Out of Bounds

My Recent Posts

I think it is time we admit that it is a bad idea to turn consensual sex between adults into political fodder.  Start down that road, and public figures (and their families) are needlessly humiliated, useful careers are destroyed, and citizens are left feeling cynical.

 

 

Certainly, when cynicism about virtue in high places becomes so abundant, we need to be concerned. But what do we do? Some people would say that because these public figures and supposed "role models" have committed adultery, they deserve to be outed, and that if they don't suffer some consequences, our young people won't know right from wrong.

 

I suppose we could try going this route again: teaching values to the young by conducting sexual witch hunts. But what will they really learn? That adults are nasty and unforgiving.

 

But publicly humiliating anyone for consensual adultery is draconian, and wrong. It teaches children cynicism. What they see is how little respect there is for privacy, and how gratuitously and harshly adults will harm one another to gain a little power. And using adultery or any aspect of consensual adult sexuality as a weapon in political battles is more abhorrent than the act itself.

 

You might say that how and why we disapprove of adultery is as important as whether we do.

 

Part II to come ... :)  And here is part II...

 

-- Janna Malamud Smith (New York Times Editorial); December 1998

 

(Please note, this post did not originally include the name of the author and the date so as to invoke a response attributable to the different political climate in March of 2018.)

Comments

Bill Kamps Added Mar 26, 2018 - 3:53pm
I would agree, especially if no laws were broken.  
Leroy Added Mar 26, 2018 - 3:56pm
Let's hope Mueller doesn't pull a Lewinsky.
Leroy Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:17pm
Despite near record viewership of the Stormy Daniel's story, most everyone is ho-hum about it, even the liberals.  I expect Maxine Walter and Bill H. to continue to harp on it, but no one else seems to care.  I didn't see the show.  The biggest news fallout seems to be how dilated her eyes were and what type of drugs she was using. There is no indication of being any there there.
Dino Manalis Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:17pm
Stormy is nasty, she seeks attention, what happened  is over, now what?  The focus should be on Trump and Melania.  America has more serious matters to be concerned with!
Bill Kamps Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:20pm
I did not see the interview, but if the clips I saw were the "best of", then it was a yawner.  The only real issue is whether she was paid off, and where that money came from and even that, is Yawnnn.
George N Romey Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:21pm
It’s none of my business. That woman was no innocent intern. A lady of the evening should know the drill.
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:25pm
Hey! Where does this place her with the metoo gang? I can just imagine:
 
You took money!? You bitch! We're trying to bring these assholes down! Why the hell you been holding out all this time?
 
LOL! You couldn't write shit this good!
Doug Plumb Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:42pm
Another institution that is being destroyed: marriage. Destruction of the family unit is a big part of communism. Marriage takes place in the eyes of the both the society and God. If it isn't codified unlawful, which I believe it is unlawful, it should be. But with state "marriage licenses" who knows.
Thomas Sutrina Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:50pm
When the Dems and GOP are fighting over crony capitalist money.  They thus have identical policies.  Something has to differentiate them.  The GOP thinks they can find more sex scandals in democrats.   The Omnibus bill has shown that both parties work for the swamp and we the lower classes need to learn to be subservient.  Need to stay in our place as serfs.
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:57pm
Oh wait, I got it. Its okay if she does it, because the intent is to take down Trump. Kinda like "takin' one for the sisterhood". Only ideologically pure sisters, of course
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 4:57pm
How silly of me to forget that double standard. I must've forgot my meds today!
Dave Volek Added Mar 26, 2018 - 5:37pm
Each of us has our own rationale for casting our vote. I would like my political leaders to be people of virtue. If they are not behaving virtuous, I want them outed so I can cast a vote against them. 
 
If they don't like it, then they shouldn't seek public office in the first place.
Bill H. Added Mar 26, 2018 - 5:40pm
 
The issue wasn't the relationship, it's Trump's constant lies.
Does he really think that we believe much of what he says anymore?
Do the WB Trump supporters really believe everything he says?
I suspect that Trump thinks that his base believes everything he says, so he just goes on lying and thinking that "Ohh, it's OK, because my supporters believe anything I say".
He will keep thinking this and keep lying as long as his supporters just "roll with the program" and not even give any indication that they might think some of what he says is pure BS.
Leroy Added Mar 26, 2018 - 5:41pm
What you seem to be saying, Dave, is that you shouldn't run for political office due to past drinking indiscretions?  Seems a bit harsh.
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 5:48pm
A multi-billionaire businessman from Queens telling lies! <Gasp> Say it ain't so, Joe! What piece of shit from Washington or NYC either one doesn't tell lies?  
 
When it was Bill Clinton it was only "about sex". Only thing that mattered were the job results. Remember? So now we're supposed to believe that you warriors on the left are the new Moral Majority? Get bent
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 5:49pm
You don't have anything else in your playbook and you're pissed off because your shit doesn't wash clean any more. Boo-fucking-Hoo!
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 5:51pm
You libs are even more pissed off that you hooked your wagon to an old ratbag who was SO devoid of character that even a buffoon like Trump could beat her like a government mule
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 5:52pm
Change your diapers. Maybe if you didn't sit in it all day you'd realize that to the rest of the world you actually DO smell like a pile of shit
Dave Volek Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:00pm
Leroy
I spent six years in party politics. One of my reasons was that I aspired to become a politician some day, and getting involved while young would give me contacts and experience.
 
In my second year, I came to realization that I didn't want be a politician. I didn't think I'm all that electable (I'm a much better writer than speaker). I didn't like the compromises many politicians have to make to become elected. And I didn't like the 12-hour days and dealing with all those people--many of whom are silly. But I stayed in politics, somehow hoping my back-room involvement would make a better world. (It didn't).
 
I lost my interest early in becoming a politician then. I have no interest today. Rather I prefer to promote my TDG, which is incompatible with current western democracy.
 
Let's suppose I did decide run for public office. I would have no trouble admitting to my wild youth. I would tell the public that I have been dry for 24 years now--and alcohol now longer impairs my value system. If people still want to vote for someone else, that would be their choice. 
 
 
 
Leroy Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:07pm
The point is, Dave, like for you, it is an irrelevant point in the past.  It's between Trump and his wife. We have no idea if it happened and if it did, whether or not his wife has a problem with it.
 
You seem to have an intense dislike of Trump but won't admit it directly.  You dance around it.
William Stockton Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:19pm
TBH . . . never better!  My first good smile of the day.  Thanks
Dave Volek Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:19pm
Leroy
 
Yes I do not like this man, and he is unfit to be a political leader. The controversy he brings into the office means he is not going to get much done.
 
But I also thought Bill Clinton should have been impeached. 
 
I do not hold Kennedy highly either.
 
Sorry I cannot trust leaders with the affairs of the world while they are more preoccupied in sizing up women and figuring out how to bed them.
 
In my TDG, sex addicts will not rise too high. Neither will alcoholics, druggees, and gamblers. People with mental instabilities will not go far either. That is a good thing.
 
BTW, all the above people still get to vote in the TDG. And they can be voted for, but I don't think they will get many votes.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
opher goodwin Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:23pm
Lynn - I don't think the business with Stormy is about sex. It's about lying, threats, buying off and other seedy stuff. It says volumes about the man. He's a sleazeball.
opher goodwin Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:24pm
When I think of the huge controversy over Clinton - this all knocks that into a teacup!!
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:24pm
Art Buchwald once said that he would rather have a man in office who was still interested enough in fucking women that they didn't turn all their attention to fucking the country.
 
And the fact is Trump is getting rather a lot accomplished. I do not mean to suggest that he may get anywhere near what needs to be done, but it is a sorely needed course correction. 
Leroy Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:42pm
"When I think of the huge controversy over Clinton - this all knocks that into a teacup!!"
 
How so, Opher?  Clinton was accused of raping and exposing himself to women, all, of course, against their will.  Trump is accused of consensual sex.  Where's the analogy?  I fail to see it.  How is consensual sex worse than forced sex?  The threat sounds awfully like the one Kathleen Willey received.  I think she is making it up, based on what happened to Willey.
TexasLynn Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:48pm
Good thread so far guys... I'm a little pressed for time so I'll comment and check back tomorrow morning.
 
Thanks for the comments...
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
 
Bill & Leroy... I agree that the law is the key when it comes to meeting the criteria (high crimes and misdemeanors) to impeach and remove from office.  Boinking between consenting adults is not illegal.
 
Trump may have had some indiscretions, but that's not illegal.  Paid off and implications to campaign financing may be a completely different matter (mostly for the lawyer).
 
Where Trump goes from here remains to be seen.  He would be a fool to meet and talk to Mueller.
 
I did not see the interview.  It just didn't interest me... it did however interest about 20 million others.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
 
Doug, marriage aside, it's about sex and everybody lies about sex, right.  Do we really need to destroy lives, and families, and careers over what everybody is doing?  How important is this stuff to running a country?
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
 
Dave, our rationales are probably relative.  What's a little boinking on the side?  How virtuous do our leaders need to be?  If we set the bar too high, we'll never attract enough qualified candidates.  The economy (especially the economy) and national security are much too important to consider such minor indiscretions; don't you think?
 
I think you and I had similar experience with party politics.  I was very active for well over a decade.  I was more interested is putting my support and efforts behind good candidates than being one myself.  And then it's as if I flipped a switch and decided it wasn't worth it.  I haven’t looked back since…
 
As for as this post we're talking about how truth should be used.  It is worth it for both sides to expose and harp on sexual indiscretion?  Is there a time-frame for this kind of thing?  1, 5, 10, 20 years?  Is ongoing OK or is there anything beyond the pale?  It seems to be all about personal destruction.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
 
Bill H, So the lying is the problem... not the boinking; then there seems to be the problem that the supporters are enablers.  Interesting take Bill...
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
 
Opher, Well, it's kinda about sex.  Surely, we can agree that it is none of our business who Trump boinked many years ago.  And isn't a little lying and ass-covering expected (even appropriate) in situations like this?  Is Trump still a sleazeball if other people worked on his behalf without him knowing it?  There are probably people whose job it is to deal with these sorts of distractions so Trump can concentrate on more important Presidential things.
 
Then there's the source of the accusations... If you drag a hundred-dollar bill through a porno set, you never know what you’ll find.  In this case, drag millions and see what happens…
 
In comparison to Clinton, how is this also not a tea-cup event?  What alleged crimes from Trump are more egregious than those of Clinton?  Isn't it just about sex in both cases?
 
Are you sure you're don't have a double standard here?  Couldn't this post just as easily have been written about and applied to Clinton or many other public servants?
TexasLynn Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:50pm
TBH, didn't mean to leave you out there... I've with William... you comments are great and exactly what could I add? :)
TexasLynn Added Mar 26, 2018 - 6:54pm
Thomas, No difference between the Dems and GOP... c'mon!  If we'll just drop all this petty stuff then we could concentrate or coming together and finding common ground and really solving problems.  I'm sure a lot of work went into the Omnibus bill and we've been assured by the President "never again".  The only thing missing was the prefix... "Read my lips"...
Doug Plumb Added Mar 26, 2018 - 7:25pm
re "Doug, marriage aside, it's about sex and everybody lies about sex, right.  Do we really need to destroy lives, and families, and careers over what everybody is doing?  How important is this stuff to running a country?"
 
This is it really - should politicians have the same kind of values that a rational people would? If someone is going to write legislation I want them to have right and wrong grounded in some kind of rational principle. Fifty years ago, people would be angry. People were a hell of a lot smarter 50 years ago. They read and had good TV.
Dave Volek Added Mar 26, 2018 - 7:32pm
Lynn
 
Last I heard, USA had 325m people. Surely this country must have someone of virtue as well as intellect and energy to be president.
 
As much as you may not have liked Obama and some if his decisions, he did not bring into the office any scandals--or create new ones while in office. If there were any, we didn't hear about them in Canada. For sure, any scandals were far fewer than the current fellow is experiencing.
 
If Obama had been caught with his pants down, for sure the same people who support Trump today would have used that information to discredit Obama.
 
This is all a double-standard: R's can do it, but D's can't OR D's can do it but R's can't. 
 
Regardless I have as my right as a voter to base that vote on any criteria I choose. I do have high standards for my elected officials--and I'm going to do what I can to keep those with higher standards in office, (short of getting involved in politics again).
 
For example, my local provincial member of the legislature has had these "minor" scandels while in office:
 
1) renting out his government-apartment while he is not in the capital city (and keeping the money).
2) hit-and-run motor vehicle accident (all caught on security camera)
3) Hunting on private property without permission.
 
Should I vote for this guy just because these are "minor" offences? What if this guy became cabinet minister in Alberta and got some real political power? Should he assume that he would hold this office with honor? 
 
I will not vote for this fellow regardless of what party banner he has or what ideology he carries.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Thomas Sutrina Added Mar 26, 2018 - 7:48pm
What do you call the omnibus spending bill that was drafted by the four leaders of both parties.  >> If we'll just drop all this petty stuff then we could concentrate or coming together and finding common ground and really solving problems.>>  Serving the swamp is common ground.
Pardero Added Mar 26, 2018 - 9:58pm
TeaxasLynn,
Although I have some small sympathy for Dave Volek's position, nothing is ever going to change because of the titillation factor and appealing to the least common denominator. 
The masses demand to be entertained as we head towards Idiocracy. 
I would argue with Dave, that we would be better served by moral leaders, but then people might have to concern themselves with substantive issues like perpetual war for a perpetual erosion of liberty.
Michael B. Added Mar 27, 2018 - 12:31am
I remember some dialog from the 1995 movie Nixon; during the 1972 meeting, Chairman Mao expresses wonderment at Henry Kissinger, telling Kissinger that all the stories he heard about Kissinger being a ladie's man and a player was incongruous to Chairman Mao, given what an old, fat, ugly fuck Kissinger was. Kissinger's reply?
 
"Power, Mr. Chairman, is the ultimate aphrodisiac."
 
I agree, sex scandals are getting pretty old, although I still can't understand why WJC was given so many passes for his numerous "passes" at women, many of whom didn't want the "attention", while Trump is being raked over the coals for fucking a porn chick and a Playboy model, both of whom usually are firmly in the "Gold-Digging Whore" category.
 
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 27, 2018 - 1:36am
....... should bring in Mila Kunis at this juncture to utter her shrill: Michael!
 
Let me hip ya to somethin', young grasshopper. These dried up hulls are of a class of skank to roll back the great phallic wave. They are whores consumed by the vilest pox ever to afflict human kind. They are not whores to money or shiny baubles. You are referring to the ideology whores. They march in lockstep like the army of mindless Golems that they are, guided in all things by the orthodoxy of their holy church, the Gospel of Gov, their patron and savior
Flying Junior Added Mar 27, 2018 - 4:24am
I didn't even know that democrats were excited about this whole Stormy Daniels line of bullshit.
 
Is that what you are talking about Lynn?  Mrs. Junior was saying something today about how stupid that is.  I wasn't sure whether or not to believe her.  If democrats are wasting their time on this, it isn't the important democrats.
 
Who the hell cares?  I suppose we should protect Barron.  He's such a dear boy.  I'm sure he is very close to his father.
 
But I tend to agree with Leroy.  Bill Clinton was the only politician that the Blue Meanies tried to impeach for adultery.
 
Nancy Pelosi was the first to quell any ridiculous ideas about impeaching the Shrub.  I have said on the WB that no one is seriously going after Trump.  Didn't y'all believe me?  I doubt that Nancy even felt any need to weigh in this time.  No one is talking impeachment.  I'm right, of course.  We will never attempt to impeach Trump.  At least for his first term
 
That said,  If the dumb son-of-a-bitch didn't give a flying fuck about his public image, maybe he should not have run for president.  The truth is everybody knows he is a serial abuser and a whoremonger.  If the big Christian guys don't mind, why should we?  BFD.  Trump made his own bed, so to speak.  If he gets in hot water for getting his dick wet twelve years ago, it can only help him by distracting from his true crimes.
 
Who really cares about destroying his life, family?  He is twice divorced.  He finally figured out that he couldn't handle an American wife because they don't take that level of shit off of selfish bitches like DJT. 
 
Trump is the big idiot who doesn't care about his family.  He likes his family.  But he only wishes to be the center of attention.  He has no real love for many.  Maybe Ivanka.
 
Out-of-bounds?  This isn't 1940.  It's all about public image today.  Trump has an appeal.  He has a tangible disgust for many.  That's just the way it is.
 
Now Barack Hussein Obama!  There's your boy scout.  Family man.  Absolutely bullet-proof from even the slightest suggestion of scandal.  Mike Pence would be proud of him.
 
Trump being a sexual harrasser and self-styled ladies' man is part of his appeal to smaller minds.
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 27, 2018 - 4:28am
And possessed of so little mind of your own this process of deduction must be wholly within your feeble grasp?
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 27, 2018 - 4:29am
BHO.....no sex scandals there. No, he was too busy fucking the country
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 27, 2018 - 4:32am
What was Franken then? The sacrifice fly to advance runners to scoring position?
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 27, 2018 - 4:36am
You libs have already cast that card into the discard pile. Now that the interview is out and its a big ho-hum you want to discount it "Oh its no big deal." Just like every other "Oh we got him now!" that adds up to nothing
Flying Junior Added Mar 27, 2018 - 4:43am
No TBH.
 
Not really.  I don't watch TV.  I have no idea what the buzz is about.  I'm only speculating.  I couldn't care less about Trump's sex life. Less information is better for me.
The Burghal Hidage Added Mar 27, 2018 - 4:47am
Less information is better for me.
 
Yes, that's rather obvious
opher goodwin Added Mar 27, 2018 - 6:39am
Lynn - I don't care who he was having sex with. That's between him and his spouse. But I do not condone the lying and cover-up. That is a pattern of behaviour that is not condonable in someone in his position.
One only has to think in terms of Nixon, the Clintons and Teddy Kennedy. Lying and cover up is not acceptable. 
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 9:38am
Pardero,
I too have sympathy for Dave's position... more than a small amount, actually.  See below.
 
I do think this is much more that a titillation thing.  It's a politics of personal destruction thing.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Michael B,
I do remember that quote from Kissinger, though I was not aware of the story behind it... thanks.
 
The whole point of this article is exactly what you have expressed... "why WJC was given so many passes for his numerous "passes" at women, many of whom didn't want the "attention", while Trump is being raked over the coals".  Much of the answer is... as usual... leftist hypocrisy.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Flying J.
They the Dems, are infatuated with the Stormy Daniels BS... all you have to do to know that is turn on CNN or MSNBC for 5 minutes.  (I understand that you don't watch TV so I can see where you don't get this.)  Also, good for Mrs. Jr for rising above the fray as usual.
 
Did Leroy say Bill Clinton was impeached "for adultery".  Leroy is usually more adept than that... so I question your assertion.  WJC impeached for adultery is indeed the leftist spin on what happened... BUT WJC was impeached for "perjury and obstruction of justice".
 
If you don't think left doesn't have designs on impeaching Trump, you're not paying attention.  Impeachment is all the Mueller investigation is about.  I'll even predict that if the Dems take both houses... Trump will be impeached.
 
Should WJC have not run for office for the same reason (his public image).  Does Clinton care not care about his family?  Does Clinton not have love for many?  Did you ask yourself these questions when he was "getting his %$^& wet"?  Which is the real point of this post.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
TBH,
Ohhhh good point on Franken being a "sacrifice fly"... That's exactly what he was.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Opher,
I understand your position on not caring who he boinked and being more concerned about the lying and coverup.  I only question your consistency in applying the same concern when it's your guy boinking and getting called out on it.
 
We do agree that "lying and cover up is not acceptable".  I submit that, to date, Trump has come nowhere near the level of WJC in that department.  He hasn't appeared on national TV with a finger waging denial.  He doesn't have Ivanka organizing character assassinations (through the likes of James Carville).  He hasn't committed perjury in a court of law.
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 9:39am
Please let me, at this time, admit that the above article is not my own, but rather exerts from a New York Times editorial from December 1998 at the height of the Bill Clinton (and others) escapades.  The author was Janna Malamud Smith.  So, this was written not concerning Donald Trump, but concerning Bill Clinton.  (I have edited the original story to now reflect that.)
 
I (TexasLynn) didn't write it.  I don't even agree with much of it.  I was curious to see the reaction today under the new political landscape.  So, thank you to those who commented. :)  I would ask that each reflect on if their comments today (about Trump) would have matched their thoughts then (about Clinton).  Personally, I think for some they would... and others not so much. 
 
I do (slightly) apologize for playing the devil’s advocate and goading a few of you.  Dave and Thomas were particular victims of this.  Thomas, you were right on the money concerning were we are politically.
 
My actual opinion on the subject is that character matters (So Dave... you and I do agree more than I let on).  And one's willingness to commit adultery, is a reflection of that character (or at least one aspect of it).  Thus, the issue is relevant when considering our leaders; one of many important considerations.
 
All too often our leaders display a lack of character and it's been happening since the beginning of human history.  King David (a man after God's own heart) was probably the ultimate example in taking another man’s wife and then having that man sent to the front lines of a war to die.  David paid a heavy price for that (the death of his son); but also found forgiveness.
 
In more recent times we have the likes of Bill Clinton who was impeached (though not convicted and removed for office).  I don't think Bill Clinton should have been impeached for adultery (and he wasn't).  He should have been impeached for perjury (and obstruction of justice); a crime he committed, and lost his law license for.  The crimes he and wife, Hillary, committed after leaving office are a completely different matter.
 
I don't think Donald Trump should be impeached for adultery.  But if he committed (or commits) an actual crime equal to those of Bill Clinton (perjury and obstruction of justice) ... he should be.
 
But I do consider adultery and other matters of character fair game in politics, if simply to help one make a more informed decision (glee and gloating aside).
 
I will say that I agree with the last statement by Mss. Smith... "You might say that how and why we disapprove of adultery is as important as whether we do."
 
Love the sinner, hate the sin... but don't turn a blind eye to anything... it all matters to some extent.
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 9:45am
Here is a link to the full article: The Adultery Wars (New York Times), By Janna Malamud Smith, DEC. 19, 1998
 
Again, thanks all for joining the thread.
Shane Laing Added Mar 27, 2018 - 12:08pm
Political parties just like digging up crap about each other hoping the electorate will vote for them instead.  It wont change in the near future in my opinion.
opher goodwin Added Mar 27, 2018 - 1:42pm
Lynn - It's hard for me to judge from over here. I bet I don't get the same coverage as you do. Sexual peccadillos have always been a trap for politicians. I guess we all bring our prejudices to bear but Trump does not come across to me as a truthful man. 
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 2:59pm
Shane,
I agree that political parties do this and it won't change any time soon.  I just assert (in addition to this) that there is a double-standard and massive bias in the process.  I also assert there is hypocrisy on the left when it comes to this particular issue; more so than on the right (but admit my own bias on this last point).
 
A final note is the stuff going on with Trump goes well beyond just digging up dirt for the purpose of smearing.  The left has had an impeachment agenda from day one and that is as strong as ever.
 
Thanks for the comment.
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 2:59pm
Opher,
I don't have a point of reference on what the coverage is anywhere outside the U.S.  My suspicion is that coverage is generally even worse (as for liberal bias) outside the U.S.  This is based solely on my limited interaction with non-U.S. citizens.
 
I think sexual misconduct has always been a trap, but how much of one has ebbed and flowed.  There was a time when the press knew about Presidential mistresses and collectively made the decision to keep it quiet.  I also suspect that such traps are more dangerous for some than others, depending on the predisposition of the press.  That predisposition has never been so skewed than it is today.  The Trump/Clinton disparity is all the proof one needs of that fact.
 
We do indeed bring our own prejudices to bear and must deal with them as best we can.  I didn't like Trump enough to vote for him.  I despised Hillary to the point that was never an option.  Stein (Green Party) was a nut and Johnson (Libertarian) was a one issue (drug legalization) candidate.
 
I would agree with you, that on average, I don't judge Trump to be a truthful man; but I could say the same thing about Obama (truthful men don't secretly ship pallets of cash to Iranians for example).
 
BUT compared to the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump is a paragon of virtue.  It's hard for me to take anyone criticizing him seriously who have in the past turned a blind eye to the Clinton.
Rick W. Added Mar 27, 2018 - 3:13pm
I was wondering where your usual grammatical errors and typos went. Now I get it. :)
 
I saw the Daniels interview. To her credit, she said she was not part of the #metoo movement, and that she knew what she was doing -- she was trying to bang her way on to The Apprentice. She screwed Trump once, he didn't get her on the show, so she closed her legs to him.
 
There are two issues she brought up that merit public attention, if true: Someone threatened her life to shut up about Trump, and Trump's lawyer paid her $130k out of personal funds a week before the election.
 
None of this changes my opinion about Trump. I suspect the same is true for his supporters.  
Flying Junior Added Mar 27, 2018 - 3:27pm
I feel like my comment was really stupid.  But I am glad that I took the time to ask you a question.
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 3:55pm
Rick W >> I was wondering where your usual grammatical errors and typos went. Now I get it. :)
 
We don't need no more stinkin' grammar nazis around here... no spelling nazis either.  When I write quickly and post I can't properly proof-read my own material.
 
I’ve got to concentrate on the superior quality of my ideas, which requires the free flow of words.
 
Rick W >> I saw the Daniels interview.
 
I think you're the first to admit that you did.  I intend to judge you in the same way as I judge those who watch awards shows (like the Oscars).
 
Rick W >> To her credit, she said she was not part of the #metoo movement, and that she knew what she was doing -- she was trying to bang her way on to The Apprentice. She screwed Trump once, he didn't get her on the show, so she closed her legs to him.
 
OK... that says something about both of them.  (Assuming it's true).  With that in mind, I don't like Trump, but he's still better than any of the 2016 alternatives.
 
Rick W >> There are two issues she brought up that merit public attention, if true:
 
Agreed.
 
Rick W >> Someone threatened her life to shut up about Trump,
 
I'm very, very skeptical on this one... but it is possible. 
 
It does remind me of a joke within conservative circles when anyone crosses the Clintons.  The crossee had better hold a press conference ASAP and announce how happy they are with life and that under no circumstances do they intend to commit suicide any time soon. :)
 
Rick W >> ...and Trump's lawyer paid her $130k out of personal funds a week before the election.
 
This is the most dangerous.  That act may indeed fit the legal definition of a campaign contribution.  (I'm no expert on that matter).  If so, there is still the issue of plausible deniability and the willingness of said lawyer to take the fall.
 
THIS is the kind of stuff the Dems are really looking for.  This is DNA on little black dress kind of stuff. :)
 
Rick W >> None of this changes my opinion about Trump. I suspect the same is true for his supporters.
 
Agreed.  Nor does it change the opinion of those of us who are completely detached and objective :)
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 3:56pm
FJ >> I feel like my comment was really stupid.
 
Please don't be too rough on yourself.  I meant this as an exercise to encourage inspection of our ideas given similar situations for those we hate and those we don't.  The inspection goes for all sides of the political spectrum.
 
FJ >> But I am glad that I took the time to ask you a question.
 
Me too.  If I didn't answer anything to your satisfaction, throw them back at me. :)
Rick W. Added Mar 27, 2018 - 5:16pm
>I think you're the first to admit that you did.  I intend to judge you in the same way as I judge those who watch awards shows (like the Oscars).
 
That's fair and balanced.
 
>I'm very, very skeptical on this one... but it is possible.
 
I am too. There's no way to know, except... did she do anything to change her behavior after the threat? If no, then I'd remain skeptical. Someone left a disturbing note on my front door, long ago, that mentioned one of my kids. I called the cops. Turned out to be another kid playing a joke. Point being... I didn't shrug it off.
 
>THIS is the kind of stuff the Dems are really looking for.  This is DNA on little black dress kind of stuff. :)
 
Absolutely! It's the Dem version of the fake birth certificate -- the dream of a speedy impeachment and removal from office of a president they despise. At best/worst, I think the Cohen payment to Daniels will get him disbarred and fined. Nobody gets away from Team Trump undamaged. But Trump himself? So far, he's Teflon Don.
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 5:33pm
RW >> At best/worst, I think the Cohen payment to Daniels will get him disbarred and fined.
 
If that's all they get then the Dems will be very disappointed.  They aren't after anything less than Trump.
 
With that in mind, I think Trump should tell Mueller to pound salt when it comes to testifying.  Only a fool would do that if they didn't have to.
opher goodwin Added Mar 27, 2018 - 6:19pm
Lynn - I think that most men of power indulge in extraneous sexual pursuits. It seems to go with the type of personalities that seek power, and, it is apparent that some women have a tendency to throw themselves at men who have power.
I think our societies need a healthier, more open attitude to sex and then we wouldn't have all these revelations.
Jeff Michka Added Mar 27, 2018 - 6:48pm
TexasLynn implies: I think it is time we admit that it is a bad idea to turn consensual sex between adults into political fodder.-You really mean, "let's drop the topic," so Tlynn can write elsewhere he's concerned about "character."  Tlynn is a gawdist aka evangelist type, who will support Trump as long as he picks "the right," judges, perhaps ending reproductive rights in the US.  You gawdists are real hypocrites.  "family values" GOP....Manson family values...
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 7:48pm
Opher >> I think that most men of power indulge in extraneous sexual pursuits. It seems to go with the type of personalities that seek power, and, it is apparent that some women have a tendency to throw themselves at men who have power.
 
I disagree but have no basis for my disagreement than intuition.  I suspect they are no more/less susceptible to the indulgence than the general population.  I hope it is not "most" (greater than 50%).
 
If you have anything to support your supposition they are more promiscuous... then please share.
 
Opher >> I think our societies need a healthier, more open attitude to sex and then we wouldn't have all these revelations.
 
More boinking and more acceptance of it?  Anything goes with two consenting adults?  We'll just have to disagree again.  THAT progression and it's effects on the family structure is the main reason for the decline in our society.
TexasLynn Added Mar 27, 2018 - 7:56pm
The Mitchka >> TexasLynn implies...
 
Mitchka, did you even read the post before you commented?  What you imply that I implied was implied by someone else about 20 years ago (as the post/and comments stated).  I also stated that I disagreed with the implications so I'm in fact saying, "don't drop the topic".
 
Thus, when I write elsewhere that I'm concerned about "character"... I'm being consistent.
 
I am in fact a Christian.  I will support whomever I see fit when they do the right thing (like the right judges) and will point out their failings when they do the wrong thing (boinking outside of marriage, or signing Omnibus spending bills).
 
Consistency!!!  Give it a try. :)  Might I also suggest reading the post and at least the comments from the author before "contributing" to the thread.
opher goodwin Added Mar 28, 2018 - 5:24am
Lynn - I do not see the progression you make here. A more open sexuality does not necessarily have to undermine the family. A commitment to a monogamous/polygamous family unit which enables the good upbringing of children is extremely important.
George N Romey Added Mar 28, 2018 - 8:35am
I’ve always said that many a poor or modest income man given the wealth of a rich man would act the same as the rich man. Money allows one to carry out for the many are nothing more than fantasies.
TexasLynn Added Mar 28, 2018 - 10:50am
Opher >> I do not see the progression you make here.
 
Well... that's surprising.
 
Opher >> A more open sexuality does not necessarily have to undermine the family.
 
You're talking theory and wishful thinking; the key word being “necessarily” when in reality and history it does undermine the family and it has done so every time.
 
Our society since the sexual revolution of the 60s is just one historical case confirming that; the state of the black community in the U.S. even more so.
 
Opher >> A commitment to a monogamous/polygamous family unit which enables the good upbringing of children is extremely important.
 
You got it half right.
 
The fact that you even mention "polygamous" proves that you (and I attribute this to socialism mostly) place no value on the family what-so-ever.  It is something to be replaced by the state (at whatever level).  You consider this a progression to utopia; I, another step to dystopia.
 
One of us is right.  One of us has been proven right repeatedly by history.
TexasLynn Added Mar 28, 2018 - 10:52am
George >> I’ve always said that many a poor or modest income man given the wealth of a rich man would act the same as the rich man.
 
I would agree with that.  There is something to power (money) corrupts and absolute power (money) corrupts absolutely.
 
Character is an elusive thing with no class having a monopoly or exclusion.  Money is one more of many worldly things that seeks to corrupt character.
Rick W. Added Mar 28, 2018 - 11:53am
As Opher said:
 
>A commitment to a monogamous/polygamous family unit which enables the good upbringing of children is extremely important.
 
That's something I've been thinking about lately -- how a non-traditional relationship, such as polyamory, works or fails when children are introduced. That might be a fun TexasLynn post. Gee, I wonder what his position will be... :)
TexasLynn Added Mar 28, 2018 - 12:38pm
RW >> That's something I've been thinking about lately...
 
No need to think about it too hard... just look at the current cluster %&*# it produces with trans-gendered families; often with consequences of regret and suicide.  But the spin will be its societies (my) fault for not embracing the lie of somebody identifying as or deciding they are something else.
 
RW >> That might be a fun TexasLynn post.
 
For who? :)
 
RW >> Gee, I wonder what his position will be... :)
 
The far left seeks to redefine (meaning destroy) the family to mean anything (and thus nothing).  Having succeeded in toppling the gay domino, they have moved on to the trans-gendered domino.  Polygamy and age of consent (especially regarding LBGT youth) will be their next assault on the family/society/decency.
opher goodwin Added Mar 28, 2018 - 1:24pm
Lynn - your assumptions and politicisation are both equally erroneous. Polygamous relationships can very easy centre around the value of the family above all else. They work very well all over the world.
Me thinks you are restricted in your thinking, associations and assumptions. There's more than one way to skin a porcupine.
opher goodwin Added Mar 28, 2018 - 1:27pm
Lynn - why this attack on the left all the time? - they want to destroy the family. That is absurd. I've been happily married for fifty years last year. My kids and grandkids are all the world to us. Why these generalised smears? They are simply unfounded.
TexasLynn Added Mar 28, 2018 - 2:25pm
Opher, we simply disagree on the polygamy... the practice is overwhelmingly a detriment to society and the structure of family.
 
Opher >> Me thinks you are restricted in your thinking, associations and assumptions.
 
Me too.  My mind is indeed not so open as to abandon objective observation and evaluation.  I need not do as the Romans do, or live the life of a pagan to properly judge the quality or impact of each on society.
 
Opher >> why this attack on the left all the time?
 
My guess would be because leftist ideas are responsible for most of the ills of society and the world?
 
Opher >> they want to destroy the family. That is absurd.
 
The left wants to redefine the family as just about anything in the name of inclusiveness.  THAT... by my definition is destroying the family.  So, I stand by the statement.
 
Opher >> I've been happily married for fifty years last year. My kids and grandkids are all the world to us.
 
Congratulations.  That is quite an accomplishment and a blessing.  It's also irrelevant to the desire of the left (in general).
 
Opher >> Why these generalised smears? They are simply unfounded.
 
When I make a statement such as this... I mean that it is the general goal and belief of the liberal mindset... of a large majority of its members.
 
For example, conservatives believe that the family should consist of one man, one woman and their children; and nothing else.  Smear or not, it's a simple fact, because a large majority of conservatives believe that.  Do 100% believe it?  Nope... but enough do, that the general statement stands.
 
So, I'm not going to clarify every general statement about the left because it lacks that 100% qualification.
 
BUT... in the interest of fairness, feel free to state right here, right now, that you reject the redefinition of the family beyond one man, one woman, and children and I will reciprocate right here, right now and state for the record that you are the exception.
 
Leroy Added Mar 29, 2018 - 8:34am
"Polygamous relationships can very easy centre around the value of the family above all else. They work very well all over the world."
 
I agree that polygamous relationships aren't necessarily bad.  As for myself, one woman at a time is more than enough.  I can't imagine life trying to please more than one woman at a time and still retaining my sanity (assuming that I have any to begin with).
 
 
Leroy Added Mar 29, 2018 - 8:51am
"(W)hy this attack on the left all the time? - they want to destroy the family. That is absurd."
 
We all want the same thing.  I don't accuse anyone of wanting to destroy the family.  It is their policies that result in the destruction of the family.  As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.   As I have said many times and I believe it to be a universal truth, those on the left are short-term thinkers.  I don't mean it as an insult, just the way it is.  Take social services, for example.  Once families depended on one another.  Now, children don't have to worry about their parents.  The government takes care of them if they are unable to provide for themselves.  The intentions were good, but the long-term effect is to destroy the family.  We've created a situation in the US where it is advantageous to not marry.  It has lead to more children born out of wedlock.  The government takes care of the children.  I have seen it up close and personal.  There was one woman who was retarded.  I rented a house to her under a government program.  She had a man who lived with her for free.  He was just taking advantage of her and living off the money intended for her and her children so he could be a bum.  Of course, anytime the government man came around, he had to clear out.  He gave her three children out of wedlock.  And, there was another woman whom I rented to with 4 kids (at last count) out of wedlock, each with a different father.  They sure had a lot of "uncles".  Without liberal government policies, none of this would happen.  Again, there is good intent, but the result is the destruction of the family.
George N Romey Added Mar 29, 2018 - 9:30am
Trump could blow minds by simply tweeting for an old man he’s always horny and the hookers do the trick.
Jeff Michka Added Mar 30, 2018 - 7:26pm
TexassLynn the deleter strikes home for freedumb once again.  yeah, delete, that means "you win" the arguement.  You are, under est conditions a world class hypocrite and deleting my posts won't change it.
Jeff Michka Added Apr 1, 2018 - 3:59pm
TexassLynn cries: Consistency!!!  Give it a try. :)  Might I also suggest reading the post and at least the comments from the author before "contributing" to the thread.AND When I make a statement such as this... I mean that it is the general goal and belief of the liberal mindset... of a large majority of its members.  Uh huh, rightist, but screwing pornstars is okay because it's "the Don" doing it, and if he ends abortion, we Xtain politicos are all for it.  Msg to Texass Lynn's son:"Okay, son! When you get older, marry someone, take vows, and she doesn't give you what you want when you want it, it's okay to go out, find a pornstar or hooker and get what you want."
TexasLynn Added Apr 1, 2018 - 4:40pm
Jeff, please... get back on your meds. While I reserve the right to delete anything on my posts (especially your crap). I haven't deleted anything of yours in months.
 
You're obviously not reading (or comprehending) much on this post... just move on.  Again... please, follow the frequency and dosage.
TexasLynn Added Apr 1, 2018 - 9:32pm
Yes... Jeff... THAT is the kind of stuff I do delete.  Same to you...
A. Jones Added Apr 2, 2018 - 9:26pm
A lady of the evening should know the drill.
 
A very droll pun. Thanks for that!
A. Jones Added Apr 2, 2018 - 9:29pm
I would like my political leaders to be people of virtue.
 
I see that "competency" isn't important for you, Volek. Interesting.
TexasLynn Added Apr 7, 2018 - 2:56pm
Jeff Mitchka you a troll and a moron.  A bad combination.  Please don't comment on my posts.  I tried to give you some leeway but I'm done.  Your comments will be deleted.