Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
Did anyone who Ken Starr targeted for investigation (...and then permit the leaking, from his office; the details of the investigation to the press....vs. what we is the proper and discrete conduct of special counsel Fitzgerald's office, over the past 3 years....)....a $71 million, 6 year investigation of a profitless real estate "deal" that resulted in no finding of wrongdoing on the part of the original targets....the POTUS and the first lady, <b>draft, co-sponsor, or promote legislation or a contitutional amendment to curtail rights or potential to achieve rights.....of anyone who engaged in extramarital sexual activity?</b>
|
No idea. If you're implying that the answer is 'no' - or that the answer for Foley is 'yes', I'll take your word for it. But then I'll also ask you what your point is. I'm not quite getting it.
I probably should've left out that Ken Starr remark. It merely expressed the less-than-certain expectation that my stated belief - in the irrelevance of much of a politician's personal life, hypocritical or not - would prompt a response of "so you're okay with what Clinton did in the oval office?" And for all I know, no one would've responded that way. So, yeah, ignore that part of my post. Unless you wish to respond that way.
I don't think my argument as presented so far is in need of sources - I don't see it as that type of argument. Do you disagree?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
the evangelicals have been chumped by the bush people, who regard them as nutcases privately, and who created administrative cul-de-sacs within which evangelical-friendly programs were set up and left to rot.
|
In other words, it's not
just that they're socially moderate/liberal in their personal lives, it's
also that their politics are less than conservative but made to look conservative?
I'm arguing that the false representation of personal life as conservative doesn't matter. But if their politics don't quite match, either, then that's an entirely different matter.
Either way, I'm still not seeing any value in outing closeted anti-gay conservatives. (But then, you may have not been addressing that topic.)