W Jefferson, 9 term Democrat US Congressman, now sentenced to 13 years for corruption, is a victim of racism.
Click to vote
50%14 Votes
Strongly Disagree
18%5 Votes
Disagree
32%9 Votes
Undecided
0%0 Votes
Agree
0%0 Votes
Strongly Agree
50%14 Votes
Strongly Disagree
18%5 Votes
Disagree
32%9 Votes
Undecided
0%0 Votes
Agree
0%0 Votes
Strongly Agree
Male
Female
43%10 Votes
Strongly Disagree
17%4 Votes
Disagree
39%9 Votes
Undecided
0%0 Votes
Agree
0%0 Votes
Strongly Agree
Results by Country
Results by Voter Type
Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
Don't know the details of the case, and am not likely to learn them reading news reports. Since he is a Democrat, it is more likely that he is a victim--IF he is a victim--of GOP hatred.
But you must admire Dauguy's splendid steadfastness in not letting her principles (I nearly typed prejudices, but that would be unkind) be overcome by mundane things like facts.
Let us all spread the word; it was a dastardly Republican who planted all those $$$$$$$ in the poor victim's freezer.
I admire Dauguy for her knowledge and contributions here. And I enjoy reading many of your contributions as well. Her overt bias against big corporations and Republicans is no different then your overt bias against Muslims, Socialist and Greens. The difference is that she usually backs up her opinions with facts.
AS I said, I don't know the details of the case. I know, from this question, that a Democrat is accused of taking bribes. Key word--"accused"--and know that since it is part of the GOP/Democrat death dance, that there will be no real information available.
I too am not in favor of bribes, especially in an economy where the individual cannot compete with corporate money. The playing field is NOT level in that area, is it?
True most individuals can not compete with corporations.
The guy was convicted and from the sounds of it correctly so. The initial investigation might have been because he was a Democrat, but that does not take away from the fact that he did accept bribes.
If she DID take a bribe, convict her and jail her. But it really shouldn't be treated like some huge horror, as it is more or less the way things are done these days. By both parties.
And in older days, too. That's why Spiro Agnew resigned from the Vice-Presidency.
The real horror should be reserved for the commonlity of it.
If it is a sin, then it is between me, my wife and if she wouldn't a mistress. Then again I do not understand why so many people have the obsession to condemn the sex lives of other consenting adults.
PS, I suspect Republicans don't really care either unless it is a Democrat that is exposed... (like Ted Haggard, Glenn Murphy Jr, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Bob Allen, to name just 5 republican gay sex "scandals")
I think we should judge the politicians for the job they are doing. Too often I see those who yell the loudest against what others do in the bedroom is because they are insecure about their own desires. For me, as long as you don't hold up traffic, you can get a blowjob anywhere you like.
True, we should judge by the job someone is doing. Unfortunately when in the public eye that room to be human is not given, nor can someone be allowed to act as others act it appears. Seems we want those we have up for our scrutiny to be above human frailty and at the very same time we love to tear them down when the chinks show in the armor and the human side comes roaring through.
[2 points]2 years ago by greeneyegirl79ReplyEdited 2 years ago by greeneyegirl79
Imo it is also ethically wrong (I'll leave the word sin to you) to exploit employees, particularly if they are young. A President is, to use an old fashioned term, in loco parentis in relation to interns.
You make a good point Peterf. I guess that is the problem with these instances, exploiting the power, in whatever way it was done it seems to be in ill advisement.
Well, I wouldn't call Monica a prize or reward, but I never understood Bill having any sexual appeal either ;o)
And, I do think people can be victims of their own appetites, whether for sex, food, money, power, etc. anyone can be brought down by their weaknesses.
[1 point]2 years ago by greeneyegirl79ReplyEdited 2 years ago by greeneyegirl79
I wouldn't call Monica or any other human being a "prize" or "reward"! Nor would I be turned on by the prospects of a blowjob if it was given as a "reward". But each to their own...
And we will all be brought down in the end, it is one of the certainties in life. We might as well live it the best we can...
Nor would I really ever call any human a prize or reward, touche. Neither one really fits in with my particular ideal of "sexy," if I was to be in that, um, particular situation.
Hum, a blowjob not being a turn on when given as a "reward", I wonder how many men would feel that way, just saying ;0)
True, in the end we are all "brought down" and can only live life the best we can. But would I say living with a thousands of dollars a week drug habit for example is not pitiable, I don't think I could say that. Is any addiction not really pitiable? We all share that human frailty I suppose, it is what makes us human for lack of a better term. We are all mortal, we are all breakable in physical and emotional ways.
[2 points]2 years ago by greeneyegirl79ReplyEdited 2 years ago by greeneyegirl79
I didn't mean to suggest that you would call any human a prize or reward, I don't think you are that shallow.
It doesn't matter to me how other men or women feel about that. I am not worried about being different and I like the fact that we are all different in some small and insignificant ways.
I feel equally sorry for those who waste their time using drugs and/or going to churches/mosques/synagogues/temples. But I also believe it is their right to waste their life in their pursuit of happiness, as long as they do not push their addiction or religion onto others or bother me with it unnecessarily.
PS. I do not mean to belittle religion by comparing it with a drug addiction (or visa versa) It is just the way I feel about it.
As for the comparison of drug addiction to religion, it is not one I would make, but to each their own like you say. I also ask no one tell someone they cannot attend Church or believe in God as they so choose or force secularism on me unnecessarily.
Sweden
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/13/jefferson.sentencing/index.html
Edited to add:
For those of you that doubt the legitimacy of CNN, here you go....
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/13/ex-rep-jefferson-sentenced-bribery-friday/?test=latestnews
Don't know the details of the case, and am not likely to learn them reading news reports. Since he is a Democrat, it is more likely that he is a victim--IF he is a victim--of GOP hatred.
Bingo!
Don't know about you, but I dislike people giving and taking bribes. I don't care what party they belong to, or their skin color either.
But you must admire Dauguy's splendid steadfastness in not letting her principles (I nearly typed prejudices, but that would be unkind) be overcome by mundane things like facts.
Let us all spread the word; it was a dastardly Republican who planted all those $$$$$$$ in the poor victim's freezer.
AS I said, I do not know the details. But I know that not having facts stops very few around here.
I admire Dauguy for her knowledge and contributions here. And I enjoy reading many of your contributions as well. Her overt bias against big corporations and Republicans is no different then your overt bias against Muslims, Socialist and Greens. The difference is that she usually backs up her opinions with facts.
AS I said, I don't know the details of the case. I know, from this question, that a Democrat is accused of taking bribes. Key word--"accused"--and know that since it is part of the GOP/Democrat death dance, that there will be no real information available.
I too am not in favor of bribes, especially in an economy where the individual cannot compete with corporate money. The playing field is NOT level in that area, is it?
Not just accused but convicted. And there seems an abundance of real information, obtained in detail over a long period.
It seems the story is not part of an inter-party war but about a man who, without scruple, milked his elected office for every cent he could.
True most individuals can not compete with corporations.
The guy was convicted and from the sounds of it correctly so. The initial investigation might have been because he was a Democrat, but that does not take away from the fact that he did accept bribes.
If she DID take a bribe, convict her and jail her. But it really shouldn't be treated like some huge horror, as it is more or less the way things are done these days. By both parties.
And in older days, too. That's why Spiro Agnew resigned from the Vice-Presidency.
The real horror should be reserved for the commonlity of it.
True.
This comment was deleted.
[5 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyWell said. As Nixon was victim of his stupidity and paranoia; Clinton a victim of his libido; Blagojevich a victim of his stupidity and greed. . .
Clinton got a blowjob in the oval office and you call him a victim? ;)
Anyone can be a victim of their sin. The trick is not to let it destroy you.
Getting a blowjob in the oval office is a sin? Where do I sign up for that sin?
It's infidelity against one's wife. It's real clear cut, sinwise. (Is that a word?) Just because it's common doesn't make it OK.
My point was that his sin cost him a lot of political capital and almost cost him the presidency.
If it is a sin, then it is between me, my wife and if she wouldn't a mistress. Then again I do not understand why so many people have the obsession to condemn the sex lives of other consenting adults.
PS, I suspect Republicans don't really care either unless it is a Democrat that is exposed... (like Ted Haggard, Glenn Murphy Jr, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Bob Allen, to name just 5 republican gay sex "scandals")
For me, it was always about integrity, but I may not be typical in that regard.
I don't think it makes much difference, Republican or Democrat. Most have fallen short one time or another.
I think we should judge the politicians for the job they are doing. Too often I see those who yell the loudest against what others do in the bedroom is because they are insecure about their own desires. For me, as long as you don't hold up traffic, you can get a blowjob anywhere you like.
True, we should judge by the job someone is doing. Unfortunately when in the public eye that room to be human is not given, nor can someone be allowed to act as others act it appears. Seems we want those we have up for our scrutiny to be above human frailty and at the very same time we love to tear them down when the chinks show in the armor and the human side comes roaring through.
Imo it is also ethically wrong (I'll leave the word sin to you) to exploit employees, particularly if they are young. A President is, to use an old fashioned term, in loco parentis in relation to interns.
You make a good point Peterf. I guess that is the problem with these instances, exploiting the power, in whatever way it was done it seems to be in ill advisement.
Well, I wouldn't call Monica a prize or reward, but I never understood Bill having any sexual appeal either ;o)
And, I do think people can be victims of their own appetites, whether for sex, food, money, power, etc. anyone can be brought down by their weaknesses.
I wouldn't call Monica or any other human being a "prize" or "reward"! Nor would I be turned on by the prospects of a blowjob if it was given as a "reward". But each to their own...
And we will all be brought down in the end, it is one of the certainties in life. We might as well live it the best we can...
Nor would I really ever call any human a prize or reward, touche. Neither one really fits in with my particular ideal of "sexy," if I was to be in that, um, particular situation.
Hum, a blowjob not being a turn on when given as a "reward", I wonder how many men would feel that way, just saying ;0)
True, in the end we are all "brought down" and can only live life the best we can. But would I say living with a thousands of dollars a week drug habit for example is not pitiable, I don't think I could say that. Is any addiction not really pitiable? We all share that human frailty I suppose, it is what makes us human for lack of a better term. We are all mortal, we are all breakable in physical and emotional ways.
I didn't mean to suggest that you would call any human a prize or reward, I don't think you are that shallow.
It doesn't matter to me how other men or women feel about that. I am not worried about being different and I like the fact that we are all different in some small and insignificant ways.
I feel equally sorry for those who waste their time using drugs and/or going to churches/mosques/synagogues/temples. But I also believe it is their right to waste their life in their pursuit of happiness, as long as they do not push their addiction or religion onto others or bother me with it unnecessarily.
PS. I do not mean to belittle religion by comparing it with a drug addiction (or visa versa) It is just the way I feel about it.
This comment was deleted by greeneyegirl79 .
[1 point] 2 years ago byThank you for not thinking me shallow :0)
As for the comparison of drug addiction to religion, it is not one I would make, but to each their own like you say. I also ask no one tell someone they cannot attend Church or believe in God as they so choose or force secularism on me unnecessarily.
Lol there is no need to thank me. I respectfully ask you keep your religions and drugs out of legislation.