Yet another GOP pedophile.

Not_Punny

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Posts
5,464
Media
109
Likes
3,056
Points
258
Location
California
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
There's another side to this coin... (LOL, as if a coin could have three sides).

In any case, there's a slightly different way of looking at it....

-- Johnny Jones (made up name) has a "lust" that is frowned upon by his family/religion/society. He suppresses this lust.

-- To help keep himself under control -- or maybe to "convince" himself that he really DOES have it under control -- he espouses some ultra-conservative cause/religion/organization, and gets up on a soapbox to tell the rest of us to NOT do the very types of things that are giving him nightmares.

-- As long as he is "preaching" against it, he can fool himself into thinking that he has it "under control".

-- Problem is, it sometimes isn't under control at all.

Hence, you get...

A) MORE people joining conservative political and religious parties with whacko lusts (they got into it as part of their attempt to expunge it from their lives)

B) LESS people with whacko lusts joining more laid back religious/political parties and organizations.

Standing in testament to my theory are hundreds (thousands?) of priests, preachers, "upstanding citizens" and other hypocrites who have failed to keep themselves under control.

Solution: Evolution, not revolution. As long as we continue to champion causes such as gay rights, same-sex marriage, legalization of marijuana, marriage for priests, etc. etc. we will systematically reduce the number of soap-boxes for social psychopaths to stand upon...

...and maybe even, someday, reduce the number of psychopaths being created. (Although I acknowledge that it's controversial as to whether they're born or created; my best guess is that it's a little of both.)
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
I think it is predominantly nurture HM, a lack of love and respect for individuality when a child. A lack of communication and education as to the wealth and breadth of the human condition.
 

Not_Punny

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Posts
5,464
Media
109
Likes
3,056
Points
258
Location
California
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
I think it is predominantly nurture HM, a lack of love and respect for individuality when a child. A lack of communication and education as to the wealth and breadth of the human condition.

I totally agree, but I also believe that in SOME cases, there is something "already there". I can't tell you WHAT it is, just that, logically, there has to be some other factor present.

People raised in the exact same environment don't develop the exact same tendencies. For example, Jeffrey Dahmer had a younger brother, David, who did not become a psychopath -- yet was raised in the same "war-ridden" household.

I don't think we have enough data yet to completely understand the psychopath phenomena...

But ain't it fun speculating about it?!
 

Not_Punny

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Posts
5,464
Media
109
Likes
3,056
Points
258
Location
California
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
And, by the way, I truly and honestly believe that a hypocrite is a TYPE of social psychopath.

Maybe not as dangerous as a serial killer...

But almost as dangerous because there are more of them and they "touch" the lives of far more people.
 

Blocko

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Posts
687
Media
0
Likes
13
Points
238
Sexuality
No Response
Some would suggest it's because the plutocratic types like their power over the powerless too much... but you know, that would be an over generalization.
 

B_All4show

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Posts
692
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
163
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
How about 3 other sides to the coin.

1. When a republican or religious person gets caught for any type of impropriety, it is a man bites dog story. 2. The media is liberal and makes sure the story gets out and blows these stories out of portion.
3. The media is liberal and does not cover negative stories about their own. No one talks about Bill Clinton's girl friend or William Jefferson Clinton's frigde full of cash. Look away, no story here.
 

D_Harry_Crax

Account Disabled
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Posts
4,447
Media
0
Likes
942
Points
228
Sexuality
No Response
So basically all conservatives are peadophiles and gay? Right.

You're rather dense, aren't you? I didn't say that all conservatives are peadophiles and gay. I suggested that it seems like all of the people who are in politics AND pedophiles AND gay are conservatives. There's a huge difference between what I said and how you summarized it, meaning either that you intentionally misrepresented what I said, you don't read very carefully, or you're not very bright.
 

D_Harry_Crax

Account Disabled
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Posts
4,447
Media
0
Likes
942
Points
228
Sexuality
No Response
How about 3 other sides to the coin.

1. When a republican or religious person gets caught for any type of impropriety, it is a man bites dog story. 2. The media is liberal and makes sure the story gets out and blows these stories out of portion.
3. The media is liberal and does not cover negative stories about their own. No one talks about Bill Clinton's girl friend or William Jefferson Clinton's frigde full of cash. Look away, no story here.

This is simply false. Do a search on Lexis-Nexis of print and broadcast stories about the congressman's cash in the fridge (his name is not William Jefferson Clinton; William Jefferson Clinton=Bill Clinton, and he was never a Congressman) or about ex-Pres. Bill Clinton's affairs. You will find hundreds of stories published and broadcast. Do a Lexis-Nexis search for articles or broadcasts about Donald Fleischman, the gay Republican Party chairman from Wisconsin having sex with 16-year-olds, and you will find that the only news media covering it are local Green Bay area news media and the gay press. The mainstream news media, contrary to being liberal and protecting their own, seem to be protecting the Republican Party from yet another gay sex scandal. Perhaps they simply think that there have been so many Republican sex scandals (a surprising number of them involving gay men) that they no longer are newsworthy! After all, the fundamental criterion for newsworthiness, whether the event be positive or negative, is that it be to some degree unusual.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
How about 3 other sides to the coin.

1. When a republican or religious person gets caught for any type of impropriety, it is a man bites dog story. 2. The media is liberal and makes sure the story gets out and blows these stories out of portion.
3. The media is liberal and does not cover negative stories about their own. No one talks about Bill Clinton's girl friend or William Jefferson Clinton's frigde full of cash. Look away, no story here.
William Jefferson Clinton's fridge full of cash? If you have a story, by all means let us in on it.

If, on the other hand, you are talking about William Jefferson (D-LA), you are an idiot if you don't think that was all over the news. You need to stop paying attention to Coulter and Limbaugh when they tell you the the media has a "liberal bias." The AP, the New York Times, and the Washington Post all love to get dirt on ANY politician, and they all love to publish it. The story about William Jefferson was on the front page of the WP for weeks, and I even posted a thread here about it (well, him and Pelosi).

What the freako-reactionary-talk-show idiots equate as "liberal bias" is simply an over-supply of ammunition on one side. The self-proclaimed conservatives are more corrupt. The democrats are corrupt, the republicans are absolutely corrupt.

Squealing about "liberal media bias" simply because most of the muckraking articles are about "conservative" politicians is ludicrous.
 

B_All4show

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Posts
692
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
163
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
This is simply false. Do a search on Lexis-Nexis of print and broadcast stories about the congressman's cash in the fridge (his name is not William Jefferson Clinton; William Jefferson Clinton=Bill Clinton, and he was never a Congressman) or about ex-Pres. Bill Clinton's affairs. You will find hundreds of stories published and broadcast. Do a Lexis-Nexis search for articles or broadcasts about Donald Fleischman, the gay Republican Party chairman from Wisconsin having sex with 16-year-olds, and you will find that the only news media covering it are local Green Bay area news media and the gay press. The mainstream news media, contrary to being liberal and protecting their own, seem to be protecting the Republican Party from yet another gay sex scandal. Perhaps they simply think that there have been so many Republican sex scandals (a surprising number of them involving gay men) that they no longer are newsworthy! After all, the fundamental criterion for newsworthiness, whether the event be positive or negative, is that it be to some degree unusual.

Link me one story about Bill's current girl friends?
 

B_All4show

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Posts
692
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
163
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
William Jefferson Clinton's fridge full of cash? If you have a story, by all means let us in on it.

If, on the other hand, you are talking about William Jefferson (D-LA), you are an idiot if you don't think that was all over the news. You need to stop paying attention to Coulter and Limbaugh when they tell you the the media has a "liberal bias." The AP, the New York Times, and the Washington Post all love to get dirt on ANY politician, and they all love to publish it. The story about William Jefferson was on the front page of the WP for weeks, and I even posted a thread here about it (well, him and Pelosi).

What the freako-reactionary-talk-show idiots equate as "liberal bias" is simply an over-supply of ammunition on one side. The self-proclaimed conservatives are more corrupt. The democrats are corrupt, the republicans are absolutely corrupt.

Squealing about "liberal media bias" simply because most of the muckraking articles are about "conservative" politicians is ludicrous.

DC,

You are an idiot if you think that media that votes for a democrat in presidential races 85% of the time is always fair and unbiased. Get a clue.
 

Not_Punny

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Posts
5,464
Media
109
Likes
3,056
Points
258
Location
California
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
* climbs up on top of a soapbox *

Hypocrites are found in greater concentrations in any and all organizations that try to tell you what you SHOULD be doing.

Liberals have their fair share of hypocrites, though their particular form of hypocrisy doesn't much make the news -- "give to the poor and needy" (not all of them personally do that), don't judge (some judge a lot), etc. etc.

But these I think are lesser hypocrisies.
 

B_All4show

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Posts
692
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
163
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Do a Lexis-Nexis search for articles or broadcasts about Donald Fleischman, the gay Republican Party chairman from Wisconsin having sex with 16-year-olds, and you will find that the only news media covering it are local Green Bay area news media and the gay press.

Do you know how small time that guy is? I couldn't name the Rebuplican chairman in my city. I think he is an extremely obese man, but that is about as much as I know about him. No one cares. It is funny how you know about it?

So what is the problem? Is it because he is a gay? Or is there a problem that he is a gay Republican? Or do you have a problem he is banging 16 year old boys?

I would venture to say that politics does not bring the top people to the game, especially on small stage.
 

B_All4show

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Posts
692
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
163
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
* climbs up on top of a soapbox *

Hypocrites are found in greater concentrations in any and all organizations that try to tell you what you SHOULD be doing.

Liberals have their fair share of hypocrites, though their particular form of hypocrisy doesn't much make the news -- "give to the poor and needy" (not all of them personally do that), don't judge (some judge a lot), etc. etc.

But these I think are lesser hypocrisies.

Thank you, great point. How can you perform lower than the standard if you have no standard?
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
DC,

You are an idiot if you think that media that votes for a democrat in presidential races 85% of the time is always fair and unbiased. Get a clue.
Hey, idiot, I'm still waiting for you to tell me what you know about William Jefferson Clinton and a refrigerator full of cash.

Come on, out with it.

Prove to us what your sources have...
 

Not_Punny

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Posts
5,464
Media
109
Likes
3,056
Points
258
Location
California
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Thank you, great point. How can you perform lower than the standard if you have no standard?

I can see how it might be interpreted that way, but that wasn't quite my point.

My point was that goody-goody organizations (the ones that are telling you to hold to certain standards) are filled with hypocrites...

And because Republicans frequently mix religious morality with their positions, they make more news when they fall from grace.

Liberals, on the other hand, don't stand on religious, thou-shalt-not platforms. Therefore, their particular hypocrisies aren't as visible, and frankly just aren't as newsworthy. (Sex, scandals, big names, death tolls and crime are the subjects that make headlines.)

- - - - -

And no -- I'm not a Democrat. I can't completely agree with them because I understand that business/economics/tax have certain requirements that don't mix with liberalism. Republicans, however, are waaaaaay too intertwined with religion and morality.