Is another Family Values Republican being exposed as an adulterer actually news anymore? Don't get me wrong I thought John Edwards was equally as slimey. To me it's always the hypocrisy that drives my level of disgust. If Barney Frank gets caught screwing thee guys it's not a big deal to me. Unless he is out in front saying screwing three guys is terrible.... From another "family values hypocrite" Senator John Ensign-
So are you saying the Republicans are way worse about it, or aren't you? Or are you saying John Edwards, while being just as slimey, wasn't as bad since he was consistent instead of hypocritical? And are you saying that Larry Craig's opponents weren't hypocritical for forcing him out of the senate for asking a man instead of a woman to have sex with him?
Who said this about Bill Clinton's extramarital affair? "An embarrassing moment for the country." 'I think we have to feel very sad for the American people and Hillary and Chelsea." On calling for Clinton's resignation: "I came to that conclusion recently, and frankly it's because of what he put his whole Cabinet through and what he has put the country through. He has no credibility left." John Ensign.
You get no argument from me on the sliminess. I don't care whether they are R, D, or whatever, hypocrite is a hypocrite. However, did you have to put the image of Barney Frank screwing three guys out there? Thanks!
Funny how this thread is all about how hypocritical those family values republicans are - even though the OP admits that it happens on both sides and I'm sure would be the FIRST to object if someone claimed that dems don't care about the sanctity of marriage and don't stress its importance. It's just summer once again expressing his hatred for anyone different than him.
True, it's not quite an intern but it's not much better (I'd still argue there's a difference there, but I'll grant you that point.) And I'm definitely not saying the guy is still in line for the white house - and trust me when I say that absolutely kills me to say because he could have done it. He's smart, articulate, he can even work with Harry Reid, for crying out loud, so you know he can at least be semi-bipartisan. And now he's screwed the whole thing up. That's just great. Maybe wayyyy down the road, but no way now.
I hope he keeps his seat, and I hope he leads the charge of "sanctity of marriage" whenever gay discussions come up in Congress again. And I hope he gets called out on that. He was one of those intent on voting in favor of the US amendment to ban gay marriage because the sanctity of marriage just had to be protected. He needs to worry about how you don't f**k your underlings, especially if that underling is married to another of your underlings instead of my marriage. If he hadn't taken that stand, I wouldn't have commented, but since he did, I'll be happy to watch him while he steps in this big pile of ****.
The thing that gets me is that no one here seems to understand what a hypocrite is. Don't get me wrong, I don't really know anything about Sen. Ensign, and he can be impeached for all I care. I have no love for him, and am NOT here to defend him or his actions. Just as I wouldn't John Edwards or Bill Clinton. The issue is that all 3 of the men mentioned above believe, and have publically said that adultary is wrong, and that they have done something wrong. I also believe all 3 men mentioned would use the word 'sin.' So all 3 are guilty of sinning, or if you don't like that 'religious' word, they are guilty of an immoral action. They are not hypocrites. Hypocrites are people who say it is WRONG for others do to said action, but perfectly OK for themselves to do it. Otherwise, because we all commit actions we would admit are immoral, then everyone in the world is a hypocrit, and therefore, we are all in the same boat. Of course I am writing this from a Xian perspective that does believe we are all guilty of sin, or immorality, and thus I am never surprised when any politician or priest or person is guilty of immorality.
I call a hypocrite anyone who feels free to tell others how to live their lives, meanwhile feeling no compunction to follow their own rules. He told me that the sanctity of marriage was paramount, then he went off and proved that was not true, at least for his marriage. He told me that Bill Clinton and Larry Craig should resign their office because they were caught in affairs, and then decided that rule didn't really apply to him. That's a hypocrite. The adultery by itself isn't hypocritical. He became a hypocrite when he said one thing until the shoe was on the other foot and now his tune has changed.
NAIU, I am pretty ignorant of this Ensign situation. I thought he was resigning, and if he isn't he should. It is definately a moral failing, and I agree with what you said on another thread I think about if he is just doing this to avoid blackmail. I don't know if he is truly remorseful or not. I actually do believe Bill Clinton and John Edwards are/were.
I haven't heard anything in a couple days. Last I heard he was resigning his seat on whatever committee he was on, but wasn't giving up his seat. I could have outdated info, though.
Ensign should be called out for his hypocrisy, and perhaps voted out if voters don't trust him anymore, but I couldn't care less about him having an affair, and I don't think he should resign. I don't think he should have resigned from the leadership post either, though he was probably forced to resign. I am curious, though, about the report that the aggrieved husband contacted FoxNews about this five days before Ensign admitted the affair. I read yesterday that Ensign decided to come out publicly after he had found out that the husband reached out to a major news organization. And I don't remember FoxNews reporting the story until after Ensign admitted it publicly. Did FoxNews sit on the story and then tip off Ensign so that Ensign could get ahead of the story?
I am going to go with hypocritical as well, because it was an ongoing thing. We're not talking about someone who slipped up once, it was something he was regularly doing. Having said that, we don't know what was going through his mind at the time - did he just get caught up in weakness, or was this something he really thought was OK for him to do. I really don't know - what I do know is that repentance is available for anyone and doesn't automatically invalidate any truth they may have said while being hypocritical. Just because he talked about the sanctity of marriage while committing adultery doesn't make marriage any less worthy of sanctification, and it doesn't even mean he didn't believe what he said. He was either unwilling or "unable" (which frankly is an excuse) to do what he had to do to abide by it. Jesus said it about the scribes and pharisees: "therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them."
Couple of points on the article - first it's still worth mentioning to Ensign's credit that he ended this over a year ago. He didn't end the affair because he got caught, he admitted it because he got caught - and I don't know of any rules that require anyone - politician or not - to call a press conference and announce that you had an affair. Second, it would be interesting to see what Fox did with the notification. It sounds like the guy turning Ensign in was strictly looking for revenge, which doesn't impress me. But did Fox say "hey, it happened a year ago and it's over, no story", or were they going to investigate, or did they ever even get the letter.
Fox is denying that they received the letter or tipped off Ensign: The Link. They say that the husband contacted them a day before Ensign admitted the affair but that they didn't find him credible enough to pursue the story.
If their inbox is anything like mine was when I was in journalism, I could believe that. And yes, true, he might have ended it only because he got caught. But even then, he was under no obligation to go public, so the criticisms of him announcing it under threat of blackmail aren't necessarily founded.
if you havent figured out yet that everyone in congress is trying to portray a certain type of person for their demographic and stay elected and will say or do anyhting to stay in that position, you are probably likely to sign a ARM and think you are getting a great deal....i mean, why wouldnt they want to stay there, as long as they keep getting elected, they get 175k a year, work 3 days a weeks for 6 months out of the year, have an expense account to take care of incidentals and have their asses kissed constantly by lobbyists...they are whores with an attitude becaue they actually think they are important. they are worthless human beings.
uhhh, you may not like it, but if that describes you, then you are an important person. __________________________________________________ just fyi, most people that make 175 a year and over earn it by working long hours and dealing with a lot of crap. most of them are also a benefit to society because they hire others, pay them and their work usually leads to a lot of other jobs. senators and congressmen are a drain on society because they get paid by tax dollars. their staff also gets paid by tax dollars. they then pass a lot of worthless legislation that spends more tax dollars. when they cant find the money to pay for the program de jour...my new word...they either raise taxes, steal the money from other programs, or simply ignore the fact that there is no money...they are great spenders of other peoples money...much like decorators...decorators are not important people. they then travel all over the country raising money and help to destroy the environment so they can continue their vicious cycle. now in the case of boxer, it could be argued that she assists the economy by helping out her husband's corporations but that is really unethical too since she should be doing what is best for her state, not what is best for her husband. so if you think breaking what is essentially a fiduciary duty to the people of her state, then by all means she is an important person.
