BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:00 PM

Isn't "the oval office" now a current anatomical euphemism?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Peace
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 02:15 PM

Y'all ain't got the corner on THAT market. Check out the House of Commons sometime.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 02:01 PM

We don't have many prepubescent men in Congress.

Just some who act like it too often.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Peace
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 01:33 PM

Well, if it's done pre-puberty, you'll know them by their voices . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)-lewd conduc
From: Genie
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 01:28 PM

Actually, Bee-dubya-ell, neither castration nor saltpeter is all that effective in curbing sexual behavior in post-pubescent males (human or other mammals).

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Peace
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 12:54 PM

Keeping it out of the Oval Office would be a great start.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 12:50 PM

well now...there's a fine idea. And YOU will be in charge of being sure all the males eat the soup. Except that very few members of Congress actually eat at the cefeteria...and....


oh, wait...gee....I'm getting the idea you weren't really being serious!


Doesn't anyone realize that we will NEVER eliminate the problem of having different attitudes about sex & morals & behavior among our elected representatives? All we can hope for is that most of them manage to keep their activities out of their public life.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 12:00 PM

Ya know, all this political sex scandal stuff could be eliminated if we'd just start requiring that all male public officials undergo castration before taking office.

Or if that's a little too extreme, saltpeter in the soup de jour at the Capitol cafeteria would be a good start.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 09:45 AM

Well, it's certainly true that making up an plausible excuse for an unnecessary war, which Bush entered into by choice, and by means of a despicable and misleading propaganda campaign, and which has resulted in the deaths of many thousands of people, will be a difficult undertaking.

And it does seem rather clear that it is a more serious issue than anything Clinton did--and even more serious than what Craig did, amazing as that might sound.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:31 PM

Sounds to me like he's still spinning the Iraq invasion as a logical, necessary reaction to the Al Quaeda attacks of 9-11-07.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ron Davies
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:27 PM

Genie--

I still think it was a mistake for Clinton not to admit the affair with Monica----probably taking the tack I described--before anything was required under oath. He was impeached for perjury--and it could have been avoided.




But again, how is everybody coming on Bush's mea culpa for the Iraq war?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:25 PM

[[McGrath -
I'd have thought that the decision of Hillary Clinton not to get divorced because of Bill's bad behaviour, and to stick with the marriage vows ("for better or worse, till death us do part") would give her brownie points among upholders of traditional morality.

Somehow it doesn't seem to work that way - there seems to be a tendency to pick and choose which bits of traditional morality to uphold.]]

You've noticed?

Oh, and as for the President of France, the French couldn't care less if their elected leaders have affairs. Wasn't it Mitterand whose wife and mistress both openly attended his funeral?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:18 PM

Ringinglinger, if a man cheats on his wife with a woman from the office, why is SHE a "tart?"

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: GUEST,Nobody
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:18 PM

The aggressive militarism of the federal Republican party suggests it is just continuing a long history of homosexuality among warrior societies. This from a fascinating site:

Famous events in Nazi history are also linked to homosexuality; events such as the burning of the German Reichstag in 1932, the 1938 pogrom called Kristallnacht, and the 1944 attempt on Hitler's life. Even the enduring image of Nazi book-burning, familiar to us from newsreels of the 1930s, was directly related to the homosexuality of Nazi leaders. The first such incident occurred four days after Hitler's Brownshirts broke into Magnus Hirschfeld's Institute for Sexual Research in Berlin on May 6, 1933. On May 10 the Nazis burned thousands of books and files taken in that raid. The Institute had extensive records on the sexual perversions of numerous Nazi leaders, many of whom had been under treatment there prior to the beginning of the Nazi regime. Treatment at the Sex Research Institute was required by the German courts for persons convicted of sex crimes. Ludwig L. Lenz, who worked at the Institute at the time of the raid but managed to escape with his life, later wrote of the incident.

http://www.abidingtruth.com/pfrc/books/pinkswastika/html/the_pinkswastika_4th_edition_-_final.htm

The American Furher class of leader typically comes out of Yale University now (Bush, Kerry, 9 of 17 CIA directors). These men are recruited into the Skull & Bones society and photographed in compromising homosexual initiattion rites. If they ever stray from the course laid out for them, they can be "outed." They toe the line.

Some estimates put the number of homosexual congressional Republicans at 50%. These people are easily controlled because of their "secret." A lot has been written about George W. Bush's affair with the former mayor of Memphis, Tennessee. The website is fascinating reading.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)-lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:14 PM

Ron Davies, when Clinton made his (in)famous "I did not have sexual relations with that woman ... " spiel, Paula Jones's lawyers were trying to use any and every bit of evidence of "sexual impropriety" against him in her lawsuit.   Consensual sex with an adult should not have been relevant, but since Monica was a White House intern, they probably would have spun the affair with her as an example of sexual harrassment.   I think that's a stretch, but I can see how, with the Jones case still unresolved, Clinton would deny having had "sexual relations" (specifically and weirdly defined by the Jones case judge) with Lewinsky -- no doubt assuming there'd be no way to disprove his statement about what had occurred in private.   And had it not been for good ol' Linda Tripp, how would anyone have known?

Heck, who knows HOW many of our fearless leaders have committed indiscretions that we'll never know about because they happened behind closed doors?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)-lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:05 PM

John Hardly,
I don't think Clinton fully "survived" the "Monicagate" or other "sexual scandals." First, his legacy will always be tarnished by having "impeached" and the various allegations cited in historical records, probably in many ways overshadowing his accomplishments (e.g., turning a deficit economy into a huge surplus). The Democratic party also took a big hit because of the brouhaha over Clinton's private sex life. Al Gore would almost certainly have won in a landslide in 2000 had it not been for the impeachment, the Starr Report, etc.


As for "Republicans who have left in sexual scandal:
Foley
Craig
Livingston
Bauman,"

let's not forget that
a) Rudy Guiliani, Newt Gingrich, and others have been guilty of adultery, sequential marriage, etc., and remained quite viable in the Republican party. Strom Thurmond even got by with having fathered a child by a black woman even while being actively racist in his public life.    The Republicans never seemed interested in delving into that.

b) Those 3 Republicans had more involved than just "sex" or "adultery" or "being gay." Foley's misdeeds were homosexual (a big no-no to his own party) and involved pages or other Congressional employees (so sexual harrassment and/or abuse of a minor may have been issues). (Had there been reason to believe Clinton initiated the affair with Monica, he probably would have been charged with workplace sexual harrassment too, but she pretty clearly planned it herself.) Plus, Livingston pretty much had to resign over his revealed affair because he had been going after Clinton with such a vengeance (holier-than-thou). Had he not attacked Clinton for his adultery, Livingston's own would probably never have been an issue.

And as for Democrats like Barney Frank and Bill Clinton not having been pressured to resign, maybe that's partly because of the overkill on the part of the opposing party and the media? And, as we've said, partly because Dems don't tend to make a BFD out of what consenting adults do in private?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 10:49 PM

Ya know, a lot of scandals would be prevented if they'd put saltpeter in the food at the Capitol cafeterias.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 10:44 PM

Another way of putting it, Rapaire, is that Yarrow's "Greenwood" song is basically saying,
"He who would lie, cheat, and steal when the stakes are low is even more likely to do so when the stakes are high."   It's a matter of degree of need or temptation, not a question of whether values and codes transfer from one area of conduct to another.   There are thieves and murderers who would never "rat on" one of their own; that would violate their own code, whereas stealing and killing are violating someone else's.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 10:17 PM

[[If an elected official cannot be true in such small things as marriage vows or their oath of office, why should I trust them at all? "If they do such things in the green wood, what will happen in the dry? -
Rapaire]]

First, why assume that it's easier to remain sexually faithful to a spouse than to uphold the Constitution, avoid perjury and other criminal behavior, and be honest about your political values and agenda?   It could be argued that in today's western world, with its permissive attitudes about sex and the many temptations both men and women are exposed to in their daily lives, being true to one's marriage vows may be among the hardest standards to live up to.

But as I've said earlier, the research on people's codes of honor and their honesty/dishonesty, etc., does not back up your assumption that marital fidelity/infidelity in any way predicts how honest/dishonest one will be in business, sports, or even other everyday interpersonal relationships.   (And maybe that's partly because of the strong biological urges that affect things like marital fidelity more than they affect, say, the tendency to cheat on your income tax.)

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Genie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 10:09 PM

[[Rapaire said:
I will say this: I find it wrong when a man, who has taken a vow or oath of marriage or office or to tell the truth in court or for any other reason, breaks that vow or oath.]]

OK.   How about people who promise "to have and to hold, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health till death do us part" and then get divorced because "we've grown apart" (or whatever) and then promise the same thing to someone else?

Pretty substantial percentage of the adult population eventually falls into that category, yet such people are fully embraced as upstanding, socially desirable members of the population, even within the churches, on school boards, in public office, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 08:37 PM

"That said, however, given his desire to commit adultery where was he supposed to go?" Isn't it the traditional way, for rich bastards like that, for them to set up a love nest somewhere, or pass the loot across to the lady for her to arrange the purchase or tenancy? I'm sure that's how President Sarkozy in France would do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 06:44 PM

I don't use the word "traditional" as a put down, Rapaire. Well, I couldn't or I wouldn't value traditional music so highly.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 02:45 PM

"It's my sense of things (that Democrats overwhelmingly didn't find the sex-in-the-oval-office wrong) from "conversations" on this and several other forums." John Hardly

I am not a registered Democrat but I'll go on record as saying that I was appalled at the chutzpah of a US president being so risk taking, so juvenile, so focused on me! me! me! as to indulge himself in that way in the Oval Office.

That said, however, given his desire to commit adultery where was he supposed to go? He couldn't take a woman up to his and his wife's quarters, he couldn't even meet her at a motel. When it comes down to it he philandered in his own home.

I understand that President Kennedy often had 'playmates' in the White House, mostly when the First Lady was on a trip.

Does anyone know if Mrs. Clinton traveled much in those days? *g*

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: Greg B
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 01:53 PM

Maybe they could change 'I do' to 'I'll give it a shot.'

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:34 AM

...it's true that promises and honor need to be remembered and revered more than they seem to be by many.

Still, I get the impression that many marriages ceremonies are just 'by the book' and read from the minister's text. Having been married before, my first one was. This time..(27 years ago)..we planned and tailored the text to reflect us and said exactly what we felt.

It may be too much for 'some' people to promise and swear that they will never give in to temptation, but at the marriage ceremony they may not be thinking about that, and they are sure not likely to insert a disclaimer saying they'll 'probably' be faithful.

I have no idea what was said at the Clinton's marriage...but I'd guess they have ummmmm...'discussed'... the rules a few times since.

I'd bet that Senator Craig had a pretty classic, conservative text, and IF he has had desires that seemed in conflict, it has probably caused him a lot of anguish and confusion as he tried to reconcile it.
   I do know that as this story has developed, I have seen a couple of psychologists explain that many men who 'sometimes' seek brief encounters with other men rationalize it with the "I am NOT gay!" line, and don't feel it should count against them. Obviously, if they hold high office, they need a lot of care & discretion, as others expect pretty narrow standards of behavior.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: Rapparee
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 07:45 AM

Traditional, nothing. "Morality" is used today as a catch-phrase for "how I think you should act."

And I wasn't talking about morality. I was speaking about ethics and about keeping the promises you make, which is part of what I would call "honor," something that has fallen into disrepute.

If I promise to give you ten dollars, I should keep my word. If I promise to "love, honor, and obey" I should keep my word (which is why when we got married we wrote our own 'vows'). When Robert Service wrote, in "The Cremation of Sam Magee," "...a promise made is a debt unpaid..." it was about honor and keeping promises. And it is as true now as it was then.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ron Davies
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 07:42 AM

Kevin-


Some think that decision on her part was a cynical political one--as is the ongoing campaign partnership between her and Bill. I suppose you could say "Damned if you do...."

Her campaign bumper sticker says "In it to win it". The question is whether she believes in anything but winning--having been burned severely in her last attempt to change US policy..   Her agonized attempts to play both sides--on so many issues-- tend to support this concern. Above all she should have forthrightly admitted she was wrong to vote for Bush's authorization for the Iraq war--as Edwards has done. Her attitude seems to be--I don't make mistakes--and we've had enough of that from the Chickenhawk in Chief.

And her claim to have more foreign policy experience--than Obama for instance-- rings hollow. She was First Lady--not a foreign policy position.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Sep 07 - 07:07 AM

Slight thread drift, but it's drifting anyway:

I'd have thought that the decision of Hillary Clinton not to get divorced because of Bill's bad behaviour, and to stick with the marriage vows ("for better or worse, till death us do part") would give her brownie points among upholders of traditional morality.

Somehow it doesn't seem to work that way - there seems to be a tendency to pick and choose which bits of traditional morality to uphold.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 10:35 PM

Rig--

That's what I said--people will tell pollsters they think marriage is a wonderful institution, and that they're happily married. But it ain't necessarily so. They may however also see much value in marriage even if theirs did not work out.

But as far as their voting, I suspect that outside the "Christian Right", it's not the deciding factor.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 10:22 PM

If you're going to use me as a paragon of...something...you ought to know what I think of Clinton (and said publicly at the time).

I've got no problem with a President who has extramarital sex in the oval office if he is leading the country to do "good" in the world.

Now comes the part you are not expecting...

I have a major problem with a man having sex with someone over whom he has power in a nonsexual situation. The fact that Monica consented does not matter to me. He was the POTUS, she was an intern far below him in the power structure. There is at least the potential for coercion there. It was wrong and inappropriate. that makes him (sexually) a less than honorable man, but has no bearing on how he performed as POTUS.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 09:58 PM

Ron - I suspect they're dishonest with polsters the other way. They'll happily tell the polster on the sidewalk that they're faithfully married, while the girl sitting next to pollee in the car is the tart from the office.

                And what does it matter what most voters think? Doesn't truth and honesty count for anything?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 09:49 PM

But more voters do think marriage does have a lot going for it. Probably by a considerable margin--not that they'll be honest with pollsters on this, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 09:43 PM

For those of us who don't think the concept of marriage has a lot going for it in the first place, what Clinton did doesn't seem to be worth all the attention it got.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 09:38 PM

Uh, perhaps that was not the best answer on his part. Might not have been his finest hour.

Also, in the US it appears that for this confession gambit to work you have to be:

1) already in office
and
2) confessing a heterosexual sin--if it's homosexual, that tends to strain the quality of mercy of the Christian Right




So, how is everybody coming on the mea culpa for the Iraq war?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: SINSULL
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 08:51 PM

But, Ron, he didn't have sex with that woman!

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 08:39 PM

All Clinton would have had to do, as I think you, John, said, is to say "Yes, I succumbed to temptation. I broke that marriage vow. And I promise you (speaking to voters) and especially you, Hillary, that I am heartily ashamed and will never do it again. The only way I can appeal to you is as a repentant sinner. That is what I am and I do ask for your mercy."

And say it before any questions were put to him on oath. So no chance for a perjury accusation.

He'd already been re-elected. Can't run again anyway.

And we would have seen if the "religious Right" 's well-known compassion for the repentant sinner extended to Democratic presidents.   I wonder which side of that question we should bet on.



Now we can devise a mea culpa suitable for pardon for starting an unnecessary war---in which many thousands are killed-- by choice, and through a despicable propaganda campaign. That may be a bit more difficult.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 08:11 PM

Former Sen. Brock Adams, late Washington Democrat. Forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988.

Former Rep. Fred Richmond, New York Democrat arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election—before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.

Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: John Hardly
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:55 PM

"Just to clarify..if a Democratic senator did what Craig did, I'd think he would probably resign also...and that most other Democratic senators would likely 'help' him make that decision."

You may think that, but history does not bear it out.

Republicans who have left in sexual scandal:

Foley
Craig
Livingston
Bauman

Democrats who have left in sexual scandal:

__________________
__________________
__________________

Democrats who have survived sexual scandal:

Clinton
Studds
Franks

Republicans who have survived sexual scandal:

________
________
________

It's not playing out the way you claim it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:49 PM

What man is going to stand up before the television cameras, his wife at his side, and say, "Hell, YES!! I got me a bj from that foxy little intern!"??

The question about Clinton's sexual adventures, of Harding's, of anyone's, should be a matter between husband and wife. But when it comes out in the press -- a press which seems to be bouncing up and down like they are gonna wet their collective pants for a nice, juicy scandal -- then it is no longer the private matter it should be.

When Larry Craig pleads guilty, it becomes a public matter -- it is in public documents, after all.

And then the breaking of those vows and oaths become public matters, whether I like it or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:41 PM

Just to clarify..if a Democratic senator did what Craig did, I'd think he would probably resign also...and that most other Democratic senators would likely 'help' him make that decision. The aura of the whole thing was pretty bad, and Craig's 'seeming' hypocrisy was the crowning touch. I personally don't CARE what he does, or with whom...and I have no opinion about whether he should resign....I even think he should fight the case against him, as it is weak, as it stands....but his fellow Republicans feel differently.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:39 PM

To the man-in-the-street,
Who, I'm sorry to say,
Is a keen observer of life,
The word 'Intellectual' suggests straight away
A man who's untrue to his wife.
                            --W. H. Auden

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:33 PM

Rapaire..if indeed Clinton's marriage vows did say that, it was likely his wife that he was promising, and thus his wife that he is answerable to...and I gather that she made her opinion clear about the matter.
I don't assume that hoping to slide by a stupid mistake by 'bending the truth' "I did not have **sexual relations** with that woman..." is a sure sign of bad character. It 'may' be, but I'll weigh it in context.

I know that several presidents had various affairs and had likely made similar 'vows'....I just think that the details of the incidents are important when considering how we judge to whole man, and in what context...

(silly example to make a point: If Clinton had been accused picking his nose and wiping it on the desk in his office..'defacing government property', and had 'denied' it, he could have accused of perjury under certain conditions with DNA tests and witnesses....but....) (I said it was a silly example)

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:31 PM

GREENWOOD
Peter Yarrow- ©1973 Pepamar Music ASCAP

I've seen a thousand people kneel in silence
And I've seen them face the rifles with their songs
I always thought that we could end the killing
But now I live in fear that I was wrong

The killer and the cynic waltz together
Their eyes are turned into their skulls
They do not feel the bullets in the bodies
They do not hear the dolphins or the gulls

If we do these things in the greenwood,
what will happen in the dry?

If we don't stop there'll come a time when women
With barren wombs will bitterly rejoice
With breasts that dry and never fill with promise
Gladly they'll not suckle one more life

Is this then the whimper and the ending?
The impotence of people raised on fear,
A fear that blinds the sense of common oneness
Common love and life or death are here

If we do these things in the greenwood,
what will happen in the dry?

Will no one light the candle in the darkness
Will no one be my guide, not let me fall
I've lost the sense that tells me where the path is
I feel the chill of winter in my soul

There's no way I can say the words more plainly
There's no one left to point at anymore
It's you and me and we must make the choice now
And not destroy the life we're living for

If we do these things in the greenwood,
what will happen in the dry?
If we do these things in the greenwood,
what will happen in the dry?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: John Hardly
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:26 PM

"...and you can't see why the cases are different?"

If that's addressed to me, the only comparison I was making (between Clinton and Craig) was one of the functional use of scandal as a political tool: That because of disparate views on sexual morality between the parties, it is not possible for a Republican to GOTCHA! a Democrat out of office. But it is not just possible, but probable that a Republican will be removed for the same sexual indiscretion. And all I was speculating was that that realization occurred to the Democrats upon seeing Clinton survive his.

That was all. All the other characterizations and comparisons were foisted upon me, and/or not offered up by me.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: John Hardly
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:26 PM

<>I"...and you can't see why the cases are different?"

If that's addressed to me, the only comparison I was making (between Clinton and Craig) was one of the functional use of scandal as a political tool: That because of disparate views on sexual morality between the parties, it is not possible for a Republican to GOTCHA! a Democrat out of office. But it is not just possible, but probable that a Republican will be removed for the same sexual indiscretion. And all I was speculating was that that realization occurred to the Democrats upon seeing Clinton survive his.

That was all. All the other characterizations and comparisons were foisted upon me, and/or not offered up by me.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Peace
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:21 PM

I think Clinton was wrong. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: John Hardly
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:17 PM

You're right. I can't argue for yes or no questions on polls. I can discuss, but I can't argue for yes or no questions on polls. You're right. I've been polled. They NEVER ask the right question.

So, I'm back to the drawing board when it comes to trying to make my point. And I guess it's one that I can't make.

It's my sense of things (that Democrats overwhelmingly didn't find the sex-in-the-oval-office wrong) from "conversations" on this and several other forums. You're right. That's not conclusive.

And it was my sense (that Democrats overwhelmingly didn't find the sex-in-the-oval-office wrong) during the investigation and ensuing impeachment, as Clinton's ratings soared through the roof. But I can't prove that either.

I've just heard over and over the same rationalizations. Why, look upthread where I wasted three posts just trying to point out that there was nobody bringing up Bush in this conversation in order to make Clinton look bad (<---yeah, like THAT would be good strategy)....yet, there were Bobert and TIA, determinied not to be disuaded from their habit of the "Clinton was okay because Bush is worse" defense (heck, I even had to endure a scolding from Ebbie because I didn't let that one go).

That leaves us just agreeing to disagree.

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:11 PM

so now you take 75 votes that "Clinton was wrong" and say "well, all 75 of you thought "Craig was wrong", and yet Criag is being driven out of office, while Clinton wasn't".......and you can't see why the cases are different?

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduc
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:08 PM

I will say this: I find it wrong when a man, who has taken a vow or oath of marriage or office or to tell the truth in court or for any other reason, breaks that vow or oath.

I will assume that Clinton's marriage vows included, at least in spirit, that he would "cleave only" unto his wife, and she to him. For him to have a fling with another woman would be and was adultery. For him to have had a fling with another man would be adultery.

I find George Bush's attempts to use war powers during an undeclared war to be a violation of his oath of office. In fact, I find all of the "wars" in which the US has been engaged since WW2 to be violations of the Constitution no matter which party was in power.

If an elected official cannot be true in such small things as marriage vows or their oath of office, why should I trust them at all? "If they do such things in the green wood, what will happen in the dry?"

Subject: RE: BS: Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)- lewd conduct
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Sep 07 - 07:03 PM

Ok...I thought it was 'wrong'....now what do you know if that's ALL I say? You don't know whether I thought it was criminal behavior, morally reprehensible, inappropriate for the White House, against common sense....or just very bad judgment.

That is exactly why you can't ask yes or no questions on many issues...and why criminal defense attorneys practice so hard GETTING folks to say what they want the JURY to hear instead of what the witness meant to say.