GOP Lawmaker's Graphic Sex-Bragging Caught On Tape, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 01:35 PM by whaaa

Originally posted by Anjin

Wanna know the difference between Dem scumbag and a GOP scumbag? You never will because the MSM will only report one side.

The MSM reported on Clinton for years and years.

What are you talking about?

And if you are a member of the Party that claimes "family values" you better walk the walk.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by whaaa]

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 01:41 PM by gravykraken

reply to post by Wimbly

pobody's nerfect ...but when someone steps forward to represent they should be held to a higher standard of social behavior. imperfection is a common trait that we all share. this guy is not only unable to keep it in his pants, buts loves to brag about his exploits to his peers, ad nauseum. this time he did it into a live mic. how brilliant. this idiot is a head of state. it's one thing to have an overactive sex drive, it is another to be so stupid as to flaunt it anywhere near a microphone or the state capital.

being a public figure pretty much dissolves privacy. anyone arrogant enough to carry on such questionable behavior while sitting in the public eye is obviously unfit to lead anything other than a downward spiral.

if i'm not mistaken this D-bag has already resigned.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 01:42 PM by lernmore

Originally posted by Mak Manto
Just another "Do as I say, not as I do" piece of garbage politician...

I think you meant "Do as I say, not as Clinton does.

I do agree, all these fast talking salesmen, I mean politicians, seem to think they're beyond the values they claim to represent. They're only sorry for getting caught, when they are.

Peace

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 04:07 PM by muggl3z

This is a good example of how our government works and is run.

What you see here is just a smaller scale example of what goes on at higher levels.

The last thing these people care about is us, their continuant's. It's all about influence and power.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 04:12 PM by Ecidemon

Meh, so what. Just because you don't follow it, doesn't mean you can't agree it's a good idea.

For example, I'm not religious and don't buy into religion, but I think some people need it and would reccommend they buy into it. If it helps them keep their morale center and peace of mind, so be it.

Now if he was talking about raping someone i could see the problem. Perhaps it's just me not caring about another persons' sexual deviances, no matter their position. Didn't care about Clinton, either.

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 04:25 PM by OhZone

wire tappingAnd the guy who recorded the conversation didn't get charged and arrested for "wiretapping"?

"But wait a second: Don't you need a wire to get charged with wiretapping? I thought so too, and the theory here is that since Truong didn't have explicit permission to record the conversation (memories of Linda Tripp), he was slapped with the additional charges. In 12 states (California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington) you're required to get the permission of all parties on the line before making any kind of recording. In the rest of the country, any single member that's part of the conversation can legally record it without consent from the other parties. And as Network World notes, wiretapping laws largely extend to in-person communications now, so no wire is required. "

reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 04:57 PM by hiluxxulih

No different than democRATS voting for high taxes then weaseling out of paying taxes ALA charlie rangelreply to post by paradigm619

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^