserts" for alighning themselves w/ the christian right and being found out to be hypocrits. All they care about is starving the gov't of revenue so that they can give their country club, frat boy, predominately white, predominately well-off boys free-rides at the expense of the greater society :mad: They (Norqist, DeLay, Ralph Reed, ect...) have been exposed for what they actually are :p
 

thebluetrain

New Member
Jul 31, 2004
1,074
0
0
52
Wurm said:
Yeah, RIGHT!...after how many years of doing the wrong thing and finally getting found out,
Kind of like your boy Bill Clinton? Whitewater, Monica come to mind.
 

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
davidmc said:
Correct. the GOP is the party who courts the religious-right w/ their "family-values" platform. The Dem's don't court the evangelical's. If some of the evangelical's want to vote Democratic, thats their own prerogative but the Dem's don't bend over backwards promising stone-age devolutions in legislation as the Repub's have done :) they are getting their "just deserts" for alighning themselves w/ the christian right and being found out to be hypocrits. All they care about is starving the gov't of revenue so that they can give their country club, frat boy, predominately white, predominately well-off boys free-rides at the expense of the greater society :mad: They (Norqist, DeLay, Ralph Reed, ect...) have been exposed for what they actually are :p


Dave - this Foley business - I understand that it's reported that the young boy who is the object of the (former) Congressman's affections is 16 years old.
Is this correct?

What is the majority age in the USA?
Is 18 years of age the age of majority over there?
 

davidmc

New Member
Jun 23, 2004
3,415
0
0
limerickman said:
Dave - this Foley business - I understand that it's reported that the young boy who is the object of the (former) Congressman's affections is 16 years old.
Is this correct?

What is the majority age in the USA?
Is 18 years of age the age of majority over there?
The age of consent is 16, in many states, however the other party can be no more than 5 yrs senior (21)