"moose" wrote in message
...
On 5/18/2010 4:37 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"John wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2010 16:05:49 -0400, wrote:

On 5/18/2010 3:41 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 5/18/2010 1:33 PM, hk wrote:
On 5/18/10 1:17 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 11:13:42 -0400,
wrote:

...snerk of the week:

GOP Rep. Mark Souder of Indiana -- the leading advocate for
abstinence
education in Congress -- will resign after an affair with one of
his
female staffers became public. From his statement of resignation

IT IS WITH GREAT REGRET I ANNOUNCE THAT I AM RESIGNING FROM THE US
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AS WELL AS RESIGNING AS THE REPUBLICAN
NOMINEE
FOR CONGRESS IN THIS FALL'S ELECTION. ... IT HAS BEEN ALL
CONSUMING
FOR
ME TO DO THIS JOB WELL, ESPECIALLY IN A DISTRICT WITH COSTLY,
COMPETITIVE ELECTIONS EVERY TWO YEARS I DO NOT HAVE ANY SORT OF
"NORMAL"
LIFE - FOR FAMILY, FOR FRIENDS, FOR CHURCH, FOR COMMUNITY.TO SERVE
HAS
BEEN A BLESSING AND A RESPONSIBILITY GIVEN FROM GOD.I WISH I COULD
HAVE
BEEN A BETTER EXAMPLE. I SINNED AGAINST GOD, MY WIFE AND MY FAMILY
BY
HAVING A MUTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH A PART-TIME MEMBER OF MY STAFF.
IN
THE
POISONOUS ENVIRONMENT OF WASHINGTON DC, ANY PERSONAL FAILING IS
SEIZED
UPON, OFTEN TWISTED, FOR POLITICAL GAIN. I AM RESIGNING RATHER
THAN
TO
PUT MY FAMILY THROUGH THAT PAINFUL, DRAWN-OUT PROCESS.

Yes, Mark. Washington, DC is to blame. For everything. Even for
your
resignation. Yup.

Of course this wouldn't be a Republican sex scandal if Mark Souder
weren't a hard core family values advocate. You know, the kind who
preaches abstinence.


Swiped from KOS.


It is interesting that the GOP has a zero tolerance policy on these
things but I suppose it doers have to do with the things they are
supposed to stand for.

Maybe he should have just switched parties like Specter ... to save
his job


There you go.

I don't for a moment think that Dems are any more "spouse loyal"
than
Repubs. The saving grace for the Dems, though, is that for the most
part
they do not align themselves with the rigid (and hypocritically
held)
"family values" of the conservative right, and therefore are less
likely
to be caught up in these sorts of scandals.

I always grin at the foibles of these idiots when they claim they've
"sinned against god." That implies they have special knowledge of a
creator when no one knows if there is one.

By your way of thinking, If you don't condemn an act you are less
likely
to be called out when you do it. Whoopty Do!


It's about bs hypocrisy not condemnation of the act. The act itself is
wrong. The hypocrisy of promoting family values and using that
promotion
as
a cudgel is even worse.

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2004/20040811.htm


Oh, I see. Hipocracy is worse than some of the horrendous acts that
were
and are being commited. You are as big a dip**** as Harry. Pardon my
French. Harry is such a pussy when it comes to discussing his own
religion, but he's ready, willing, and eager to trash other peoples
religion. At least, to your credit , you haven't stooped that low.

Being a hypocrit is bad. It's kinda like saying one is trying improve
this
group
while making offensive comments with almost every response.

However, being a liar is much worse. But, I suppose the NY Times is just
another
right wing rag.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/nyregion/19reax.html?src=mv`1


--
Annoy a Liberal...practice personal responsibility!

John H


So, you believe hypocracy isn't lying. Not too bright are you...




So you believe hypocrisy is lying?

Using the following example you would be correct.

A "champagne socialist" is a pejorative political term originating in the
United Kingdom. The phrase is used to describe a Socialist self-proclaimed
advocate of the poor or working classes, who claims to support a form of
socialist ideology, but who might disregard socialist ideals in their
daily life. Champagne Socialists may claim to be against the Capitalist
system but will still happily function in it and prosper from it. The term
is sometimes used as an attack by opposing politicians to portray and
ridicule their opponents as hypocritical.

But the following definition makes think that you are, maybe, full of
****e.

Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: \'hi-p?-?krit\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin
hypocrita, from Greek hypokrites actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
Date: 13th century

1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or
feelings

- hypocrite adjective

Read more on the subject and find out that you and Harriet are both
Hypocrites. Have a pleasant day. Oh! If that makes you liers too, then so
be it.

Interesting that you can copy and paste just fine, but when it comes to
actually typing something, you fail miserably.

Yes, for sure, you're an idiot.