On Jun 23, 12:33*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jun 22, 3:16*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 22, 1:51*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jun 22, 7:54*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 22, 1:46*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jun 22, 12:10*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 22, 12:12*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
After an investigation, the Ethics Committee found no evidence that
Frank had known of or been involved in the alleged illegal activity
and dismissed all of Gobie's more scandalous claims.[18][19]
Attempts to expel or censure Frank, led by Republican member Larry
Craig (who himself was later embroiled in his own gay sex scandal),
failed.[20][21] Rather, the House voted 408-18 to reprimand Frank who
later won re-election in 1990 with 66 percent of the vote, and has won
by larger margins ever since.[22]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_...mmittee_action
He is an idiot and immoral for letting himself be used.
That means your buddy 2pid is likewise "immoral".
I didn't know that he was a Congressman and that he had
the moral responsibilities of a Congressman. It's news to me!!!!!
Oh, you said someone not knowing something was "immoral".
2pid is really, really "immoral" then.
What are the "moral responsibilities" of a Congressman or any other
politician?
Clinton had oral sex with that Lewinski woman. Frank had this
(although in Frank's case the "immoral" argument is pretty weak).
His immorality is not because he "sucks dicks", it is because
he let a complete sleazebag into his life, and let him
have the run of his digs. This guy is a powerful senior
Congressman, and he lets some bum who would never be able
to get even a low level security clearance have the run of
his house.
It sounds just like you want to control the private lives of those in
Congress.
Fine, if you want a crack whore as your Congressperson, fine with me.
What a dumb idea.
Until their clouded judgment leads to a security leak,
or extortion or blackmail.
If you like that risk, fine with me.
Its a breach of Frank's responsibility to
both his constituents, and to the rest of'
the country, because he has access to all
sorts of restricted information.
LOL!
Search "government employees who bring classified information into
their home and what happens to them" and see what you get.
Christ, not even the "sleazebag" himself made this accusation. You're
reaching.
It's a breach of his responsibility to put himself
in such a position of risk
It s the same issue as if a male Congressman had
a female sleazebag entwined in his life.
It isn't an "issue" at all.
Your argument, therefore, is that the government needs to be "big
brother" to elected officials.
No, it's pretty clear your "immoral" arguments are more about sexual
preference.
no, the constituents need to be the big brother.
I don't really are that Frank is gay.
I had no problem until his scandal and the home loan
issue came out.
I don't like Ted Kennedy, and he is straight.