These things never happened and never shall be discussed again (overheard in MSM newsrooms).
Hey, I was just going to post this!!! Any chance that this stuff will become the next talking points of the MSM that pulled Sally Hemmings out of the air to save Bill?
Something has to be done about the media. I am tired of hearing about their rights, they have the responsibility to report honestly and fairly, and highlighting the SocialistCrats hypocracy would be a part of that.
Now do a list for the White House.
My favorite - Wilbur Mills
WHY were Foley's "Over-Friendly" E-mails sent YEARS AFTER the sex-filled Instant Messages??? It makes NO sense.
I thought killing someone was the ultimate scandal. Need to include that with fata*s Kennedy.
Clinton is a serial rapist who got oral sex while deploying troops by phone and Monica did not have appropriate security clearance. He bought off her testimony with high dollar job offers from his friends. He lied under oath. He got others to lie under oath.
Der Schlickmeister is the King Cat Daddy of DemoRat sex scandals.
Americans aren't stupid (I hope)...
Most of us KNOW that a different standard is applied to DEMOCRATS...
What?! No Wilbur Mills? No Gary Hart on the list???
Thanks for posting. Kind of gives a little perspective to the whole thing.
Wow! Wilber Mills and his Fanny Fox didn't even make the top 10.
Also no mention of Wilbur Mills, his was certainly the most "colorful" of the bunch.
This whole feigned righteous indignation on the part of the Dems and the media probably only plays with their leftist base. It should have the effect of further emboldening the GOP base to get out and drive a stake through the Democrats' heart in November.
How were these 10 chosen from what must have been thousands I wonder.
Reposting a post I put on a couple of threads over the weekend:
Here's a little more info. Found this site earlier today.
Click on the link below if you want to see specifics about each Congresscritter (each of their names is linked on the site)
The 21st Century may be the century of graft and corruption for the Republican Party, but it has a long way to go to catch up with the Democratic BadBoys from the 20th and 19th Centuries.
Who's ahead--Democrats or Republicans? The usual caricature is that Republicans are only interested in stealing money and Democrats are content with sex. Well, let's see. Here's the score card for Congressional Bad Boys. This represents the BadBoys since 1975, those that have their own page on this website (plus a couple more).
Looking at the House Ethics Committee historical list, you'll find that there were 68 Democrats and 34 Republicans, from 1856 through 2004 who were caught up in questionable activity. (Note, the list starts keeping tabs of Democrats versus Republicans in the mid 1850s, once the Republican party was formed. Click here to see beginning of the tally). So, from the House Ethics Committee historical list, the Democrats maintained a healthy two-to-one lead.
A number of the BadBoys listed here and throughout the website are on the House Ethics Committee list, but a surprising number never appeared there or in the Senate Ethics Committee (which does not have an online list). (But check out the punishments given to Senators and Representatives).
The numbers in the table below reflect BadBoys who are highlighted on this website, those who have gotten in trouble since 1975. A couple are mentioned twice, with the second mention in parentheses.
Dems - 56
Repub - 25
Extracurricular Activities Democrats Republicans
Ended up in Jail/Penitentiary
(usually bribery, scams, other forms of greed)
Subtotals: Dems: 28; Rep: 7
J. F. Hastings
Subtotals: Dems: 13; Rep: 5
Probation or House Arrest
Subtotals: Dems: 3; Rep: 2
Drunk, Driving too Fast, Acting Crazy
Subtotals: Dems: 0; Rep: 0
Sex with Teenagers
Subtotals: Dems: 2; Rep: 3
Miscellaneous BadBoy Activities
Subtotals: Dems: 9; Rep: 5
Subtotals: Dems: 3; Rep: 1
15 posted on 10/02/2006 5:43:46 AM PDT by Seattle Conservative (God Bless and protect our troops and their CIC)
Although Kennedy deserves to be # 1, it should not be for the reason the article cited.