1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trent Lott resigning from Senate

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Double Down, Nov 26, 2007.

  1. writing irish

    writing irish Active Member

    Come on, he's a law-and-order kind of guy.











    [​IMG]
     
  2. Blitz

    Blitz Active Member

    BOARD DEMOGRAPHICS
    Let's see .. we have the SJ Masturbation nation, which seems to be most enamored with heterosexual commentary and as many pics posted as possible.
    We also have a good number of people who rarely make commentary regarding anything pertaining to "sexuality".
    Then we have the resident homophobes, who exhibit constant knashing of teeth and unbridled angst toward anything or anyone that appears "gay" - as if they might somehow change that gayness and convert it into something "non-gay"
    (Also on the board, there are zero openly-gay people who post here. And zero pics.)
    What if Sen. Lott WAS gay. Would it matter in how he helps govern or set policy for U.S. citizens.
    Would he be likely to change his preferences at the behest of any media folk?

    C'mon guys (Poin, Fen, Cran) .. got any real introspective commentary to bring to this thread?
     
  3. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    It would make him one of a host of hypocrites in Congress who portray themselves as straight, God-fearing Republicans and vote against anything that has to do with gay rights. It wouldn't matter a bit if he was honest about it and why would someone in the media care if he "changed" his sexual preference? As if that's even possible.
     
  4. Blitz

    Blitz Active Member

    A big deal is made regarding a person's sexuality only, of course, when they are said to be gay.
    And don't tell me that it's the hyprocriticality issue you are worried about here and with folks like Craig.
    You simply can't get over the fact that some people are gay.
    It bothers you, and others.
    You get this mental picture of that person engaged in a sex act, but you do no such mental musing when pondering folks you regard as "straight".
    Whether Trent's a hypocrite is likely of no concern to you.
    That's my guess.
     
  5. wickedwritah

    wickedwritah Guest

  6. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Not sure where you are coming from, blitz. I doubt many of the libs care much whether Trent Lott is gay except where it makes him a hypocrite.

    It's just sad for people to be railing against something publicly that they practice in their own private lives.
     
  7. terrier

    terrier Well-Known Member

    Just a year after being elected, it's got to be either his health or a scandal. And he says it's not his health.
     
  8. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    Why can't it be the "hyprocriticality" of a person's public positions compared to his private actions? Just because there's no such word as hyprocriticality? If I suggest that you seek help will you claim I'm overly curious about the mentally ill?
     
  9. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    It's avoiding the new lobbying rules.
     
  10. Let me chime in here also since it I posted that "hard news story." There are a lot of things at play here. First, I posted that because you don't get that kind of news with the current media we have in place. The only person with big enough balls to post something like that is a gay "gossip" blogger. Funny thing is, if you really look at some of his posts, they are timely. Notice I use timely and not necessarily newsworthy.

    For the record, I couldn't care less if Trent Lott is a fudge packer. It makes no difference in his ability to govern...if he can do the job so be it. What is troublesome is that an individual who potentially chooses to engage in homosexuality would run on an anti-homo platform and help to push through legislation that, for lack of a better term, nearly criminalizes homos.

    From a philosophical standpoint, the dude who hates anything homo is likely jerking off to gay mags and struggling with serious homo feelings...this view comes from experienced gay people. I have many, many gay friends. I have a gay male friend that literally told me one evening that he wanted some. That told me two things, 1. I must be decent looking if a gay man wants some of me and 2. I have absolutely no attraction to homosexual activity.

    Further argument here that everyone sees, but is unwilling to explore the connection: Larry Craig who said he would step down September 30th...did not. Why? Have we seen any hard news on this...no pun intended. Seriously, does anyone see the potential that the dogs were called off because maybe the bastard decided to out every homo in the senate...which may have turned out to be more GOP than Dems?

    Again for the record, Larry Craig should not have to resign because he is gay nor should Jim McGreevy. I'm not even certain they should resign because the were dishonost about something personal. However, if you are homo and then drafting legislation that persecutes homos...you should be dragged out of office by you nut sack.
     
  11. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    gandhi,

    Maybe you aren't that good looking and your "homo" friend was just drunk and desperate.
     
  12. wickedwritah

    wickedwritah Guest

    McGreevy resigned because he was a fraud and had arranged for his boyfriend to hold down an influential state position for which he was unqualified. He did not resign because he was gay.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page