Mull this question over...
Why are the very same Liberals and Democrats who thought the Boy Scouts should allow Gays to be Scout Leaders, are now upset that Foley was in charge of Pages in Congress?
Either it is ok or it's not, which one is it?
Conservative-Majority is here to bring you the blogging spot where all Republicans, Liberals & Radicals come to discuss current events, policies, etc. If you have a topic you would like to discuss, a question or a comment, feel free to e-mail us at Republican.Majority@gmail.com *ATTENTION* For your viewing purposes, this blog works best with Mozilla.
7 Comments:
We need to get a rulebook from the Democrats:
— Boy Scouts: As gay as you want to be.
— Priests: No gays!
— Democratic politicians: Proud gay Americans.
— Republican politicians: Presumed guilty.
— White House press corps: No gays, unless they hate Bush.
— Active-duty U.S. military: As gay as possible.
— Men who date Liza Minelli: Do I have to draw you a picture, Miss Thing?
You have confused the issue. This isn't a scandal because he is gay and he is making advances towards another man. This is a scandal because the target of his advances is a child. It would have been just as big a stink if the page he had been harrassing was a female of the same age.
Just because someone is gay, that doesn't make them a pedophile.
Ahhh...but you are wrong concerning Jordan Edmund. Edmund was 18 years old at the time and is considered to be an adult, except in this instance when the Democrats wanted to consider him a poor, helpless overly innocent child.
Why did the Democrats over look the true scandals in '83, '89 and '01 which actually involved sexual intercourse, not just talk?
This is an 'October Surprise' as we all know, however, this is blowing up in the Dem's face.
You missed the part about the Gay Scout leaders. Let me break it down for you...why is it ok for a Gay man to be around little boys and be their Scout leader (Liberals and Democrats favored this), but now they are against a Gay man being around young adults and being their leader while they are pages.
This was designed to hurt the Republican Party, pure and simple.
Oh, but Diego, we must remember that when the rules are applied to Republicans, "it's the seriousness of the charge" that matters, not the actual facts.
Maybe Alec Baldwin could portray Foley in a re-do of the SNL "canteen boy" skit with Adam Sandler...
The Reepers have set their own standards - and violated them, and you want your opposition to give you a free pass for it?
Either your the moral party or your not - it can't be both.
Wear the suit you've made and quit blaming everyone else for it.
Tell me "Would you rather spend a month at Club Gitmo or Would you rather spend a month with the real terrorists?"
You have the nerve to challenge someone else for repeating "talking points" when you repeat stuff like tha as if you had yourself invented it?
You're a dogmatic fraud.
The problem isn't Foley - the problem is the admitted lack of investigation and concern FOR 16 YEAR OLDS entrusted to the safety of Congress.
First off, who said anything about a free pass? I didn't, nor has anyone else and I've said it before that I am glad that Foley is gone.
Next, I never suggested nor tried to take credit for the Club Gitmo comment. In fact, only 1 person has said it and that person is...none other than...Rush Limbaugh and for you I say Mega-dittos for being a Rush listener!!!! Are you a 24/7 subscriber? I am.
I agree there has been a lack of investigation, but it is a two way street. Equal blame goes both ways, especially since Democrats knew about this since,hmmm...last year.
Thank you for voicing your opinions though, it is greatly appreciated.
Got a big laugh reading this today. Rep Jetton is well known for speaking his mind...
http://www.semissourian.com/story/1172582.html
The Dems are upset about this 'insensitive' comment, but then how many Republicans do you know who are sitting around collecting welfare?
Post a Comment
<< Home