John Boehner sex scandal

[Stoneburg]

Here’s a different perspective:

Shouldn’t the (D)'s be happy if ®’s are sleeping with lobbyists and vice versa?

I mean a lobbyist would/could work you in order to make you vote the other way, right? So anyone not agreeing with Boehner in this case should be happy if some lobbyist holds power over him. You should only be worried when people on the side you agree with start boning a lobbyist, and only if the lobbyist represents something you disagree with (otherwise, who gives a crap?).

And to the “moral” argument.

Power is an aphrodisiac, especially in cultures with large gender inequalities. So this 61 year old is probably getting a lot of pussy thrown at him. Probably a lot of young and attractive pussy too. And if you haven’t had that happen to you and proudly walked away, then you should probably take a breath before throwing that stone.

I would also be willing to wager that successful politicians have a stronger libido than average. You need drive, passion and a competetive attitude to succeed. So you’ve got a group of people with above average sexual drive being tempted by above average attractiveness women. You’re going to get a bit of side action.
I also doubt that there is a correlation, or at least a significant one, between someone cheating on their spouse and being an immoral person in general. I’m extremely honest for example, but I’m also pretty sure that if I’m 61 years old and a young blonde knockout starts hitting on me, there’s a very real chance of me responding favorably to that, married or not. Yet I would never, ever take a bribe. Whereas someone might be willing to take a bribe (or start an immoral war), but never cheat on his wife.

Solution to this ‘problem’:

Become more gender egalitarian. This will make politicians and other male figures of power less attractive to women.

Stop caring. If nobody cared about this stuff, we wouldn’t have the hypocrisy, because politicians wouldn’t be forced to go out of their way to praise family values and portray the perfect nuclear family.

[fumster]

@gonzomax

His votes tell all. You are buying his disavowal of being behind those issues while voting for each and every one of them. What you say is less important than what you do.

So he’s just does evil because he wants to be re-elected, but he is not actually evil. I feel better now.

[marshmallow]

@Stoneburg

Solution to this ‘problem’:

Become more gender egalitarian. This will make politicians and other male figures of power less attractive to women.

Explain.

[ElvisL1ves]

@sh1bu1

So he’s just does evil because he wants to be re-elected, but he is not actually evil. I feel better now.

On the other hand:

“You are what you repeatedly do.” - Aristotle, as quoted by Shaquille O’Neal

[tomndebb]

@gonzomax

His votes tell all. You are buying his disavowal of being behind those issues while voting for each and every one of them. What you say is less important than what you do.

I’ve never heard Boehner disavow any of the positions that get your back up, so I am hardly “buying his disavowal.”

I am not claiming that he is some sort of liberal in disguise; he is a leader of the Republican Party.
I simply note that while his votes and even his rhetoric are in line with mainstream Republican positions, (imagine that!), his actual efforts in his position as Speaker have been directed toward the economy and have not been directed toward pushing the social agenda of the Religious Right.

[Cisco]

@tomndebb

I’ve never heard Boehner disavow any of the positions that get your back up, so I am hardly “buying his disavowal.”

I am not claiming that he is some sort of liberal in disguise; he is a leader of the Republican Party.
I simply note that while his votes and even his rhetoric are in line with mainstream Republican positions, (imagine that!), his actual efforts in his position as Speaker have been directed toward the economy and have not been directed toward pushing the social agenda of the Religious Right.

You really don’t think that gutting the social safety net, fighting against accessible healthcare for the lower and middle classes, cutting education funding, pushing for privatization of social security, fighting for tax breaks for the wealthiest individuals and most profitable companies, and on and on is part of a social agenda?

And don’t go a’hunting and point out that there’s one or two of those issues that Boner isn’t technically on the record supporting; that’s his party’s M.O.. Just answer the question.

[tomndebb]

@Cisco

You really don’t think that gutting the social safety net, fighting against accessible healthcare for the lower and middle classes, cutting education funding, pushing for privatization of social security, fighting for tax breaks for the wealthiest individuals and most profitable companies, and on and on is part of a social agenda?

Quote his public declarations on those issues made since he became Speaker of the House, pointing out how they do not reflect the fiscal policy he touts and I will reconsider whether he is “extreme.”

I have not said that he is not a pure Republican. I simply have noted that he is not out pushing the social policy in an extreme manner. Nothing you or Gonzo has posted has actually provided evidence that his positions are more extreme than the rest of his party. In addition, his decision to ignore campaigns by Joe Barton, Ron Paul, Steve King and others to be appointed chairs of committees in which they have demonstrated extreme positions speaks to a reasonableness that belies the “extreme” claim.

[BobLibDem]

@sh1bu1

The thing about Boehner is that when he is good, he is very, very good. But when he is bad, he is orange.

Snort! Good one!

[BobLibDem]

@tomndebb

his actual efforts in his position as Speaker have been directed toward the economy and have not been directed toward pushing the social agenda of the Religious Right.

I disagree. The GOP ran against the unemployment rate and the deficit. Once in office, what was job one? Jobs? The deficit? No, job one was a showboat attempt to thumb their nose at health care reform, a repeal which if successful would add to the deficit. Then what was job two? Jobs? The deficit? No, job two was abortion and another meaningless showboat to appease the far right. So when exactly is the GOP going to focus on the economy? I predict never, since the ONLY idea they have, cutting taxes, would add to the deficit. Since a Democrat is in office, deficits matter.

[Cisco]

@tomndebb

Quote his public declarations on those issues made since he became Speaker of the House, pointing out how they do not reflect the fiscal policy he touts and I will reconsider whether he is “extreme.”

I have not said that he is not a pure Republican. I simply have noted that he is not out pushing the social policy in an extreme manner. Nothing you or Gonzo has posted has actually provided evidence that his positions are more extreme than the rest of his party. In addition, his decision to ignore campaigns by Joe Barton, Ron Paul, Steve King and others to be appointed chairs of committees in which they have demonstrated extreme positions speaks to a reasonableness that belies the “extreme” claim.

I’m not claiming that he is any more extreme
than the rest of his party. I’m asking you if you honestly don’t think those are social issues. Answer my question please.

[Steve_MB]

Dating back to his time as House Minority Leader, current Speaker John Boehner has enforced a no-shenanigans policy among the GOP rank-and-file.

Well, now, a Speaker of the House can hardly be described as one of the “rank-and-file”. So, no problemo.

[tomndebb]

@Cisco

I’m not claiming that he is any more extreme
than the rest of his party.

gonzo was making that claim and that is what I am disputing. All policy has social ramifications. What has Boehner said or done that is actually extreme, (providing one does not subscribe to the notion, (that I suspect gonzo might), that the Republican Party is inherently “extreme”)?