Are Democrats Hypocrites?

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But this simply isn't true. They support each other all the time. I remember when one of the Republicans pursuing Clinton for the Monica affair stepped down because he had just been caught having an affair with his wife- His fellow Republican Senators tried to compel him to stay! Its fantastic. The guys who spend endless resources trying to bring down the President for having an affair... one of them is having an affair. And all his peers SUPPORT HIM.


[/ QUOTE ]

If your point is that republican politicians are hyporcrites I agree with you. However the point I made is that everyday joe shmoo democrats(not elected politicians) are in general more hypocritical then republicans.

Do you think this "guy" would have the same support amoung his fellow republicans if he had perjured himself trying to cover up this affair? Also do you know the name of this "guy" or have a link to the story you are referring too, I'm interested in seeing if this "guy" actually exist was re-elected.


Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

I think kurto means Bob Livingston, who wasn't a Senator but a member of the House and was chosen to be Newt Gingrich's successor as Speaker of the House. IIRC, his affair was outed because Larry Flynt offered something like a million dollars to anyone who could verify an extra-marital affair of an influential Republican in the wake of the Clinton/Lewisnky scandal -- someone eventually produced the evidence and before Flynt could publish the story, Livingston was forced to step down in the midst of the Clinton impeachment proceedings. I don't remember anyone asking for Livingston to stay -- in fact, I seem to remember the GOP essentially showed him the door so that his story wouldn't distract from the impeachment proceedings/the GOP narrative, ala the inside job the GOP leaders did on Trent Lott back in 2002 when Bush/Rove spearheaded his ouster from the Minority Leader's position.

But kurto may be right, and I may not remember the events correctly. I'm almost positive he's talking about Bob Livingston, though.

[Colonel Kataffy]

Republicans more so then democrats set themselves up for scrutany. By holding other people to a higher standards of morality, they are also holding themselves out for ridicule if they fail to live up to those standards.

For instance, a republican cheats on his wife with his intern, no prob. thats your business, not mine. if that same republican goes on and on about the sanctity of marraige and that he has christian values and that gays shouldn't be able to marry bla blah blah and then we found out he's screwing his intern, then I think we should call him out on it.

[4 High]

Stu you make no real point. Most "joe schmo" democrats dont even know about Studds and the few that do are either 70 or know about thanks to people like you or Sean Hannity. So how in the hell can they be more hypocritical?

[bkholdem]

Are people over 6' tall hypocrites?

[samsonite2100]

[ QUOTE ]
considering they re-elected this guy 5 times?

Discuss

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Has anyone pointed out yet that Studds' relationship with the page was consensual and legal? Creepy, yes, but entirely different from the Foley situation.

And to answer your question, republicans are bigger hypocrites than democrats. It's scientific.

[samsonite2100]

Also, I love Hannity-style talking points like this

[ QUOTE ]
Some years later a democrat president was involved in a sex scandle. His party gives him a pass. They even give him a pass for trying to cover that scandle up, yet now they are crying for Hasterts resignation for hiding a sex scandal.

[/ QUOTE ]

It makes it look like republicans can't tell the difference between Clinton lying about a hummer and Hastert et al covering for a known pedophiliac. I think the voting public is going to unkindly remember these little logical contortions in a few weeks--please keep repeating them.

[elscorcho768]

I think it's wrong to say Republicans are more hypocritical than Democrats or visa-versa. The ideology doesn't make them more hyprocritcal. It's the nature of politics. Since the desire to get re-elected is perhaps the strongest incentive for a politician to act certain ways, when one politician on either side of the aisle gets out of line in some way (this particular case is really sick, the other side will pounce on this. Both sides do it and no side is better than the other.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
It makes it look like republicans can't tell the difference between Clinton lying about a hummer and Hastert et al covering for a known pedophiliac. I think the voting public is going to unkindly remember these little logical contortions in a few weeks--please keep repeating them.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I am calling for Hastert's head and I am not defending the Republicans and I hope they get their asses whooped good in November. However, you are making a tired and silly argument defending Clinton that to this day still ticks me off for the retardedness of it.

a) The man attempted to destroy a young girls life by making her look like a pyscho until she dropped the goods on him (because, of course, he dropped the goods on her).
b) He wagged his finger to the public and lied with righteous indignation.
c) He committed a felony in the coverup (whether it was provable of not).
d) He dragged the nation through a horrible ordeal as a result of his deeds (regardless of the republican culpability)
d) He is an adulterer and as a leader he set a terrible example
e) And most importantly, he put our national interests at risk. Whether it was his right to do what he did with that woman, he certainly could foresee the firestorm if he ever got caught and he did it anyway.

The man didnt just get a hummer from some woman. He was a national disgrace and a felon. The innocents of the act that started the whole ball rolling does not forgive his future deeds.

Now, Foley should be taken behind a woodshed and have the [censored] kicked out of him. However, he never purposely set out to destroy a young person's life like Clinton did. What do think would have happened to Monica if she didnt have the dress?

Clinton's actions were worse than Foley's by a LONG way. And, the Democrat response to those actions was a national disgrace as well.

[samsonite2100]

Oh get off it. The shitstorm that was "Monicagate" was created and sustained by a relentless republican effort to discredit Clinton. Try as you might to make the scope grander, in it's essence it does come down to A) Clinton got blown B) Clinton lied about it.

[ QUOTE ]
Clinton's actions were worse than Foley's by a LONG way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, please keep repeating stuff like this b/c it makes republicans look totally insane.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh get off it. The shitstorm that was "Monicagate" was created and sustained by a relentless republican effort to discredit Clinton. Try as you might to make the scope grander, in it's essence it does come down to A) Clinton got blown B) Clinton lied about it.

[ QUOTE ]
Clinton's actions were worse than Foley's by a LONG way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, please keep repeating stuff like this b/c it makes republicans look totally insane.

[/ QUOTE ]You have said absolutely nothing of course. But hey, knock yourself out with completely ignoring the facts of the situation and completely ignoring Clinton was trying to destroy a young women. I suppose when you keep repeating "it was only a blow job" to the uneducated they will eventually believe it like you did. It is propoganda 101 and it is why both parties do it.