http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/house/mark-souder-to-resign.html?hpid=topnews

Indiana Republican eight-term congressman Mark Souder is resigning due to an affairs --

WITH A WOMEN!!!!

Yes, that's right - a male republican had sex with a female. Even though the right wing holier than thou tea bagger was married (yes to a women) he in fact actually had an affair, which I believe involves hot sweaty sex, with A WOMEN - she had a vagina! No confirmation he had a penis though.

Was that in Fairfax, Indiana?


Irregardless - the party of family values.

__________________________________
That's not a ladybug, that's a cannapiller.

What the hell was a Republican doing sleeping with a woman? Disgrace to the Republican party!

Who's the lucky lady who got a slice of this beefcake?



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

A WOMEN?!?!

Warhawk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Irregardless - the party of family values.

"Irregardless?" I'm afraid I'm going to have to report you to the Department of Redundancy Department.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who's the lucky lady who got a slice of this
> beefcake?
>
>


Probably didn't look like much. Just look at what Clinton chased after.

She is the host of this "interview." Better than Lewinsky and not a bad pull for his portly ass.

Are Republicans bi-bolar? Everything they say they are for is complete lies.

Ester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are Republicans bi-bolar? Everything they say
> they are for is complete lies.

What is bi-bolar? Is that like saying you served in Viet Nam when you really didn't?

Ester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are Republicans bi-bolar? Everything they say
> they are for is complete lies.


Both parties are full of crap. Democrats claim to be the party of tolerance -- unless you disagree with them.

Ester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are Republicans bi-bolar? Everything they say
> they are for is complete lies.


Bo´lar
a. 1. Of or pertaining to bole or clay; partaking of the nature and qualities of bole; clayey.


What does the Republican Party have to do with clay???

So So Asi Asi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ester Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Are Republicans bi-bolar? Everything they say
> > they are for is complete lies.
>
> What is bi-bolar? Is that like saying you served
> in Viet Nam when you really didn't?


What is bi-bolar? Motherfucking heaven!



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Mark Souder is the poster child for how well abstinence education works. He did such a good job abstaining from fucking his staffer.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

When was the last time someone from either party did something that helped the middle class and not a special interest lobbying group? Both sides are equally guilty. Once they arrive in Washington they forget everything they said to get there.

I have my own moral compass and dont need any politician to lecture me on spending or fidelity.

Congress is just an old boys club which is for sale to the highest bidder.

The difference is that in the Republican party affairs outside marriage are subject to immediate sanctions.

In the Democratic party, affairs can be excused if there are mitigating circumstances, such as the other woman was hotter than the current wife.

A voter has a choice. Either you believe that people who cheat on their spouse can still represent your interests in lawmaking, or you don't.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mark Souder is the poster child for how well
> abstinence education works. He did such a good job
> abstaining from fucking his staffer.

No doubt he is a dirtbag and good riddance. What's the difference here? He resigned promptly after getting caught. Compare that to Blumenthal who staged a BS and indignant presser to try and squirm out of his pretty disgustingly low lies about being in Viet Nam.

The Difference Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The difference is that in the Republican party
> affairs outside marriage are subject to immediate
> sanctions.
>

You mean like Larry Craig or David Vitter who didn't resign? Get serious.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Compare and Contrast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> No doubt he is a dirtbag and good riddance.
> What's the difference here? He resigned promptly
> after getting caught. Compare that to Blumenthal
> who staged a BS and indignant presser to try and
> squirm out of his pretty disgustingly low lies
> about being in Viet Nam.


Are you sure you want to take such a "wide stance" on that?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Difference Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The difference is that in the Republican party
> > affairs outside marriage are subject to
> immediate
> > sanctions.
> >
>
> You mean like Larry Craig or David Vitter who
> didn't resign? Get serious.

Larry Craig was a strange one. Who gets off hanging out at a stinky dirty public bathroom? I never understood that bathroom thing for men, there is something more to that than just being gay.

Yeah, he might have run a brothel from his residence or something.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Compare and Contrast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> No doubt he is a dirtbag and good riddance.
> What's the difference here? He resigned promptly
> after getting caught. Compare that to Blumenthal
> who staged a BS and indignant presser to try and
> squirm out of his pretty disgustingly low lies
> about being in Viet Nam.


He will be gone in a week. What about this guy?



Last time I looked, he was still the GOP governor of SC.

Correction. Blagovich was forced out of office. Of course, why is Sanford still in office?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2010 04:16PM by WashingTone-Locian.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Correction. Blagovich was forced out of office. Of
> course, why is Sanford still in office?

Dunno, his ass should have been gone not because of the affair, but because of his unreachability while serving as the chief executive of a state. His impeachent vote didn't succeed. Blogo didn't go quietly. He had to be impeached and removed.

Compare and Contrast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Dunno, his ass should have been gone not because
> of the affair, but because of his unreachability
> while serving as the chief executive of a state.
> His impeachent vote didn't succeed. Blogo didn't
> go quietly. He had to be impeached and removed.

He didn't go quietly. But the Dems in Illinois voted to get rid of him. What about the GOP in SC? Where were they when it came to getting rid of Mark Sanford? Not only is Sanford an asshole, but so is any GOP member of the State Legislature who didn't force him out.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Probably because they watched the lessons Bill Clinton taught on ignoring obvious problems, or debating the meaning of the word "is" when defining a sex scandal.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

The reason they wont resign is the power and the perks. Once in office they get their asses kissed by everyone. They travel all over at taxpayer expense and answer to no one until the next election.

Mark Souder = a young Larry "Bud" Melman

I have to give Souder credit. He's an ugly fuck who hit it with a young Annette Benning-looking staffer. What the fuck was John Edwards smoking?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Blech! Why oh why party with this guy?

Souder added: “I sinned against God, my wife and my family by having a mutual relationship with a part-time member of my staff.”

The “part-time” member of the staff and, apparently, full-time mistress of the Congressman is Tracy Jackson, a 40-year-old married woman whose role was to interview Souder for a radio spots that aired on a Christian radio station in Fort Wayne.

Remember...Family Values! Sanctity of Marriage! Abstinence Education!!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Remember...Family Values! Sanctity of Marriage!

John Edwards agrees:

"Our nation was built on the values of hard work, equal opportunity, thrift, and strong families. Americans believe in the importance of community, responsibility, and, most of all, family. We need to strengthen this institution that--for most of us-- is the central work of our lives and the foundation of our own and our children’s success. The first financial cushion we need is a stable family, and the first lessons we learn about responsibility are learned in our homes."

How'd his "strong family" idea work out for him? How did he perform in order to "strengthen this institution" of family? Yeah only Republicans ramble on about family values.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

The use of family values as a political term became widespread after a 1992 speech by Vice President Dan Quayle that attributed the Los Angeles riots to a breakdown of family values. Quayle specifically blamed the violence in L.A. as stemming from a decay of moral values and family structure in American society. In an aside, he cited the fictional title character in the television program Murphy Brown as an example of how popular culture contributes to this "poverty of values", saying: "t doesn't help matters when primetime TV has Murphy Brown—a character who supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly paid, professional woman—mocking the importance of fathers, by bearing a child alone, and calling it just another 'lifestyle choice'".

The GOP has only itself to blame for being hoisted with its own petard.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2010 04:02PM by WashingTone-Locian.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The use of family values as a political term
> became widespread after a 1992 speech by Vice
> President Dan Quayle that attributed the Los
> Angeles riots to a breakdown of family values.
> Quayle specifically blamed the violence in L.A. as
> stemming from a decay of moral values and family
> structure in American society. In an aside, he
> cited the fictional title character in the
> television program Murphy Brown as an example of
> how popular culture contributes to this "poverty
> of values", saying: "t doesn't help matters when
> primetime TV has Murphy Brown—a character who
> supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly
> paid, professional woman—mocking the importance of
> fathers, by bearing a child alone, and calling it
> just another 'lifestyle choice'".
>
> The GOP has only itself to blame for being hoisted
> with its own petard.

Who does John Edwards have to blame for his exploitation of family values? Which party is/was he a prominent member of? He ran for VP on one of the major party tickets. Which one was that again?

potter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Who does John Edwards have to blame for his
> exploitation of family values? Which party is/was
> he a prominent member of? He ran for VP on one of
> the major party tickets. Which one was that
> again?


It's irrelevant. The GOP coined the phrase, wrapped themselves around it and now have to pay the price for being a bunch of closeted and perverted fucks.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Compare and Contrast Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Dunno, his ass should have been gone not
> because
> > of the affair, but because of his
> unreachability
> > while serving as the chief executive of a state.
>
> > His impeachent vote didn't succeed. Blogo
> didn't
> > go quietly. He had to be impeached and
> removed.
>
> He didn't go quietly. But the Dems in Illinois
> voted to get rid of him. What about the GOP in SC?
> Where were they when it came to getting rid of
> Mark Sanford? Not only is Sanford an asshole, but
> so is any GOP member of the State Legislature who
> didn't force him out.

Yeah too bad it was a Democrat that "scuttled" the impeachment proceedings according to the LA Times:

ATLANTA — The saga of philandering South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford took another odd turn Tuesday when a fellow Republican's attempt to launch impeachment proceedings was scuttled by a Democrat.

Tuesday's proposed resolution by Republican state Rep. Greg Delleney said that Sanford's secret visit to South America had "brought extreme dishonor and shame" to the state. It alleged that Sanford had deceived his staff, "clandestinely evaded" state police and failed to communicate with the chain of command when he made the June trip.

But Delleney's attempt to introduce the resolution was stymied by Rep. Walton J. McLeod, who argued that it was out of order because the House was meeting in a special session to discuss specific economic issues -- not impeachment.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> potter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Who does John Edwards have to blame for his
> > exploitation of family values? Which party
> is/was
> > he a prominent member of? He ran for VP on one
> of
> > the major party tickets. Which one was that
> > again?
>
>
> It's irrelevant. The GOP coined the phrase,
> wrapped themselves around it and now have to pay
> the price for being a bunch of closeted and
> perverted fucks.

Since when are facts about hypocrisy irrelevant? Particularly when John Edwards wrapped himself around it?

dumdeedoodeedum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Yeah too bad it was a Democrat that "scuttled" the
> impeachment proceedings according to the LA
> Times:
>


Nice try. Maybe you should have looked up something a little more recent....

A subcommittee in the South Carolina state House voted against an impeachment resolution against Republican Gov. Mark Sanford on Wednesday.

The constitutional laws subcommittee voted 6-1 against the impeachment resolution, which was introduced by the subcommittee’s chairman, GOP state Rep. Greg Delleney – the only vote in favor.

The news means Sanford will likely serve out the rest of his term, as the will to oust the governor has been waning in the months since he admitted to an affair with an Argentine mistress.

Sanford still must face a vote of the full House Judiciary Committee, but numerous South Carolina lawmakers suggested Wednesday that the resolution will likely face a similar fate in front of the whole committee.

At various points throughout the saga, a majority of the Republicans in both the state House and state Senate have called on Sanford to resign. But the politics of removing the governor has always been tricky, as many of the state’s legislative leaders are competing against each other in 2010 in campaigns for higher office. Additionally, the state’s legislature has been out of session since early summer, preventing any action against the governor.


In other words, the GOP majority in South Carolina wouldn't do shit about it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> In other words, the GOP majority in South Carolina
> wouldn't do shit about it.

And what did the Democrats do? Oh yeah, they blocked it.

potter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> >
> > It's irrelevant. The GOP coined the phrase,
> > wrapped themselves around it and now have to
> pay
> > the price for being a bunch of closeted and
> > perverted fucks.
>
> Since when are facts about hypocrisy irrelevant?
> Particularly when John Edwards wrapped himself
> around it?


Keeping the focus on Edwards, eh?

Maybe I should point out some things...

Edwards hasn't been an elected official within the Democratic Party for a number of years.

The Democratic Party doesn't run as the "family values" Party.

The Democratic Party doesn't actively pretend to be a bunch of fake Christians to appeal to Evangelical voters.

The Democratic Party was never part of "The Moral Majority" or "The Christian Coalition."

The fact is, the Republicans are a bunch of fucking hypocrites. They deserve this.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

dumdeedoodeedum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > In other words, the GOP majority in South
> Carolina
> > wouldn't do shit about it.
>
> And what did the Democrats do? Oh yeah, they
> blocked it.


The Republicans have a Majority in both houses of the State Legislature in South Carolina. The GOP blocked it. As for the "special session" thing you quoted, there was a special session to address economic issues. They have had regular sessions of the legislature since. The REPUBLICANS blocked it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dumdeedoodeedum Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > In other words, the GOP majority in South
> > Carolina
> > > wouldn't do shit about it.
> >
> > And what did the Democrats do? Oh yeah, they
> > blocked it.
>
>
> The Republicans have a Majority in both houses of
> the State Legislature in South Carolina. The GOP
> blocked it. As for the "special session" thing you
> quoted, there was a special session to address
> economic issues. They have had regular sessions of
> the legislature since. The REPUBLICANS blocked it.

When it came up in October of '09, who blocked it? nuff said. move along.

dumdeedoodeedum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> When it came up in October of '09, who blocked it?
> nuff said. move along.


When it came to December '09, who blocked it?

Move along, my ass. You are a fucking moron.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WTL - why so much anger over this? Were you caught when you had an affair or something?

In all seriousness though, it isn't just Republicans who tout family values - but if we went by that standard, then when Democrats get caught on any issue they are hypocrites for, they should resign also. Period.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University