A statement

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

U2democrat

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Aug 21, 2004
Messages
22,142
Location
England by way of 'Murica.
The Democrats have all the sex scandals, the Republicans have all the money scandals.





(This is an attempt to have a semi-humorous thread in here...lighten things up a bit)


I personally am proud to be in the party with the sex scandals...:drool::shifty::angel:
 
I realize that it was intended with levity, but here is a question. Knowing both are wrong, and if taken personally, which would worry you more in front of a spouse? A parent?
 
nbcrusader said:
I realize that it was intended with levity, but here is a question. Knowing both are wrong, and if taken personally, which would worry you more in front of a spouse? A parent?

Well in front of a spouse obviously the sex scandal would hurt more.

But a sin is a sin.

I find it very funny how America treats one so much worse than another.

As a politician, in the long run money scandals hurt many more people than a sex scandal.

But sex scandal hits home harder.
 
nbcrusader said:
I realize that it was intended with levity, but here is a question. Knowing both are wrong, and if taken personally, which would worry you more in front of a spouse? A parent?



A parent?

We are not voting for a Daddy.

It does seem like some want a parent
and put blind trust in their choice.
 
Last edited:
nbcrusader said:
The idea is accountability. Many want to be accountable to their parents.

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying this is OK?

The relationship between a child and parent is a unique relationship and shouldn't be a model for any other relationship.
 
nbcrusader said:
The idea is accountability. Many want to be accountable to their parents.


Do you mean you want to be accountable to God?


I don't want to be accountable to an elected official

and I don't care if they have problems in their marriage

I do care if they are corrupt.
 
A_Wanderer said:
Sex rarely hurts anyone. .



Are you kidding me right now?
It most certainly does hurt. It
hurts in more ways than you will
ever know. It hurts in ways that
cause scars that last forever. It
is never forgotten, hardly forgiveable.
It embarrasses SO's, spouses,
families, political parties, states,
and the country. It is humiliating.

Sure it is easier to prove something more
material such as stolen money or assets.
That is something that can be tried and
the perpetrator punished with fines, jail
time etc. Sex is different. It hurts in an entirely
different way.
 
Sex between mutually consenting adults is not by definition harm.

Taking other peoples money and spending it against the reasons that they payed it is much more of a violation.
 
A_Wanderer said:
Sex between mutually consenting adults is not by definition harm.

Taking other peoples money and spending it against the reasons that they payed it is much more of a violation.

I agree.

The first, if it involves infidelity (or a similar breech of trust), is painful for the individuals involved, but has little effect on the running of a government (which is the context in which we are discussing it here).

The second, however, is a violation of the actual position the person was elected/hired for -- which is the running of a government. And that hurts far more people than someone screwing around.
 
indra said:


I agree.

The first, if it involves infidelity (or a similar breech of trust), is painful for the individuals involved, but has little effect on the running of a government (which is the context in which we are discussing it here).

The second, however, is a violation of the actual position the person was elected/hired for -- which is the running of a government. And that hurts far more people than someone screwing around.

nicely put :up:
you do not run a country with having a lovely wife and 2 perfect children and a dog. You better make damn sure you do not abuse the trust placed on you. It is your JOB you get PAID for by the very people that ultimately depend on you.
 
nbcrusader said:
The idea is accountability. Many want to be accountable to their parents.

Every parent glows when their child embezzles and mismanages money.

But how dare they have sex!

Melon
 
That's right, the emotional pain from a sex scandal can be pretty nasty. Look at all the people who've been hurt by pedophilic priests in the Catholic Church. Some of those people are scarred for life.
 
i think pedophelia and adultery are not quite the same

embezzling money is a crime, paedophelia is, rape is... criminals should not hold high public offices and have any power over other people's money/ lifes. Adultery is a moral issue (that not even everyone cares that much about) and belongs to a person's private life.
 
U2democrat said:
The Democrats have all the sex scandals, the Republicans have all the money scandals.

Actually, this isn't true at all. Since the 1980s, the vast majority of money scandals have involved Democrats. I don't claim that the below list is exhaustive, but I've believe its representative, and it paints a picture quite different from the initial implication. (This list only involves convictions)




Rep. Michael Myers (D-PA) served 20 1/2 months of a three year prison sentence for accepting bribes from FBI agents impersonating Arab businessmen. He was convicted in 1980 and expelled from Congress.

Rep. John Murphy (D-NY), Frank Thompsom (D-NJ), John Jenrette (D-SC), and Raymond Lederer (D-PA) convicted and sentenced in the Arab businessmen bribery scandal.

Rep. Mario Biaggi (D-NY) was convicted in 1988 of extorting nearly $2 million from a defense contractor.

Rep. Nick Mavroules (D-MA) pleaded guilty to charges of bribery and tax evasion in 1991.

Rep. Jay Kim (R-CA) was convicted of accepting illegal campaign contributions from foreign sources.

Rep. Wes Cooley (R-OR) was convicted of falsifying VA loan applications

Rep. Albert Bustamante (D-TX) was convicted in 1993 of racketeering and accepting an illegal gratuity.

Rep. Larry Smith (D-FL) was convicted in 1993 of income tax evasion and campaign reporting violations.

Rep. Carl Perkins (D-KY) pleaded guilty in 1994 to filing a false financial disclosure statement, conspiracy to file false statements with the Federal Election Commission, and bank fraud.

Rep. Mel Reynolds (D-IL) was sentenced in 1997 to 6 1/2 years for bank fraud and other violations.

Rep. Walter Tucker III (D-CA) was sentenced in 1996 to two years and three months in prison for accepting and demanding bribes while mayor of a Los Angeles suburb. He resigned from Congress a week after his 1995 conviction.

Rep. Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL) pleaded guilty in 1996 to two felony mail fraud charges.

Rep. Jim Traficant (D-OH) was indicted on 5/4/01 for bribery, tax evasion, racketeering, conspiracy, and obstruction of justice. Found guilty of all charges in April 2002.

Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) pleaded guilty to accepting at least $2.4 million in bribes and underreporting his income for 2004
 
a-mole said:
i think pedophelia and adultery are not quite the same

embezzling money is a crime, paedophelia is, rape is... criminals should not hold high public offices and have any power over other people's money/ lifes. Adultery is a moral issue (that not even everyone cares that much about) and belongs to a person's private life.

True. I was speaking in very general terms. So it's true that Clinton had the blow job, and DeLay had the campaign finance scandal and neither incident exactly fit what we like to see in our public officials.
 
not a money crime

just killing an innocent person



Sioux Falls, S.D. — "That's just Janklow" was a characterization that followed Wild Bill through his career. Some said it in affection. Some said it in frustration or anger. And some surely thought it on Aug. 16, 2003 in anger.

That day Janklow ran a stop sign at nearly 70 mph, right into the path of motorcyclist Randy Scott. Scott didn't have a chance. His cycle hit the car just behind the driver's door. His body struck the back of Janklow's borrowed Cadillac with enough force to tear open the trunk.

Shortly after his death, Randy Scott's friends held a motorcycle rally in his honor. Scott's family and friends were devastated. The Hardwick, Minnesota, farmer was a popular figure, and was always ready with a joke. Most of the people there, like Dick Lauseng, were bitter toward Janklow.


"I remember years ago, when Janklow was governor, he wanted flashing lights on his vehicle so he could speed and stuff like that," Lauseng said at the time. "So apparently he loves speed. It just finally caught up with him. And it's too bad it was a bike. Too bad it couldn't be a semi."

A semi-trailer would have flattened Janklow.

Flandreau, South Dakota, Dec. 8, 2003. Reporters shout questions at Janklow as he leaves the Moody County courthouse in his hometown. Moments before, a jury had convicted him of manslaughter. Many on the jury knew Janklow personally.

After the accident, Janklow seemed a changed man. He'd suffered a head injury in the crash. At his first public appearance after the accident, he spoke slowly and seemed confused.

"I'm 64 years old. And I've never dealt with anything. You can't prepare in life to deal in life with the enormity of what I'm dealing with, and what I put other people through," Janklow said.

During that appearance Janklow misidentified the dead motorcyclist. Repeatedly, he called Randy Scott Mr. Robertson.

"There's no way that I know how to express the sadness and the sorrow and the grief that has been brought to Mr. Robertson's family. None."


Janklow refused to talk about what happened that day, saying it was for the courts to decide. Some South Dakotans were upset that Janklow maintained his innocence in the face of the early evidence.

The criminal investigation brought more shocks. It documented that Janklow had long been just as aggressive on the highway as he had been in politics. He had received a dozen speeding tickets over a 10-year period. Once, he was clocked doing 100 mph. It also showed South Dakota police and state patrol officers regularly let Janklow go without a ticket, once they found out whom they had stopped.

His record made a mockery of words he had spoken during his state of the state message in 1999. He was arguing for stiffer criminal penalties, and used himself as an example of why stiff penalties deter criminals.

"Bill Janklow speeds when he drives. He shouldn't, but he does. And when he gets a ticket he pays it. If someone told me I was going to jail for two days for speeding, my driving habits would change. I can pay the ticket but I don't want to go to jail," Janklow said at the time.
 
verte76 said:

So it's true that Clinton had the blow job, and DeLay had the campaign finance scandal and neither incident exactly fit what we like to see in our public officials.
:hmm: I still actually claim that way more people care when it is about their money.
We have similar discussion regarding 1-2 of our politicians (when it comes to marriage, adultury and such) and yet i do not care at all and find it irrelevant :shrug: In my case it is just not even on the list of what i care for in an government official :)

as for the report
is taht guy still in office?
 
Back
Top Bottom