English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Sure he did something that was dispicable, but soes that mean the rest of the party is guilty. Do you think that the democarts are any better. Consisering they are so softon things like child protection and such. They seem not to care about values at all

2006-10-20 12:11:19 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

AFDS??????

2006-10-20 12:14:50 · update #1

23 answers

Youve got to one look at the individuals that are runnig and vote for the one you honestly think is going to do the best job.

2 All the parties have someone that has done wrong and should not be elegable for election.

3 the democrats are hypocrites they knew of Foley's emails as soon as every one else but waited till it woould do the most damage what a better time then when thee is an imortant election.

4. What he did was wrong and he should be punished. But the two liberals that actually had sex with minors should be behind bars but instead fools re-elected them.

2006-10-21 10:12:07 · answer #1 · answered by dreson k 4 · 0 0

It's all a game.

The communist party #%@&*$, I mean the democrats are playing a game, but the republicans are doing a job.

The two parties have a different mentality when it comes to government.

In playing the game, the commu . . . I mean democrats try to precipitate various crisis in order to tilt the Republicans off-balance. The Republicans aren't good at playing this game, look at the trouble Nixon got into.

The whole Foley thing is a prime example. OK, the guy's a predatory homofaggotite, but they've been holding the information in reserve for years. Then they sprung at the most opportune moment to advance thier marker in the game. Commie gets to move five spaces forward.

They forget the stakes are for keeps. They take liberties to do things that are destructive to America and Americans, like the whole leaky money thing. The dollar has lost 96% of its value because of the Federal Reserve Act, but they won't fix it because it advances their marker in the game against the GOP.
.

2006-10-20 19:12:42 · answer #2 · answered by s2scrm 5 · 3 1

No, not because of what Foley did. However, I would choose not to vote for the Republican Party if I knew that the ENTIRE Republican leadership of the House was AWARE that Foley was a pervert and harassing teenage boys and that Republican leadership chose to allow Foley to continue harassing young boys instead of forcing him out of office. That Republican leadership was more concerned with retaining power and not concerned with the young boys working in the House of Representatives.

2006-10-20 23:46:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Foley was out of line. He is gone. We need to talk about something else. There is nothing stating that he did anything more than send emails. Had Republicans covered it up, which they did not, or done what the Democrats did with Studds or Frank.

The whole thing is nothing but a diversion from the fact that they have nothing to offer.

2006-10-20 19:16:48 · answer #4 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 1 1

In ANY group you are going to have people who behave poorly. If you have any group that you portray as 100% pure it is because you are lying to yourselves. The Republicans forced Foley to resign, that is all they could do, they cannot turn back time and prevent the incident. I do not know how this could reflect on the rest of the GOP.

I think that the Evangelical Christian who is staying home because of the incident is largely a Liberal pipe dream and media concoction. I do not know a single Christian who is staying home because of the Foley incident.

2006-10-20 19:19:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

and the republicans are STRONG on child protection? do you know who spearheaded the campaign to protect minors from internet predators? FOLEY! the whole time the drunken perv was trying (and no one knows for sure if he succeeded) to pick up underage boys using IM's...the reason i'm voting against the republicans isn't foley...he's just a symptom of the disease of one-party control of the government...i'm voting against the republicans because of all the other boobs, thieves, and hypocrites like allen, cunningham, ney, bush, mccain, frist, hastert, cheney...the list goes on and on...

2006-10-20 20:43:19 · answer #6 · answered by spike missing debra m 7 · 1 0

Foley scandal is a reason not to vote for Foley, Hastert, Reynolds, and the few others who knew about his actions and chose to cover it up in order to protect him. It's not a reason to vote against the Republican party. The Iraq war, the Christian Right, the corruption and incompetence, and the rubber stamping of Bush's extremist agenda are reason to vote against the Republican party.

2006-10-20 19:25:22 · answer #7 · answered by Duffman 4 · 1 1

It is pretty stupid to ignore an entire party because of one idiot. I guess it is as stupid as voting for a candidate because of his/her party membership.

1) Foley is bad but that doesn't mean that everyone else in his party is bad.
2) I'm voting (insert Party here) regardless of the candidates and their qualifications, platforms, etc because I love the Party.

Yes, both situations are stupid. VOTE for the best QUALIFIED candidate. Don't vote for a Party.

2006-10-20 19:30:51 · answer #8 · answered by ssbn598 5 · 1 0

I would vote Republican anyway in spite of Foley because I agree with you. Over all the Republicans are the better choice and I see far more disgusting scandals among Dem's.

2006-10-20 19:24:16 · answer #9 · answered by mammabecki 4 · 1 1

Hypocrisy again! They are so liberal and lenient about their own transgressions but will use anything to win an election.

Anyone who would put either party into one moral category is stupid.

Note of rukidding. Great info but you forgot to mention the rapes Clinton committed and trying to destroy the women who complained against him. May I addd, with Hillarys backing.

2006-10-20 21:38:36 · answer #10 · answered by Heidi 4 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers