[Grovenet] bad politics

[Meredith Bliss]

On Friday 06 October 2006 23:02, allnutt wrote:
> I talked about Studds earlier, even though I didn't mention him by name.

Thanks for the clarification.

> I'll say that I won't be surprised if the Republican didn't just shoot
> themselves in the foot and they are trying to cast blame on anybody but
> themselves in a close election year.
> The whole thing is absolutely hilarious from the perspective of how much
> time and effort the R's are putting in finding who was that D operative
> that pulled off the stunt so effortlessly. 

At least that's a little better than their other spectacle of blaming the 
victim: those nasty voluptuous pages, it's all their fault, they shouldn't be 
allowed to be so appealing. Now where have we heard that line before?!

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Meredith Bliss" <mbliss at agora.rdrop.com>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 9:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] bad politics
>
> > On Thursday 05 October 2006 14:36, Krystof Zmudzinski wrote:
> >>   I'm confused.  You seemed to be defending Gerry Studds who did have
> >> sex with a minor and took a minor not only across state lines but to a
> >> different country.  So sex with a minor is OK but not IMs.  And Studds
> >> stayed.  Foley is gone.  What else should Republicans do?
> >
> > Boy, talk about the straw man argument! As far as I can tell, no one ever
> > mentioned Gerry Studds. I had to do a Google search to figure out that
> > you were talking about a representative who was censured in 1983 for "a
> > 1973 relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional page who was of
> > the age of
> > legal consent, according to state law at the time." And he stayed because
> > he
> > was re-elected several times after that. Foley immediately resigned after
> > learning that his true tastes would be made public, that's quite a bit
> > different.
> >
> >>   If there was a crime and if there is a cover-up (which in itself may
> >> not
> >> be criminal) that's one thing.
> >
> > And as in the "Plame affair," just because prosecutors decided that they
> > could
> > not win a conviction doesn't mean either that a crime was not committed
> > or that voters have no right to expect accountability.
> >
> >>   Right now, this whole thing stinks and I wouldn't be surprised if
> >> there were indeed some Democratic party operatives involved but I'm not
> >> about to
> >> hurl accusations
> >
> > That would be a first (but I think you just did anyway)!
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> > Just happy to be here, but speaking
> > only for myself!
> > Meredith Bliss --- www.rdrop.com/~mbliss
> > ----------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

-- 
----------------------------------------
Just happy to be here, but speaking 
only for myself!
Meredith Bliss --- www.rdrop.com/~mbliss
----------------------------------------