<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/</link>
	<description>Exposing The Low Wattage Of The Liberal Mindset</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2011 03:12:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fascist Hating Fag</title>
		<link>http://www.stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/comment-page-1/#comment-2028</link>
		<dc:creator>Fascist Hating Fag</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 01:02:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/#comment-2028</guid>
		<description>GOP: Gay Old Pedophiles have fare more scandals than the dem&#039;s.  Patheitc to go back over 20 years to get your example of a dem and NOT list the rethugicon scandals during that period.   The con&#039;s have FAR more scandals.

The CON&#039;s gave Vitter a standing ovation *after* he *admitted* to repeated violations of the law - paying prostitutes.  They couldn&#039;t throw Craig under the bus fast enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>GOP: Gay Old Pedophiles have fare more scandals than the dem&#8217;s.  Patheitc to go back over 20 years to get your example of a dem and NOT list the rethugicon scandals during that period.   The con&#8217;s have FAR more scandals.</p>
<p>The CON&#8217;s gave Vitter a standing ovation *after* he *admitted* to repeated violations of the law &#8211; paying prostitutes.  They couldn&#8217;t throw Craig under the bus fast enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/comment-page-1/#comment-2027</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2007 01:17:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/#comment-2027</guid>
		<description>This article is pointless.  If all these scandals took place recently, okay.  But bringing up scandals from 20 years ago, which btw weren&#039;t ignored then, its stupid.  The most recent, William Jefferson, is being handled as Speaker Pelosi removed him from his committee assignments.

It&#039;s true that Democrats arent harassed as much about sexual scandals as Republicans.  Why?  Because Democrats don&#039;t act like they are holier than thou and look down on anyone different than them, whereas the Republicans are OBSESSED with controlling the sexuality of the country.  Small government?  Last time I checked, being for smaller government isn&#039;t supposed to include controling who people can date, marry, and have sex with.  In fact, they want to control what position you have sex in! (support of sodomy laws)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This article is pointless.  If all these scandals took place recently, okay.  But bringing up scandals from 20 years ago, which btw weren&#8217;t ignored then, its stupid.  The most recent, William Jefferson, is being handled as Speaker Pelosi removed him from his committee assignments.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s true that Democrats arent harassed as much about sexual scandals as Republicans.  Why?  Because Democrats don&#8217;t act like they are holier than thou and look down on anyone different than them, whereas the Republicans are OBSESSED with controlling the sexuality of the country.  Small government?  Last time I checked, being for smaller government isn&#8217;t supposed to include controling who people can date, marry, and have sex with.  In fact, they want to control what position you have sex in! (support of sodomy laws)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jan</title>
		<link>http://www.stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/comment-page-1/#comment-2026</link>
		<dc:creator>Jan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:55:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/#comment-2026</guid>
		<description>The GOP is in serious trouble because of &quot;debates&quot; with itself like this one. You don&#039;t even make an attempt at honesty.
Okay, make yourself feel better/  But not facing the Truth is what got you The Thumpin&#039; in 2006.  If this kind of argument is all you have to run on, 2008 is going to be even worse for the GOP.

You name as (quote)  &quot;recent&quot; GOP scandals exactly two.
However, you actually have more than two Republicans who have GONE TO JAIL in the last year.  And you failed to even mention them!
You currently have more than two Republicans under criminal indictment. And you somehow failed to even mention them.
 Are those 2006 GOP arrests and indictments not &quot;recent&quot; enough?

In contrast, there are ZERO arrests with the Democratic &quot;scandals&quot; you list, just the same old-same old &quot;I don&#039;t like Democrats&quot; rumors and inuendos.

 In addition, does being forced to reach all the way back into the friggin&#039; 1980&#039;s HELP your argument, do you think?

Let&#039;s  match Tom Delay with William Jefferson ( although Delay is actually indicted and Jefferson is not).
Other than that, what Democrat in 2008 will you match up with Jack Abramoff in 2008?
With Duke Cunningham in 2008?
With Bob Ney in 2008?
With the entire Alaskan delegation in 2008?

I&#039;m really starting to feel sorry for Republicans. We heard you were going to bring honor and integrity back to government. What this article screams instead is, &quot;Republicans are no less corrupt than Democrats. In fact, if I told you the truth, we&#039;re a lot worse.&quot;

How must it feel these days to be so desperate that you have to go back to the 1980&#039;s for your examples of Democratic corruption? And even at that, you can&#039;t come up with a single Democrat spending retirement in jail like Duke Cunningham is!

And the Clinton Hating? Don&#039;t you think it&#039;s time to grow out of it?   President Clinton&#039;s numbers soared after the GOP impeachment and they haven&#039;t dropped since. And she is currently polling higher than every single Republican Presidential candidate in the race. Bringing back the Clinton Hating is a no-win campaign -- they already spanked y&#039;all numerous times.

But, hey, if you think petty name-calling wins elections, I&#039;ll take it.  The 2006 GOP campaign slogan (&quot;Nancy Pelosi is very, VERY scary!&quot;) was a complete loser.    But, I guess if you have no fiscal discipline, support The Worst President Ever, and expand the government -- what ARE you going to run on...  except maybe  &quot;Democrats have kooties.&quot;

This point of view is just plain sad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The GOP is in serious trouble because of &#8220;debates&#8221; with itself like this one. You don&#8217;t even make an attempt at honesty.<br />
Okay, make yourself feel better/  But not facing the Truth is what got you The Thumpin&#8217; in 2006.  If this kind of argument is all you have to run on, 2008 is going to be even worse for the GOP.</p>
<p>You name as (quote)  &#8220;recent&#8221; GOP scandals exactly two.<br />
However, you actually have more than two Republicans who have GONE TO JAIL in the last year.  And you failed to even mention them!<br />
You currently have more than two Republicans under criminal indictment. And you somehow failed to even mention them.<br />
 Are those 2006 GOP arrests and indictments not &#8220;recent&#8221; enough?</p>
<p>In contrast, there are ZERO arrests with the Democratic &#8220;scandals&#8221; you list, just the same old-same old &#8220;I don&#8217;t like Democrats&#8221; rumors and inuendos.</p>
<p> In addition, does being forced to reach all the way back into the friggin&#8217; 1980&#8242;s HELP your argument, do you think?</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s  match Tom Delay with William Jefferson ( although Delay is actually indicted and Jefferson is not).<br />
Other than that, what Democrat in 2008 will you match up with Jack Abramoff in 2008?<br />
With Duke Cunningham in 2008?<br />
With Bob Ney in 2008?<br />
With the entire Alaskan delegation in 2008?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m really starting to feel sorry for Republicans. We heard you were going to bring honor and integrity back to government. What this article screams instead is, &#8220;Republicans are no less corrupt than Democrats. In fact, if I told you the truth, we&#8217;re a lot worse.&#8221;</p>
<p>How must it feel these days to be so desperate that you have to go back to the 1980&#8242;s for your examples of Democratic corruption? And even at that, you can&#8217;t come up with a single Democrat spending retirement in jail like Duke Cunningham is!</p>
<p>And the Clinton Hating? Don&#8217;t you think it&#8217;s time to grow out of it?   President Clinton&#8217;s numbers soared after the GOP impeachment and they haven&#8217;t dropped since. And she is currently polling higher than every single Republican Presidential candidate in the race. Bringing back the Clinton Hating is a no-win campaign &#8212; they already spanked y&#8217;all numerous times.</p>
<p>But, hey, if you think petty name-calling wins elections, I&#8217;ll take it.  The 2006 GOP campaign slogan (&#8220;Nancy Pelosi is very, VERY scary!&#8221;) was a complete loser.    But, I guess if you have no fiscal discipline, support The Worst President Ever, and expand the government &#8212; what ARE you going to run on&#8230;  except maybe  &#8220;Democrats have kooties.&#8221;</p>
<p>This point of view is just plain sad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: University Update - Diabetes - Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans</title>
		<link>http://www.stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/comment-page-1/#comment-2025</link>
		<dc:creator>University Update - Diabetes - Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/#comment-2025</guid>
		<description>[...] Nile Virus                           Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans &#187;  This Summary is from an article posted at Stuck On Stupid on Wednesday, August 29, 2007    This [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nile Virus                           Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans &#187;  This Summary is from an article posted at Stuck On Stupid on Wednesday, August 29, 2007    This [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: University Update - Tony Blair - Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans</title>
		<link>http://www.stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/comment-page-1/#comment-2024</link>
		<dc:creator>University Update - Tony Blair - Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:10:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stuckon-stupid.com/2007/08/29/political-scandals-democrats-vs-republicans/#comment-2024</guid>
		<description>[...] Clark                           Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans &#187;  This Summary is from an article posted at Stuck On Stupid on Wednesday, August 29, 2007    This [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Clark                           Political Scandals: Democrats vs. Republicans &#187;  This Summary is from an article posted at Stuck On Stupid on Wednesday, August 29, 2007    This [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

