« Let Me Just Take Advantage of the Loophole In the Law That Permits Use of the Word "Moron"... | Main | Newt Gets One Off »

08/08/2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The only thing I don't like about the "Would somebody give Bush a blowjob so we can impeach him" bumper sticker is that it's inappropriate for the younger audiences that see it on bumpers. Otherwise, hypocrisy and peccadillos are non-partisan. We Democrats just find more irony in the failings of the religious right than the tragic downfalls of our own.

So unwanted sexual advances by a rinky dink officer of a podunk county chapter of the nerdy Young Republicans are news. But allegations of forceable rape against a sitting President of the United States are of no account. And the reason for the difference is hypocrisy.

That argument would be a little stronger were you able to identify any actual hypocrisy by the accused. Anything at all. You know, like something anti-gay he said, or did, or wrote, or thought, or read, or heard, or watched.

Conrad,

I wasn't blogging when Clinton was President, so did not have the opportunity to address the issue of rape accusations against him. Given the level of political bullshit being bandied about at the time, I'm not sure there's a valid way to decide whether those accusations are true. I have been pretty clear about the fact that I do not consider President Clinton's extramarital escapades admirable. That said, I would probably find more laugh potential in his wanderings if he had run for office on a zero-tolerance-for-sexual-harassment platform.

And I freely admit I know nothing of Mr. Murphy's politics. I am, however, intensely aware of the politics of the Republican Party in southern Indiana, which is intensely anti-gay. Mr. Murphy would not have thrived in that party as either an open advocate of gay rights or as an openly gay man. That leaves the possibility that he was a closeted homosexual supportive of and active in a regional political party that almost literally wants to drive people like him into exile. My wise-ass remarks, I believe, are equally valid in that best-case (for Mr. Murphy) scenario.

Finally, let me address the implied issue of my own hypocrisy: When a self-professed liberal acts racist or homophobic, I'm entirely willing to mock that, as well. Search Garrison Keillor and Al Sharpton and see what you find.

Wow, you're right Tom. I sure am glad there is no "level of political bullshit being bandied about" these days!

I'm thinking the guy was a mole. Sent by the homos to seduce fresh-faced, God-fearing, Young Republicans into the clutches of the sodomite cause while they slept.

Well, Tom, since you weren't blogging when Clinton was president, how about something about his wife, whom he humiliated in front of the whole nation?

Y'know, like, oh, I dunno, maybe the fact that she's a moral accessory to the rape of Juanita Broaddrick, in that two weeks after the (alleged) assault, Hillary went up to her at a political function and tacitly threatened her.

If the press were doing their job, they'd be asking Mrs. Clinton about this. Instead, she gets a pass.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/Juanita.htm

As for Mr. Murphy, notice that he resigned his posts. Funny how this contrasts with homosexual Democrats, like Gerry Studds. After his homosexual relationship with a 17-year-old former Congressional page became known, he not only did not resign, but was re-elected a couple of times.

Never a double standard here!

I'm totally unprepared to debate the merits of the accusations against Clinton. I do want to point out that there may be no person alive in the world today who has been investigated more than Clinton, by legal authorities, freelance lawyers, and journalists. The idea that either Mr. or Mrs. Clinton has gotten a "pass" is ridiculous.

If Hillary isn't getting a pass, then why does she get only nice, soft, easy lobs from the press? Why isn't anyone persistently asking tough questions that expose her sordid past?

Could be because about 90% of all journalists are Democrats?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/

Naaah. Liberals would never ignore the malfeasance of their own while endlessly harping on the infractions of the eeeeeevil Repuglicans.

wait a minute, you mean there's a reason to join the young republicans besides gay sex?

The comments to this entry are closed.