Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Vitter used taxpayer money for whores and diaper fetishes

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ORDagnabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:49 PM
Original message
Vitter used taxpayer money for whores and diaper fetishes
He is a senator and he gets paid by our tax dollars. He used money to pay for the whores and diapers ergo he used my money on personal pleasure.

Just called his office again and demanded he resign!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hmm, interesting perspective.
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 05:56 PM by mzmolly
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. what a MORANIC concept.
once a person has been paid, the money is THEIRS.
NOBODY has ANY right to say that ANY public servant is spending anyone's money but their own.

does YOUR employer have a right to say how YOU spend YOUR paycheck?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firefox_fan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Yup, silly argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madaboutharry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Yeah, If one takes this
approach then any boss has the right to determine how an employee spends their money. It really doesn't fly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. We do have a right if the money is spent illegally
We can, through political pressure and perhaps a court of law, require him to return some of this money in the form of fines. Prostitution is illegal--he used the money for an illegal activity. I've known other politicians who have lost political office because of illegal activities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. no, we don't.
he can be charged for the illegal activity, but he doesn't have to re-imburse his employer for illicitly spent wages- nobody does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. I didn't say he did
I was commenting on the fact that any politician who engages in illegal activity often forfeits his job and has to pay large fines. Anything wrong with that? Or do you think that politicians are above the law, and any action they do should never have political or financial consequences?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. the topic was wages, not fines.
your subject line said that we have the right to say how he spends his wages.

we don't.

and yes, ALL people should be subject to equal treatment when they break the law, whether it be in terms of fines or jailtime- whatever the law dictates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. But we do
in that if he spends his money on something illegal, we have the right to arrest him and boot him out of office. If I spent my wages in buying and/or using illegal drugs, you're darned tooting I'd be fired in a heartbeat. There is a strict no drugs policy at my place of employment. So my employer has, in fact, put a restriction on how I spend my money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Toad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. The restriction isn't on how you spend your money
its on your consumption of drugs - unless you're telling me that if you got high on drugs that were a gift the response would be different, or that you would be fired if you loaned a friend of yours money and he spent it on drugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. but it is
because of the no-drug policy at work, I wouldn't buy drugs unless I wanted to get fired (plus I don't do drugs anyway). So the restriction is there-maybe not as clear cut as you make it--but if I wished to keep my job, I don't spend money on drugs.

And here's another example--a man has a political patronage job. In order to maintain the job, he is expected to "donate" a certain percentage of his paycheck to the party who got him the job. If he doesn't, he doesn't have the job. If he donated to the opposition party, he'd also be out of a job. Another even more clear-cut example of how an employer can dictate how you spend your money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Toad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Your second example is an illegal
restriction under the Hatch act, at least with respect to federal political patronage jobs, as well as to state jobs where any portion of the funding comes from the Federal government. (and as a Dem who at one time was hired by, and worked for, Rep in a state job I was never asked for a contribution and was never even asked to volunteer non-financially to his contribution. Even his cohorts (who I also worked with and for on occasion) who were less likely to hire outside of the party didn't dare expect a donation from me or from the folks who worked directly for them).

As for the first, from anything you have said it is not a restriction on spending - I certainly don't blame you for not wanting to make it a habit of buying things you can't use, but that's your hangup - not something imposed by your boss. Your basic premise is that Vitter used taxpayer money so we have some right to demand it back. So far as I know, he didn't use taxpayer money. Once he is paid, it is his money and as taxpayer - employers we have no right to dictate how he spends it. There are potentially criminal remedies, and those remedies might include fines, but those same remedies would apply to anyone - they don't apply to him because it was our money that paid his salary.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #24
36. your employer has put no restrictions on how you spend your money.
you can buy all the drugs you want.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mandate My Ass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. tell that to repugs who trash "welfare queens" who spend their pittance
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 06:03 PM by Mandate My Ass
on whatever repugs find repugnant at the time.


The biblican quote about the mote and the beam come to mind here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. "welfare queens" are a myth to begin with.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mandate My Ass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. a myth republicans invented
so taxpayers wouldn't realize what cheats they actually are and how greedily they suck at the gov't tit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. yes...but a myth nonetheless.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. Whose time was he on? We pay these idiots to work not visit hookers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. i don't think that senators punch a clock...
so i would say that he was on his own time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ORDagnabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. I dunno I'd go the other direction and say he is a 24/7 public servant and is always on the clock
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #15
38. if that were true- no elected person could ever drink alcohol-
since it would be drinking on the job.

i definitely don't consider my representatives to be 'on the clock' 24/7...EVERYONE deserves a private life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Local mayor here was visiting topless bars on his lunch hour and putting it on the taxpayer tab.
LOST HIS JOB.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. if he has a lunch hour- does he have set work hours?
and putting on the taxpayer tab is a little different than paying for it out of your own pocket, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. He's on call 24/7. He takes an OATH OF OFFICE.
Maybe we should look into the rules and regulations regarding those who take an 'oath of office' in the U.S. Senate, and what bylaws of ethical conduct pertain to his salary as an elected official. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #25
37. by that reckoning, no public official could ever drink alcohol, even at home...
since it would be drinking on the job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. Bad analogy, and If you aren't going to bother to look up the answers neither will I.
:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. look up what answers?
Edited on Tue Jul-17-07 09:22 AM by QuestionAll
:shrug:

i don't need to look up the rules of the senate, because i know that they aren't considered to be "on the clock" 24/7- no reasonable person would/could ever infer something like that. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. OK, then QuestionNothing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. His lunch hours turned into whole afternoons. And all billed to the city
as "business lunches".

Taxpayers weren't too happy about paying for lap dances
for the mayor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
18. My employer is fine with the 20% of my paycheck that he
demands I spend on him directly. What a nice sort of fellow.... bwahahahahahah.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fresh_Start Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
19. well I agree with that...but I'm not sure your boss
would so easily dismiss you calling whores from your place of business.
Vitter was hiring DC madam whores while he was in the House on rollcall votes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razors edge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
27. My employer, No.
But Vitter's Employer sure as hell does.

Buy a pizza for the IDF, no prob.

Buy a box of baby formula for a Pal, see you in Gitmo jack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #27
39. you lost me...
i have no idea what you are referring to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razors edge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. My employer can not
tell me where I can or can not spend my money, but Vitter's employer has no problem telling me where I can or cannot spend my money.

As a matter of fact, they can confiscate any money I have and any property involved, such as homes and cars, in the commission of a felony such as the one Vitter admitted to.

Since assholes such as Vitter wrote these laws and profit personally from them, I have no problem charging them for using tax payer supplied monies, as some of that income was derived from the confiscation of personal property from those involved in the very same victim-less crimes he has committed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
3. Let's concentrate on unlame things.
And then the lame things will take care of themselves.

If we don't distract from Vitter's hypocrisy by pushing something grossly obtuse, we might get something from it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
6. No. Once he's paid, it's his money.
However, making assignations with whores while voting might indicate a lack of attention to the actual job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. dupe sorry
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 06:13 PM by cassiepriam
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
9. Well, he DID receive 5 phone calls from Madam Palfrey while in the House waiting for roll call votes
so he WAS planning his diaper escapades on OUR dime. He definitely should resign!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #9
26. oops!
phone records. :dunce: :dunce: :dunce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. YEPPERS! Madam Palfrey and Larry Flynt have a LOT of phone records.
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
31. Oh stop! So if a gay teacher looks at porn on his personal computer is he spending
taxpayer money on pornography?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
32. Aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh chooostupid
Gezundheit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
35. one of the shows on msnbc tonight were actually talking about his
lets see...i watched some of fucker, tweety & olbermann

someone said we need to find out where his whoring money came from--and determine that it was not paid for by a LOBBYIST!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 24th 2014, 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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