Republican staffers enjoy child pornography?

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
Weren't you raging at me earlier claiming I was a sock puppet and thought I had a tiny weenis. And now you want to engage in a reasonable debate? I'm sorry, but I don't take you seriously.
That's when I thought you were someone else. But fair enough.

You are wearing UncleBuck camo. Don't be suprized when someone mistakes you for him.
 

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
is the kid who stole jewelry and tools from his own parents in order to feed his heroin habit accusing democrats of not having values?
We're you that guys fucking counselor or something? I can't imagine anyone would give you that much ammo to use against themselves
 

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
You said a bunch of nothing. But thanks for your input. Have a nice day!
You asked if Republicans were hypocrites and I replied. Just because you don't jive with my answer doesn't mean it's a whole lot of nothing.
 

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
You're completely missing the point. The point isn't that democrats don't do dirt, but they aren't to ones running around as the "family values" crowd, which is just a bit hypocritical. You've got gay republican politicians who will repeatedly vote against pro LGBT legislation for fear of being outed and forced out of office. You fucking people are sickening.
I never said that Republicans aren't, just that they inherently aren't. Sorry you missed the nuance.
 

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
He talks about 'fucking dudes.'

I've always heard when two men have sex the only one that is really gay is the one receiving the thrust.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
You asked if Republicans were hypocrites and I replied. Just because you don't jive with my answer doesn't mean it's a whole lot of nothing.
It's not that I didn't jive with your response, it's that I didn't understand it. To me, there was no substance in your thought. Maybe I misunderstood, would you care to reassert your point?

Edit: your, not you
 
Last edited:

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
It's not that I didn't jive with you response, it's that I didn't understand it. To me, there was no substance in your thought. Maybe I misunderstood, would you care to reassert your point?
The way your OP is worded it would seem your simply trying to imply Republicans are hypocrites. It's true there are many scandals involving Republicans though that doesn't mean being a Republican makes one more apt to these scandals. Basically it'd be ignorant and stereotyping to infer anything about Republicans based off the mistakes or ignorant rhetoric of a few. There are more Republicans than the ones we see on TV and in the News.

Your Original Questions:

Why does it seem that Republicans enjoy extramarital affairs, anonymous gay relations and child pornography, but lecture America about family values?

My Answer: The media is quick to cling to any scandal or juicy affair they can get their hands on and you can bet a straight laced Republican going rogue on his values is sure to garner the attention of the public but this doesn't mean Republicans as a whole are of this caliber.

Are Republicans hypocritical?

My Answer: No, not in general. A specific person who happens to be Republican can be hypocritical but to call the whole party hypocritical is stereotyping, as not every Republican is going to be a hypocrite.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
Your Original Questions:

Why does it seem that Republicans enjoy extramarital affairs, anonymous gay relations and child pornography, but lecture America about family values?

My Answer: The media is quick to cling to any scandal or juicy affair they can get their hands on and you can bet a straight laced Republican going rogue on his values is sure to garner the attention of the public but this doesn't mean Republicans as a whole are of this caliber.

Are Republicans hypocritical?

My Answer: No, not in general. A specific person who happens to be Republican can be hypocritical but to call the whole party hypocritical is stereotyping, as not every Republican is going to be a hypocrite.
You may be confusing conservatism with Republican-'ism'. I'm a centrist with conservative values, but in no way would I vote for a political party that claims one thing and does another (without merit). "Read my lips, no new taxes".

I agree that the media is quick to cling to a scandal, however that does not preclude the fact that whatever it is, didn't happen. So that argument is moot.

Like UB said, I challenge your assertion, "No, not in general", that Republican's are hypocritical. Would you agree that more than 49% would be considered, "in general"? - Or better put, would you agree that 50 out of 100 would be considered "general"? - I would argue that if I randomly picked out 100 Republican representatives in the House and Senate, that more than 50% of them are hypocritical, dangerously so.
 

Cyrus420

Well-Known Member
You may be confusing conservatism with Republican-'ism'. I'm a centrist with conservative values, but in no way would I vote for a political party that claims one thing and does another (without merit). "Read my lips, no new taxes".

I agree that the media is quick to cling to a scandal, however that does not preclude the fact that whatever it is, didn't happen. So that argument is moot.

Like UB said, I challenge your assertion, "No, not in general", that Republican's are hypocritical. Would you agree that more than 49% would be considered, "in general"? - Or better put, would you agree that 50 out of 100 would be considered "general"? - I would argue that if I randomly picked out 100 Republican representatives in the House and Senate, that more than 50% of them are hypocritical, dangerously so.
Even if you picked 50% hypocrites it doesn't make the sentiment that Republicans are hypocrites true, it just means you picked half hypocrites. You cannot assume anything of a group even if the majority displays the same character trait, especially when it comes to something as ambiguous as political beliefs.

Edit: My argument is moot? No, it's a fine example of what you were showing is just media portrayal of a slew of corrupt politicians and isn't indicative of the majority of those like minded individuals. The very fact that you don't understand what I'm saying is extremely frustrating. Good day.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
You don't have me pegged. You're a bad judge of character.
I don't believe in a two party system. In fact, "party" politics is stupid. Ideas should run this country, not favors and bargains.

And once again, you are missing the point, or choose to ignore it. But I agree that both Democrats and Republicans are both guilty of doing dumb shit, ie. Ted driving drunk and killing someone.

The stark difference is, Republicans preach about not doing dumb shit, and then are guilty of doing that same thing. In other words, Republicans need to stop being hypocrites. Why are you so dense? Is this concept really that difficult for you to grasp?
Yea. It seems accountability is an advanced concept for right wingers, at least in my experience.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
Even if you picked 50% hypocrites it doesn't make the sentiment that Republicans are hypocrites true, it just means you picked half hypocrites. You cannot assume anything of a group even if the majority displays the same character trait, especially when it comes to something as ambiguous as political beliefs.
Um. Yes it does assume something, it assumes that 50% or the GENERAL populous of the Republican party is hypocritical. That's basics of statistics. Don't be silly.

Edit: Furthermore, it most certainly goes to show that in general, all Republicans including officials and constituents are hypocrites. The officials who hold office are representative of the people for whom they govern. In simple terms, the GENERAL constituency of the Republican party identify with Donald Trump, or perhaps many other Republicans who hold office in the Senate and House. If you identify with someone who is a hypocrite... if it quacks like a duck, smells like a shit filled duck, its likely a Republican.

Edit: My argument is moot? No, it's a fine example of what you were showing is just media portrayal of a slew of corrupt politicians and isn't indicative of the majority of those like minded individuals. The very fact that you don't understand what I'm saying is extremely frustrating. Good day.
See above for causality of "moot". Your argument is moot.

I'm frustrating you because I am right and you are babbling. You haven't proven my initial claim false, you've only offered hypotheticals and "feelings". Try harder.
 
Last edited:
Top