RE: How About An Ethics Czar?

RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

luckydawg -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 10:04:18 AM)
Why is this Scumbag Crook still in a position of leadership? Why does he have his hands on our taxes? And why doesn't Obama care????

mnottertail -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 10:09:12 AM)
No, I just tire of responding to all your sock puppet nicks out here. I suspect that the investigation will continue, and since he is innocent till proven guilty, (or resigns like nixon or gingrich, in which case all is forgotten very quickly) just as the CIA torturers and administrators under the Bush regime, he will not have much to say by way of initiating the conversation, unless asked a question about it. And this guy has had his hands on your taxes for a long while, as have other ne-er do wells in this and other administrations. Ron

SpinnerofTales -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 10:16:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg Why is this Scumbag Crook still in a position of leadership? Why does he have his hands on our taxes? And why doesn't Obama care???? For the same reason that Obama, the Democrats, the Liberals and the Media do anything, of course, Lucky....to piss you off and to destroy the paradise that this country would be if only they let those who share your views on everything run the place as is their god given right. Oh..and it's in that order too. And Obama doesn't comment because this is a matter for the legislative arm of our government, not the executive branch. The legislature can impeach a president. The president can not impeach a legislator.

luckydawg -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 10:26:00 AM)
No, as a serious matter, when a Republican is accused with reasonable evidence of a serious offense, he/she gets removed from leadership in Congress. Why is this not happening now? And as usuall Spinner, you are left trying to make it about me. Which shows the folks reading along quite a bit. And I don't get teh Impeachment thing you mentioned. Do you really think Commenting on and impeaching are the same thing? And Obama had no problem commenting on a police Officers actions.

SpinnerofTales -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 10:32:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg quote: No, as a serious matter, when a Republican is accused with reasonable evidence of a serious offense, he/she gets removed from leadership in Congress. Why is this not happening now? What republican, charged with an equivilant offense, are you speaking of? Can we get a name or two?

mnottertail -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 10:47:42 AM)
Uhhhhhhhhhh.................Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy? LOL. I can't get serious about political infighting guys, sorry. Ron

tiemeupalso -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 10:58:40 AM)
i say throw them all out in the next election and do a write in vote.DONT VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS OF A PARTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. i'm not sure if its possable on electronic machines anymore but it would be nice.lets vote the partys out and some people in!!!!!!!!!

Sanity -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 11:40:58 AM)
That's the whole issue right there. Not, "what about the Republicans" not "what about Iraq..." Why is this scumbag still in office? quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg Why is this Scumbag Crook still in a position of leadership? Why does he have his hands on our taxes? And why doesn't Obama care????

FirmhandKY -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 11:50:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Not the subject of the thread, as I have been told repeatedly. Good for you that you throw the unethical Gingriches and the drug addicts like Limbaugh out of the corps, the arms for hostages appeasers like Reagan, the virulently criminally insane like Nixon, the lying invaders of countries like Bush. Had the democrats had such iron willed and family valued Cromwells as you all, well; their act would have been cleaned right the fuck up as yours would have been if your follow-thru was as even handed as your rhetoric: got any update on any of these? 1. Memogate: The Senate Computer Theft 2. Doctor Detroit: The DOJ's Bungled Terrorism Case 3. Dark Matter: The Energy Task Force ... etc, etc, etc, Ron You should cite your sources Ron. The scandal sheet Firm

SpinnerofTales -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 12:09:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity That's the whole issue right there. Not, "what about the Republicans" not "what about Iraq..." Why is this scumbag still in office? Because at this point he is still under investigation and has not been found guilty of anything that would allow him to be removed from office by due process of law. Because until he has been found guilty, he continues to be afforded the rights and privlidges of an innocent man. And because he is shameless enough that until he is found guilty and removed, he isn't going to be resigning anything. Does THAT answer your question?

OrionTheWolf -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 2:35:57 PM)
~FR~ Sanity, I click on the news link on Google often and saw this story several days ago, so it has been in the news. To others, someon once told me "What do you expect, polticians are corrupt." I responded "What do you expect, when people will accept that polticians are corrupt.". I have pointed out on numerous occasions: 1) Politicians on both sides of the aisle have done unethical and illegal things. 2) The problem is not with a single party, but with the fact that they use the two party, us versus them, system to distract from real issues. Polticians know that some of the people will be so party loyal that in discussion forums and other places, they will keep the us versus them mentality going so that the focus is not on the illegal and unethical behavior, but on everything from blow jobs to WMD's. 3) Focus on the problem each and every time. Do not support the polticians such as Rangle, that have obviously violated the public trust. Ask your fellow Americans to not support them, and do not support people that support them so that they are isolated instead of celebrated. Heh. I have written so many emails in the last year, I am sure that somewhere, someone has me listed as a radical. I will not be voting for any incumbants in the next election, except for one county commissioner here who seems to be trying to stand up to the good ole boys club. I will point out that the Fair Tax would eliminate any and all tax cheats from the system, and remove power from the politicians to get elected by promising to raise or cut taxes.

Loki45 -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 2:45:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I love your spin, Spinner. Yep, a Republican might have done something bad once, so this is nothing. BRILLIANT, I tell you. It's better than your "See? See? The democrats are bad too, like us Republicans! Don't hate us republicans, the dems do it too!!" And by the way, it's laughable that you say "A Republican might have done something bad once." Apparently in your zeal for crucifying the dems, you've put on blinders to the republicans and their antics. So basically, instead of cleaning up the antics of the republicans, you point to the misdeeds of some democrats as justification of the republicans' misdeeds. And people wonder why our government never gets anything done.

Sanity -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 3:21:36 PM)
You're one of the most consistent people here Orion, you and Merc. I don't necessarily agree with either of you on everything you post but I certainly respect both of you for being sincere and for having solid and unwavering principles that you're willing to stand behind, and generally I think that both of you are on the right track about a lot of things. Neither party will ever be pure but I don't think a third party stands a chance, it'll end up pulling votes from one side or the other and we'll be right back where we started. I am in agreement that we need to stay focused on individual problems and work to eliminate them, and yes I admit that there are problems on both sides. But really, and this may be a perception thing on my part, but I don't hear anyone complaining about Rangel from the left. I don't hear any calls for him to step down, I don't hear any condemnation from that side, and this is some really dirty nasty stuff. When Republicans are pulling that kind of shit I like for them to step down or be pushed aside because a. they're assholes and b. they make the rest of us look bad. But all I'm hearing from the left is, "So what, he's a politician. What do you expect?" Or, "Well, REPUBLICANS do it too..." as if that's a legitimate defense of the guy. So I am finding myself in disagreement of sorts, I'm seeing hypocrisy on one side that I don't perceive on the other. It could be just me and the way I see things, but I really don't think so. Democrats campaigned on highlighting every scandal they could find among Republicans and screaming about it day after day. They called it a culture of corruption and claimed they were going to clean things up. Do you recall that? Now here they are - they have their chance, and what do they have to say about some of the worst kind of slimy corruption combined with sheer arrogance and stupidity? Absolutely nothing.

Sanity -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 3:28:33 PM)
It seems like the party leadership would take the guy by the arms and say, "Come, Charlie. Step down for a while, until this is cleared up one way or the other, because as the top tax legislator in Congress with all these bombs going off all around you, you're making us look really bad." Trying to pretend that this is nothing will only get you laughed at, Spinner, because just a casual look at the facts shows that this is really, really bad. Where is the shame? quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales Because at this point he is still under investigation and has not been found guilty of anything that would allow him to be removed from office by due process of law. Because until he has been found guilty, he continues to be afforded the rights and privlidges of an innocent man. And because he is shameless enough that until he is found guilty and removed, he isn't going to be resigning anything. Does THAT answer your question?

Loki45 -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 3:39:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity But all I'm hearing from the left is, "So what, he's a politician. What do you expect?" Or, "Well, REPUBLICANS do it too..." as if that's a legitimate defense of the guy. You're hearing it incorrectly. It's not being used as a defense. It's being used to illustrate that you're not the judgmental of your own side, so why do it to the other side? quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity So I am finding myself in disagreement of sorts, I'm seeing hypocrisy on one side that I don't perceive on the other. It could be just me and the way I see things, but I really don't think so. Case in point. Your posts are the hypocrisy on the other side. Because you don't come here blasting republicans when they screw up, only the democrats. I'm fairly certain that if you posted one thread blasting a republican's corruption or poor decisions, you wouldn't have half the people arguing with you that you usually do. Since you don't, you will always have those people. You'll have them because they are neccessary. If you are going to blast one side and not the other, there must be people who blast your side and not their own. It's the message board's warped sense of balance.

Sanity -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 3:43:19 PM)
Are you trying to represent that you are non-partisan? Because you are not. I am a partisan, and I think that people should be partisan, they should believe in something and stand for and argue for and even fight for what they believe in, and I do so unashamedly. The left doesn't need my help in smearing Republicans, that's ridiculous. They have millions and millions of George Soros' dollars to do that through moveon.org on their own, just fine, without any help from me. Which is fine, they have a right to buy as much astroturf as they want - but please don't try to insist that I should be helping them. [:)]

luckydawg -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 3:50:43 PM)
I was pretty sure that I remember Sanity being very against the TARP bailouts by Bush, so I am not sure what you are talking about Loki....as well as immigration and NCLB issues.

Loki45 -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 3:57:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Are you trying to represent that you are non-partisan? Because you are not. Actually I am. I don't care what you think I am. quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I am a partisan, and I think that people should be partisan, they should believe in something and stand for and argue for and even fight for what they believe in, and I do so unashamedly. Then we disagree. Because being so devoted to one side that you ignore good ideas on the other is counter-productive. It's why our current, very partisan government is known for doing nothing. quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Which is fine, they have a right to buy as much astroturf as they want - but please don't try to insist that I should be helping them. I just insisted that you try some semblence of balance. Until you do, you will get the people on these boards who immedately take the opposing side. As many of your threads seem to have. If you're going to have blinders on to your own group, don't expect your opponents not to have blinders on to their own group. When you see the logic in that connection, you've made progress. Until then, you're just like our government. And you'll never agree with your opponents and they'll never agree with you.

Loki45 -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 3:58:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydawg I was pretty sure that I remember Sanity being very against the TARP bailouts by Bush, so I am not sure what you are talking about Loki....as well as immigration and NCLB issues. So he was against one 'thing' that Bush did. That's token. Especially considering that Bush was one of the bigger potato-heads of our country's presidential history.

luckydawg -> RE: How About An Ethics Czar? (9/3/2009 4:24:22 PM)
"Case in point. Your posts are the hypocrisy on the other side. Because you don't come here blasting republicans when they screw up, only the democrats. I'm fairly certain that if you posted one thread blasting a republican's corruption or poor decisions, you wouldn't have half the people arguing with you that you usually do. " This is demonstrably false. I pointed out 3, and there are plenty more. Not the token one you pretend.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125