Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/11/08 01:11 AM, Musician wrote: Who cares? seriously? I'll never understand all the fuss about paying for sex.

Of course that's the line you're going to use, because the person we're talking about is a Democrat.

I wonder what results someone would have if they checked your post history to find what you've said about similar scandals involving Republicans.

At 3/11/08 01:15 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Of course that's the line you're going to use, because the person we're talking about is a Democrat.

I wonder what results someone would have if they checked your post history to find what you've said about similar scandals involving Republicans.

I did make a comment on Larry Craig once you know, but his case is completely different. He spent his entire political career vehemently speaking out against homosexuals, so when he was caught, it wasn't so much about the sex, it was more about the hypocrisy.

At 3/11/08 01:13 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: For fuck sake, Elliot Spitzer came into office under the banner of ethics reform, he lead a quest against prostitution rings, he was touted by Democrats as the antithesis to the corrupt Republicans.

Did he now? I'd like to see a source for that.

At 3/11/08 01:21 AM, Musician wrote:

At 3/11/08 01:13 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: For fuck sake, Elliot Spitzer came into office under the banner of ethics reform, he lead a quest against prostitution rings, he was touted by Democrats as the antithesis to the corrupt Republicans.

Did he now? I'd like to see a source for that.

I don't want to intrude on cellardoor, but I found this while reading an article on msnbc.com.

"His cases as attorney general included criminal prosecutions of prostitution rings and tourism involving prostitutes. In 2004, he was part of an investigation of an escort service in New York City that resulted in the arrests of 18 people on charges of promoting prostitution and related charges."

At 3/11/08 01:20 AM, Musician wrote:

At 3/11/08 01:15 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Of course that's the line you're going to use, because the person we're talking about is a Democrat.

I wonder what results someone would have if they checked your post history to find what you've said about similar scandals involving Republicans.

I did make a comment on Larry Craig once you know, but his case is completely different. He spent his entire political career vehemently speaking out against homosexuals

And Elliot Spitzer made his career vehemently speaking out against (and presoecuting) prostitution rings and touting ethics form etc..

so when he was caught, it wasn't so much about the sex, it was more about the hypocrisy.

LOL!

And Elliot Spitzer isn't a hypocrite even though he prosecuted prostitution rings and now got caught partaking in the very illegal/immoral practice he prosecuted others for doing?

At 3/11/08 01:21 AM, Musician wrote:

Did he now? I'd like to see a source for that.

BAM.

In 2004, then-New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer announced criminal charges against 16 alleged members of a profitable prostitution ring based in Staten Island.

"This was a sophisticated and lucrative operation with a multi-tiered management structure," Spitzer said at the time. "It was, however, nothing more than a prostitution ring, and now its owners and operators will be held accountable."

It was one of the many cases brought by Spitzer's office that helped develop his reputation as a tough-on-crime moral crusader, and one of at least two prostitution cases he oversaw.

------------

Do some research next time! Holy hell I can't believe you allow yourself to get owned so often.

Spitzer did ride in on the mantle of being a hard-ass prosecutor with strong ethics and the ability to clean up Albany. I always thought something like this would happen, and I'm so glad it did, because it's hilarious.

At 3/11/08 01:49 AM, JMHX wrote: Spitzer did ride in on the mantle of being a hard-ass prosecutor with strong ethics and the ability to clean up Albany. I always thought something like this would happen, and I'm so glad it did, because it's hilarious.

that's what I'm saying!

it isn't about double standards or hypocrites in office, it's just ironic and entertaining to see this kind of stuff.

Unlike Craig or Vitter, though, Spitzer will resign, probably by the end of the week.

At 3/11/08 02:00 AM, JMHX wrote: Unlike Craig or Vitter, though, Spitzer will resign, probably by the end of the week.

as a new yorker, I feel almost sad about this because aside from this, he hasn't been too bad of a governor.

his budgets were reasonable, he was trying to get some life into some of the depressed economies and until now, he hasn't really made too big of an ass of himself. He seemed like an all right fellow.

My only qualm is with his continuing to ignore the medecaid/medicare situation.

In NY the government reimbursements for medicaid and medicare run down like this:
federal government: 50% of the cost
State government: 25% of the cost
County governments: 25% of the cost

This is (I think) the only case in the country like this. the rest of the states reimburse 50% from fed. and 50% from the state government.

what this has done to NY is make medicaid/medicare giant chunks of county budgets, putting a lot of strain on retirement/poor regions of the state, and even bankrupting some counties (I'm thinking Niagra, but I can't be certain). local property taxes in rural areas are skyrocketing not only because of second home owners from New Jersey and downstate, but because of these giant county budgets which are basically out of the counties control because it's all based on the medicaid/medicare needs.

At 3/11/08 01:30 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: BAM.

Do some research next time! Holy hell I can't believe you allow yourself to get owned so often.

How exactly did you own me? I never claimed that he hadn't prosecuted a prostitution ring, I only asked you to provide a source, but you're so incredibly eager to leap at someones throat at any opportunity, that you completely disregarded that and turned your post into a personal attack. You know cellar, I've actually come to expect this kind of illegitimate mud-slinging from you.

Let me ask you a question: Do you ever wonder why everyone here loathes your guts? Do you ever wonder why you won Most Overrated Poster 2007 on the politics board, and Drama Queen 2007 in general?

Ever notice how you accuse others of ad hominem, yet almost 75% of your average post is dedicated to irrelevant personal attacks?

Ever notice that you're the ONLY poster here who thinks linking to old debates is a valid debate tactic?

Ever notice, how you NEVER EVER think you're wrong? How even in the face of undeniable facts, you won't yeild even an inch of your position?

I wonder if you feel proud copying and pasting the exact same argument into every discussion you've ever been in. Does it give you a tingly feeling inside as you work yourself into a red, sweaty rage, arguing with teenagers online? Does it make you feel like a big man when you aggressively attack anyone who's world view differs even slightly from yours?

Do you ever consider the fact that everyone on this board LOATHES your guts? How even the mods think of you as a pest? Do you ever consider how destructive you've been to this forum, driving away new and old members away with your incessant trolling?

Because I'm curious why you even stay here.

At 3/11/08 02:15 AM, Musician wrote: Because I'm curious why you even stay here.

I think it's because he always has people like you saying all this stuff he's heard a million times and probably never stops being amused by to say it over and over, and make him feel ever so important.

Another governor scandal? At least I can console myself that it wasn't Jersey this time...though if Corzine wants to quit...I won't cry.

At 3/11/08 02:15 AM, Musician wrote:

At 3/11/08 01:30 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: BAM.

Do some research next time! Holy hell I can't believe you allow yourself to get owned so often.

How exactly did you own me?

I alluded that you are a hypocrite and you judge this situation differently because of your political bias. Thus showing what is typical among liberals with regards to scandals like this.

Elliot Spitzer is a democrat, therefore you, being a liberal, downplayed the significance of this scandal because of your political loyalty. I was revealing the double standard in this issue, your own views of this issue are based your assimilation of that type of larger political mindset.

You suggested that you aren't hypocritical and don't have a double-standard when you said:

At 3/11/08 01:20 AM, Musician wrote:

I did make a comment on Larry Craig once you know, but his case is completely different. He spent his entire political career vehemently speaking out against homosexuals, so when he was caught, it wasn't so much about the sex, it was more about the hypocrisy.

-----

This is hilarious because Elliot Spitzer's situation isn't "completely different" because that "hypocrisy" factor you talk about with Larry Craig exists now in this current scandal.

Spitzer prosecuted prostitution rings, the banner of his political life is of being a squeaky-clean ethics reformer. And now he's caught up in a scandal, having practiced and SUPPORTED the very illegal activity he prosecuted and took a moral/legal stance against. And yet, liberals are now either defending him, trying to divert attention away from the situation, or completely minimizing it as if it's not a big deal at all.

He's a hypocrite, and YOU and other liberals are hypocrites, for downplaying this particular scandal, after having condemned Republicans for doing similar things.

You got owned.

I never claimed that he hadn't prosecuted a prostitution ring, I only asked you to provide a source

You said:

At 3/11/08 01:21 AM, Musician wrote: Did he now? I'd like to see a source for that.

-----

Thus showing you put that claim in doubt. Either that, or as also typical of you, you rushed to judgment (or lack of judgment) without having any clue about the actual situation. This would further validate the point that the fact he's a democrat cause you to judge the situation differently. You didn't even attempt do any research before giving him a de facto defense by creating an end-all moral statement on prostitution in general when you said:

At 3/11/08 01:11 AM, Musician wrote: Who cares? seriously? I'll never understand all the fuss about paying for sex.

--------

but you're so incredibly eager to leap at someones throat at any opportunity, that you completely disregarded that and turned your post into a personal attack. You know cellar, I've actually come to expect this kind of illegitimate mud-slinging from you.

I've come to expect this pathetic, cowardly, delusional denial mode that you tend to devolve into when you get owned, as you always do. Since you can't even address the topic anymore because it's been established that you're completely full of shit, you have to divert attention to me to help you cope.

Let me ask you a question: Do you ever wonder why everyone here loathes your guts?

Do you ever wonder why the people who claim to loathe my guts are always people like you who get humiliated in arguments against me? Notice how the people like you who create several off-topic paragraphs out of the blue as a moral referendum on my behavior tend to do it immediately after they get embarrassed in a political issue?

Do you ever wonder why you won Most Overrated Poster 2007 on the politics board, and Drama Queen 2007 in general?

Do you think that the opinion of people like you bothers me?

Ever notice how you accuse others of ad hominem, yet almost 75% of your average post is dedicated to irrelevant personal attacks?

You notice how you've completely ceased talking about the subject, and now have dedicated an entire post about me personally, thus completely voiding your argument and revealing another example of how hypocritical you are? You stopped talking about the topic, and in this rant you have about me personally, you have the audacity to say that my posts are dedicated to "irrelevant personal attacks". Lol you're hilarious.

Ever notice that you're the ONLY poster here who thinks linking to old debates is a valid debate tactic?

It's a valid tactic when that it's a person like you who does the exact same thing he did in a prior argument in which he got thoroughly disproved. Bringing up proof of prior arguments is a good way to keep people like you in check when you think you can use the convenience of time and people's forgetfulness to make false statements and take false stances.

Ever notice, how you NEVER EVER think you're wrong? How even in the face of undeniable facts, you won't yeild even an inch of your position?

Lol, notice how since you know you've embarrassed yourself again, you create an intentionally deceptive argument, suggesting I've argued against "undeniable facts" when you know that's bullshit?

See, this would be a good time for me to post a link to one of our arguments where YOU kept arguing something after you were already completely disproved, to show how hypocritical and full of lies you ALWAYS are.

Because I'm curious why you even stay here.

Because I enjoy watching delusional retards like you squirm.

At 3/11/08 01:11 AM, Malachy wrote: I find it more entertaining when it's a republican because of their seemingly "moral high ground" over the other parties because of their conservative Christian values. When it's a democrat it's like "well, at least they admitted to it this time"

At least the Republicans are consistant overall.

Republican stances:

-Bill Clinton, you need to step down because of this sex scandal.
-Larry Greig, you need to step down because of this sex scandal.
-Spitzer, you need to step down because of this sex scandal.

Democrat stances:

-Bill Clinton's sex scandal doesn't affect his job.
-Larry Greig, you need to step down because of this sex scandal.
-Spitzer's sex scandal means nothing compared to the good he's done.

At 3/11/08 03:20 AM, Memorize wrote:

At 3/11/08 01:11 AM, Malachy wrote:

Republican stances:

-Bill Clinton, you need to step down because of this sex scandal.
-Larry Greig, you need to step down because of this sex scandal.
-Spitzer, you need to step down because of this sex scandal.

- Newt Gingrich, let's make you Speaker of the House.
- Bob Livingston, let's let you investigate Bill Clinton's adultery.
- David Vitter, let's discuss your chances as Governor of Louisiana.
- Mark Foley, let's try and hide this until after the elections.

conspiracy theory:

Spitzer, annoyed that such prostitution rings still exist, wanted to take it down the best way he could. He took one for the team, he pretended to be a client and he solicited sex (purely to help stop the ring) and he made sure he got caught, bringing the ring into the light of the media and giving it a scape goat who can now be prosecuted and convictions will follow, whereas if he left it, the other clients may not have been caught as soon as he did and it would take much longer for an arrest to be made.

that's right, I just made spitzer a christ figure.

seriously, if you douchebags don't notice this joke and have already hit the "reply with quote" button, I hope to god you make a fool of yourself when you hit the "Post it! >" button.

At 3/11/08 12:27 PM, Malachy wrote:

seriously, if you douchebags don't notice this joke and have already hit the "reply with quote" button, I hope to god you make a fool of yourself when you hit the "Post it! >" button.

Well now you just went and ruined that one :)

musician DID quit postin...

lol, why cant american politicans keep it in thair pants?

Here's what I find funny (as for how "bad" it is... well aside from the fact that hiring a prostitute outside of Nevada state sanctioned establishments is well...illegal - if he did it the Clinton way it would have been perfectly legal - I don't think this kind of thing impacts someone's stance or productivity in office, never has never will)...anyway.. the hilarious thing is about a month ago he was on The Daily Show and declared that his Super Delegate vote was going to Hillary no ifs and or buts. She had the same moral fiber as he did and he liked what she did for him and the state of NY. I'm just thinking, not that I'm pro or anti-clinton, that JESUS MAN KEEP IT IN YOUR PANTS FOR LIKE 3 MORE MONTHS! (And yes that should be screamed at him by someone)

However, it brings up an odd question I never thought I would ask, let alone think. Does this mean, since he had already pledged his delegate ticket to Clinton that whoever replaces him does the same, votes their own way OR (my personal favorite) Obama should break out a super delegate of his own with some sort of stupidly mistimed sex scandal? Maybe Eleanor Holmes Norton you know... gettin jiggy wit it.

hehehe

When Spitzer resigns, he will no longer be a Super Delegate. The black Lt. Governor has talked positively of Obama in the past, so he may get a Super Delegate out of it.

At 3/11/08 04:10 PM, JMHX wrote: When Spitzer resigns, he will no longer be a Super Delegate. The black Lt. Governor has talked positively of Obama in the past, so he may get a Super Delegate out of it.

he's also mostly blind.

so you associate him as a black man rather than a blind man? Racist!

At 3/11/08 10:25 AM, JMHX wrote:

- Newt Gingrich, let's make you Speaker of the House.
- Bob Livingston, let's let you investigate Bill Clinton's adultery.
- David Vitter, let's discuss your chances as Governor of Louisiana.
- Mark Foley, let's try and hide this until after the elections.

And yet... that still does do jack shit to what I said.

Congrats.

At 3/11/08 11:29 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 3/11/08 10:25 AM, JMHX wrote:

- Newt Gingrich, let's make you Speaker of the House.
- Bob Livingston, let's let you investigate Bill Clinton's adultery.
- David Vitter, let's discuss your chances as Governor of Louisiana.
- Mark Foley, let's try and hide this until after the elections.

And yet... that still does do jack shit to what I said.

Congrats.

Not really. He's saying that Republicans, like Democrats, have strong loyalty to their party.

I don't care what party you're in, you will support politicians that did wrong by saying how they did good over their downfall.

Especially people like Karl Rove who does nothing BUT hide political scandal, and somehow find it ok for him to be on his high horse as he smashes the Democrats, for such things as being heathens, non-Patriots, anti-American, etc.

Why didn't he go to Nevada, it's legal there.

At 3/12/08 08:26 AM, ThePretenders wrote: Why didn't he go to Nevada, it's legal there.

Well, the main issue is that he was traveling across state borders with a prostitute. Aside from prostitution being illegal in New York, of course. But thats why the feds are dealing with him and not simply the NY Attorney General.

He was going to pick the woman up in New York State and then travel to Washington D.C. with her (paying her for the travel as well)

So, even if he picked a prostitute up in Nevada, by traveling out of state, he would have still broken the law.

http://www.yahoo.com/s/829793

It's official.

I wouldn't have considered this one not a scandal were it not for his previous work in busting up prostitution rings.

I don't know if he ever explicitly declared himself a person of high moral standards, but the whole "charging people for something that you are later involved in" deal is not cool.

At 3/12/08 12:11 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: http://www.yahoo.com/s/829793

It's official.

it is pretty interesting that the lt. gov. position will remain vacant until the next election, and that Joseph Bruno would work as acting governor whenever Paterson is out of state or incapacitated.

At 3/12/08 01:16 PM, Malachy wrote: Joseph Bruno would work as acting governor whenever Paterson is out of state or incapacitated.

Oh no

*face palms*

At 3/12/08 09:05 AM, Malachy wrote:

At 3/12/08 08:26 AM, ThePretenders wrote:

So, even if he picked a prostitute up in Nevada, by traveling out of state, he would have still broken the law.

The Mann Act.

But, what prosecuters are wondering now is, how he paid for this transaction and if it wasn't from some government slush fund.