Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:What else is there to say, other than he made some terrible decisions and is getting raked over the coals for it?

Protip: Don't send pictures of your mule to people you barely know.

Its coming out he was tweeting underage girls. Thats beyond "meh" to officially "creepy sewaty old guy at the keg level."

Yeah, that does kind of change things.

He's not just a fool now, he's a creepy fool!

Monster Rain wrote:
Yeah, that does kind of change things.

He's not just a fool now, he's a creepy fool!

Well, the relevant question now is whether or not he knew she was underage, and whether or not anything he sent was explicit. According to family members the messages were harmless.

To put it into context, I've conversed with underage people on this board via PM regarding completely legitimate topics. I'm sure most of us have, given the membership of this board, the MODS definitely have. Speaking to underage people online via PM isn't necessarily odd.

Some show mentioned that one of the girls asked him to her prom. He immediately stopped talking to her. I am of the personal opinion that lying, cheating bastards are not fit to represent their constituents. I realize, of course, that DC would most likely be a ghost town, but a guy can dream right?

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:Some show mentioned that one of the girls asked him to her prom. He immediately stopped talking to her. I am of the personal opinion that lying, cheating bastards are not fit to represent their constituents. I realize, of course, that DC would most likely be a ghost town, but a guy can dream right?

Sgt. Scruffy has the way of it.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:Some show mentioned that one of the girls asked him to her prom. He immediately stopped talking to her. I am of the personal opinion that lying, cheating bastards are not fit to represent their constituents. I realize, of course, that DC would most likely be a ghost town, but a guy can dream right?

I'm generally of the opinion that lying, cheating bastards are the only people fit to represent their constituents.

dogma wrote:

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:Some show mentioned that one of the girls asked him to her prom. He immediately stopped talking to her. I am of the personal opinion that lying, cheating bastards are not fit to represent their constituents. I realize, of course, that DC would most likely be a ghost town, but a guy can dream right?

I'm generally of the opinion that lying, cheating bastards are the only people fit to represent their constituents.

No, you need lying cheating basted that look like good honest men

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:Some show mentioned that one of the girls asked him to her prom. He immediately stopped talking to her. I am of the personal opinion that lying, cheating bastards are not fit to represent their constituents. I realize, of course, that DC would most likely be a ghost town, but a guy can dream right?

Maybe his wife gets off on his sending pictures of his twig and berries to other women...

I'm reminded of the old chestnut that all politicians are lying, cheating bastards until you run for office.

I see this exact same gak being pulled by fifteen year old girls every day on the internet. The only difference is that a politician was doing it.

I think that he doesn't need to be kicked out of office. The fact that everyone now knows what his dingaling looks like and can mock him for his childish attempts to lie about it is punishment enough.

themocaw wrote:I see this exact same gak being pulled by fifteen year old girls every day on the internet. The only difference is that a politician was doing it.

I think that he doesn't need to be kicked out of office. The fact that everyone now knows what his dingaling looks like and can mock him for his childish attempts to lie about it is punishment enough.

No facing a pregnant Wife to remind him of it daily (for 9 mo. mol at least) would be enough.

alarmingrick wrote:

themocaw wrote:I see this exact same gak being pulled by fifteen year old girls every day on the internet. The only difference is that a politician was doing it.

I think that he doesn't need to be kicked out of office. The fact that everyone now knows what his dingaling looks like and can mock him for his childish attempts to lie about it is punishment enough.

No facing a pregnant Wife to remind him of it daily (for 9 mo. mol at least) would be enough.

Well probably the next 18 years

Wardragoon wrote:

alarmingrick wrote:

themocaw wrote:I see this exact same gak being pulled by fifteen year old girls every day on the internet. The only difference is that a politician was doing it.

I think that he doesn't need to be kicked out of office. The fact that everyone now knows what his dingaling looks like and can mock him for his childish attempts to lie about it is punishment enough.

No facing a pregnant Wife to remind him of it daily (for 9 mo. mol at least) would be enough.

Well probably the next 18 years

Touche'!

themocaw wrote:I see this exact same gak being pulled by fifteen year old girls every day on the internet. The only difference is that a 40 year old married man was doing it.

I think that he doesn't need to be kicked out of office. The fact that everyone now knows what his dingaling looks like and can mock him for his childish attempts to lie about it is punishment enough.

Corrected your typo. Thats a big damn difference.

Frazzled wrote:

themocaw wrote:I see this exact same gak being pulled by fifteen year old girls every day on the internet. The only difference is that a 40 year old married man was doing it.

I think that he doesn't need to be kicked out of office. The fact that everyone now knows what his dingaling looks like and can mock him for his childish attempts to lie about it is punishment enough.

Corrected your typo. Thats a big damn difference.

Says the man who had a fiance he didn't marry.

Oh snap.

Thread just got real.

Its in the name are you really so suprised

porkchop806 wrote:Its in the name are you really so suprised

Thats not representative Wiener.

THIS is representative Wiener!

Frazzled wrote:

porkchop806 wrote:Its in the name are you really so suprised

Thats not representative Wiener.

THIS is representative Wiener!

I think Representative Wiener needs to be adopted into the Wiener Legion to learn the proppa way of living like a Wiener.

...and he's out.

Or better said be Niel(or is it Neal) Cavuto "And the bulge is out"

dogma wrote:

biccat wrote:
No it's not relevant. My moral outrage is not based on his standards for his own conduct, but rather on his conduct.

You may not be a relativist, but relativism is a real thing, and it does matter when determining what your standards of conduct are.

biccat wrote:
No, it's not arguing that his standards for good behavior are different, it's arguing that because he doesn't have an articulated standard he shouldn't be held to account for any standard.

Nah, no one said that, you're paraphrasing to advantage.

biccat wrote:
Although if you buy into the silly theory that he should be held to a different standard, how do you explain his contrition?

Easy, politics. Also, lots of people are idiots who are easily offended.

biccat wrote:
A more interesting issue: why are people excusing him for his false accusations of a federal crime against people who simply reported on the issue?

Because people who accuse people of a crime are not legally liable for anything?

Young Newt would otherwise be in prison.

Assuming he does hold a different moral standard than Bicc, wouldn't his appology, politically motivated or not, be an act of hypocrisy? So isnt he a hypocrite either for commiting the act, or appologizing for it?

romegamer wrote:
Assuming he does hold a different moral standard than Bicc, wouldn't his appology, politically motivated or not, be an act of hypocrisy? So isnt he a hypocrite either for commiting the act, or appologizing for it?

Apology implies regret (most of the time) but regret does not imply that what was done was incorrect.