Jump to content


Photo

Scandals: Pubs vs. Dems

politics

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38778 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 12:01 PM

Does anyone out there assume that one party makes an ass (pun intended?) of themselves more than the other?  I know we have our republicans who are all about family values but are then found in the address book of a madam who runs an upscale escort service.  Disgusting.  We have anti-gay types who are later found with boys.  Reprehensible.  We have those who take money or gifts and try to hide them, etc.  It's embarrassing.  We have Mark Sanford who lied about hiking the Appalachian trail but was instead chasing some Brazilian tail... and now he has been elected again.  There's also the douchenozzle from Missouri who is convinced rape victims can't get pregnant.  OTOH, we have Bill Clinton lying about getting a blowjob in the white house, Rod Blagojevich milking Illinois dry, we have Weinergate (also running for mayor of NY and leading the polls), Elliot Spitzer who was prosecuting hookers while at the same time, employing them and this other San Diego asshole Filner who wants his secretary to come to work without underwear on.  Charlie Rangel is under investigation, Barney Frank is a button-pusher and some other Dem was found with a bunch of stolen money in his freezer.  Is it possible that there is just too much material on both sides to point fingers or are there people who love their party so much that they assume that the other party is CLEARLY more corrupt and scandal-worthy?


  • 0

#2 Thag

Thag

    Comptroller of Nothing

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 46294 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 12:03 PM

It is hard to make fun of Libertarians, they wear their crazy like a badge of honor.
  • 0

#3 codemonkey

codemonkey

    Ass. Comptroller of Ferthdays

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18916 posts
  • LocationMy suburban paradise

Posted 25 July 2013 - 12:04 PM

I think the Ds take the lead in volume, mostly because the group is a lot less homogeneous than the Rs. The R scandals tend to be more mind-blowing, though.

 

/my rather biased opinion


  • 0

#4 TonyBrown

TonyBrown

    Comptroller of C-Blocking and Wet Streak Marks

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73012 posts
  • LocationRedneckistan

Posted 25 July 2013 - 12:08 PM

I think the Ds take the lead in volume, mostly because the group is a lot less homogeneous than the Rs. The R scandals tend to be more mind-blowing, though.

 

/my rather biased opinion

i'd agree here.  D's seem to be involved more but its less volatile to their political stances.  anti-gay R's being caught in a seedy motel with a male prostitute, well, family values indeed, right?  very easy targets they make of themselves.


  • 0

#5 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38778 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 12:14 PM

I was going to mention that Ds seem to get involved with sex more that Rs but now I'm not sure.  Sanford and the guy from Louisiana (found in the address book of the escort service) was about sex.  Remember the R from Florida who was all over the (male) teenage page/interns at the capital?  Sex there too.  Hmm.


Edited by KenLenard, 25 July 2013 - 12:14 PM.

  • 0

#6 shmgeggie

shmgeggie

    Comptroller of Mythical Creatures

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9205 posts
  • LocationPort Orchard, WA

Posted 25 July 2013 - 01:30 PM

There was the "wide-stance" guy too. Had to use google to tell me he was on the R team, cause I forgot.


  • 0

#7 shmgeggie

shmgeggie

    Comptroller of Mythical Creatures

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9205 posts
  • LocationPort Orchard, WA

Posted 25 July 2013 - 01:32 PM

Do we count Kennedy boinking MM in the White House as a "scandal" or is that just doing it like a boss?


  • 0

#8 Stains_not_here_man

Stains_not_here_man

    Phat O'Mic Chef Winner!

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 94404 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 01:33 PM

There was the "wide-stance" guy too. Had to use google to tell me he was on the R team, cause I forgot.

 

Don't worry, lots of people have this problem, because the media (cough FOX NEWS cough) misidentified him as a Democrat when they broke the story... :D

 

Posted Image


  • 0

#9 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38778 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 01:46 PM

Yeah, the guy from Idaho.  I never did understand that story.  What was with the foot-tapping?  If you find yourself in a public men's room stall and you tap your foot, gay male models are supposed to come out of the ceiling tiles, drop down and get busy with you?  I don't get it.  But he is another excellent example of politicians gone horribly wrong.


  • 0

#10 BIG POPPA

BIG POPPA

    Duke of Errrrl

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 25964 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 01:51 PM

Truth be known I think they are all guilty. However when the Rs get up on their high horse so much and preach it like it was from the mouth of god, that's where they get so much attention. The really loud and high and mighty are more fun to watch fall off and bust their ass.


  • 0

#11 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38778 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 02:16 PM

Truth be known I think they are all guilty. However when the Rs get up on their high horse so much and preach it like it was from the mouth of god, that's where they get so much attention. The really loud and high and mighty are more fun to watch fall off and bust their ass.

I agree.  Oh, the irony of the straight-laced, family value guy getting caught with his dingle someplace it shouldn't be.

 

One jagoff I wanted to mention in my original rant (but there were so many that I forgot) was John Edwards.  Let's have an affair and then a child with the girlfriend all while the wife is battling cancer.  Wow, classy work there.


  • 0

#12 MissPerforation

MissPerforation

    Official Thing Holder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1479 posts
  • Location1 toke over the line

Posted 25 July 2013 - 02:21 PM

I thought getting caught doing something naughty was an occupational hazard of being a politician

 


  • 0

#13 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38778 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 02:25 PM

I thought getting caught doing something naughty was an occupational hazard of being a politician

I think it's fair to say it's been a bi-partisan effort.  :lol:

 

I was watching some talking heads the other night and someone mentioned what an ass Elliot Spitzer was and then someone else mentioned what an ass Mark Sanford was.  Then someone defended Mark Sanford saying that "he didn't do anything illegal".  That would make a great tagline on his election commercials... Vote for Mark Sanford because... he hasn't done anything illegal!:covreyes:


Edited by KenLenard, 25 July 2013 - 02:33 PM.

  • 0

#14 orudis

orudis

    Deputy Comptroller of Rarts

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19555 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio

Posted 25 July 2013 - 02:52 PM

I think you'd have to be incredibly dumb to think one side is more prone to scandal than the other.  


  • 0

#15 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38778 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 02:59 PM

I think you'd have to be incredibly dumb to think one side is more prone to scandal than the other.  

When you watch Fox, all Republicans walk on water.  On MSNBC, it's the same for the Democrats.  When a R messes up, Fox rarely reports it.  When a D messes up, MSNBC just keeps talking about what an ass Mark Sanford is.  I realize these people are entertainers, not journalists.  If there was a show called "Political Scandal!", the script would write itself. 


  • 0

#16 orudis

orudis

    Deputy Comptroller of Rarts

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19555 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio

Posted 25 July 2013 - 03:02 PM

When you watch Fox, all Republicans walk on water.  On MSNBC, it's the same for the Democrats.  When a R messes up, Fox rarely reports it.  When a D messes up, MSNBC just keeps talking about what an ass Mark Sanford is.  I realize these people are entertainers, not journalists.  If there was a show called "Political Scandal!", the script would write itself. 

 

Well, I also think it would be pretty dumb to watch only Fox or only MSNBC, although I have to say I did watch some msnbc yesterday and they were pretty critical of Weiner, so I don't think you are really on solid ground in drawing an equivalence between them.  


  • 0

#17 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38778 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 03:04 PM

Well, I also think it would be pretty dumb to watch only Fox or only MSNBC, although I have to say I did watch some msnbc yesterday and they were pretty critical of Weiner, so I don't think you are really on solid ground in drawing an equivalence between them.  

Agreed, I did see some Weiner-bashing on MSNBC.  I try to get some balance... a little Lawrence O'Donnell, a little O'Reilly, a little Rachel Maddow, etc.  Hannity and Limbaugh I can't listen to or watch.  It's fun to get the different perspectives and see what angle they take.  It's comical, actually.


  • 0

#18 orudis

orudis

    Deputy Comptroller of Rarts

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19555 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio

Posted 25 July 2013 - 03:15 PM

Agreed, I did see some Weiner-bashing on MSNBC.  I try to get some balance... a little Lawrence O'Donnell, a little O'Reilly, a little Rachel Maddow, etc.  Hannity and Limbaugh I can't listen to or watch.  It's fun to get the different perspectives and see what angle they take.  It's comical, actually.

 

Sure, I didn't mean to imply that you were only getting one side of the story.  At the gym earlier today I watched a little bit of Fox and their chyron said something like "Potential fallout from Obama's claim of phony scandals."  Its often educational and entertaining to see what the "other side" is consuming, information-wise.  


  • 0

#19 bierboy

bierboy

    Comptroller of Temporary Pancakes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14576 posts
  • LocationThe Firey Pits of Liberal Hell

Posted 25 July 2013 - 03:26 PM

I agree with most of what is being said. I am not sure that we will have another Watergate or Iran Contra again the way these ####ers collude. Sex, of course, sells.
  • 0

#20 BIG POPPA

BIG POPPA

    Duke of Errrrl

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 25964 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 03:49 PM

Sure, I didn't mean to imply that you were only getting one side of the story.  At the gym earlier today I watched a little bit of Fox and their chyron said something like "Potential fallout from Obama's claim of phony scandals."  Its often educational and entertaining to see what the "other side" is consuming, information-wise.  

 

The thing I despise is when I go to the doctor's office, which as you get older gets more frequent, they always seem to have Fox news on. Maybe it's just around here, but it is irritating. By the time the lil nurse comes out to take my BP I'm already worked up.


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: politics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users