A republican state representative from neighboring Stanly County has resigned.
Rep. David Almond resigned Thursday from the state Legislature due to an unspecified personnel complaint filed with House leadership, a day after the chamber's GOP caucus said it was looking into allegations of "serious, improper behavior."Now the mainstream media isn't reporting at all what those allegations were. They seem to think it was a "personnel/personal matter" and hence they don't want to report any details. The problem is that this "improper behavior" happened in Mr. Almond's office on taxpayer's time, so that's why I'll tell you what supposedly happened.
"Sadness" was the response to the complaint by Paul Stam the House Republican leader, which he said he first heard about late Monday afternoon, and to Almond's resignation.
Stam, R-Wake, said Republican leaders asked Almond to resign "if the allegations were true," but that Almond resigned on his own.
House speaker Joe Hackney said he received "a personnel complaint" involving Almond last week, but said state and federal confidentiality laws bar him from giving any details.
This is what allegedly happened:Rep. Almond was in his office and called his Legal Assistant in to help him with something.
She found him masturbating.
That Legal Assistant has since quit and the Republicans called an emergency caucus and apparently told Almond he needs to resign or face the penalty of the civil suit and or criminal case.
Seems to me that a lot of republicans have such unhealthy repressed feelings about sex that at one point they can't hold back anymore and start doing something stupid.
We had Mark Foley and his fondling of congressional pages and we just had Senator David Vitter, (R-LA), getting in trouble because he frequented a prostitute in Washington DC.
It's also a public secret that there are several high ranking republicans consistently pushing an anti-gay agenda while they are secretly gay themselves. Just a matter of time until those skeletons fall out of the closet (no pun intended).
It is also interesting to know that Rep. Almond is a vice chairman of the House committee on children, youth and families. Nice!
Is it just a matter of time until we find Coy Privette or Robin Hayes with their pants around their ankles?
At least when Clinton got a hummer it was between 2 perfectly consenting adults.
10 comments:
Another GOP Pervert.
http://www.armchairsubversive.org/
Is it true Vitter resignedd? I hadn't heard this.
*
No, I'm sorry, that was just wishful thinking of mine. Vitter hasn't resigned (yet). I just had that Almond guy's resignation on my mind. I'll correct My original post.
Well, I beleive you have some kind of fortune telling thing going on. Charlotte Observer reports Coy Privette has been charged in aiding and abetting prostitution!
Evidently Democrats are not involed in sex scandals?
How about:
Barney Frank?
Mel Reynolds?
Gerry Studds?
AND
Bill Clinton?
You see, the big problem is not the sex, but the huge hypocrisy. I don't give a rats ass (pardon my french) about what kind of sex someone has and who they're doing it with.
But if you proclaim yourself to be "holier than thou" and you say your Party has much better and higher morals than the other party and then go out and have sex with a prostitute i DO have a problem with that. If you push a consistently anti-gay agenda knowing you're gay yourself, you're just a huge hypocrite. Have sex all you want with whoever you want, as long as its between consenting adults, but shut up about your supposed high morals and so called "family values" already!
The list of supposedly crisp clean republicans that proclaim themselves to be morally better than democrats and then turn out to be just like anyone else (or worse) just keeps growing and growing...
Clinton never proclaimed to be an asexual person and he definitely never had to pay for it.
To paraphrase a famous James Carville quote: It's the hypocrisy, stupid.
You are OK with sex among consenting adults - fine. The problem is that most of the cases I can find involving Democrats are not consenting adults.
Let me pick from the previous list, a VERY condensed list I might add.
Mel Reynolds from Democrat from Illinois, convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault on a 16 year old - pardoned by Clinton just before leaving office.
Or, how about this one...
Democrats have a hissy and force Mark Foley from office, yet 17 years later Barney Frank is not only still in congress, but chairs the Financial Services Committee.
Now, that sounds like hypocrisy, stupid!
I started this blog half a year ago, so it would have been impossible for me to comment on Mel Reynolds and Barney Frank since those cases happened from way before I ever started blogging. I don't see how you can call me a hypocrite on that.
I'm pretty sure Mel Reynolds and Barney Frank never said they had much bigger and better morals than anyone else. You don't seem to get My hypocrisy point. I have a problem with people proclaiming to be better than others and then secretly doing exactly what they said they never do. In the republicans case lately that seems to have a lot to do with sex.
And since you're making lists anyway, you can research the following republicans:
Strom Thurmond (impregnated a 15-year old African American maid)
Keith Westmoreland
Stephen White
Robin Vanderwall
David Swartz
Craig J. Spence
Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr.
Tom Shortridge
Beverly Russell
and the list goes on and on....
All republicans accused of some kind of sex act with minors.
No you don't get it.
My point has never been a list - the list was only to prove the hypocrisy. I hope you are man enough to acknowledge that unfortunately, we could exchange names of pervs from both parties from now on. The point is your self-serving defintion of hypocrisy.
In your world, it is hypocrisy for a Republican to campaign on morals because other Republican have had moral failure. While it is just good political strategy for Democrats to form a public lynch mob over people like Foley while protecting Frank.
And, I can and do call you a hypocrite on Barney Frank. You may have started your blog a year and a half ago, but I beleive Mr. Franks still serves and I do not see in your archives a call for him to resign.
In your words, "It's the hypocrisy, stupid."
"I hope you are man enough to acknowledge that unfortunately, we could exchange names of pervs from both parties from now on."
Yes, I'm more than man enough to admit that.
"In your world, it is hypocrisy for a Republican to campaign on morals because other Republican have had moral failure."
Yes! You finally understood my point!
I think it is indeed totally hypocritical for the whole Republican party (i'm not talking just about a few candidates, but the whole party always likes to say this)to portray themselves as the only party with moral and family values, when time after time it is shown that their party is such as full of perverts as any other party. And on top of that it is usually those certain republican candidates who seem to scream the loudest about morals that turn out to be the biggest perverts.
From the dictionary:
hy·poc·ri·sy : a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
Thanks for pointing out Barney Frank to Me. After studying up on him I think he's now one of My heroes.
First of all i want to address his supposed "sex scandal":
In 1990, the House voted to reprimand Frank when it was revealed that Steve Gobie, a male escort whom Frank had befriended after hiring him through a personal advertisement, claimed to have conducted an escort service from Frank's apartment when he was not at home. Frank had dismissed Gobie earlier that year and reported the incident himself to the House Ethics Committee after learning of Gobie's activities. After an investigation, the House Ethics Committee found no evidence that Frank had known of or been involved in the alleged illegal activity. The House voted 408-18 to reprimand him, not censure him. Sounds like a lot of Republicans agreed to just reprimand him!
And now for the reason he could be one of my heroes:
He manages to express the point that I tried to make in this post a lot better than I ever could, by saying in 2006 that "I think there’s a right to privacy. But the right to privacy should not be a right to hypocrisy ... people who want to demonize other people shouldn't then be able to go home and close the door, and do it themselves."
Amen to that!
Post a Comment