You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #33: Studds didn't defend HIMSELF, calling the whole thing [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. Studds didn't defend HIMSELF, calling the whole thing
inappropriate and regrettable. That's one of the big differences. He also didn't hide in rehab to avoid the press. He also didn't have higher ups trying to cover his ass.

Pointing out the difference in these things as consent vs. lack of consent is absolutely essential. Also pointing out the difference is the GOP coverup is essential.

It's become the coverup, you see, not the dirty emails to unwilling teenagers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -The freepers are milking the Gerry Studds incident to death LSK  Oct-04-06 08:31 AM   #0 
  - Well, I guess they can now say...  Virginia Dare   Oct-04-06 08:32 AM   #1 
  - Freepers milking Gerry Studds. (shuddering at visual)  soothsayer   Oct-04-06 08:33 AM   #2 
  - It's all they have. Ancient history.  Texas Explorer   Oct-04-06 08:33 AM   #3 
  - the pendulum has swung -- so to speak  Supersedeas   Oct-04-06 08:33 AM   #4 
  - It's "Gerry" Studds.  Tracer   Oct-04-06 08:33 AM   #5 
  - whoops! fixed  LSK   Oct-04-06 08:39 AM   #11 
  - It's "Gerry".  11 Bravo   Oct-04-06 08:33 AM   #6 
  - thanks  LSK   Oct-04-06 08:39 AM   #13 
  - So, their new slogan is...  brooklynite   Oct-04-06 08:34 AM   #7 
  - !  Blue State Native   Oct-04-06 08:54 AM   # 
  - one guy thirty years ago  C_U_L8R   Oct-04-06 08:36 AM   #8 
  - 30 years ago??  philb   Oct-04-06 08:42 AM   #17 
     - 33 years ago to be exact  C_U_L8R   Oct-04-06 08:43 AM   #18 
  - For the past couple of days Sean Insannity  RebelOne   Oct-04-06 08:36 AM   #9 
  - no Foley is new, fresh, contemporary, he has happened to the largest...  bridgit   Oct-04-06 08:38 AM   #10 
  - as soon as DEM LEADERSHIP found out they CENSORED  seabeyond   Oct-04-06 08:39 AM   #12 
  - "CENSURED" with a U. n/t  skids   Oct-04-06 08:44 AM   #19 
  - The Gerry Studds case was just a LITTLE different  Warpy   Oct-04-06 08:40 AM   #14 
  - And the page though 17 at the time of the affair, was 27 by the time  MADem   Oct-04-06 08:48 AM   # 
  - Actually, another difference about the Studds case  hughee99   Oct-04-06 08:48 AM   #21 
  - Thanks for the info.  sadiesworld   Oct-04-06 08:50 AM   #26 
  - Exactly, it was a very different time  Warpy   Oct-04-06 09:33 AM   #32 
     - Studds did NOT apologize  onenote   Oct-04-06 10:31 AM   #39 
        - Um, I lived in his district  Warpy   Oct-04-06 11:06 AM   #41 
           - I'll split the difference with you  onenote   Oct-04-06 11:21 AM   #44 
  - there is no need or reason to defend Studds  onenote   Oct-04-06 09:12 AM   #31 
     - Studds didn't defend HIMSELF, calling the whole thing  Warpy   Oct-04-06 09:47 AM   #33 
        - I don't think that's correct  onenote   Oct-04-06 10:04 AM   #37 
           - I think you're right about this...  hughee99   Oct-04-06 10:29 AM   #38 
  - 1973?  Botany   Oct-04-06 08:40 AM   #15 
  - thats when the actual act occurred  LSK   Oct-04-06 08:41 AM   #16 
     - 1983 scandal  philb   Oct-04-06 08:47 AM   #20 
  - Any Mention Of Daniel Crane?  KharmaTrain   Oct-04-06 08:48 AM   #22 
  - Was there a House leadership cover up with Studds?  Touchdown   Oct-04-06 08:49 AM   #23 
  - No mention of former Representative Dan Crane on their side?  Penndems   Oct-04-06 08:50 AM   #24 
  - It's 1973 AND 1983- here's why the confusion  grizmaster   Oct-04-06 08:50 AM   #25 
  - well......that horse should be dead by now  philb   Oct-04-06 08:54 AM   #28 
  - Here's a large pic of a Washington Times frontpage -- Share this!  Bozita   Oct-04-06 08:52 AM   #27 
  - Hey, isn't that their own Republican rag?  Little Star   Oct-04-06 09:01 AM   #29 
  - Was this the Moonie Times in '89?  NCevilDUer   Oct-04-06 09:08 AM   #30 
     - now its the Tony Blankley Times  LSK   Oct-04-06 10:00 AM   #36 
  - This is the best they can come up with? It seems to me that they need to  WePurrsevere   Oct-04-06 09:55 AM   #34 
  - Gerry Studds who?  blogslut   Oct-04-06 10:00 AM   #35 
  - Good, we can bring up Nixon again  Fighting Irish   Oct-04-06 10:33 AM   #40 
  - First of I don't think that was much of a scandal even way back then  Lone_Star_Dem   Oct-04-06 11:09 AM   #42 
  - It seems to me that the story is the *coverup*- and perhaps even  Marr   Oct-04-06 11:09 AM   #43 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC