All men are alike.  Except Democratic and Republican politicians
July 23rd, 2007 by 
Gerald Plessner
Posted in Corruption, Sex | 
Click here to comment »
Recent Posts
- I have no intention of getting over it!
- These shoes were made for throwing!
- Whats the big deal?
- Did anyone notice?
- Had enough? Just wait!
- Democrats minimize Palin at their own peril
- Dear fellow Older American
- Republicans are excellent liars!
- The McCain Palin selection
- The George W. Bush Time Bomb
Categories
- Alberto Gonzales
- Barack Obama
- Clarence Thomas
- Conseratism
- Corruption
- Country of Georgia
- Dick Cheney
- Election 2008
- Franklin Roosevelt
- George Bush
- George W. Bush
- Global Warming
- Hillary Clinton
- Immigration
- Imperialism
- Iraq War
- Israel
- John Edwards
- John McCain
- Oboma Administration
- Palestinians
- Paul Wolfowitz
- Race & Class
- Religion
- Republican Party
- Richard Perle
- Ronald Reagan
- Rudy Giuliani
- Russia
- Sarah Palin
- Sex
- The Borderland
- The Constitution
- Torture
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Uncategorized
- Valerie Plame Wilson
- War on Iraq
Archives
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
Meta:
July 23rd, 2007 by Gerald Plessner
All men are alike. Except Democrats and Republicans. Most married men might like to look at an attractive woman (me included) but the time honored rule of “look but don’t touch” seems to have escaped many Republican politicians.
While the vast majority of politicians are certainly loyal to their spouses, too many Republican elected officials seem to live deceitful lives, running on family values while cheating on their wives.
But the Republican predilection to marital infidelity is not limited to conservative politicians. I believe that it is much more prevalent in the general Republican and conservative community. And that is because of unrealistic and unnatural religious beliefs and rules about sex which dominate Republican and conservative culture.
In the larger conservative religious community which dominates Republican politics, religious doctrine taints sex as something other than a God-given gift to humans, which I believe it is.
It should be no surprise that something which is condemned becomes something to be stifled and avoided. Such prudishness has its own reward and that reward if too often infidelity.
If religion teaches its children that sex is dirty or unnatural, then many youngsters, and especially females, will shun or fear it, being subjected to a limited sexual life and ending up with partners who are also sexual cripples. (The exposure some years ago of Christian television preacher Jimmy Swaggart’s visits to New Orleans prostitutes comes to mind.)
Clearly, the condemnation of natural sex by conservative religions, especially in the American South, has contributed to the continuing rash of infidelity among Southern conservative Republican politicians.
On the other hand, predominately liberal Democrats are more open and realistic about sex. No one denies that some violate their marital obligations but the frequency among Democratic politicians is but a fraction of Republican infidelity.
That is because Democrats and liberals probably have healthier sex lives than Republicans and conservatives. Unlike conservative Republicans, liberal Democrats probably just love sex, and especially with their wives! So they are more likely to remain loyal to their wives. And those wives probably have healthier attitudes about sex themselves.
And that is probably why Republicans in Congress are a lot more likely to be philanders.
In the case of Louisiana Republican David Vitter, who campaigned as a saint and then sought funding for abstinence training that advocated limiting sex partners, and who condemned gay marriage as an assault on the institution of marriage, the story is more about political dishonesty, lies and corruption that are endemic to the modern Republican party.
According to Bill Minor, political columnist for the Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi, Vitter’s political history included the following:
In the 1990s Vitter won elections “with his holier-than-thou public posture while harshly demeaning other pols.”
“A New Orleans woman charged with running the ‘Canal Street’ brothel ring identified Vitter as a client in the 1990s.”
Vitter’s name appeared five times on the list of the accused D.C. Madam.
Contrast that to Vitter’s attacks on President Clinton and his support of impeachment while serving in the House of Representatives, and you have a true measure of the man and the hypocrisy rampant in the Republican-controlled Congress of the 1990s.
Perhaps political hypocrisy is born in the bed of sexual hypocrisy.
Did Dick Cheney patronize the DC Madam?
May 11th, 2007 by Gerald Plessner
Posted in Corruption, Dick Cheney | Click here to comment »
I have never forwarded an article to my email friends but this is just too delicious to pass up!
Finally, the Republicans have a reason to impeach Cheney that is consistent with their stand on family values. Getting more than 3300 of our fine military men and women killed in a war created out of fantasy hasn’t been good enough.
(This story is not yet confirmed by another media source. Though it is believable, it may not be true.)
Gerald Plessner
May 8, 2007 — Cheney on DC Madam’s list. Yesterday, WMR reported on the DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s list: “WMR has been informed that the CEO of a major corporation is a former CEO but, nonetheless, the aforementioned extremely high-level official of the Bush administration. The individual, who is definitely “newsworthy,” reportedly engaged the services of Palfrey’s escort firm while he was the CEO and maintained a residence off Chain Bridge Road in the Ballantrae neighborhood in McLean, Virginia, a few blocks from the headquarters of the CIA.”
WMR has confirmed with extremely knowledgeable CIA and Pentagon sources that the former CEO who is on Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s list is Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney was CEO of Halliburton during the time of his liaisons with the Pamela Martin & Associates escort firm. Palfrey’s phone invoices extend back to 1996 and include calls to and from Cheney. Ironically, in 2000 Cheney was appointed by Bush to head his Vice President selection committee, a task that enabled Cheney to gather detailed personal files on a number of potential candidates, including Bill Frist, George Pataki, John Danforth, Fred Thompson, Chuck Hagel, John Kasich, Chris Cox, Frank Keating, Tom Ridge, Colin Powell, and Jim Gilmore, before he selected himself as the vice presidential candidate.
The White House saw to it that ABC/Disney killed the DC Madam’s story before yet another scandal swamped the Bush administration. Cheney is departing Washington today for a trip to the Middle East, where he will visit the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the USS John C. Stennis in the Gulf.
Three neo-conservative horsemen of the Apocalypse
April 22nd, 2007 by Gerald Plessner
Posted in Corruption, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle | Click here to comment »
(First installment exposing the neo-conservative conspiracy to subvert American foreign and defense policy)April 20, 2007 – It’s beginning to feel like a recurring nightmare — a bad dream that keeps coming back over and over again. The three neo-conservative horsemen of the Apocalypse — Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and John Bolton — are back on television telling us how to rule the world. And what’s even more disturbing is that our president and vice president depend on these people for advice!
PAUL WOLFOWITZ
Paul Wolfowitz was the Assistant Secretary of Defense under Donald Rumsfeld. Wolfowitz is the one who refined the rationale for the war on Iraq. A key member of the Project for the New American Century, Wolfowitz is perhaps the most important neo-conservative after Dick Cheney.Among other deceptions in the run up to the war, Wolfowitz refused to answer Senators’ questions about Bush administration plans for the invasion of Iraq. He then refused to tell the Senate what the war would cost before it was stampeded into voting to support the war. Wolfowitz is a leading neo-conservative intellectual. He has been involved at every point in their subversion of American foreign and defense policy that has brought the United States to its current status of distrust and disrespect in the world.
As Assistant Secretary of Defense under the hapless Rumsfeld, one of Wolfowitz’s key roles seems to have been to keep generals and experts in post-war planning out of the preparation for the war. Read the rest of this entry »