Now here are two people who deserve each other!

Maddow and Co are in some serious denial…but whats new. Avoiding reality is what Progressives do best. They have a difficult time seeing thru the rainbow, and recognizing that sometimes the pot at the end is not filled with gold.

In the real world, Weiner was the media front man and poster boy for the progressive left. His remaining in office can in no way help their cause.

Did Vitter lie about his “activities?” And why didn’t Rachael play the audio from the Greta show instead of telling us what Mr. GOP said in her own words without, at least, quoting the guy?

If Vitter lied on the public record about being a douche, than yea, he should resign to, but can Maddow at least present the question without the economy-sized spin?

One smut dealer interviewing another, no news here.

As always… it’s not the crime is the coverup.

In this case, there wasn’t a crime, so there was even less reason to lie. But he did. And that’s the problem.

There wasn’t some prominent journalist, politician, or scholar she could have gotten to expound on this?

Larry Flynt!!

Has she gone completely nuts?!

ImNotBlue said:
As always… it’s not the crime is the coverup.

In this case, there wasn’t a crime, so there was even less reason to lie. But he did. And that’s the problem.

And I find it really disconcerting that a Rhodes Scholar of Political Science apparently doesn’t understand that.

I agree about the hypocrisy of the family values type of conservatives.

But just as important is that Weiner’s brand of big government liberalism is rooted in the idea government can run your life better than you can.

Weiner is a proponent of a perpetual nanny state. So he may not preach “values” but he’s a proponent of an ever increasing government regulation on everything from what to feed your children to what kind of vehicle you should drive.

If a politician can’t control his own life, why on earth would you want him legislating the lives of others?

Rachel Maddow has had some creepy guests, but this is really a new low. Someone please assure me that this was a mistake and that MSNBC will issue an apology tomorrow.

Rachel I can’t wait to see your interview with the Son of Sam. Will you ask his opinion on the sanctity of human life? You’re a trip!!!

felixw said:
Rachel Maddow has had some creepy guests, but this is really a new low. Someone please assure me that this was a mistake and that MSNBC will issue an apology tomorrow.

Actually felixw, Flynt was regarded as a hero for offering a million dollars to anyone who could prove an affair with a Republican.

But for some reason Breitbart is somehow evil for publishing the same thing and somehow this is not news worthy.

Only Rachel Maddow would focus this week on some stone cold story from 4 years ago about David Vitter. Then again, it’s impossible for Rachel to go through an entire show without playing gotcha with a Republican. So she has to do the best she can, even if it looks desperate and inappropriate.

And all this because she thinks this justifies Rep. Weiner’s behavior? A five-year-old could understand the logical flaw in THAT argument. Then again, anyone looking for logical consistency would have given up on Ms. Maddow a long time ago.

But honestly even creepier than Vitter or Weiner is Larry Flynt, who she invites on to her show as an “esteemed guest.” Has Maddow lost all sense of proportion and values? She might as well get Weiner on her show to comment on Flynt’s disgusting behavior patterns.

Actually, four years ago when the info came out it was about something that had taken place in the early 90′s, before Vitter had run for office.

That’s no excuse for his denying it later, but the time aspect is certainly a significant difference from Weiner’s escapades.

turk281 said:
Actually felixw, Flynt was regarded as a hero for offering a million dollars to anyone who could prove an affair with a Republican.

But for some reason Breitbart is somehow evil for publishing the same thing and somehow this is not news worthy.

I agree. Flynt has made his career in the most disgusting and exploitative way possible. Even Rachel Maddow, who has few scruples, should hold herself to a higher standard than bringing him on board as an “expert” on a news story which revolves around ethical issues. This would be like having O.J. Simpson on her show to give advice on improving your marriage.

ImNotBlue said:
As always… it’s not the crime is the coverup.

In this case, there wasn’t a crime, so there was even less reason to lie. But he did. And that’s the problem.

Not only did he lie… he attempted to smear someone else (Breitbart) and allowed his coverup crew (MSM) to run with the smear as well. He sanctimoniously called a CNN producer a jack*ss in the midst of his lies.

BTW, what’s wrong with Vitters, or anyone, promoting abstinence to 13 and 14 year olds? I suppose Rachel would prefer he promote sexual relations between minors and adults, like Obama’s “Safe School Czar” Kevin Jennings and his NAMBLA buddies.

Why in the world would Rahel Maddow of all people allow this sexist exploitive old pornographer on her show?

It’s astounding!

ImNotBlue said:
As always… it’s not the crime is the coverup.

In this case, there wasn’t a crime, so there was even less reason to lie. But he did. And that’s the problem.

It’s not the crime? I see you’re covering for Vitter!!

Comparative Analysis of Democratic and Republican Sex Scandals. Sounds like the title of her thesis at Oxford. Good thing she is not wasting that education.

Yoda002 said:
It’s not the crime? I see you’re covering for Vitter!!

You do understand there’s a difference between the terms “coverup” and your implication of “cover” as in making excuses for someone.

I love the Morality Police on Mediaite….you guy crack me up. No go back to trolling for hookers on craigslist or looking for gay sex in a Airport bathroom. The world laughs at stuff like this, but then again conservatards and baggers don’t have a sense of humor.

im confused, where does the pathological lying and denial and actually playing maddow for a fool on her own show come into play. just on a professional level this “journalist” should be going out of her way to destroy this man for playing her for a fool and her being so foolish to give her a platform to do such. what the hell, does she really thing we’re that stupid!? Maddow is a tool

david r said:
Comparative Analysis of Democratic and Republican Sex Scandals. Sounds like the title of her thesis at Oxford. Good thing she is not wasting that education.

Yeah, maybe tomorrow she can analyze the scorned wives via the meanderings of Charlie Sheen.

turk281 said:
I agree about the hypocrisy of the family values type of conservatives.

But just as important is that Weiner’s brand of big government liberalism is rooted in the idea government can run your life better than you can.

Weiner is a proponent of a perpetual nanny state. So he may not preach “values” but he’s a proponent of an ever increasing government regulation on everything from what to feed your children to what kind of vehicle you should drive.

If a politician can’t control his own life, why on earth would you want him legislating the lives of others?

It’s sad that were a nanny state to big corporations. Maybe if we had some more regulations against Banks, Coal mines and off shore oil drilling we wouldn’t have had all those catastrophes.

I know you think they can regulate themselves but they won’t.

Michael Adam said:
I love the Morality Police on Mediaite….you guy crack me up. No go back to trolling for hookers on craigslist or looking for gay sex in a Airport bathroom. The world laughs at stuff like this, but then again conservatards and baggers don’t have a sense of humor.

Well, when liberal women start finding Hustler funny maybe you’ll have a point.

Maddow has hit a new low, bringing in a smut merchant to aid her false moral equivalency argument. She enjoys swimming around in the bottom of the barrel, obviously.

Yoda002 said:
It’s not the crime? I see you’re covering for Vitter!!

You are nuts…. Please change your avatar. I insults all children of the 80′s and geeks at the same time.

Yoda002 said:
It’s sad that were a nanny state to big corporations. Maybe if we had some more regulations against Banks, Coal mines and off shore oil drilling we wouldn’t have had all those catastrophes.

I know you think they can regulate themselves but they won’t.

Or prosecuted eco-terrorists.

Cecelia said:
You do understand there’s a difference between the terms “coverup” and your implication of “cover” as in making excuses for someone.

I was talking about the crime itself. I don’t think you understand the difference.

Yoda002 said:
It’s sad that were a nanny state to big corporations. Maybe if we had some more regulations against Banks, Coal mines and off shore oil drilling we wouldn’t have had all those catastrophes.

I know you think they can regulate themselves but they won’t.

Maybe if big government politicians didn’t subsidize big corporations with tax payer money, corporations would have to play by the rules that small companies who can’t afford lobbyists have to!

Your beloved regulations are what spawn those loopholes left open for corporations to crush their competition. Why do Tobacco companies spend millions lobbying for MORE regulation on cigarettes? Because small companies can’t comply. And on and on…

No thanks, I prefer not to side with corporate welfare.

tatboy said:
You are nuts…. Please change your avatar. I insults all children of the 80’s and geeks at the same time.

Why?? It shows that I fight for the right of the Alliance against the Evil Empire.

Yoda002 said:
I was talking about the crime itself. I don’t think you understand the difference.

Well, were you accusing ImNotBlue of covering up a crime or making excuses for a crime, Einstein?

Michael Adam said:
I love the Morality Police on Mediaite….you guy crack me up. No go back to trolling for hookers on craigslist or looking for gay sex in a Airport bathroom. The world laughs at stuff like this, but then again conservatards and baggers don’t have a sense of humor.

This is funny because you sound like what you are attempting to mock.

Yoda002 said:
It’s sad that were a nanny state to big corporations. Maybe if we had some more regulations against Banks, Coal mines and off shore oil drilling we wouldn’t have had all those catastrophes.

I know you think they can regulate themselves but they won’t.

You’re the guy who probably spews that the conservatives and that wish to cut spending want to deprive the poor and deprive disable children, right? But your wish to impose regulations on every industry, thus making it more expensive to do business, thus making products cost more and impacting employment levels actually do more harm to your “victim class” than any budget than any budget reform. The recipient class in this country is the one true group who will never regulate themselves

Yoda002 said:
Why?? It shows that I fight for the right of the Alliance against the Evil Empire.

Jar Jar Binks would be a better avatar to reflect the way in which you engage that fight. And the Republic against the Confederacy better describes the combatants. You’re nothing but prequel trilogy: no substance but lots of CGI =)

Is this woman completely tone-deaf? Does she think she’s helping the cause of libs and Dems by bringing on Larry Flynt???

turk281 said:
Maybe if big government politicians didn’t subsidize big corporations with tax payer money, corporations would have to play by the rules that small companies who can’t afford lobbyists have to!

Your beloved regulations are what spawn those loopholes left open for corporations to crush their competition. Why do Tobacco companies spend millions lobbying for MORE regulation on cigarettes? Because small companies can’t comply. And on and on…

No thanks, I prefer not to side with corporate welfare.

But your side is in bed with big corporations. They are even fighting against consumer protection rights.

Speaking of Tobacco, Speaker Boehner was once caught on the floor passing around Tobacco checks. At least some Republicans told him that this shouldn’t be done and they made sure this gets done behind closed doors.

W.I.S.C said:
Jar Jar Binks would be a better avatar to reflect the way in which you engage that fight. And the Republic against the Confederacy better describes the combatants. You’re nothing but prequel trilogy: no substance but lots of CGI =)

I feel a little jealousy coming on? I see no Avatar?

Cecelia said:
Well, were you accusing ImNotBlue of covering up a crime or making excuses for a crime, Einstein?

I’m just saying in Vitter’s case he did a crime and in fact got a big applause by the Senate Republicans.

Yoda002 said:
I feel a little jealousy coming on? I see no Avatar?

I need no craven images to represent my presence: One word from me is worth a thousand avatars.

brownsound said:
You’re the guy who probably spews that the conservatives and that wish to cut spending want to deprive the poor and deprive disable children, right? But your wish to impose regulations on every industry, thus making it more expensive to do business, thus making products cost more and impacting employment levels actually do more harm to your “victim class” than any budget than any budget reform. The recipient class in this country is the one true group who will never regulate themselves

What you don’t understand is that it will cut down on cost and make it more competitive.

W.I.S.C said:
I need no craven images to represent my presence: One word from me is worth a thousand avatars.

How cute!!

Yoda002 said:
I’m just saying in Vitter’s case he did a crime and in fact got a big applause by the Senate Republicans.

Vitter did a crime years before. Your comparison of the two stories is ludicrous. I don’t care if Weiner resigns or not. I also don’t care if he runs again and is reelected.

Why do the demos all suffer from ADD. What the hell does Vitter have to do with this story? Nothing – absolutely nothing.

tit for tat, it is not.

Time to grow up people. Stay on point and quit trying to justify bad behaviour by previous bad behaviour. That’s just so juvenile.

yah but your Mother wears army boots. Makes about as much sense.

Hey everybody!
Anyone want to projectile vomit?
Watch Maddow in action, defending Weiner and spreading every one of the stupid leftist #hacked conspiracy theories out there, all the while she attacks and smears everyone who got it right, while saying that they should apologize.
Question. Do you think Maddow is man enough to apologize for her loathsome behavior and #hackery?

Video here (vomit alert, unless you’re demented and used to people behaving bizarrely like this): http://www.verumserum.com/?p=25495

Yoda002 said:
How cute!!

Think of it as Dooku dialogue.

Seriously though: If Weiner resigns and ends this carnival, the narrative moves back to actual issues. How does this chain of events not help the Democratic Party?

Only Rachel Maddow would think of turning for guidance on moral issues to Larry Flynt.

Good old Maddow trying to desperately get the attention away from Weiner with a five year old scandal (where were the libs back then?), and with Larry Flint of all people.

Forget it Ray Ray trying to stop Weiner story at this point is like trying to swim upstream after the dam broke.

W.I.S.C said:
Think of it as Dooku dialogue.

Seriously though: If Weiner resigns and ends this carnival, the narrative moves back to actual issues. How does this chain of events not help the Democratic Party?

You’re spot on. We’ve had some of the worst economic news in the last couple of weeks. Weiner is actually doing the Democrats a favor.

Poll: Should Congressman Anthony Weiner resign?

http://wepolls.com/p/681245/Should-Congressman-Anthony-Weiner-resign

turk281 said:
You’re spot on. We’ve had some of the worst economic news in the last couple of weeks. Weiner is actually doing the Democrats a favor.

Not really. In reality, downturn economics hurt us all. I just wish Weiner would go away so the two parties can focus on work rather than politics and maybe do what they were elected to do: make the US engine run better.

W.I.S.C said:
Not really. In reality, downturn economics hurt us all. I just wish Weiner would go away so the two parties can focus on work rather than politics and maybe do what they were elected to do: make the US engine run better.

You know what will happen. Republicans will suggest budget cuts and Democrats will suggest Republicans are trying to hurt the poor.

It’s election season.

Until a single Democrat offers a solution to the budget deficit, Paul Ryan stands as the only person who has laid out a plan. Even if you think it’s ass backwards, there is no alternative.

And around we’ll go…

Yoda002 said:
I’m just saying in Vitter’s case he did a crime and in fact got a big applause by the Senate Republicans.

Well, I remember chuck rangel getting one hell of a standing ovation, too. Your point, yodler?

You will forgive me if I not read or watch this post, but comment anyway. I am so glad Rachael Is interviewing Mr. Flint. I want her and all at MSNBC people to freely draw inspiration from their core beings. Her relishing the Santorum Google thing comes from the same cavernous depravity that it took to invite this man on. It doesn’t matter what the discussion is, people just need to see them together. Keep it up. And thanks to Mediaite for monitoring it so I don’t have to.

MSNBC Lean Forward, Change the Cnannel before you GAG.

turk281 said:
You know what will happen. Republicans will suggest budget cuts and Democrats will suggest Republicans are trying to hurt the poor.

It’s election season.

Until a single Democrat offers a solution to the budget deficit, Paul Ryan stands as the only person who has laid out a plan. Even if you think it’s ass backwards, there is no alternative.

And around we’ll go…

Paul Ryan was the only guy who had a debatable alternative (other than than the simplistic “no”) to the President’s plans regarding healthcare over a year ago when the two sides meant to discuss its overhaul. He, along with Rand Paul, rates high on my “Republicans who actually have something to say list.” It was disappointing to see the President use politics against Ryan rather than Socratic debate after Ryan’s budget proposal. It’d be nice if those two camps could work together.

Here’s a shocker (sarcasm)

Weiner’s Las Vegas cyber sex pal contacted Rachel Maddow with information about Weiner’s 9 months of sexting with her, in order to give Mr Maddow the scoop. She never heard back (shocking!).

Boy that Mr Maddow sure is a real journalist. Or should that be journ-o-list? Ignoring the story to protect a liberal friend. Not at all surprising.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2011/06/weiner-mistress-lisa-weiss-tipped-rachel-maddow-scandal-twitter-facebook

I didn’t and wouldn’t read the story. I only dropped in to show my amazement that the dirtbag is still alive. Flynt, I mean, in this instance.

MSNBC and Maddow, what class! You can’t get any lower than Larry Flynt…unless you have Olbermann back for a comment, or maybe have Weiner on live.

MSNBC is a joke!

turk281 said:
Until a single Democrat offers a solution to the budget deficit, Paul Ryan stands as the only person who has laid out a plan. Even if you think it’s ass backwards, there is no alternative.

And around we’ll go…

Paul Ryan was not the only person who has laid out a plan for 2012. Paul Ryan’s plan was the only one the Republican majority house passed.

There were plans by Democrats “laid out” that were voted on but did not pass the vote.

Nacho said:
Paul Ryan was not the only person who has laid out a plan for 2012. Paul Ryan’s plan was the only one the Republican majority house passed.

There were plans by Democrats “laid out” that were voted on but did not pass the vote.

there were? By whom? What were they?

Weiner laid out his package.

This is low!

Try to find a worse excuse for a human to put on TV than Flynt .

Vitter is the left’s talking point and it’s not much . No one is defending him .

In my opinion, the reason Weiner’s scandal is different is because it played out live in front of everyone. The tweets, the phony coverup tweets, the denials, the blame game, pointing fingers, the 11 hours of media interviews pompously denying any wrong doing, calling a reporter a jackass, the trolling for young women on FB and twitter, the discovery of the women, the chat logs, the photos, the tearful press conference….and now, more pics, and finding out his wife is pregnant. (and he doesn’t even know if these women are of age!)

You can’t hide from that, you can’t move on from that, politically. Why would anyone ever trust him again. He lied over and over again to the media and to the public, right to their faces.

Vitter, what? They found a phone number in a Madam’s black book? Had there been video or recorded phone calls with hookers or something, that’s a different story. That’s why Lee resigned so fast. There were creepy images to see.

In light of all the recent sex scandals, Bill Clinton is actually looking pretty smart. He didn’t take photos, post anything on the internet, leave text chat logs, get anyone pregnant… If it wasn’t for that one blue dress…. That’s why it’s been easy to *forgive and forget* Clinton. We didn’t see it all.

Sanford, he came out pretty quickly, balled like a baby and admitted he was in love. Not very scandalous really.

It’s a lot easier to move on when you haven’t witnessed every sordid detail, and been lied to, over and over again.

John Edwards denied his own child, cheated on a wife with cancer and had his aid claim HE was the father. Blech! Arnold – the woman worked in their house! Blech!

Weiner’s judgment and mental state are the issue here. He didn’t even KNOW these women and he was sending them (recycled) lewd photos, and dirty chatting with them, from his office, with pics of his wife, and president, etc. behind him. He didn’t even KNOW them. It could have been anyone – reporters, even. All the while he’s bashing and attacking Republicans for how they do their job, and he’s back in his office whacking off to total strangers.

That’s just wrong.

and, weiner kind of thru his wife under the bus a bit when he said she knew about his pervy online predatory behavior before they were married.

turk281 said:
Maybe if big government politicians didn’t subsidize big corporations with tax payer money, corporations would have to play by the rules that small companies who can’t afford lobbyists have to!

Your beloved regulations are what spawn those loopholes left open for corporations to crush their competition. Why do Tobacco companies spend millions lobbying for MORE regulation on cigarettes? Because small companies can’t comply. And on and on…

No thanks, I prefer not to side with corporate welfare.

This is what gave me so much hope with the Tea Party uprising. Unfortunately, the message seems to be hijacked by big money. The problem certainly isn’t a purely Democrat or Republican one and won’t change until the people rise up and quit allowing our politicians to be bought by corporations. What we have economically now is corporatism, not capitalism. Only when that changes can we get into a real meaningful debate between the merits of laissez faire economics and transparent capitalism with government oversight.

I was channel surfing and I saw this creep on the air with Rachel and she was treating him like an expert witness or something; it was shocking, jaw dropping shocking that MSNBC would allow this creep to get on the air.

And then I thought about it…Rachel has threatened to out gay journalists because she thinks its the right thing to do, and it is along the same lines of the actions of Flynnt who digs dirt on all republicans and tries to expose them…he doesn’t do it to democrats, just republicans.

They are birds of a feather; COMCAST should be proud.

Yikes.

@ Yoda

I wasn’t talking about Vitter. He is not part of the current scandel.

But please, tell me why Weiner’s lies were acceptable, and do not cause you to question his judgement.

Lol this is why Rodger Ailes is trying to move off this story asap – Vitter. Weiner is like a giant arrow pointing to the depraved Republicans like Vitter. Vitter a man whom promoted abstinence, officially. Why would you promote abstinence when you made regular visits to prostitutes? To fool your base.

Base (that is all you holier-than-thou haters) Vitter is laughing at you while you lambaste Weiner. Im laughing too…

sarainitaly said:
Vitter, what? They found a phone number in a Madam’s black book?

Well, that plus his own tacit admission when confronted with the allegation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1557154/Senator-David-Vitter-was-DC-Madams-client.html

donalan said:
Lol this is why Rodger Ailes is trying to move off this story asap – Vitter. Weiner is like a giant arrow pointing to the depraved Republicans like Vitter. Vitter a man whom promoted abstinence, officially. Why would you promote abstinence when you made regular visits to prostitutes? To fool your base.

Base (that is all you holier-than-thou haters) Vitter is laughing at you while you lambaste Weiner. Im laughing too…

Of course, Vitter supports the diaper industry in a very direct and important way.

I laugh out loud when you lefties bring inVitter – he went through his scandal and survivied it….kind of like Charlie Rangle…..reelected despite being a tax cheat….you know, the guy for the little people who rips them off?

So funny.

This story is about Weiner, and only Weiner…but you go ahead and play your game. Typical lefties.

donalan said:
Base (that is all you holier-than-thou haters) Vitter is laughing at you while you lambaste Weiner. Im laughing too…

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Of course, Vitter supports the diaper industry in a very direct and important way.

Can either of you tell me why Weiner’s lies were/are acceptable?

This isn’t about Vitter, it’s about Weiner. Please do try to stay on topic… at least a little bit. Royal, I know how important that type of stuff is to you, so I’m surprised.

ImNotBlue said:
Can either of you tell me why Weiner’s lies were/are acceptable?

This isn’t about Vitter, it’s about Weiner. Please do try to stay on topic… at least a little bit. Royal, I know how important that type of stuff is to you, so I’m surprised.

In point of fact, on another thread this morning, I note that despite the vile depravity and perversion of your Senator Vitter, it does not excuse the conduct of Rep. Weiner. On the contrary, the unwavering support of Senator Vitter’s depravity and perversion by virtually all Republicans is the clearest illustration why we Democrats ought not to excuse Rep. Weiner. The last thing we would want and the last thing America needs is another depraved and perverse elected official like Senator Vitter. It appears we Democrats are largely unanimous in our condemnation of Rep. Weiner and seem to be calling for his resignation with one clear voice, much as Republicans are unanimous in their support for Senator Vitter and calling with one clear voice for him to continue in his depravity and perversion.

You are right. The focus is on Rep. Wiener. Senator Vitter merely informs us why we Democrats ought not act like Republicans.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
In point of fact, on another thread this morning, I note that despite the vile depravity and perversion of your Senator Vitter, it does not excuse the conduct of Rep. Weiner. On the contrary, the unwavering support of Senator Vitter’s depravity and perversion by virtually all Republicans is the clearest illustration why we Democrats ought not to excuse Rep. Weiner. The last thing we would want and the last thing America needs is another depraved and perverse elected official like Senator Vitter. It appears we Democrats are largely unanimous in our condemnation of Rep. Weiner and seem to be calling for his resignation with one clear voice, much as Republicans are unanimous in their support for Senator Vitter and calling with one clear voice for him to continue in his depravity and perversion.

You are right. The focus is on Rep. Wiener. Senator Vitter merely informs us why we Democrats ought not act like Republicans.

Okay… two points:

1) Your notion that Republicans didn’t call for Vitter’s resignation, and Democrats are unanimous in calling for Wiener’s resignation is laughable… and most easily disproved by the story this thread is based around. Rather clearly, Ms. Maddow isn’t part of that “unanimous voice” you think is being echoed.

2) Still no explanation on why Wiener’s lies are acceptable. Again, I’m not really all that concerned about his sexual exploits. It’s the lie and attempted coverup that is the problem.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Of course, Vitter supports the diaper industry in a very direct and important way.

Big Eddie said:
Try to find a worse excuse for a human to put on TV than Flynt .

Correction . There is someone worse than Flynt .
His initials are : Robert Stephenson . O.S.H.

One Sick Hairdresser .

ImNotBlue said:
Still no explanation on why Wiener’s lies are acceptable. Again, I’m not really all that concerned about his sexual exploits. It’s the lie and attempted coverup that is the problem.

Why would I and why would other Democrats be calling for Wiener’s resignation if lying were acceptable? Your comment is utterly preposterous.

But you and other reactionary Republicans have put yourselves into a vise here. You can’t cry uncontrollably about a splinter in your finger while you have an infected, festering boil on your bum. You can’t wrap yourselves in a cloak of sanctimony over Weiner whilst sharing a bed with Vitter. I have, virtually all Democrats have condemned Weiner. Why can’t you and other reactionary Republicans condemn Vitter? Given the golden opportunity we now have as Democrats and reactionary Republicans, as Americans to declare the conduct of Weiner and the conduct of Vitter disgraceful and unacceptable, why squander it? For if you and other reactionary Republicans don’t join us Democrats in a clear, unconditional condemnation, then you have accepted not only Vitter’s conduct, but also Weiners. What a shameful thing that would be.

Big Eddie said:
Correction . There is someone worse than Flynt .
His initials are : Robert Stephenson . O.S.H.

One Sick Hairdresser .

I think you’re confusing your computer monitor with a television.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Why would I and why would other Democrats be calling for Wiener’s resignation if lying were acceptable? Your comment is utterly preposterous.

But you and other reactionary Republicans have put yourselves into a vise here. You can’t cry uncontrollably about a splinter in your finger while you have an infected, festering boil on your bum. You can’t wrap yourselves in a cloak of sanctimony over Weiner whilst sharing a bed with Vitter. I have, virtually all Democrats have condemned Weiner. Why can’t you and other reactionary Republicans condemn Vitter? Given the golden opportunity we now have as Democrats and reactionary Republicans, as Americans to declare the conduct of Weiner and the conduct of Vitter disgraceful and unacceptable, why squander it? For if you and other reactionary Republicans don’t join us Democrats in a clear, unconditional condemnation, then you have accepted not only Vitter’s conduct, but also Weiners. What a shameful thing that would be.

The statute of limitations has taken care of the Vitter issue. He was re-elected remember?

Saw many pictures and sexts of him did you?

Please lets focus.

Now THAT had to have been one hell of a show!!
Larry Flynt and Rachel Maddow
apparently blaming David Vitter for one of their
fellow perverts ,Tony Weiner, for tweeting his pecker
pic out to strangers on the internet!
Wish I had DVR’d!
No I don’t!
Can’t wait to see the ratings on that one!

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
I think you’re confusing your computer monitor with a television.

Robert and his colleague Larry Flynt desperate to draw equivalency between Weiner and Vitter .

That is pitiful .

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Why would I and why would other Democrats be calling for Wiener’s resignation if lying were acceptable? Your comment is utterly preposterous.

Why would other Democrats bring up Vitter’s transgressions as though they had/have something to do with Wiener’s lies? Why would Rachel Maddow talk to Larry Flint about Wiener’s sexual whatevers, if the actual issue (to them) was his lies, and not his fooling around?

You are aware of the topic of this thread, right?

But you and other reactionary Republicans have put yourselves into a vise here. You can’t cry uncontrollably about a splinter in your finger while you have an infected, festering boil on your bum. You can’t wrap yourselves in a cloak of sanctimony over Weiner whilst sharing a bed with Vitter.

Ah… the old, “It happens to you guys, so you can’t say anything” theory. So let me see if I understand you correctly. Because Republicans have been caught in similar situations, Republicans now can’t say anything ever. Does that mean that Democrats shouldn’t make comments about Vitter, because of Clinton? Does it work both ways… or is this another one of those, “Republican only” rules?

Man… if they followed that line of logic, congress should would be awfully quiet.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

I have, virtually all Democrats have condemned Weiner. Why can’t you and other reactionary Republicans condemn Vitter?

Well, while you’re at the center of your world… you’re not really there for anyone else. And since the topic of this thread is Rachel Maddow, who clearly isn’t at the same place you are, we’re talking about THAT reaction.

As for Vitter… I officially condemn Vitter, and so on and so forth. Does that work for you?

Given the golden opportunity we now have as Democrats and reactionary Republicans, as Americans to declare the conduct of Weiner and the conduct of Vitter disgraceful and unacceptable, why squander it?

Ask Rachel.

For if you and other reactionary Republicans don’t join us Democrats in a clear, unconditional condemnation, then you have accepted not only Vitter’s conduct, but also Weiners. What a shameful thing that would be.

Anyone who says “My guy’s bad behavior is acceptable, but your’s isn’t,” should not be taken seriously. Again, please see the comments of Ms. Maddow and Mr. Flynt.

Of course, those who say, “Oh yeah my guy sucks… but what about this guy,” and holds up an old story as some sort of defense… is equally foolish.

Fact: Madcow performs for ratings week with Penthouse interview.

Maddow began her show with the “GOP Vitter problem”…
That gave me a hearty chuckle…

What we are seeing here is Maddow doing some heavy political lifting…

Sisyphus come to mind…

Good to know that Larry Flint is her star witness and Liberal ally…

ImNotBlue said:
As for Vitter… I officially condemn Vitter, and so on and so forth. Does that work for you?

Absolutely. You have at long last and begrudgingly condemned Vitter, and I have condemned Wiener.

As for the remainder of the babbling, let me remind you MSNBC is not FOX “News”. MSNBC’s on air personalities are not spokespeople for the DNC nor for the Administration. Indeed, the harshest criticism of the Democratic party and of the Obama Administration has been from MSNBC on air personalities, notably O’Donnel, Maddow and Schultz. To be sure this has been analytical, methodical and substantive criticism, lacking in the whining and bashing quality of which FOX “News” fans are so fond and to which they are so drawn. To the extent Ms. Maddow seems to support Weiner, a proposition which seems to me to be at best over-stated by you, for self-serving purposes, she is not speaking for or on behalf of the Democratic party. There is no Democratic equivalent of an Ailes or a Sammon pushing DNC talking points upon MSNBC on air personalities. Indeed, how could there be judging from the harsh SUBSTANTIVE criticism of the party and the Administration.

In my view, if MSNBC and FOX “News” went off the air today, our national dialogue would not suffer. Indeed, it would improve. But, that is the sole point of juncture. You can’t reasonably argue that MSNBC is a liberal FOX “News” and you can’t say FOX “News” is a conservative MSNBC with any credibility at all.

The funny thing is NO ONE is defending Weiner – he should go. The ironic thing is Republicans really cannot call for him to step down without inviting questions as to Vitter. Is that simple enough for you to understand. Its called moral-high-ground. Neither party has the high-ground but the Republicans rely on the lie of Morality in order to get votes from their base.

Vitter – paying for whores while preaching family values and abstinence. Certainly does not get better than that for the Dems. Keep this going as long as possible please.

Just when you thought MessNBC couldn’t sink any lower, they trod out a “the” premiere pornographer of the world to discuss a scandal that has nothing to do with the current Weiner scandal. Very weird!

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Absolutely. You have at long last and begrudgingly condemned Vitter, and I have condemned Wiener. As for the remainder of the babbling, let me remind you MSNBC is not FOX “News”. MSNBC’s on air personalities are not spokespeople for the DNC nor for the Administration. Indeed, the harshest criticism of the Democratic party and of the Obama Administration has been from MSNBC on air personalities, notably O’Donnel, Maddow and Schultz. To be sure this has been analytical, methodical and substantive criticism, lacking in the whining and bashing quality of which FOX “News” fans are so fond and to which they are so drawn. To the extent Ms. Maddow seems to support Weiner, a proposition which seems to me to be at best over-stated by you, for self-serving purposes, she is not speaking for or on behalf of the Democratic party. There is no Democratic equivalent of an Ailes or a Sammon pushing DNC talking points upon MSNBC on air personalities. Indeed, how could there be judging from the harsh SUBSTANTIVE criticism of the party and the Administration. In my view, if MSNBC and FOX “News” went off the air today, our national dialogue would not suffer. Indeed, it would improve. But, that is the sole point of juncture. You can’t reasonably argue that MSNBC is a liberal FOX “News” and you can’t say FOX “News” is a conservative MSNBC with any credibility at all.

blue, give up, he really believes this crap

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
MSNBC’s on air personalities are not spokespeople for the DNC nor for the Administration.

Not on Morning Joe today .

Bill Burton appeared today and was laughed out of the studio today by everyone at the table .
Burton was spouting the most ridiculous talking points that even the lefties had to laugh .

Robert and his close ally Larry Flynt should take note of how foolish they sound .

Just try to appear rational on occasion .

cjd ohio 1 said:
blue, give up, he really believes this crap

msnbc has no political agenda lol

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Absolutely. You have at long last and begrudgingly condemned Vitter, and I have condemned Wiener.

Yes, at long last I condemned something that I had previously condemned, and in reference to a story that has absolutely nothing to do with that particular scandal. Anything else I should condemn… you know, just in case you decide to relate it to Wiener. Forgive me for not better anticipating your reactions, and pre-condemning things I’ve already condemned to suit your needs.

As for the remainder of the babbling, let me remind you MSNBC is not FOX “News”. MSNBC’s on air personalities are not spokespeople for the DNC nor for the Administration.

Riiight. Exactly what, in your mind, is the difference between MSNBC’s hosts and FNC’s hosts? Why FNC’s guys “mouthpieces” yet MSNBC’s not? I’m sure you have to have a reason.

Indeed, the harshest criticism of the Democratic party and of the Obama Administration has been from MSNBC on air personalities, notably O’Donnel, Maddow and Schultz.

Really? They have been “harsher” than Beck?! WOW! A total chance in perspective from Royal!

So I assume you think they’re all racists now, right? After all, if Beck is a racist for attacking Obama, and MSNBC has been “harsher” they too must be racists, right?

To be sure this has been analytical, methodical and substantive criticism, lacking in the whining and bashing quality of which FOX “News” fans are so fond and to which they are so drawn.

For example?

To the extent Ms. Maddow seems to support Weiner, a proposition which seems to me to be at best over-stated by you, for self-serving purposes, she is not speaking for or on behalf of the Democratic party.

I forgot… Maddow doesn’t speak for the party… YOU do. Yes, clearly your example is the one to be followed, not the very popular (amongst Liberals and Democrats) Ms. Maddow.

There is no Democratic equivalent of an Ailes or a Sammon pushing DNC talking points upon MSNBC on air personalities. Indeed, how could there be judging from the harsh SUBSTANTIVE criticism of the party and the Administration.

No. They all just “happen” to say pretty much the same thing, frame stories in a way that is positive for Democrats, negative for Republicans, and echo each other’s comments. But that’s just coincidence.

In my view, if MSNBC and FOX “News” went off the air today, our national dialogue would not suffer. Indeed, it would improve. But, that is the sole point of juncture. You can’t reasonably argue that MSNBC is a liberal FOX “News” and you can’t say FOX “News” is a conservative MSNBC with any credibility at all.

I’m sorry, but how did all this blather come about? Oh yes, it’s because I showed your argument about the “unanimous voice” of the Democrats to be a completely false statement.

I assume you’ll retract that now.

cjd ohio 1 said:
blue, give up, he really believes this crap

Oh I know he does. That’s why pointing out the obvious and overt flaws in his “logic” is so much fun.

donalan said:
The funny thing is NO ONE is defending Weiner – he should go. The ironic thing is Republicans really cannot call for him to step down without inviting questions as to Vitter. Is that simple enough for you to understand. Its called moral-high-ground. Neither party has the high-ground but the Republicans rely on the lie of Morality in order to get votes from their base.

Vitter – paying for whores while preaching family values and abstinence. Certainly does not get better than that for the Dems. Keep this going as long as possible please.

Please please produce a transcript, any transcript of Vitter preaching. This is so silly and so lame of the left, but not a surprise. Vitter – over 10 years ago. A lot of water under that bridge. His constituents re-elected him. Get it?

It’s such a silly argument.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Well, that plus his own tacit admission when confronted with the allegation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1557154/Senator-David-Vitter-was-DC-Madams-client.html

congrats on missing the point, completely.

seek said:
Please please produce a transcript, any transcript of Vitter preaching. This is so silly and so lame of the left, but not a surprise. Vitter – over 10 years ago. A lot of water under that bridge. His constituents re-elected him. Get it? It’s such a silly argument.

sorry seek, but in a way true…….democrats have no family values so its easy for them

donalan said:
paying for whores while preaching family values and abstinence. Certainly does not get better than that for the Dems.

That’s all you have when you can’t run on the issues…

“paying for whores”
so is that only a vice when the person supports strong parental units? do tell…

Big Eddie said:
Not on Morning Joe today .
Bill Burton appeared today and was laughed out of the studio today by everyone at the table .
Burton was spouting the most ridiculous talking points that even the lefties had to laugh .

I’m watching it now…
we can see why Burton was not picked to replace Gibbs…

Oh, do spare me the bogus indignation about what a terrible person Larry Flynt is. Not being approved of by tight asses does not make him incorrect here.

It’s a pretty simple equation. Any Republican who did not vocally call for Vitter to step down after consorting with real live hookers has no business calling for the resignation of Weiner for Twitter sex. If you don’t have that sort of consistency, then you don’t have a third leg to stand on.

I would also mention that not once has Rep. Weiner ever played the increasingly boring Moral Guardian role in the way Vitter has. Weiner has never campaigned for abstinence only sex education (which obviously didnt work for him,) Weiner has never presented himself as the defender of the sacred institution of marriage the way Vitter did.

The only thing that I can think of is that maybe Senator Vitter’s penis also believes in huge tax breaks, which is apparently a better form of protection than a condom as far as the Republican Party is concerned.

A little consistency would be nice, regardless of what party you happen to belong to.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
In point of fact, on another thread this morning, I note that despite the vile depravity and perversion of your Senator Vitter, it does not excuse the conduct of Rep. Weiner. On the contrary, the unwavering support of Senator Vitter’s depravity and perversion by virtually all Republicans is the clearest illustration why we Democrats ought not to excuse Rep. Weiner. The last thing we would want and the last thing America needs is another depraved and perverse elected official like Senator Vitter. It appears we Democrats are largely unanimous in our condemnation of Rep. Weiner and seem to be calling for his resignation with one clear voice, much as Republicans are unanimous in their support for Senator Vitter and calling with one clear voice for him to continue in his depravity and perversion.

You are right. The focus is on Rep. Wiener. Senator Vitter merely informs us why we Democrats ought not act like Republicans.

Right before Brieitbart started bringing out his hourly pictures, you were trying to shut down the entire discussion of Weiner by sanctimoniously chiding blog commenters that people with “integrity” no longer spoke of the issue.

Now, your new tactic for controlling the fallout and the subject matter is that in order to speak of it, we have to denounce a Republican (specifically Sen. Vitter).

Mind you, VItter’s romps with a prostitute that came out in 2007, happened before he was elected in the early 90′s.

However, Vitter did lie about the issue when it came to light that he had been a client of prostitutes, over a decade ago.

NOW– how much more so should YOU be denouncing a man IN office, who was spending time trolling the internet for cybersex?

How much more so should you be denouncing a newly married man with a baby on the way, for not finding those circumstances to be the slightest impetus for curbing this sort of behavior.

YOU who have had the “integrity” to bring up Vitter endlessly and relentless for YEARS. YOU who have argued on at least two blogsites that Vitter is illustrative of a PARTICULAR REPUBLICAN pathology.

I have no problem denouncing Vitter. He should have been jettisoned for lying by the Republican leadership and not reelected.

I don’t say that for YOU or because YOU demand that I do it. I say it because it’s correct.

YOU don’t have any integrity. You have ANY moral standards that don’t play second fiddle to political strategies and tactics.

YOU just have a desire to control at all times by any subterfuge and intellectual deceit available.

You have NO moral coinage with ANYONE here. So take your attempts to control every word uttered on a blogboard and stuff it.

NyQuill said:
I would also mention that not once has Rep. Weiner ever played the increasingly boring Moral Guardian role

yes he has…
check his website: crusaded against “protecting women on the internet”, cyberstalking, protecting women on college campuses…

ImNotBlue said:
cjd ohio 1 said:
blue, give up, he really believes this crap

Oh I know he does. That’s why pointing out the obvious and overt flaws in his “logic” is so much fun.

Fraid not. He really does NOT believe “this crap”. He’d be saying exactly what you are saying, if the shoe was on the other foot.

He’s an amoral, by any means necessary, political strategian.

The only thing he is sincere about is the desire to advance liberal causes.

skoorbekim said:
That’s all you have when you can’t run on the issues…

“paying for whores”
so is that only a vice when the person supports strong parental units? do tell…

Vitter advocated abstinence-only sex education, emphasizing abstinence over sex education that includes information about birth control, drawing criticism from Planned Parenthood.[86] He said, “Abstinence education is a public health strategy focused on risk avoidance that aims to help young people avoid exposure to harm…by teaching teenagers that saving sex until marriage and remaining faithful afterwards is the best choice for health and happiness.”

So that covers the whoring Vitter double speak.

Issues? Like the fact the Republicans destroyed our economy for generations to come – sure that would be good to debate too but so long as the sanctimonious Republicans argue against Weiner they render themselves and their party moot.

As I said – keep it up Repubs

maybe Maddow’s Sisyphean task would be easier if she had a photo of Vitter’s erect penis…

‘Intelligent’ debate for Maddow, now, is, Vitter’s prostitutes are worse than Weiner’s weiner? LOL. Maddow’s such a deep thinker. LOL.

donalan said:
As I said – keep it up Repubs

Keep trying to change the subject.

As long as Anthony Weiner wants forgiveness without consequences, you’re going to have to keep up the deflection.

donalan said:
Vitter advocated abstinence

I teach my kids the same thing… yet I did not practice what I am preaching… am I a bad person?

Weiner, I know you plan on resigning on Friday at the end of business, but I encourage you to reconsider. You are doing great things in Congress right now…for the other side of the aisle…LOL Keep up the great work you little shit!

newzmaker said:
‘Intelligent’ debate for Maddow, now, is, Vitter’s prostitutes are worse than Weiner’s weiner? LOL. Maddow’s such a deep thinker. LOL.

It’s not the subject matter, it’s the astonishing fact that she felt it necessary to bring on a man who supplied endless amounts of heroin to his late wife, via the sell of pictures of women that were better suited for gynecological texts.

skoorbekim said:
yes he has…check his website: crusaded against “protecting women on the internet”, cyberstalking, protecting women on college campuses…

Weiner is an Internet predator .

Big Eddie said:
Weiner is an Internet predator .

In a different way , so is Robert .

this sleaze bag Flynt got more air time. Maddow went right to the sewer to try to further her point. She has absolutely no shame or moral compass – none.

Since I didn’t watch her scintillating program, did she perchance call out Flynt for his foul smear against Palin – oh sorry, forgot that she is into upholding liberal values which just don’t exist.

Flynt is a degenerate pervert. There is nothing he can say – just add slime to an already high pile of it. Sad, truly sad.

Big Eddie said:
Weiner is an Internet predator .

http://www.weiner.house.gov/issue_display.aspx?id=844

donalan said:
As I said – keep it up Repubs

So again, you have no problem with Wiener lying to the public and the press about this? You’re okay with him admitting that he makes bad decisions?

None of that is a problem for you, because you really REALLY hate Republicans? Is that how this works?

You look back at the postings from the left and it sounds like a schoolyard. Yah but your guy did it too – many years ago and it wasn’t pictures and sexting but he visited a hooker so he should now resign because although it happened many years ago, that wasn’t nice.

I mean really people, is this what the adult world has come to? My kids were never allowed to use the excuse that “Mary’s Mother lets her do that so you must let me” – didn’t fly. Or well she did so and so too – my response was usually “I don’t much care what anyone else does, I care what you do”. It appeared to work – my Children gave up that nonsense in grade school.

Again NO One is defending Weiner – at least not me. I am just saying the political gain in keeping this in the news is, Ironically, in favor of the Dems because it takes focus away from the economy and the path this story leads down is a big loser for the Republicans (Vitter).

What about the Debt Ceiling? Republicans raised it Seven times for Bush but now its simply impossible to do because of debt (‘deficits dont matter’ Cheany). What happened to Bank Reform and regulation (Obama said he would do it)?

LARRY FLYNT IS A PILE OF GARBAGE:
Pornographer Larry Flynt Calls Palin’s Down Syndrome Son ‘Brain Dead Vegetable’
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/05/28/pornographer-larry-flynt-calls-palins-down-syndrome-son-brain-dead-ve

donalan said:
Again NO One is defending Weiner – at least not me. I am just saying the political gain in keeping this in the news is, Ironically, in favor of the Dems because it takes focus away from the economy and the path this story leads down is a big loser for the Republicans (Vitter). What about the Debt Ceiling? Republicans raised it Seven times for Bush but now its simply impossible to do because of debt (‘deficits dont matter’ Cheany). What happened to Bank Reform and regulation (Obama said he would do it)?

obama voted aginst raising the debt ceiling too

“Flawed leaders and leaders who admire the flaws of human beings make the most despicable among us feel welcome to follow the flawed leader. Those who hold themselves to higher standards are left to wonder, what in the hell is real anymore?”
-Rand

” MSNBC’s on air personalities are not spokespeople for the DNC nor for the Administration.”

Uh, huh.

Let’s see: Vitter had paid sex with adults.Tawdry, sure. Sleazy? Perhaps. Call it what you like, but the paid-for sex were CONSENTUAL ACTS between adults. Weiner sent images of himself, some of them to total strangers…they could have been underage, they could have been any of the thousands (if not tens of thousands) of internet contacts that misrepresent themselves as someone else online every day. Ask yourself this…which is more depraved: a man who consorted with prostitutes or a man that sends naked photos of himself to strangers on the internet? If it was your brother, father, or son that got caught- which act is more seemly? Vitter used poor judgment to say the least. But Weiner’s actions are absolutely creepy…ranks about a “10″ on the perv-o-meter. And as for Ms.Maddow to ask the guidance and opinion of- of all people- Larry Flynt (a guy that would probably approve of sex with animal corpses), doesn’t add much credibility to her argument.

henry the ninth said:
Let’s see: Vitter had paid sex with adults.Tawdry, sure. Sleazy? Perhaps. Call it what you like, but the paid-for sex were CONSENTUAL ACTS between adults. Weiner sent images of himself, some of them to total strangers…they could have been underage, they could have been any of the thousands (if not tens of thousands) of internet contacts that misrepresent themselves as someone else online every day. Ask yourself this…which is more depraved: a man who consorted with prostitutes or a man that sends naked photos of himself to strangers on the internet? If it was your brother, father, or son that got caught- which act is more seemly? Vitter used poor judgment to say the least. But Weiner’s actions are absolutely creepy…ranks about a “10″ on the perv-o-meter. And as for Ms.Maddow to ask the guidance and opinion of- of all people- Larry Flynt (a guy that would probably approve of sex with animal corpses), doesn’t add much credibility to her argument.

Henry, you are probably right, but Im so sick of the sleaze going on in DC and those that make excuses for them. And as always its two faced excuses. I will agree the Left seems to be more hostile towards a Republican than we are used to seeing voices against Liberals who screw up. But its time to draw the line. These people spent millions and millions telling us how special they are, and why we should vote for them, and how they are going to go to DC and represent us and our needs. When one of them violates a trust we gave them, Liberal, Conservative or what ever, they have to go. NO questions asked just run them out of town. If we dont do this, that slime pit will just get bigger, slimmier and the work of the people will never get done.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
MSNBC’s on air personalities are not spokespeople for the DNC nor for the Administration

I guess you’re conveniently omitting Mika’s on air admittance of using talking points supplied to her by the White House. MSNBC is comically aligned with exactly the same talking points as the DNC. Your credibility is shot if you continue to claim otherwise

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
But you and other reactionary Republicans

Thanks again REALROYAL–”reactionary Republicans”? Thats a good one! LOL A knee slapping hoot! Sort of a reverse oxymoron? LOL

REALROYAL, do you really see the Socialist-Democrats as being the “cool headed logicians”?

Do you know who coined the phrase/quote, “cool minded logicians”?

“Well, except for one: South Carolina governor Mark Sanford. “What happened to him is that the guy fell in love,” he noted, “with these other dogs it was just sex.”

Larry Flint voices the double standard via the Republican Hypocrites…. smile :-)

Seriously folks:

Larry Flynt has become an icon of the First Amendment and protected speech.

The Flynt cases are examples of what and where the Court’s should or shouldn’t go or do. Effectively, an unending battle within our Republic.

Pornography should not be protected by the 1st Amendment, just as Stripper or other, various forms of expressive behavior, shouldn’t be “protected speech”. Neither promulgate a viable idea, and hiding such endeavors under the guise of that august, Amendment, diminishes us and our self respect as a nation.

However, Strippers and Pornography could/should be protected by part and parcel of other amendments, namely the 14th amendment’s due process clause. America’s, adults have the freedom to enter into contracts and behavior that others might find unsavory. However, we are protected, Constitutionally, I argue, to do such.

But, NOT by the 1st amendment for pete’s sake!

As for Mr. Flynt, he won, he carried the day, but, the cost was another chink in the Constitution’s armor and our self respect.

Personally, I admire the man as I believe he was trying to limit where Government should go in our personal lives. I, for one, do not see a need for a Sheriff or Attorney general to poke around in my wife’s underwear drawer.

Then again, her parading around the yard in little or no clothing, or, sending photos of such, unsolicited, then LYING about it…

PURVEYOR OF RHETORIC

donalan said:
sanctimonious Republicans

Donalan,

“Sanctimonious”, good word. However, there is always a ‘however’, isn’t there? Anyway, I hope you agree with me that “sanctimonious” is not exclusively a Republican trait?

I don’t believe we’ve spoken before. Nice to make your acquaintance.

PURVEYOR OF RHETORIC