Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dude1394
I guess you are right jack...Everyone's bedroom habits should be out in the open so we can vote on them. I mean why shouldn't we know that hillary used to run a train in arkansas or something.
It's crap imo, the whole outting for political purposes. It probably works for the dems because 'if it feels good, do it" is their mantra.
|
Politicians and sex? Well, this is a little more interesting to discuss, at least. Come on, Dude, please don't expect us to believe that you didn't delight in Bill Clinton's miseries with the rest of us. I mean, he wasn't even being explicitly hypocritical--voters KNEW, or shoulda known what they were getting when they voted that clown into office. Wouldn't you have wanted him to be honest before the elections about what he'd been doing in the Oral Office? You know he'd have gone down in flames.
Re outing for political purposes, greyer. One of those things that I might never be able to do, but can kinda understand the logic of.
I mean, for one candidate o out another candidate hoping that voters will vote against him/her just because he/she's gay? Over the line. Probably won't work in a lot of places either.
But to point out a gross inconsistency in stated policy and private personal behavior of a sitting, office-holding politician? I mean, suppose you found out that one (or more) or Mitt's daughters (or daughers-in-law) had had abortions at his insistence. Should that remain out of the political debate? Do ya imagine there's any chance it would?
Larry Craig is a pathetic figure in many respects. I sincerely hate to see someone destroyed that way, but in truth, it was his own actions that did him in. The Oregon newspaper had investigated him but decided not to run the story UNTIL his arrest and plea became public.
So many questions about him to answer:
1) Do I think he has had homosexual exchanges throughout his life? Yeah, more than likely.
2) Do I think he went to the airport restroom looking for a sexual exchange? Yeah, more than likely.
3) Would I, as a juror, vote to convict him even for disorderly conduct on the basis of what's been reported? Nah, no way.
4) Do I think he should resign his office? Well, not so much based on what he did in the restroom, in and of itself, although that demonstrates some incredibly poor personal judgment. More based on his handling of the aftermath. I do think that if he stays on it will be disastrously bad for Republicans over the next year. That's why most of them are trying to hustle him off the public stage STAT ASAP. This thing is gonna leave a welt though.
5) Should law enforcement spend time policing airport restrooms? Absolutely. Especially if there are particular places that develop a reputation for activity. And yeah, they should prosecute and publicize cases to deter activity. However, they would need a far higher standard of proof than winks, nods and toe taps. Unless there is some imminent lip (or at least hand) contact with penis, no conviction. If he don't unzip, you must acquit.
6) Should anyone (man or woman) pursue sexual asignations in public bathrooms? Generally not. For one reason, the hygiene issue is just too great to overcome. And there's just too much room for ambiguity, mixed signals, etc. Seriously, two (or more) consenting individuals gettin' their freaks on behind closed doors of PRIVATE spaces (not public restroom stalls) ? Go for it. But I think it's an entirely legitimate argument from law enforcement's perspective that unchecked activity of this sort will not remain small scale, and first thing you know some 11-year old boy is getting firsthand Full Uncle Monty without really being in a position to make an informed, consenting adult judgment on the question.
Get a room, y'all.