1 posted on
02/12/2004 4:52:48 PM PST by
Pokey78
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 last
To: Pokey78
I agree. If the Republicans are behind this, they deserve to be trashed. This is absolutely not something that deserves to be a factor in our current debate. Excuse me! What garbage! This girl friend thing was either thought up by the Clintons, or it is being touted by the Democrats to cover up something else evil Kerry has done that they don't want the public to dwell on.
Anyway, the Republicans don't have the guts to play this dirty.
68 posted on
02/12/2004 5:42:52 PM PST by
swampfox98
(Beyond 2004 - Chaos)
To: Pokey78
Sullivan is using this as the way to pave his switch to liberal/Dem politics. Pretty weak, too, I might add.
He was never a conservative from the get-go. I liked some of his articles, but like most homosexuals, his sexual addiction has overcome his intellectual and common sense.
74 posted on
02/12/2004 6:21:38 PM PST by
PLK
To: Pokey78
I'd tell Andrew Sullivan the leak didn't come from us, it came from the Clintons or whoever inside the Democratic Party has it in for Kerry. And you can take that to the bank.
75 posted on
02/12/2004 6:23:18 PM PST by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: Pokey78
I tend to agree. I do not want to see Americans engaged discussisng 24/7 until November the alleged dubious regard that Senator Kerry seems to hold his marriage vows. I'm personally sick and tired of having our tax money used for such investigations and more so paying for the salaries of our elected officials who seem to have problems keeping their pants and/or pantyhose on when they aren't with their wives/husbands.
The truth is this is not the 90's. President Bush is practicing a NEW POLITICAL TONE, which means IMHO, abstinance from trying to screw your political opponents. They seem to do enough of that on their own.
Do you remember under the Clinton Era, Clinton, his administration, and FOB's spoke of this well-financed organization that was out to destroy his presidency because they were angry that Clinton won, even though the people voted him in? As you recall, Clinton's wife, without an ounce of shame, named it "The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy". Mrs. Clinton's fictional VRWC became the invented enemy, that they could blame, ridicule and marginalize. All great fodder for the airwaves and cable networks. This allowed Clinton's other more critical transgressions become less of the focus of news.
President Bush, nor his administration, nor his FOG's (Friends of George) has spoken negatively about Democrats. Mrs. Bush has not gone on the Today Show with Matt Lauer and talk unabashedly about a vicious, well-financed organization that has been angry ever since her husband won the presidency and are out to destroy him, and call it "The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy".
President Bush seeks to reach out to everyone, including hard-working illegal aliens, Ted Kennedy and the "religion of peace". He's never blames, or ridicules, or denigrates his political opponents, but resolutely forges onwards.
You see, his new tone is for all Americans. He does not treat us, or certain groups as his enemies. The Clintons did. They sought to divide and disturb, and agitate the people constantly.
But, President Bush has clearly and emphatically defined who the enemy is and his "New Political Tone" carries resoundingly well because he is not just talking about the "evil doers", he is doing something about it, and that new tone can be heard loud and clear.
So, I agree, I'd rather press Kerry on hiw political activities and direction he wishes he could take us if he were elected President. Focusing now on some cheap and tawdry relationship he had with a woman other than his wife will not stop al Quaeda from threatening our nation, our lives, our heritage, and most of all our children, our future.
In closing, we need to evaluate the character of our elected officials and their allegiance to their vows, marriage and our great Constitution.
Enough said.
77 posted on
02/12/2004 6:58:19 PM PST by
harpo11
(Hey, We're Fighting the Dem Cong!)
To: Pokey78
Andrew Sullivan is losing his mind.
78 posted on
02/12/2004 7:00:56 PM PST by
jwalsh07
To: Pokey78
Sullivan had a real problem with the Lewinsky thing, and all the alleged "privacy violations" it entailed. Here's why -- a few years ago, gay activists outed him as running a personals ad where he was looking for another HIV-positive partner to have condom-free, unsafe sex with. He then equated himself with what Clinton was going through, and has had a real problem with any of these sex stories as being violations of privacty. So, as usual, it's all about Andrew -- the personal is the political. Good riddance.
To: Pokey78
I agree. If the Republicans are behind this, they deserve to be trashed. This is absolutely not something that deserves to be a factor in our current debate. Andrew Sullivan is a very intelligent man. Unfortunately, no matter how inconsistent, every interest of his is subordinate to his personal desire for guilt-free, socially accepted, homosexual relations. He therefore supports all kinds of heterosexual bad conduct, so that homosexuality seems tame by comparison.
To: Pokey78
Andy Sullivan is gonna go the way of David Brock. Just watch.
81 posted on
02/12/2004 7:14:16 PM PST by
ambrose
("John Kerry has blood of American soldiers on his hands" - Lt. Col. Oliver North)
To: Pokey78
A DemocRAT wrote the letter. It is the same tactic they have been using all over talk radio.
93 posted on
02/12/2004 9:44:36 PM PST by
doug from upland
(Don't wait until it is too late to stop Hillary -- do something today!)
To: Pokey78
This guy is an idiot...
Chris Lehane (Dem Operative) has been shopping this story around for a LONG time, and Wesley Clark is the one who ultimately leaked it.
Only the MEDIA is blaming the GOP. The GOP would not have dropped this story -- the timing is not right.
94 posted on
02/12/2004 9:46:40 PM PST by
jmstein7
(Real Men Don't Need Chunks of Government Metal on Their Chests to be Heroes)
To: Pokey78
If a man takes a solemn oath to be faithful to his to be wife and then proceeds to cheat behind her back how is that not relevant to his integrity in taking the oath of office???
96 posted on
02/12/2004 10:04:24 PM PST by
DB
(©)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson