Sigh. And yet another uber patriot, gay pedophile? Again.
- Thread starter anon_xl72qcu5isp39
- Start date
He's another example of who Oklahoma conservatives choose to elevate. He appleals to them. That says so much.
Yep, he's also the guy who introduced legislation to prevent embryos from being put into food products as if that was a real thing. I don't know what he called the Bill, but I'm hoping it was the Soylent Green Act or something.
He's an obvious idiot and apparently a sick criminal. Lock him up and throw away the key if he's guilty.
Yep only Republicans are pervs.
Yeah, they're ate up with women, not boys. Guess its equivalent to you.
There's just a correlation. Why do you think these sicko conservatives always opt for boys instead of girls?
So sexual orientation determines the level of a person's perversion in your world. Both were targeting under age victims.Yep only Republicans are pervs.
Yeah, they're ate up with women, not boys. Guess its equivalent to you.
Watch out you're going to get your lib card pulled.
The only reason I see "gay" making a difference is just that conservative lawmakers in general have an anti gay history, thus if one of them has held anti gay views in the past, getting with young boys makes them both a slime ball criminal and a hypocrite.
Otherwise, no difference, a kid is a kid.
Otherwise, no difference, a kid is a kid.
Well, being as how it was a 15 year old girl, yeah, very equivalent when it comes to pedophilia. Or does pedophilia only exist when it involves underage boys in your world?
You forgot conservative and people.
So nobody really wants to talk about it, and that's cool, I guess. But why do these conservatives so frequently opt for boys?
It's weird that you see partisan politics in stuff like this. Obviously "Shorty" is loathsome regardless of party right?
It's very creepy. It's almost as if it's the sex of the victim that's the issue, not that the victim is underage.
I'm not familiar with his campaign. Did he include being a pedophile as part of it? Or are all conservatives pedophiles?
I doubt he ran on that platform, but for some reason these oklahoma cons dont pick up on his creepy dynamic. It takes most people about 2 seconds to pick it up. One of the posters on here talked about his wife spotting him as a freak. Just something about these degenerates really appeals to Republican voters.
Why boys?
I'm creeped out by this.
He called a 15 year old girl "a woman" and then made a comment suggesting that underage boys and girls aren't equivalent in pedophilia.
Well I feel the reading conservative comments through the years on here has given me a leg up on understanding it. There's a definite uptight, dishonest ethos that correlates to family values conservatives holing up with boys in motels and doing whatever uptight conservatives do with boys in motels.
Shit, uve missed something. Show me where Antony holed up with a child in a motel.
Wow. Just wow. So if it was an underage girl it's better? You keep harping on "why boys" and referred to a 15 year old girl as a woman, so it's a legitimate question.
Oh OK then. No big deal what the Weiner did since he didn't hole up in a hotel room with the 15 year old. I guess you win that battle.
Well, it's an obvious question. Unless Shortey holed up in the Motel 8 with the boy and tweeted at the kid. I'll bet that's what happened. So why do you think the fixation with boys instead of girls? The frequency of it is a mathematical anomaly -- there's a correlation between the politics and the perversion, imo.
I'm just curious why right wingers seem to disproportionately seem to molest boys instead of girls. Sorry if you don't like the question. Your discomfort and conservative defense of the Senator is kind of creepy, but sort of expected.
I'll predict if we looked, ol Shortey voted for the anti-gay crap that went through the legislature.
Well, there's a range -- a spectrum of deviance. Obviously WienieDog has his issues, and it cost him dearly. But again, he, Clinton, whoever chase girls. These uptight republicans go for boys.
I mean, Langford loves his "conservative principles." Why Shortey? He couldn't tell there's something off with the guy?
You'll have to explicitly point out where I've defended him in any way. Since you made that accusation, do it. Come on Cupcake. Don't be caught in yet another pathetic lie.
We both know that all of my posts in this here visible thread have been regarding YOUR obsession with the "boys" in this pedophilia thing. I make no distinction regarding sex when it comes to pedophilia, regardless of politics. You don't seem to do the same. Your posts would be logical and very fitting if you didn't have this creepy obsession with "boys."
You're better than this. Don't defend him or attack the messenger. Instead of these clumsy mirroring accusations (such a predictable conservative!) why not just engage in the discussion of why conservatives seem to step out of line with boys instead of girls? Is it the wingnut craziness that just happens to manifest with boys also, or are they frequently masking their disfunction with the conservative, macho politics?
Uptight? It's the sjw crowd who is upright. You continue to amaze with your gross simplification of the word 'conservative' to mean whatever you want it to.
As predicted. Another post, another syskatine lie. I haven't defended anything or anyone, as clearly indicated by my posts. I've only questioned you and have gotten nothing but concerning deflection in return.
And no, I'm not going to engage you in a conversation where you've clearly politicized pedophilia. That's disgusting.
Saw this elsewhere, couldn't resist.
"He wouldn't be in so much trouble if he would have checked into the Super 18 Motel."
I don't believe I'm going off the rails here, by saying that I understand where syskatine question is coming from. If you approach it as a sociological or psychological issue. There does seem to be an anomaly, outside what should exist statistically, for some male politicians/religious leaders who are the most vociferous in their condemnation of gays or the most vocal proponents of "family values", to eventually be caught with young boys/young men. To me, what stands out is it's often men who are married, in long term relationships who have children of their own.
I interrupt my post to let you know that Moore Police have suggested he be charged with Prostitution/Soliciting/Transporting related felonies be filed against Shortey.
"He wouldn't be in so much trouble if he would have checked into the Super 18 Motel."
I don't believe I'm going off the rails here, by saying that I understand where syskatine question is coming from. If you approach it as a sociological or psychological issue. There does seem to be an anomaly, outside what should exist statistically, for some male politicians/religious leaders who are the most vociferous in their condemnation of gays or the most vocal proponents of "family values", to eventually be caught with young boys/young men. To me, what stands out is it's often men who are married, in long term relationships who have children of their own.
I interrupt my post to let you know that Moore Police have suggested he be charged with Prostitution/Soliciting/Transporting related felonies be filed against Shortey.
Outside of syskatine posts, where is the data to support this? Surely there is something outside of anecdote that supports this assertion. OR maybe it seems so because religious types and politicians get a decent amount of media coverage when it occurs, more so than the usual run of the mill shitbag. Something interesting to read.
http://www.newsweek.com/priests-commit-no-more-abuse-other-males-70625
Liberals do seem to have a problem confusing their opinions for facts. Why is that?
Guy is a sick scumbag if all this is proven. This whole conservative vs liberal slant to this is petty and at the end of the day irrelevant.
