May 11, 2008

Just like clockwork: Republican Family Values case #499277

Goodfella Vito Fosella, you may remember him from his frothing indignation and condemnation of President Bill Clinton for having such low moral character, shows he's a normal Republican liar and raging hypocrite.

Maybe in the future, I could save time and just report the sanctimonious figures in the Republican party who AREN'T some sort of adulterer, homosexual, pervert, predator, sexual deviant, or other sort of degenerate.

Looking back, I think we might have begun to wonder why it was that although Fossella has been in Congress for more than 10 years, he did not seem to have a Washington address. Really, that’s a little long to crash with friends.

Fossella has embarked on a series of mea culpas, beginning with a drunken driving incident that set the whole crisis in motion. “As a parent, I know that taking even one drink of alcohol before getting behind the wheel of a car is wrong,” he said. This was actually one of those nonapology apologies, since “taking even one drink” does not have much relationship to attaining a blood-alcohol level twice the legal limit.

His adventures began last week with a White House party to celebrate the New York Giants’ Super Bowl victory. (Although that triumph feels as if it occurred six years ago, the Bush administration was a little slow in taking note.) The congressman continued partying. He was arrested in Alexandria, Va., around midnight after going through a red light and failing the recite-the-alphabet test. (Fossella appeared to have trouble deciding exactly where “H” goes.)

He told the police officer that he was on his way to take his daughter to the hospital, which did not seem like a good plan from the daughter’s perspective. Then he summoned a friend, in the form of Laura Fay, a retired Air Force officer who plunked down $2,500 to spring the man who, we would discover, was the father of her child and a familiar sight to the neighbors of her nearby home.

Not only a sanctimonious and phony hypocrite and adulterer, but stupid to boot.


At 5/15/2008 9:03 PM, Blogger nicodemus said...

This Vito Fossella sounds like he qualifies to be a Kennedy. If he was, you'd think he was a great guy.

At 5/16/2008 8:13 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

First of all, I don't recall any Kennedy fathering children out of wedlock, bozo.

Secondly, if this Fossella jerk had contributed anything but bullshit to the people of this country, maybe he'd be less of a laughing stock.

Nice try.

If you didn't have the Kennedys to make lame and dumb-ass remarks about decade after decade after decade, what would you do?

Funny from a guy who supports a party where you could pick any one of hundreds of creeps, perverts, hypocrits, theives and criminals and it would make the Kennedys look like saints.

Face it Nico, the Republicans ARE more greedy, unethical and corrupt than Democrats in general... and by a long shot.

If all you can do is sit there and whine about something a Dem did 50 years ago, I'd suggest you give it up.

At 5/16/2008 4:03 PM, Blogger nicodemus said...

Hey now, I like JFK.

The Kennedys whom I was actually referring to is Sen. Teddy Kennedy, (as in Chappaquiddick) and his son, congressman Patrick Kennedy whose substance abuse makes him a chip off the old block.

But no, JFK was alright in my book. If JFK ran today, Dems would not not give him the time of day. They would boo him off the stage and say that he was too hawkish. JFK was criticized for his lack of experience, but even JFK's experience dwarfs Obama's by comparison.

At 5/16/2008 4:56 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...


You're not thinking clearly. If JFK ran today, it wouldn't be the Dems that stopped him.

JFK wasn't some ultra hawk anyway, and you seem to have that bizarre notion that Democrats are somehow all pacifists who refuse to engage in war for any reason, of course completely forgetting little wars like, oh, WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Vietnam, etc.

Seriously, it's way past time to give up trying to simply state that the Dems are afraid of using military force for any reason. It's not only blatantly untrue, it just sounds stupid, in my opinion.

It's the Republicans who'd destroy anyone like JFK.

He'd be on FOX news 24/7, Rush Limbaugh wouldn't need to gulp pain pills he'd be so busy spreading slander, and a new blaring headline would appear on Drudge every other hour discussing Kennedy's abuse of prescription drugs, his extra-marital affairs, (my GOD, can you imagine the absoulute 24/7 media freak out if a candidate was revealed to be having an affair with a Hollywood starlet like Marilyn Monroe??!!!)

And if that weren't tabloid enough, there's the mob connections, and a whole bunch of other crap that they'd just plain make up.

He'd never get out of the gate against the Republican slime machine, and the media would devote entire new shows to Kennedy stories alone. It would make the O.J. trial look like peanuts and the Kennedy scandals would spawn a multi-million dollar industry complete with books, Kennedy "experts", DVDs, magazines, wall to wall cable coverage, etc.

At 5/19/2008 4:16 PM, Blogger nicodemus said...

JFK was a Cold Warrior and he was about ramping up national defense and closing the missile gap and mobilizing to meet the enemy. I guess I missed something, because I don't hear that stuff from Obama. I am un-convinced that Obama will take the fight to the terrorists. Read JFK's speech where he says "Pay any price bear any burden", etc. He was NOT about appeasement.

JFK also cut taxes when he took office. Democrats don't run on that issue either.

At 5/20/2008 11:09 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Nico, do you even know what "appeasement" is?

You seem to have simply aped the current right wing buzz word.

Appeasement is when you give things away to an enemy thinking it will placate them and keep them from doing something, as when Chamberlin gave away a part of Czechoslovakia to Hitler to avoid him going further.

Obama has NEVER said anything remotely indicating he'd give away anything to anyone, so the whole issue is based on a huge lie, not surprisingly.

I have no idea what makes you think Obama would be "soft" on terror, but you DO realize it's based on fantasy and no actual fact, right?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home