Republicans/Tea Partiers Gone Wild

**joepistole** · 08-20-12, 06:18 PM

After taking the nation to the brink of financial disaster, Republican/Tea Party congressmen party like rock stars in the Holy Land.

“While on one of those phoney-baloney AIPAC “fact-finding junkets” vacation thingys in the Holy Land, a bunch of Republicans were partying like it was 29 AD, got ripped to the gills on Manischewitz (Jewish Zima) and next thing you know clothes were flying off and everyone was a’splishing and a’splashing in the throes of some kind of sex-rapture aquatic-orgy in the sacred water upon which Jesus once moon-walked. First in to Shrinkage City was Kevin Yoder who showed the Middle East and other Congress-people’s families what it’s like to rock out with your xxxx out.” - Fire Dog Lake

http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2012/08...unks-his-junk/

I think we have to appreciate all the good humor our Republican/Tea Party fellows bring to us on regular basis. However, it would be nice if they could spend at least as much time doing something more relevant to their profession and something that could help the nation like some practical courses in applied ethics.

If their fact finding mission was so important to the nation, it should have been paid for by the US taxpayer and not a special interest group. Additionally, would it be too much to ask our Republican/Tea Party brothers and sisters to act with decorum when overseas on public business.

**spidergoat** · 08-20-12, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by joepistole

After taking the nation...

I hate these guys as much as anyone, but I'm not sure why I should care about them drinking and swimming on vacation.

**joepistole** · 08-20-12, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

I hate these guys as much as anyone, but I'm not sure why I should care about them drinking and swimming on vacation.

It's the hypocrisy Spider. These guys represent themselves as better than the rest of us, more moral, God's favored. Lasts time I checked, I have never heard a Christian pastor advocate getting naked in mixed company and partying like a rock star.

**spidergoat** · 08-20-12, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by joepistole

It's the hypocrisy Spider. These guys represent themselves as better than the rest of us, more moral, God's favored. Lasts time I checked, I have never heard a Christian pastor advocate getting naked in mixed company and partying like a rock star.

Not sure what's immoral about it.

**Pandaemoni** · 08-20-12, 09:01 PM

But it was only the one guy who was actually naked? And Eric Cantor chastised them for it? Yoder can be rebuked for his antics (I'm not sure if he "should be" as I have certainly shown worse judgement, on occasion), but I'm not sure why Cantor found "swimming while intoxicated" to be untoward. Having fun while drunk isn't against the rules where I went to church. I suppose "party like a rock star" sounds bad, but surely that's more spin than substance.

Were any of them hardcore evangelicals or Mormons? (As at least they do, so far as I understand it, have rules against drinking.)

**Balerion** · 08-20-12, 09:19 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

Not sure what's immoral about it.

Nothing. This is the same kind of mountain-via-molehill nonsense that the left always complains about.

**joepistole** · 08-20-12, 11:46 PM

What if President Obama visited Israel, got drunk, got naked, and went partying in a holy place? Do you think this is acceptable behavior for our officials when they go overseas?

**Balerion** · 08-21-12, 12:02 AM

Originally Posted by joepistole

What if President Obama visited Israel, got drunk, got naked, and went partying in a holy place? Do you think this is acceptable behavior for our officials when they go overseas?

You're not comparing like with like, but I would personally have no problem with Obama getting nutty on vacation. You don't think he wants to let loose every once in a while? And what the hell does it being a holy place matter?

**joepistole** · 08-21-12, 12:11 AM

Originally Posted by Balerion

You're not comparing like with like, but I would personally have no problem with Obama getting nutty on vacation. You don't think he wants to let loose every once in a while? And what the hell does it being a holy place matter?

Oh, it is not like to like? Congress is a branch of our government. Congressmen are high government official, they are the heads of one branch of our government and who often travel to meet foreign leaders and discuss foreign and other policy issues with other states. The President is the head of the executive branch.

There is a difference between getting naked and swimming in holy places and going nutty on vacation and doing it when you are on duty, on official business. How would you like it if your employees got drunk and win skinny dipping in your neighbor’s pool? These Congressmen were not on vacation. They were on an official fact finding mission.

It is one thing to get nutty on vacation. It is quite another when you are on official business of state. These guys are representing The United States of America on an official fact finding mission. So you don’t mind if representatives of our country go to another country in an official capacity and act like asses? Ok. That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. But I find it rather embarrassing.

**Balerion** · 08-21-12, 12:42 AM

Originally Posted by joepistole

Oh, it is not like to like? Congress is a branch of our government. Congressmen are high government official, they are the heads of one branch of our government and who often travel to meet foreign leaders and discuss foreign and other policy issues with other states. The President is the head of the executive branch.

The president is the face of the nation. A freshman Congressman isn't. Also, if Obama travels to Israel, he's there on our dime, so any extracurricular activities could be construed as how he's deciding to spend taxpayer money. As you said, this group's trip was privately-funded.

There is a difference between getting naked and swimming in holy places and going nutty on vacation and doing it when you are on duty, on official business.

They weren't on duty, they were relaxing after dinner. Nor were they there on any "official" business whatsoever. They were there for AIPAC, which is an Israeli lobbying group, not a governmental department.

How would you like it if your employees got drunk and win skinny dipping in your neighbor’s pool?

Not even remotely the same thing as what happened here.

These Congressmen were not on vacation. They were on an official fact finding mission.

Or as the AIPAC calls it, "a vacation." C'mon, man, they all brought their families with them and everything. If you want to complain about something, complain that the AIPAC is allowed to fund all-expenses paid vacations to Israel for elected officials under the thin guise of "fact-finding missions."

It is one thing to get nutty on vacation. It is quite another when you are on official business of state.

I don't necessarily agree, but they were not on official state business.

These guys are representing The United States of America on an official fact finding mission. So you don’t mind if representatives of our country go to another country in an official capacity and act like asses? Ok. That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. But I find it rather embarrassing.

Again, you're knocking down strawmen. This was not official US government business. This was an AIPAC funded vacation. And no, I have no problem with them getting loose overseas. Even if it were official business, they were partying after dinner, which is their own time. And I don't care what they do on their own time.

**Repo Man** · 08-21-12, 01:14 AM

I think Joe is getting off message. It isn't so much a matter of how bad this was, it's a matter of how badly Republicans would lose it if it were democrats who had done it. Sort of like imagining if a Democrat president had given a press pass, to a "reporter", who only asked the softest of softball questions, and then turned out to be a male prostitute. If it had been a democrat, I imagine it would have rivaled the Lewinsky scandal. But who remembers Jeff Gannon now?

**joepistole** · 08-21-12, 02:36 AM

Originally Posted by Balerion

The president is the face of the nation. A freshman Congressman isn't. Also, if Obama travels to Israel, he's there on our dime, so any extracurricular activities could be construed as how he's deciding to spend taxpayer money. As you said, this group's trip was privately-funded.
They weren't on duty, they were relaxing after dinner. Nor were they there on any "official" business whatsoever. They were there for AIPAC, which is an Israeli lobbying group, not a governmental department.
Not even remotely the same thing as what happened here.
Or as the AIPAC calls it, "a vacation." C'mon, man, they all brought their families with them and everything. If you want to complain about something, complain that the AIPAC is allowed to fund all-expenses paid vacations to Israel for elected officials under the thin guise of "fact-finding missions."
I don't necessarily agree, but they were not on official state business.
Again, you're knocking down strawmen. This was not official US government business. This was an AIPAC funded vacation. And no, I have no problem with them getting loose overseas. Even if it were official business, they were partying after dinner, which is their own time. And I don't care what they do on their own time.

You are wrong on a number of issues; first fact-finding missions are considered official congressional business. The fact that they take family members with them does not change the fact that it is official business of Congress.

“Members of Congress make fact-finding missions to learn about other countries and stay informed, but these outings can cause controversy if the trip is deemed excessive or unconnected with the task of governing. For example, the Wall Street Journal reported lawmaker trips abroad at taxpayer expense, which included spas, $300-per-night extra unused rooms, and shopping excursions.[168] Lawmakers respond that "traveling with spouses compensates for being away from them a lot in Washington" and justify the trips as a way to meet officials in other nations.” - Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress

Two you need to brush up on the meaning of a straw man.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I did not misrepresent the position of an opponent, I merely pointed out some obvious errors. Two there were more than freshmen congressmen in attendance. Eric Cantor was there too. Is Eric Cantor a junior congressman? No. What I find interesting here is that you don’t have any qualms about our law makers going to foreign lands and acting like asses. How would you feel if Israel's law makers came here and acted like asses?

**Buddha12** · 08-21-12, 06:50 AM

Swimming is allowed in the Sea of Galilee by anyone. I have a big problem not knowing much about when the Democrats go on there "junkets" as to their behavior because the media never brings their agenda up at all. Fair and balanced media, baloney, the media is only trying to find anything wrong with the Republicans they can and turn their heads when Democrats do something foolish.

**joepistole** · 08-21-12, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by Buddha12

Swimming is allowed in the Sea of Galilee by anyone. I have a big problem not knowing much about when the Democrats go on there "junkets" as to their behavior because the media never brings their agenda up at all. Fair and balanced media, baloney, the media is only trying to find anything wrong with the Republicans they can and turn their heads when Democrats do something foolish.

Is naked swimming is allowed? NO. It is not. Your partisan stripes are showing.

Oh, now the infamous “liberal media” is responsible. Ok here is your big chance to prove the big bad “liberal media” exists. Show us where Democrats have done similar things while on fact-finding missions? If you cannot, are you suggesting that the media is obligated to create fiction in the interest of bipartisanship? If that is the case, is Fox News, Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, et al. going to be similarly obligated?

**~~Gustav~~** · 08-21-12, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by Balerion

...AIPAC........AIPAC.....AIPAC.....AIPAC.....

that mantra is misplaced, just flat out wrong and obviously pulled out of your ass
aief was the sponsor. a lobby such as aipac is not allowed to directly sponsor trips but does so thru other means

Originally Posted by Balerion

I have no problem with them getting loose overseas. Even if it were official business, they were partying after dinner, which is their own time. And I don't care what they do on their own time.

cant say i blame you. others however tend to put an adult spin on the events rather than insisting it was akin to some frat boys on spring break. for instance.....

A Cantor spokesman confirmed that the majority leader dressed down his Republican colleagues and that a staffer was later interviewed by FBI agents.

“Twelve months ago, [Cantor] dealt with this immediately and effectively to ensure such activities would not take place in the future,” said Doug Heye, Cantor’s deputy chief of staff.

Heye added: “Last year, a staffer was contacted by the Bureau [FBI], which had several questions, the staffer answered those questions and that appears to have been the end of it.”

...but i get it that shit like that simply does not compute with you

/pats

**~~Gustav~~** · 08-21-12, 10:04 AM

so ahh.. around the same time 26 dems took aief's blood money and flitted over to israel where.......

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, who is leading a congressional delegation on a week-long trip to Israel, broke with U.S. policy on Thursday and said the Jewish state should be allowed to build in disputed East Jerusalem.

Just two days after the State Department blasted Israel’s recent authorization of additional housing construction in the eastern section of the holy city, Hoyer told POLITICO in an interview that he sees the area as a Jewish neighborhood that must be expanded to accommodate growth.

skinny dipping drunk in the galilee would have been eminently more preferable
i say hang for treason

**Buddha12** · 08-21-12, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by joepistole

Is naked swimming is allowed? NO. It is not. Your partisan stripes are showing.

Oh, now the infamous “liberal media” is responsible. Ok here is your big chance to prove the big bad “liberal media” exists. Show us where Democrats have done similar things while on fact-finding missions? If you cannot, are you suggesting that the media is obligated to create fiction in the interest of bipartisanship? If that is the case, is Fox News, Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, et al. going to be similarly obligated?

I'm just fed up with the media always bringing up trival bullshit when Republicans do something off the wall but rarely do I see the same upheavel when Democrats are found doing the same thing or something similar, which is a rare event since the media is biased. Since I do not pay for cable I'm not getting any "news" from Limbaugh,Hannity or Levin so I can't comment about their views very well. I'm only saturated with CBS, NBC and CBS , which, to me, are very biased going with the support of Democrats for the most part. I don't watch it that often but whenever I do I do not see many negative things about Democrats on those stations. Hell even Jay Leno and Conan are never telling many jokes about Obama but still talk about Bush, amazing isn't it?

As to showing about what the Democrats do, I can't really come up with their nonsense as easily because the media doesn't say much against them, interesting isn't it?

**joepistole** · 08-21-12, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by Buddha12

I'm just fed up with the media always bringing up trival bullshit when Republicans do something off the wall but rarely do I see the same upheavel when Democrats are found doing the same thing or something similar, which is a rare event since the media is biased. Since I do not pay for cable I'm not getting any "news" from Limbaugh,Hannity or Levin so I can't comment about their views very well. I'm only saturated with CBS, NBC and CBS , which, to me, are very biased going with the support of Democrats for the most part. I don't watch it that often but whenever I do I do not see many negative things about Democrats on those stations. Hell even Jay Leno and Conan are never telling many jokes about Obama but still talk about Bush, amazing isn't it?

As to showing about what the Democrats do, I can't really come up with teir nonsense as easily because the media doesn't say much against them, interesting isn't it?

Is it triviality or the fact that you don’t like what you are hearing that bothers you? Just because you don’t hear something it does not follow that something exists. Maybe you are not hearing something, not because of bias, but because it doesn’t exist or it doesn’t exist in equal quantity?

You have concluded that the media you hear is biased, the magical mystical liberal media is behind every fault in the Republican Party in your mind. But you cannot support your notion with evidence, so just maybe your conclusion is wrong. Conclusions should be based on evidence, and you have none.

News organizations are businesses, they sell news. They are biased toward what sells. The media is biased towards sensationalism regardless of party affiliation. So if Republicans present more comedic/sensational opportunities, the media is going to pick up on it. And you are going to see it in their programming. So just because you see one party being reported more for silliness, it does not mean the media is biased against them. It is because they are silly.

And some media organizations are deliberately peddling to a specific audience (Fox, Clear Channel, MSNBC and CNBC, etc.) versus the broader news market and selling a specific agenda. Those are definitely biased sources. I view news from a variety of sources. But here is where I draw the line. When news is created out thin air, when facts are created to suit the political need; that is where I draw the line. And that happens all the time in the conservative media (e.g. Fox, Clear Channel, et al.). You don’t see that in news sources like MSNBC or CNBC.

**Buddha12** · 08-21-12, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by joepistole

You have made conclusion that the media you hear is biased, the liberal media. But you cannot support your notion with evidence, so just maybe your conclusion is wrong. Conclusions should be based on evidence, and you have none.

News organizations are businesses, they sell news. They are biased toward what sells. The CNBC.

I really don't need to support what is already known to millions of people.

As I said the media is biased, I guess you didn't understand me very well. What use to sell was things citizens needed to know about not this kind of trival crap.

**joepistole** · 08-21-12, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by Buddha12

I really don't need to support what is already known to millions of people.

As I said the media is biased, I guess you didn't understand me very well. What use to sell was things citizens needed to know about not this kind of trival crap.

Originally Posted by Buddha12

I really don't need to support what is already known to millions of people.
As I said the media is biased, I guess you didn't understand me very well. What use to sell was things citizens needed to know about not this kind of trival crap.

Yes you have said it well; you don’t need evidence and reason to support your biases. You are going to believe whatever you want to be regardless of reality. Anything that runs contrary to your biases is obviously a liberal socialist media plot. You have that in common with millions of fellow conseratives.