J. Dennis Hastert, a little known low-level Republican of little renown, has not been formally charged with molesting 14 year old boys - because of statutes of limitation, apparently.
He is charged however, with llegally structuring bank withdrawals to pay one of his victims in an effort to hide the abuse. He’s plead guilty to that.
Of course, I’m sure I’ll be told he’s not a “true Republican”.
Or this is “old news, never mind, look away”
Or, it’s all OK, since he said “sorry”
Or that since he’s not actually being convicted of having the little boys suck his old wrinkled phallus, then that never actually occurred. Because someone has to be actually convicted of a crime, and exhausted all appeals before it ever actually happened.
I realize you were likely being sarcastic but Hastert clearly was not “a little known low-level Republican of little renown.” He was Speaker of the House–the most powerful position in the House and second in succession behind the President–for eight years. (Granted, he acted like a figurehead while Dick Armey and Tom Delay actually ran things during much of his tenure but he was still the third most powerful man in U.S. government.)
The random moral failings of politicians don’t reflect on their party unless it’s specifically related to their actions as politicians. Like when those anti-gay crusaders get caught soliticiting gay sex, that’s noteworthy. Or if they used their political power to cover up their crimes, and their party helped them, that may be noteworthy too. But this thread feels like “this guy is a scumbag! see! republicans bad!” which is just lame. And I’m as anti-republican as you can get on these boards.
That’s pretty much my thoughts as well. Hastert was a schmuck, and now it turns out he was a molesting schmuck, but I don’t think that’s related to his party affiliation.
Do you think none of your defined terms apply to Hastert? I think he’s a hypocritical asshole on all counts. The guy was a grade A douchebag in terms of ‘promoting family values’ AKA trampling the rights of gays.
Are you pitting Hastert, or some imaginary posters on the MB? I can get behind (ha!) the pitting of the former. Yes, apparent scumbag. You lose, though, when you throw out a whole series of straw men complaints. Wait until someone actually makes those arguments before you go off on them.
The OP certainly never made a case. The thread just sounds like tribalism. HAHA ONE OF YOUR GUYS GOT CAUGHT MOLESTING KIDS. -1 FOR YOUR SIDE. YAY OUR SIDE.
I have no problems with pitting a child molester. Or laying out why the guy is a hypocrite. But the way this thread was made sounds like the laziest of tribalism and that’s boring.
I’d rather have Haysbert as president than Hastert. Did Obama ever thank him for helping to make the idea of a black president more palatable to white Americans?
This is why I don’t understand the Republican outrage over Robert Bentley. He had a consensual affair with an adult woman. Doesn’t that make him kind of a role model for you guys at this point?
It was a tongue-in-cheek comment, of course. But really, at this point, a Republican having an extramarital heterosexual affair with an adult is relatively stodgy and traditional, isn’t it?
I’ll admit this completely catches me by surprise. Whatever faults I thought Hastert had, I never suspected he was having sex with teenage boys. Was I out of the loop or did this surprise everyone?