shagmidmod
|
posted on March 21, 2007 09:01:53 AM new
So, if you take the top 3 Presidential candidates of each party and add up their marriages... Republicans have been married 8 times and Democrats have been married 3 times.
The Republicans win!!!!
It is quite sad that the party that claims itself rich in "moral and family values" are riddled with such poor representatives. Oh sure, you can argue that marriage sometimes doesn't work out. I understand that, but with the exception of McCain... Guliani and Gingrich are both scumbags when it comes to family values and McCain isn't a Saint by any means either. One had his mistriss living in the McMayor Mansion and the other left his 2nd wife while she was dying and he was cheating on her. Absolutely sick!!!
I hope the Republicans can come up with a better candidate than what they have so far. With all of the scandals brewing in the White House, they would probably need Jesus Christ to be their candidate, but he would be too liberal for them.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 21, 2007 10:31:10 AM new
It's always funny to read a progressive/??? whine about the morals of others when anything has been allowed/accepted from their own. Then it's not relevant.....now it is. How funny....double standards always are.
Can you say hypocrite???? I sure can....and this is but one example.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack." 
Ann Coulter
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 21, 2007 11:36:09 AM new
The reason we like to comment on these types of facts is because the Republican Pary has alwsays touted itself as the "Family Values Party"--thus the hypocrisy. Democrats know enough to keep their mouths shut about family values 
|
profe51
|
posted on March 21, 2007 11:51:41 AM new
It's just that the Republicans are spreading their doctrine of family values to more than one spouse, unlike the Democrats who selfishly marry only one person. Typical liberals keeping everything for themselves. tsk tsk tsk
|
desquirrel
|
posted on March 21, 2007 12:44:55 PM new
What might be funny is listing who the "top 3" Democrats are. I'm willing to bet 2 of them have a snowball's chance in hell for the nomination.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 21, 2007 01:42:22 PM new
Oh, but I disagree, coincoach.
IF you were paying any attention AFTER the dems lost the 2004 election....THEY were seeking out answers to WHY that happened. They just couldn't believe it had.
Many democratic leaders felt is was because the dems/liberals were preceived by the general public as NOT being committed to family values in the same fashion the righties are. lol
Perhaps a good review of quotes from your own leaders would enlighten you to THEIR concern they ARE preceived MUCH differently.
One reason, imo, so much effort is now being expended to discredit the right.....so they look as poor to the voters as the left always has....morally that is.
I don't believe it will EVER work.....the radical difference in social/moral positions will never come even close to one another.
Good try.....but no [clinton] cigars.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 21, 2007 01:43:47 PM new
and again, I agree with desquirrel's assessment of the current right hopeful's.
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 21, 2007 01:53:14 PM new
And I disagree with you, Linda. The right has preached "Family Values" ad nauseum for many years---a major issue on their platform. That holier than thou attitude makes it amusing when we watch one after another get caught, or admit to behavior that does not come under the heading of Family Values. Practice what you preach.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 21, 2007 01:59:48 PM new
I DO practice what I preach.
And the fact is that all the liberals here continue to do is whine about morals that NEVER bother them when their leaders are doing it. They laugh it off....tell us to stay out of their bedrooms...etc.
Even their president could not do enough to VIOLATE and display his lack of morals in the WH....with a subordinate.
Fine example they are/were.
So it's nothing but more hyprocrisy for the left to continually whine about something they've RARELY supported themselves.
Just shows them up for what they really are.....hypocrites.
edited to add:
And even MORE.....lol....is the blind view that the clintons have only been married once....compared to others on the right who have been married more than once. LOL
But the liberals just totally overlook old slick willies girlfriends over all these years.....his sexual misconduct....etc. OH....but having a so called 'marriage' like that is SO much more commendable/MORALLY acceptable.
ROFLMHO.....wrong!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Mar 21, 2007 02:03 PM ]
|
desquirrel
|
posted on March 21, 2007 02:15:16 PM new
Another amusing tidbit is the Left's endless harping about bjs, family value violations, etc.
No matter how many times you explain to these clowns, they just do not "get it". Clinton's problems had nothing to do with hypocritical bj receivers. He was charged with perjury.
p e r j u r y
And for a President, that's kind of a big thing you know, not like a bj.
|
bigpeepa
|
posted on March 21, 2007 02:41:05 PM new
Hey BUSHY WHY ARE YOU AFRAID OF HAVING ROVE AND MIERS TESTIFY UNDER OATH.
The vast majority of Americans now believe Bushy and his Gang of republican lawmakers have no morals or values. The new-cons continue to prove the majority right almost daily
America is tired of BUSHY's form of "family values" that is why people like desquirrel and LIAR_K are now in the minority and will remain there. They have little political power left and will have less in 2008.
All we have to do is expose their every sleazy way.
I SAY AGAIN HEY BUSHY WHY ARE YOU AFRAID OF HAVING ROVE AND MIERS TESTIFY UNDER OATH.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 21, 2007 02:48:40 PM new
They've had to make it appear to be ONLY about a bj. Otherwise they'd be laughed off the face of the earth by anyone with two brain cells who KNOWS what happened.
Obstructing justice....lying under oath....abusing the CIVIL RIGHTS of another citizen - another position they CLAIM to support, unless they're able to ignore it being done by THEIR president.
And he admitted it all to them. But sadly many still refuse to acknowledge it. They'll defend him no matter what he's done. And they'll try to convince US that his morality didn't matter....what he did as president did. LOL LOL LOL
Gives me a great laugh.
Those who refuse to support or even recognize the truthful FACTS.....have no credibility in my eyes. How could they? They're just not in touch with reality
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 21, 2007 03:04:43 PM new
Linda and Desquirrel--I'll try this again. The reason there is criticism of the right's moral shortcomings is not because they have shortcomings---we are all human after all. The criticism is because the right is often heard preaching family values, bragging about their moral rectitude, being holier than thou. If you are going to hold yourself up as "morally" superior, you better not have any skeletons in your closet. That would be the height of hypocrisy. I also did not claim any moral high gound for the left because human nature is too unpredicable for that. I leave judgment to a higher power. And when I said practice what you preach, I didn't mean you, specifically. It was a global YOU.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 21, 2007 05:13:47 PM new
I understood what you said the first time.
You tend to be another liberal that continues to REPEAT what was already addressed. The secular/atheist/agnostic left has NEVER had the values the religious right has. LOL To try and persuade others that's not the case.....just doesn't 'sell'. Even your OWN party knew that - spoke about the problem THAT caused them in the '04 election.
That you choose to disagree......doesn't make it so.
The liberal side of the aisle has always promoted an 'anything goes' platform. The right hasn't. No one is perfect....that's right. But the liberal left has ALWAYS supported the tiny, minority groups - no matter how offensise or immoral they've been/they are. Just get their votes/support and screw their morals.
tsk tsk tsk
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 21, 2007 06:09:33 PM new
Linda, I am curious to know what posts you are talking about. Not mine. You obviously did NOT understand my posts. I said nothing about the morals of either the left or the right, good or bad. The POINT of my posts is that if you preach morality to everyone (hallelujah!)you better make sure you actually have superior morals (whatever those may be.) If you (that is the global you--not you Linda)do not want to look like a hypocrite or lose your credibility, either stop preaching or live your life the way you preach it to others.
|
shagmidmod
|
posted on March 21, 2007 07:14:25 PM new
Linduh says, "Obstructing justice....lying under oath....abusing the CIVIL RIGHTS of another citizen - another position they CLAIM to support, unless they're able to ignore it being done by THEIR president."
"THEIR" President was your President as well Linduh, or are you trying to say you weren't "american" during the Clinton years??? Bush is our President, just as Clinton was our President. I've said it a thousand times before and I will say it once again... Clinton was wrong for lying under oath. Plain and simple. I would expect the same punishment for any other president who lies under oath. In fact, I actually support the idea that whenever a President, Congressmen, Cabinet member, or any other government official is speaking in the chambers, in front of or behind the seal of the White House/President that they are considered under oath. I could care less if it is a Republican, a Democrat, or anyone else for that matter. When they speak as a representative of our government, they should be honest and truthful, and anything they say or do should have 100% accountability behind it. If you want to end political corruption, that is a good start.
To be quite honest, my whole point of this thread was to shed light on the fact that the Republicans have hypocrites as their top 3 nominees. I would hope that the "moral authority" of the Republican Party is quite concerned about that, because it sure is hard to sell a candidate that doesn't reflect the "values" that they love to tout.
I actually hope that both Democrats and Republicans, and possibly a 3rd party candidate or two will come out of the pack and show the true leadership that this country desperately needs. We all win when that happens.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 21, 2007 09:47:32 PM new
And my whole point was to mention that those pointing fingers only tend to do so when it's against the opposition. They remain silent when their own are doing the exact same things.
Most liberals fall into the category of being total hypocrites. You might wish to announce you're not.....lol...but I see most of your posts QUITE differently than you see yourself.
If a poll were taken right here...I'd bet that most ALL dems and liberals would SAY they'd LOVE to have clinton back in office. They don't CARE what he did in his personal life. But with the republicans they SURE to whine on and on about it.
Double standards....the left is FULL of them.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 21, 2007 11:40:24 PM new
"Double standards....the left is FULL of them." You mean like the do as I say, not as I do RIGHT? You mean like holier than thou NEWT?
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 22, 2007 07:40:13 AM new
"They don't CARE what he did in his personal life. But with the republicans they SURE to whine on and on about it."
No, I do not care what any politician does in his/her personal life, as long as it is legal and does not affect job performance. What I do care about is some supercilious right wing hypocrite preaching his idea of right and wrong, halo glowing as he talks, only to find out he doesn't practice what he preaches. At least Clinton did not have the audacity to tell people how to behave.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 22, 2007 10:23:02 AM new
LOL
Well....for someone who wishes to be believed about her 'not caring' you sure can go on and on about it. lol
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 22, 2007 10:43:05 AM new
I apologize to everyone in advance for the caps. LINDA--WAKE UP. GET YOUR EYES CHECKED OR HAVE SOMEONE TRANSLATE FOR YOU. ARE YOU DELIBERATELY BEING OBTUSE?
The point of my posts (and I think you know it) is: IT IS NOT WHAT PEOPLE DO IN THEIR PERSONAL LIVES THAT CONCERNS ME. MY ONLY GRIPE IS THE ATTITUDE OF REPUBS/RIGHTISTS WHO TELL EVERYONE THEY ARE PURE AND GOOD, AND THAT EVERYONE SHOULD LIVE THE WAY THEY DO---ONLY TO FIND OUT THEY LIVE JUST LIKE US HUMANS WITH ALL THE HUMAN FOIBLES. DON'T PREACH IF YOU CANNOT LIVE UP TO YOUR PREACHING.
That is arrogant and hypocritical.
CAPISH?
|
bigpeepa
|
posted on March 22, 2007 10:59:33 AM new
coincoach
Good for you every-time the old wind bag LIAR_K shows up its one lie after another.
Oh and don't forget LIAR_K's history lessons some go back as far as 65 years. LOL
You are 100% right coincoach its what's left of the new-con republicans that is doing all the whining these days.
The sensible republicans are all leaving BUSHY and his GANG behind by coming over to our side.
LIAR_K's views are those of a left behind failed political movement who's views are insignificant now.
|
mingotree
|
posted on March 22, 2007 11:54:59 AM new
""ARE YOU DELIBERATELY BEING OBTUSE? ""
Not exactly since linduh doesn't know big words like that.
But it's more of the "when linduh is backed into a corner and has no answer she has more ways around an answer than Tony Snow"
Oh, and she's also not too bright....devious but not intelligent......
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 22, 2007 05:18:29 PM new
LOL Mingo. Thanks Peepa. I don't know why I even try.
|
mingotree
|
posted on March 22, 2007 06:13:06 PM new
Oh Coincoach I hope you're not trying to TEACH linduh anything or have her LEARN anything...that ain't gonna happen ever.
The sport of it is to chase her around and around with the truth and watch her squirm and dodge and make excuses !
It's kinda like that old game of "pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey...only here it's the jackass that keeps moving....
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 22, 2007 07:56:24 PM new
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 22, 2007 08:23:28 PM new
Now not only is coincoach following in the footsteps of our resident SCREAMER, 'waco', but she's posting LIES to boot.
tsk tsk tsk
Show ONE case of where any of these three republican candidates have EVER made such crazy statements as you falsely accuse them of. LOL LOL
I have NEVER seen any of them say they were 'pure and good'. How HYSTERICAL. lol lol lol
Again....it's the liberal thinking gone berserk is what it is. NOT factual at all.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Mar 22, 2007 08:26 PM ]
|
mingotree
|
posted on March 22, 2007 11:45:33 PM new
Coincoach, did you just hear a loud braying ???
|
kiara
|
posted on March 22, 2007 11:55:30 PM new
Now not only is coincoach following in the footsteps of our resident SCREAMER, 'waco', but she's posting LIES to boot.
Once again for the slow learner, an opinion is not a lie!
opinion
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3. the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.
4. Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5. a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.
6. a favorable estimate; esteem: I haven't much of an opinion of him.
|
coincoach
|
posted on March 23, 2007 06:53:59 AM new
Linda, I have not accused any candidate of anything. My posts offer my opinion, in general terms, regarding the Republican platform of family values. You really need to brush up on your reading comprehension.
|
