Defend Traditional Marriage!

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


I disagree. The conservatives are claiming they are trying to preserve the sanctity of marriage by opposing same sex marriage, yet they clearly don't hold the same standard of sanctity in their own marriages. I do agree that it was good that he at least had the guts to publicly apologize despite the fact that it was possible his name wouldn't have been revealed, but it does not excuse the fact that he publicly crusaded for the sanctity of marriage while at the same time destroying his own. The Democrats may be trying to capitalize on this and show that this is corrupt, but the simple fact of the matter is that it is corrupt to campaign for the sanctity of marriage while destroying it yourself.



Now honestly, do you think the Republican party doesn't constantly try to dig stuff up on people? Unfortunately that's a large part of what politics has come down to these days - who can dig up the more damning stuff about the opposing side. It is ugly and it is wrong, but you can't seriously claim it's the fault of only one side.

If the senator in question was a Democrat, the Republican party would be foaming at the mouth to use this against the Democrat in question and trying to capitalize on it, so that point struckpx, is moot.

You don't see the hypocrisy here? :scratch:

as Diemen pointed out but it does not excuse the fact that he publicly crusaded for the sanctity of marriage while at the same time destroying his own



I concur with Diemen :up:
 
Lila64 said:
If the senator in question was a Democrat, the Republican party would be foaming at the mouth to use this against the Democrat in question and trying to capitalize on it, so that point struckpx, is moot.

Exactly. And there is the distinct (and, let's face it, likely) possibility that there will be a Democrat revealed soon. I wonder if the Republicans will show the same restraint struck thinks everyone should be showing in this case.
 
Diemen said:




Now honestly, do you think the Republican party doesn't constantly try to dig stuff up on people? Unfortunately that's a large part of what politics has come down to these days - who can dig up the more damning stuff about the opposing side. It is ugly and it is wrong, but you can't seriously claim it's the fault of only one side.

Did I say they didn't. But, the Democratic party has become the true leader in that, when in all honesty, it should be the conservatives. I just don't view Democrats digging this type of stuff up and supporting it. Maybe people have changed. My views of the Democratic Party is one that advocates for people's rights, but also does it cleanly. The current party has not done that. They will do anything to sell out a republican.

not very democratic if you ask me.
 
I find the Republicans much more ruthless when it comes to digging up dirt. Just look what Bush did to McCain, another Republican, in 2000. And then to John Kerry in '04.
 
You can't run a ticket on the sanctity of marriage, and try to make others second class citizens, while you yourself aren't upholding the sanctity of marriage.

What part of that do you not understand?
 
Diemen said:
I find the Republicans much more ruthless when it comes to digging up dirt. Just look what Bush did to McCain in 2000.

I do as well.

But recently I find the Democrats to be much worse, when both sides have much to dig. I actually think the Conservatives and moderates will run a cleaner campaign this year than the democrats. they have become savages. We saw this in the last debate, with Edwards going after Obama and Clinton almost every chance he got, vice versa.

Yes, it was wrong of him, and no one is saying it isn't. Is it our business? No. If any of you are interested in his personal affairs that is disturbing.

Most importantly, the Democrats should be ashamed because they ultimately had to buy this list to publish it. I hope that you are happy that you have probably ruined their marriage Larry dickhead Flynt. Go film some more porn and contribute to society, you dirt bag.
 
Amazing how you can ignore easiest statements.

And Vitter's marriage won't be destroyed. As he said himself he opened up to his wife, took some counselling and they are still together.
 
I've always liked douche bag better than dirt bag

struckpx said:


Most importantly, the Democrats should be ashamed because they ultimately had to buy this list to publish it. I hope that you are happy that you have probably ruined their marriage Larry dickhead Flynt. Go film some more porn and contribute to society, you dirt bag.

Okay, let me get this straight: Digging up dirt on other party members and making it public = bad, horrible, and shameful.

Name calling (a.k.a mud slinging)and making it public = okay in your book.

:up: gotcha.
 
Well, I'll just say that the GOP Senator is a Schmuck for cheating on his wife. It's wrong. Period.

The Hollywood elite garbage always makes me laugh. The 'Hollywood Elite' for the majority are just people who stand in front of a camera and say words written for them by other people.
Very rarely do they give or contribute much besides "their celebrity" to a cause or crisis. Those who do should be applauded. The rest should stick to what they get paid to do.

And as for The Senator from Louisiana, I'd like to remind him that the American people are alot smarter than they're given credit for which is why I guess we all decide when to change the Constitution.

my opinion.
 
Struck, focus on this case, without pointing the finger outside for just a moment, and answer these questions:

If you advocate for the "sanctity" of marriage and how it only can occur if gays aren't allowed to, does it make sense to go and bury the same sanctity?

Does it make sense to worry so much about homosexual relationships and then suddenly turn to this and say, "It's not my place to discuss this kind of thing. What people do in their relationships is none of my business?"
 
struckpx said:

Larry dickhead Flynt. Go film some more porn and contribute to society, you dirt bag.

Hey! Don't you go calling Larry Flynt names, kid. :madspit: I kinda like Larry Flynt.

(and yes, I know he makes porn. :) )
 
3_63_071107_madam.jpg


July 10: Jeanette Maier, former madam of a high-priced New Orleans brothel, poses for a photograph in Gretna, La.

New Orleans' Madam Says Sen. David Vitter Used Her Brothel

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

AP


NEW ORLEANS —
New allegations tie Sen. David Vitter to a high-priced brothel in his hometown, one day after he publicly apologized for his connection to an alleged prostitution ring in Washington, D.C.

On Monday, Vitter acknowledged being involved with the so-called D.C. Madam. A day later, new revelations linked him to a former madam in New Orleans and old allegations that he frequented a former prostitute resurfaced, further clouding his political future.

Jeanette Maier on Tuesday said Vitter was once a client of the Canal Street brothel. She pleaded guilty to running the operation in 2002. Vitter won his seat in the U.S. Senate in 2004.

Saying he was a "decent guy" who appeared to be in need of company when he visited the brothel, Maier added unexpected details to a scandal enveloping the first-term Republican.

"As far as the girls coming out after seeing David, all they had was nice things to say. It wasn't all about sex. In fact, he just wanted to have somebody listen to him, you know. And I said his wife must not be listening," Maier said in an interview with The Associated Press.

She also was interviewed by several other news organizations.

Vitter's office did not respond to calls for comment on the latest allegations.

Well-known pornographer Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler magazine and free-speech advocate, also has come forth, saying it was his investigation that prompted Vitter's confession. A press conference was scheduled for later Wednesday.

Federal prosecutors unveiled the existence of the Maier's $300-an-hour brothel in April 2002. It was linked to similar operations in other U.S. cities.

"It wasn't all about dirty, raunchy, crazy sex," Maier told the AP. "It was a bunch of guys coming over hanging out with the girls and having a few cocktails, and men being men."

Maier was among 17 defendants who pleaded guilty in the investigation. With all the guilty pleas, there never was a trial, and that kept under wraps a list of customers that reportedly included prominent lawyers, doctors and business professionals.

"He is a decent guy. He's not a freak. He's not using drugs. He's not using taxpayers money to buy hookers or drugs or anything like that. He's just a decent, normal guy," she said.

Vinny Mosca, Maier's attorney in the brothel case, said in a statement late Tuesday that she never told him about Vitter being a client and that his name never came up in the case.

"Throughout the time that I represented Jeannette Maier in the Canal Street brothel case, the name of David Vitter or any code name for him never came up," Mosca said. "It was not contained in any evidence in the case, including in any book, list or document seized by the federal government or given to the federal government by Ms. Maier."

Mosca also said Vitter's name "was never picked up on any government wiretap nor is it listed in any transcript or court document as part of the Canal Street brothel case."

Also Tuesday, details resurfaced about an allegation that Vitter paid weekly visits to a prostitute in the French Quarter in the late 1990s. The allegations were investigated by a Republican rival when Vitter ran for a House seat in Congress in 1999. The seat had been vacated by Robert Livingston, who resigned after disclosure of marital indiscretions.

Vincent Bruno, a member of the state Republican Party's central committee, said Tuesday that he had confirmed the allegations at the time while working for the campaign of David Treen, a former Louisiana governor running against Vitter.

The allegations never surfaced in the congressional campaign, but The Louisiana Weekly, a New Orleans newspaper, wrote about them in 2002 and 2004. Vitter denied the accusations. The prostitute never spoke publicly about the alleged affair, which was largely ignored by mainstream news organizations.

"She said she was having a paid affair often on Tuesdays and Thursdays at Dauphine and Dumaine," Bruno said, referring to two French Quarter streets.

"It's very sleazy, and it's illegal. But, OK, it doesn't apply to senators. They're an elite group," Bruno said with irony. He has called on Vitter to resign.

Bernie Pinsonat, a Louisiana political analyst, said Republicans most likely would stand behind Vitter despite the new allegations.
 
1103otherraces.jpg


Wife, baby, U S Senate and prostitutes.


"It wasn't all about dirty, raunchy, crazy sex," Maier told the AP. "It was a bunch of guys coming over hanging out with the girls and having a few cocktails, and men being men."

Maier was among 17 defendants who pleaded guilty in the investigation. With all the guilty pleas, there never was a trial, and that kept under wraps a list of customers that reportedly included prominent lawyers, doctors and business professionals.

"He is a decent guy. He's not a freak. He's not using drugs. He's not using taxpayers money to buy hookers or drugs or anything like that. He's just a decent, normal guy," she said.


Vitter's name "was never picked up on any government wiretap.
 
at the very least, Vitter was fucking the correct gender.

let's applaud him for that.

it's the little things that matter for the GOP these days.
 
Irvine511 said:
at the very least, Vitter was fucking the correct gender.

let's applaud him for that.

it's the little things that matter for the GOP these days.

did Mark Foley break any laws?



This guy did.


Let's see how the GOP deals with a U S Senator that took an oath to uphold the Constitution and swore an oath on the Bible.

and then,
while in office broke the law.
 
deep said:


did Mark Foley break any laws?



but Mark Foley was hitting on 18 year old men. it would have been far less creepy if he had been masturbating over Britney Spears' 1999 Rolling Stone photospread:

160px-BSpearsRstone99.jpg


because 15 year old girls are hot, but 18 year old boys are immoral. every middle aged straight man knows that. and what's a little prostitution that a godly marriage In Christ can't fix?

not like those McGreevy's ...
 
Irvine511 said:




but Mark Foley was hitting on 18 year old men. it would have been far less creepy if he had been masturbating over Britney Spears' 1999 Rolling Stone photospread:

160px-BSpearsRstone99.jpg


because 15 year old girls are hot, but 18 year old boys are immoral. every middle aged straight man knows that. and what's a little prostitution that a godly marriage In Christ can't fix?

not like those McGreevy's ...

There's a bit of massaging of the figures going on here, but that aside, presenting this as the usual 'persecuted gays' meme is silly.

Foley was damned by the media for his indiscretions, and now for his (much lower, as they involved consenting adults) Vitter is also being hounded.

Both Foley and for that matter Clinton abused their offices to take advantage of employees and that is abominable. Of course, that does not mean it should be treated as an impeachable offense but it should certainly be condemned.
 
financeguy said:


There's a bit of massaging of the figures going on here, but that aside, presenting this as the usual 'persecuted gays' meme is silly.

Foley was damned by the media for his indiscretions, and now for his (much lower, as they involved consenting adults) Vitter is also being hounded.

Both Foley and for that matter Clinton abused their offices to take advantage of employees and that is abominable. Of course, that does not mean it should be treated as an impeachable offense but it should certainly be condemned.



the point is that when middle-aged men take an interest in late-adolescent teenaged males, it's always labled pedophilia/pederasty. and it should be, since we have an age of consent of 18, something Foley clearly abided by, it seems. Foley had sex with former pages of legal age. Vitter used prostitues. one thing is illegal, the other is not.

regardless, Foley is a creep. Vitter is a creep, and broke actual laws, and should be punished as well.

when middle-aged men take an interest in mid-to-late-adolescent teenaged females -- can we remember the countdown for when the Olsen twins became legal? can we listen again, in that song from that Herbie movie, when Lindsay Lohan gasps into the microphone, "i wannt come first, i wanna come FIRST!" -- it's considered perfeclty good commerce.

that's simply the double standard i'm highlighting.
 
You do realize that Vitter used prostitutes in 3 different circumstances (repeatedly) and each time it was illegal.
 
Republicans called on Vitter to resign.

Republican State Central Committee member Vincent Bruno of Kenner, a former New Orleans police leader, said Vitter should quit "for his own good, the good of the party and the good of his family."

Bruno said if Vitter doesn't quit, he should "join the Democratic Party, where they think that kind of behavior is OK."

Bruno said if the GOP doesn't enforce family values, "they ought to take it out of the vocabulary." If not, "we are the party of hypocrites. Vote for us, and we'll lie to you, we'll engage prostitutes, and we'll cheat on our wives."

Christopher Tidmore of Metairie, now a Republican candidate for the state Legislature, wrote the Louisiana Weekly article five years ago about Vitter's relationship with Canal Street brothel prostitute Wendy Cortez. Vitter continuously denied any relationship. Tidmore said Vitter has tried to sabotage his career since he wrote the article.
 
Actually, all of this could be avoided if the US didn't have such insanely backwards ideas about sex. We're obsessed with it--use it to sell everything...yet we're a nation of prudes who gasp and hide our eyes at the idea of it. If we'd freaking grow up and accept it as a natural part of being human and not try to attach all these morals to it, we'd be a lot more comfortable in our own skins.

I totally support what Larry Flint is doing (BTW, his Hustler store north of Cincy is rather nice...very clean!). He's just pushing buttons to show the hypocracy that's rampant in the Republican party. He's doing what the journalists and media of this country seem to be unable to do lately--call out bullshit when they see it!
 
Looks like all the hypocrites in the GOP are being exposed lately:

Washroom Sex Bust Blow To McCain Campaign
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff

Posted: July 12, 2007 - 5:00 pm ET

(Titusville, Florida) A co-chair of Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign in Florida has been busted for trying to pick up an undercover male police officer.

State Rep. Bob Allen (R), a foe of LGBT rights in Florida, is charged with offering the cop $20 for oral sex in a washroom at Veteran's Memorial Park in Titusville.

Police said that Allen, 48, was seen coming in and out of a restroom three times before approaching the officer.

Allen has been charged with solicitation for prostitution, which has a maximum penalty of one year in jail.

The state lawmaker is one of six co-chairs of McCain's Florida campaign. Allen posted a $500 bond and was released pending trial.

Ironically in the last session of the Florida legislature he sponsored a failed bill that would have tightened the state's prohibition on public sex. He also has been a supporter of amending the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage and has opposed a bill to curb bullying of gay students.

Allen resigned Thursday from the McCain campaign.

Meanwhile, two McCain strategists abandoned the campaign in Iowa on Thursday. Ed Failor Jr.and Karen Slifka longtime GOP operatives with deep ties in Iowa.

The three withdrawals Thursday will hurt McCain's campaign already damaged by money problems.

So...which Republican hypocrite is next?
 
Diemen said:
Well, common sense tells us making something illegal completely eliminates any desire to do it.

:huh:

It boggles the mind.

Well duh!:happy: Nobody drank alcohol during Prohibition, right?:rolleyes:


I know your comment was sarcastic! I just wanted to emphasize it a little more.:wink:
 
Back
Top Bottom