GOP Senator linked to prostitute

[bio-chem]

so whats the story. you bummed you cant marry a dude or what? you ignored what i wrote about and blindly continued to harp on some stupid ass story no one feels is story worthy.

if the guy did something pre-election got it cleaned up then joined the US senate who is to say his change of heart wasnt sincere? you? hahah. the guy he replaced was doing it while a senator, wasnt he? its different.

you do realise this whole thread is a joke dont you?

 

[DOMS]

so whats the story. you bummed you cant marry a dude or what? you ignored what i wrote about and blindly continued to harp on some stupid ass story no one feels is story worthy.

And this sums it up.

He's about 50 years old and gay. Growing up in 60s and 70s gay wasn't easy. Hell, some guys killed themselves. Some just went a little off-kilter.

You should have been here for a thread where he started to spout off about hetero-Christian conspiracies. He life has led to be one of the most close-minded people that I've ever seen (in person or on the web). He has never (on IM), and will probably never, meet anyone half way.

 

[bio-chem]

And this sums it up.

He's about 50 years old and gay. Growing up in 60s and 70s gay wasn't easy. Hell, some guys killed themselves. Some just went a little off-kilter.

You should have been here for a thread where he started to spout off about hetero-Christian conspiracies. He life has led to be one of the most close-minded people that I've ever seen (in person or on the web). He has never (on IM), and will probably never, meet anyone half way.

hetero-christian conspiracies

thats so cool. if there is a secret hetero-christian group. i want to be a member

 

[kbm8795]

so whats the story. you bummed you cant marry a dude or what? you ignored what i wrote about and blindly continued to harp on some stupid ass story no one feels is story worthy.

No, but there are likely quite a few people in this country who are, and they don't hire prostitutes or cheat on their partners.
It might not have been too story-worthy if the guy hadn't spent his career shooting his mouth off about other people's morals - when he didn't have any of his own. That's a story.

if the guy did something pre-election got it cleaned up then joined the US senate who is to say his change of heart wasnt sincere? you? hahah. the guy he replaced was doing it while a senator, wasnt he? its different.

you do realise this whole thread is a joke dont you?

He was in public office. And it wasn't his "heart" that was changing - he was speakin' right from the heart and lips all along about morality while his fingers were unzippin' the mighty warrior and pulling out the wallet.

 

[kbm8795]

And this sums it up.

He's about 50 years old and gay. Growing up in 60s and 70s gay wasn't easy. Hell, some guys killed themselves. Some just went a little off-kilter.

And maybe some became metrosexuals.

You should have been here for a thread where he started to spout off about hetero-Christian conspiracies.

We don't recall ever using that term "hetero-Christian". It's not quite an accurate assessment. One of the first rules of effective reporting, rather than spreading idle gossip, is to get the description right. I don't work for Faux News, ya know. . .oh - you don't know.

He life has led to be one of the most close-minded people that I've ever seen (in person or on the web).

You might try opening your mind enough to rewrite that sentence.

He has never (on IM), and will probably never, meet anyone half way.

I'm sure you reviewed all the posts. . .

 

[kbm8795]

hetero-christian conspiracies

thats so cool. if there is a secret hetero-christian group. i want to be a member

Wouldn't they have to change their name if you joined?

 

[bio-chem]

point is the story says they can link him to a call girl 10 years ago. big deal. his wife forgave him, i dont have to worry about voting for him. no story. how do you know he hasnt had a change of heart? and clinton. did it in office on the desk of the oval office then lied about it. big difference.

this guy fessed up appologised then moved on. i can live with that. so can america. except apparently you. remember yoda "hate leads to the dark side" you might want to chill a bit before you get so worked up over a guy that doesnt represent you, and you dont have to vote for or against.

 

[bio-chem]

Wouldn't they have to change their name if you joined?

i dont follow? im pretty sure if the requirements are heterosexuality and christianity then i qualify

 

[kbm8795]

Actually, according to his own statements nine years ago, he can't live with that. So he changed his mind when the phone number was published. He had a decade of public moralizing about other people's marriages - including Terri Schiavo's - and hasn't done much apologizing. He says he fessed up - we don't know how that was handled - it's not like he took God back to the Madam's place.

And who is worked up? It's just fun seeing how long it takes conservatives to admit they ain't any more moral than anyone else.

Vitter set his own table. And they are still looking into other occasions since there were rumors for so many years. And maybe he waited for the statute of limitations wore out so he couldn't be charged for soliciting a prostitute. We do know the public only got the information because his phone number showed up on the telephone records of the indicted DC madam.

Meanwhile, in today's news, Republican State Representative Bob Allen was arrested in Titusville (Florida) for allegedly soliciting a male undercover police officer in a public bathroom. The married assemblyman, a stanch supporter of protecting marriage, is accused of offering $20 for a blowjob.

You are right - no one cares what people do in the privacy of their relationships - EXCEPT when they run around insisting that the public SHOULD be interfering in those relationships. like federal marriage amendments, jokes in public speeches about other the morality of other taxpaying citizens in the state, and joining in the Schiavo marriage-busting spectacle. Then the public gets to care. It eventually always comes back to bite them on the ass, no matter what party.

His ass should resign because that is the standard he set for everyone else. . .and then neglected to mention his own transgression to the public.
The Republican he replaced as Congressman had been in office for a long time - and his own marital infidelity was the reason that guy chose to not seek re-election. Vitter jumped on that situation to make his own bold pronouncement about the other guy's marriage and infidelity. If that guy did the right thing, according to Vitter, then Vitter knows exactly what he needs to do in his own situation now.

 

[kbm8795]

i dont follow? im pretty sure if the requirements are heterosexuality and christianity then i qualify

It was a joke.

 

[bio-chem]

you remind me of john h. if i say it enough, then people will suddenly think exactly the way i do.

"and then neglected to mention his own transgression to the public. "

there is no reason on earth for him to say anthything about it.

wait and see buddy. more and more the democrates are going to try and show how moral, and pious they are and start telling the people just how christian they are

 

[kbm8795]

But the story isn't about what you think - it was about what HE thought.

There was a reason for him to say something to the public because he passed public judgement on two other officials who had done similar things (except not with prostitutes, which IS an illegal activity). And then he told the public what the remedy should be for such an activity. He could have kept his mouth shut all along.

I don't care if Democrats start playing the moral card. If one of them starts making regular public pronouncements about other people's morals and their own is in the toilet, they need to be kicked out on their asses too.

There isn't supposed to be a religious litmus test to hold public office in this country. If someone is stupid enough to start claiming some link to moral superiority because of his/her religious beliefs, you can bet they'll get their ass kicked if they fall off their self-constructed pedestal.

 

[DOMS]

And maybe some became metrosexuals.

I'm too young. I'm only 34. Besides, I only have some of the sensibiities of a gay man, but not the sexual preference. Me likey the hairy beaver too much.

My friend Mark, who's the same age as me, grew up gay in the 80s and 90s. I've talked with him at length about how people had treated him through those years. He said that with a few exceptions (no more or less than in this decade), he was treated pretty well.

But he said that gays that grew up before that had it very bad. From beatings, to ostracizing, to never being allowed to be who you really are. Actually, I talked with him about you. That's why I've toned down my harsh words quite a bit.

We don't recall ever using that term "hetero-Christian".

What? Are you in drag now doing the Queen of England (or maybe Eddie Izzard)?

You did. You mentioned the hetero sexual orientation, Christian belief, and conspiracy all in one. I gave you shit for and your rebuttal was simply "It's true!"

You might try opening your mind enough to rewrite that sentence.

But you are. I've have never seen you admit anything wrong with the Democrats. You've never met anyone halfway about anything.

I guess you just don't see it.

I'm reminded of a very old saying (from memory), "Those who are most afraid of theft, are often those that do the stealing."

 

[bio-chem]

But the story isn't about what you think - it was about what HE thought.

There was a reason for him to say something to the public because he passed public judgement on two other officials who had done similar things (except not with prostitutes, which IS an illegal activity). And then he told the public what the remedy should be for such an activity. He could have kept his mouth shut all along.

I don't care if Democrats start playing the moral card. If one of them starts making regular public pronouncements about other people's morals and their own is in the toilet, they need to be kicked out on their asses too.

There isn't supposed to be a religious litmus test to hold public office in this country. If someone is stupid enough to start claiming some link to moral superiority because of his/her religious beliefs, you can bet they'll get their ass kicked if they fall off their self-constructed pedestal.

so your boiling this down to a US senator who is going against something he said and is being hypocritical? adain non-issue, non-story and everything else. hell, the american people have been disillusioned over the falibility of US statesman a long time ago. truth is, if he runs on a moral platform, and votes a moral platform thats all that matters. im sure the people who voted for him are happy as long as he votes the way they want him to. regardless of his personal life being in line with the way he votes. hell, ill vote for a gay guy as long as he votes that a marriage is only between a man and a woman

 

[kbm8795]

I'm too young. I'm only 34. Besides, I only have some of the sensibiities of a gay man, but not the sexual preference. Me likey the hairy beaver too much.

My friend Mark, who's the same age as me, grew up gay in the 80s and 90s. I've talked with him at length about how people had treated him through those years. He said that with a few exceptions (no more or less than in this decade), he was treated pretty well.

But he said that gays that grew up before that had it very bad. From beatings, to ostracizing, to never being allowed to be who you really are. Actually, I talked with him about you. That's why I've toned down my harsh words quite a bit.

Well, now that's nice of Mark, but I think he was talking with you in general terms. I don't know that I've ever mentioned anyone outside this forum, except passing on advice I've read or mentioning the web site to some other people at the gym. I don't tend to talk about people I don't really know.

What? Are you in drag now doing the Queen of England (or maybe Eddie Izzard)?

Who said only one person ever uses this computer or name?

You did. You mentioned the hetero sexual orientation, Christian belief, and conspiracy all in one. I gave you shit for and your rebuttal was simply "It's true!"

I can't imagine a response from this end would ever be simply "It's true." I won't mention my credentials on the subject.

But you are. I've have never seen you admit anything wrong with the Democrats. You've never met anyone halfway about anything.

Well, it ain't as if there are people around here afraid to trash the Dems and the "liberals" before I could even have a chance.

I guess you just don't see it.

No - I meant rewrite the actual sentence.

I'm reminded of a very old saying (from memory), "Those who are most afraid of theft, are often those that do the stealing."

Which is, after all, what is most interesting about the Vitter case and the general fear-and-smear paranoia tactics of those running the Republican party.

Could the Democrats do any better? We'll see if they grow a spine and break the constant Right-wing filibusters in Congress over nearly every piece of legislation. They have some fear of their own to handle.

 

[bio-chem]

how does someone get credentials on the subject of hetero-christianity?

why have multiple people on one name. any reason not to each have there own? that way people might diferentiate the individuals

 

[lojasmo]

point is the story says they can link him to a call girl 10 years ago. big deal. his wife forgave him, i dont have to worry about voting for him. no story. how do you know he hasnt had a change of heart? and clinton. did it in office on the desk of the oval office then lied about it. big difference.

Clinton was NOT CONVICTED. Or you his new judge and jury?

Here's the thing, folks. Vitter is a scumbag who, for years, has blathered about family values and the "sanctity of marriage" working to disenfranchise a whole lot of his constituents of the same rights he enjoyed (marriage) while he was FUCKING A PROSTITUTE....putting his wife at risk for disease.

He is a hypocritical little bitch.

Could the Democrats do any better? We'll see if they grow a spine and break the constant Right-wing filibusters in Congress over nearly every piece of legislation. They have some fear of their own to handle.

It takes 60% + one vote to break a filibuster. The SENATE is where the filibusters are occurring. What it is going to take is for some republicans to get some morals. In the most recent case, SEVEN republicans voted to adequately train and rest our troops who are fighting in Iraq. SEVEN.

 

[kbm8795]

how does someone get credentials on the subject of hetero-christianity?

Research and publication.

why have multiple people on one name. any reason not to each have there own? that way people might diferentiate the individuals

Why doesn't everyone just use their real name?

 

[tucker01]

Why doesn't everyone just use their real name?

I do.

 

[bio-chem]

Clinton was NOT CONVICTED. Or you his new judge and jury?

.

no, he was was impeached. it was congress who was judge and jury. public opinion judged him as well.

 

[bio-chem]

Here's the thing, folks. Vitter is a scumbag who, for years, has blathered about family values and the "sanctity of marriage" working to disenfranchise a whole lot of his constituents of the same rights he enjoyed (marriage) while he was FUCKING A PROSTITUTE....putting his wife at risk for disease.

.

who does he want to disenfranchise? and if his constituents didnt like what he was doing they will vote him out. i love how you attack vitter and defend clinton in the same post. are you vitter's judge and jurry? let his constituents decide. as clinton was president we were all his constituents.

infedelity is bad no matter what the situation. its wrong. however when it comes to public office, its all in the details. clinton did it in the oval office of the white house, then tried to cover it up. vitter did it before he was in the US senate and never tried to deny it. grow up dude.

 

[kbm8795]

who does he want to disenfranchise? and if his constituents didnt like what he was doing they will vote him out. i love how you attack vitter and defend clinton in the same post. are you vitter's judge and jurry? let his constituents decide. as clinton was president we were all his constituents.

infedelity is bad no matter what the situation. its wrong. however when it comes to public office, its all in the details. clinton did it in the oval office of the white house, then tried to cover it up. vitter did it before he was in the US senate and never tried to deny it. grow up dude.

Vitter set himself up as his own judge and jury. Then changed his own rules for himself.
He was in the U.S. House before he was in the Senate, and in the state legislature before he was in the U.S. Congress.

Actually, his support for amending the U.S. Constitution was designed to permanently deny 1,400 privileges, rights, and regulations from ever being extended to over 20 million Americans. And his excuse for co-writing that was to protect "traditional' marriage. Well, his marriage isn't too traditional and his religious doctrine is pretty clear about adultery.

 

[bio-chem]

Vitter set himself up as his own judge and jury. Then changed his own rules for himself.
He was in the U.S. House before he was in the Senate, and in the state legislature before he was in the U.S. Congress.

Actually, his support for amending the U.S. Constitution was designed to permanently deny 1,400 privileges, rights, and regulations from ever being extended to over 20 million Americans. And his excuse for co-writing that was to protect "traditional' marriage. Well, his marriage isn't too traditional and his religious doctrine is pretty clear about adultery.

as far as religiously speaking goes his infedelity is between him, his wife, and God. i leave that to them.

in the entire history of the US and to England before that (where we got most of our laws from) gay marriage has never been allowed to begin with. so he isnt fighting to change anything, just keep the "status quo" something it seems his constituents hired him to do. i can live with that. and so it would appear can the rest of america

 

[KelJu]

as far as religiously speaking goes his infedelity is between him, his wife, and God. i leave that to them.

in the entire history of the US and to England before that (where we got most of our laws from) gay marriage has never been allowed to begin with. so he isnt fighting to change anything, just keep the "status quo" something it seems his constituents hired him to do. i can live with that. and so it would appear can the rest of america

I live with the status quo because I finally realized that I can't fight it. I am going to do what I want to do no matter what the law or the status quo says, so I guess I don't have a problem with it anymore.

I say fuck the system up the ass from within, rather than fight it on the outside and lose.

 

[bio-chem]

thats cool. i thought you were strait? oh well

 

[kbm8795]

as far as religiously speaking goes his infedelity is between him, his wife, and God. i leave that to them.

in the entire history of the US and to England before that (where we got most of our laws from) gay marriage has never been allowed to begin with. so he isnt fighting to change anything, just keep the "status quo" something it seems his constituents hired him to do. i can live with that. and so it would appear can the rest of america

Actually it existed long before that. He was fighting to permanently place into the United States Constitution an amendment which would forever ban them access to protection of 1,400 laws. In the process, the intent was to prevent any of those laws to be altered to add any other Americans, including those laws which were originally designed to have nothing to do with "marriage."
In the laws of the U.S. and, before that, England, adultery was punishable in what way? Solicitation of prostitution?

Sorry - but tradition goes both ways. He argued, in 1998, in a major news story in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, that Bill Clinton should resign - not because of the perjury CHARGES - but because of the immorality of his sexual activity. He based his argument on the MORAL tradition of anyone holding public office. He set his own standard. He knew what he was saying. It's all nice he made his "piece" (wrote on purpose) with God and his wife. He didn't make it with the public - he ignored them after making such a public spectacle of himself moralizing.

His sorry ass needs to resign.

 

[bio-chem]

Actually it existed long before that. He was fighting to permanently place into the United States Constitution an amendment which would forever ban them access to protection of 1,400 laws. In the process, the intent was to prevent any of those laws to be altered to add any other Americans, including those laws which were originally designed to have nothing to do with "marriage."
In the laws of the U.S. and, before that, England, adultery was punishable in what way? Solicitation of prostitution?

Sorry - but tradition goes both ways. He argued, in 1998, in a major news story in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, that Bill Clinton should resign - not because of the perjury CHARGES - but because of the immorality of his sexual activity. He based his argument on the MORAL tradition of anyone holding public office. He set his own standard. He knew what he was saying. It's all nice he made his "piece" (wrote on purpose) with God and his wife. He didn't make it with the public - he ignored them after making such a public spectacle of himself moralizing.

His sorry ass needs to resign.

all right this thread has lasted long enough. i'm bored now. write a letter or something. the guy most likely wont resign and life will continue on. and i agree we dont need to amend the constitution. the states are doing just fine on this subject

 

[ZECH]

I quit posting to see if KBM would argue with himself and ya'll keep fucking it up

 

[kbm8795]

I quit posting to see if KBM would argue with himself and ya'll keep fucking it up

They sure did.