Virginia as a harbenger of bad times ahead

Better go back and check out that story. As Attorney General of Virginia Cuccinelli was using the sodomy statute to prosecute child molesters, just like 47 other cases prosecuted by democratic AGs before him. Don't you believe in prosecuting child molesters? I guess those democrats were puritans as well. Read about the case in point and realize that you have been suckered. Some of you got sucked voluntarily and I'm sure that others didn't know.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-in-teen-case/

Cuccinelli was going after a 47 year old man who had sex with a 17 year old girl using the sodomy law. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Cuccinelli makes his real agenda pretty clear. he doesn't give a fuck about that sodomy case.

http://m.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/0...al-sex-sodomy?

Cuccinelli made clear that he objected to oral and anal sex (at least between gay people) on principle, telling the Virginian-Pilot, "My view is that homosexual acts—not homosexuality, but homosexual acts—are wrong. They're intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law-based country it's appropriate to have policies that reflect that...They don't comport with natural law."

But I would welcome Old T to post some relevant facts supporting his opinion that Cuccinelli is to the right of the Taliban (on social or other issues) ! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I'm not quite sure how you provide "facts" to "prove" where a person stands on an ill defined, subjective "left/right" scale. Prove to me the Taliban's score to 4 decimal places and I will gladly then give you Coccie's score. But you know your call for "proof" is specious--and you don't care.

Truth alert!!! Note the sentence above. "he used the sodomy law to go after child molesters" Now note the next important sentence, "....he would NEVER use the same tool to hunt down gay men". According to these sentences Cuccinelli has NOT used the sodomy laws to go after gay men. Understand that. He has NOT but they are afraid, and have been saying, that he has. IT is a bald faced lie to say that he did. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

IB's inability to read is rubbing off on you. Try reading my posts again. I was relaying the OPINIONS of the people at the dinner party, including a number of Cuccinelli's own party. People who know him better than I do--and I'm sure they know him a hell of a lot better than you do. People who hear his rhetoric and see what he does behind the scenes. Yes, I trust their opinions of him--which is what I said. Unlike you who probably base your opinions strictly upon which party he is running on. According to multiple people I do trust, the man can't make a cogent argument for anything without a bible quote as his reason for supporting or opposing a political point. Yep, that does sound just like a lot of the mullahs out there, don't you think? Or are you saying that if they quote YOUR preferred translation of YOUR preferred religious book it's just fine to have a theocracy?

Why is he persecuting particular acts, rather than prosecuting UNDERAGE sex?

That apparently is fine with him, because, you know, they are having biblically-correct sex.

Instead, he goes after the blowjobs and the anal sex so he has tools to persecute gays while letting straight vaginal sex slide through.

Cuccinelli tried to get the sodomy law back on the books using "protect children" as an excuse. Originally Posted by ExNYer

How dare you say those mean things about a good upstanding Thumper? Myopic JD doesn't want to hear such things about Cuccie. Bad Ex! Bad Ex!

I'm just waiting for the day that the homophobe, homohater Cuccinelli is caught with a gay prostitute in a YMCA--just like so many of his Thumper preacher friends. He has all the earmarks of the prototypical clone of Ted Haggard, Eddie Long (who screamed to execute homosexuals), Paul Barnes, et. al.

doh!!! ...double post

doh!!! ...double post Originally Posted by JCM800

Yep. Looks like the system bogged down. I posted the one above a while ago and it finally showed up.

But your point was worth making twice even if you did. Cuccie is a Thumper, and neither Dizzy nor JD have any problem with that since he's a "conservative" Thumper. They are all for Big Brother so long as Big Brother thumps the right version of the bible and runs as a Republican.

That theocrat of a political candidate hates gays (excuse me, he doesn't hate them, he just thinks they are "unnatural") and thinks they should be prosecuted because it violates Cuccie's sensitivities--at least the ones he professes in public.

He has appointed himself as a higher moral authority than the supreme court on this point. He lies about why he does it. He thinks he has a god given (literally) mandate to make VA safe for heterosexuals, English speakers, and who knows what else. Safe on his terms of course.

Cuccie could clear this all up by (1) pushing to simplify the law (aren't RWWs all in favor of simple laws?) to say "adults having sex with minors is wrong", and (2) comprehending that the US is not a Theocracy.

But Dizzy and JD see nothing wrong with that. They see nothing wrong with bad laws because they trust the government to know when to apply them and when not to--isn't that their perspective on government? You mean it's NOT?!?!?!? I'm truly shocked! Oh, that's right, they trust government to act wisely when the "government" is a RWW Thumper who has megalomania and delusions of personal conversations with god."

Don't register my guns which can kill people, but it's fine to tell me what I can do in my bedroom with a consenting adult." No, they would rather absolve Cuccie because "Clinton was a sex addict" (and because they are probably as homophobic as their boy Cuccie).

Old-T is spot on. It's a sad state of affairs when this sort of conundrum pervades the political process in so many races around the nation.

Clueless buffoons like Barleycorn and Whirlaway are so intoxicated with blind partisan zealotry that they can't think straight.

Glad to see you are still alive. We been worried about ya! Originally Posted by timpage

Still alive, and very busy. This place has become a bore. It's tiring to try to make a point, and have Assup, BiSex, Eva (an Assup wannabe who is even too stupid to reach THAT standard) and others posting the same old "homo" jokes and pictures of poo.

Even though you are usually wrong - not all the time, but usually - you at least try to make a point, unlike these other brainless wonders.

I still check on this place, but there is very little entertainment, anymore.

Carry on, Timmy! Fight the good fight! Whirly, JD, Iffy and IB, with help from others, can handle it.

I'll be back.

Take your time homo peepee poopoo man!

I hear business is booming down on your knees in the Salina bus station!

YAWN.

It's tiring to try to make a point, and have Assup, BiSex, Eva (an Assup wannabe who is even too stupid to reach THAT standard) and others posting the same old "homo" jokes. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Hanoi COG, if you don't want posters to call you out for being a "homo," then it stands to reason that you shouldn't openly refer to your ATF IIFFY as "Sweet Ass!" Those were your exact words, I merely quoted you!

Just sayin'

Yeah, and he posts "reviews" of "girls"

wink, wink!

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/07/28/virginia-isnt-for-governors-column/2594405/

I’m spending the week in DC on business and had a nice dinner with some acquaintances/politicians from both sides of the political spectrum. The host put all discussion of the budget off the table for the evening (which all seemed to appreciate), but politics still wound up being the topic of the evening.

However, unlike most political dinner debates this one had no shots being fired by one guest at another, nor any heated words directed at anyone in the room. The reality was everyone there was in complete agreement, cons and libs alike. They ALL decried the new low in political choices (or lack thereof) as they talked about the VA governor’s race.

Choose between a charlatan, lying, money skimming Dem on one side.

And a man who wants a spy cam in every bedroom, and whom the Taliban thinks is too socially conservative on the Rep side.

Why is it neither party wants to run candidates that are sane AND reasonably honest?

The best line of the evening was by a guy reasonably high up in the VA Dem party who said, “I’m going to campaign real hard to have as many Dems as possible to vote for Cuccinelli. I’m not sure we [the Dem party in VA] can afford the embarrassment of McAuliffe being governor.” His Rep equivalent never lost a beat responding, “What about dueling pistols at dawn. Loser’s candidate gets elected and we all move out of the state and watch the implosion.”

A sad commentary on the US political state. Originally Posted by Old-T

I don’t know what’s sadder. That these two are the “best” that Virginia can offer, or that there are posters who actually argue Cuccinelli isn’t a sick bastard. At least the liberals on here have had the good sense not to try and defend McAullife. I guess the conservatives on here are just dumber that way.

For shits and grins I looked up JDBarleycorn’s and Whirlaway’s reviews. As I suspected both say they have engaged in unnatural sodomy by the ex-Virginia standards. So what stupid reason can they give for supporting Cuccinelli’s position? Read the Mother Jones article, specifically the piece that says, “But in 2004, when a bipartisan group of state Senators was trying to fix the sodomy law so that it would only apply to cases involving minors and non-consensual sex, Cuccinelli, then a state Senator, blocked the effort.”

Why would he block such a change if he really wanted to only go after child molesters? The answer is he doesn’t. He wants to go after those unnatural gay fags that if he had his way he’d throw in jail as a threat to society. If he is so concerned about 17 year old girls being abused then why doesn’t he push to change the stupid Virginia age of consent from 15 to 18? ExNYer has him pegged perfectly, a deceitful politician who should be shunned by any honest citizen, especially those with a few thousand posts here.

Old-T, bet you’re right that it’s only a matter of time until it comes out that Cuccinelli is just like Eddie Long. Thanks for bringing up that name, I had almost pushed his filth out of my memory. I wonder if he’ll be coming out to endorse Cuccinelli?

Do you really, REALLY, think that Cuccinelli thinks the Taliban is too socially liberal? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

According to these sentences Cuccinelli has NOT used the sodomy laws to go after gay men. Understand that. He has NOT but they are afraid, and have been saying, that he has. IT is a bald faced lie to say that he did. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

“But in 2004, when a bipartisan group of state Senators was trying to fix the sodomy law so that it would only apply to cases involving minors and non-consensual sex, Cuccinelli, then a state Senator, blocked the effort.”

Why would he block such a change if he really wanted to only go after child molesters? The answer is he doesn’t. Originally Posted by TGBeldin

Care to explain this to TG? What was your pal Cuccie thinking when he fought to keep consensual homosexuals categorized as felons? Was he worried about 17 y/o girls then? You may want to examine your new heroes a little more closely before you start idolizing them just because of the party they are affiliated with.