Is THAT what that meant? When men run out of toilet paper, we waddle out and grab a handful of paper towels and then purposely clog the toilet. The foot under the partition I just wrote off to tight pantyhose.

Politicians know what's best for *you*. That doesn't mean it applies to them, whatever it may be.

Man, this Craig flames brighter than Elton John at concert night.

Democratic-voting media people will beat on naughty Republicans just as long and as hard as they can. They are never this thorough with naughty Democrats, of whom we have no shortage at all *coughBarney Frankcough*.

The effect on the Republic is not at all good, and the people know this -- it's why they're watching a lot more Fox News these days, to at the very least get an opposing bias. It's a method I use myself.

Though isn't capital-C Conservative the name of a British political party?

This article gives his party affiliation as Tory. And then there's this included in it:

Actually, it's the republicans that make the biggest deal of it.

Have you heard of Congressman David Vitter?

He's that one who got in big doo-doo a few weeks back about that 'DC Madam'.
Do you hear a huge outcry for his resignation anymore? Of course not. He's out of sight, out of mind.

And you know why?
Because the governor of his state is a democrat. If Vitter goes, a democrat steps up in his place. On the other hand, the governor of Craig's state is a republican. If Craig goes, the Republicans get to put whoever they want as a senate incumbent up for re-election. This would mean, in effect, they get to replace the damaged Craig for anyone they could get elected.

Now do you see the problem?
It's not democrats who're busting this guy's chops - it really is the republicans, and that's why.

@UG

*smiles* yeah, Conservative is the proper name of the party "Tory" is another name for them, relating to their history and the basis of their ethos.

Ah, so that's it. Thanks.

Over here, we use "Tory" as a bit of historical namecalling, er, categorizing. It was a popular term for the loyalist population during the American Revolution, who weren't at all afire to break with England and King George III. The American colonial population of the time was divided into approximate thirds, one part Tories loyal to the King, one part the radicals who made the Revolutionary War, and a third part who mostly tried to keep their heads down at least for some of the eight years the shooting went on, 1775-83. There were a small number of regiments raised in America to fight for George III, and there was a good deal of backstreet unpleasantness for the Tories in the civilian sector, such that many of them fled to Canada, where some remained while others made their way back after the peace (Treaty of Paris? IIRC) to resume the interests they had had to drop. Not to say there wasn't some residual ill feeling, but with everybody having something better to do than feud, namely conduct business and rise in the world, this too faded away within its generation. And there was the ever present western frontier as a refuge for anyone who wanted a new set of neighbors.

However difficult these birth pangs, which only finally ended with yet another war between England and the newborn United States in 1812 -- we lost a lot of the land battles and had Washington DC burned (why the White House is white, incidentally -- we painted over the scorch-marks) -- it's our consensus view that the United States could not have become what she is without our culture's grounding in England's political institutions, especially limited government, and Englishmen's political expectations. This is why England and America have gotten along so well since 1814, and why the mutual admiration continues.

Yeah. I studied some of that period last year. Very interesting.

A Democrat replaces a Democrat and there's no noise, a Republican replaces a Republican and there's noise. No, I'm sorry you'll have to explain this one again to me.

There are plenty of lousy representatives from both parties - one just seems to get rid of theirs when "outed."

Vitter is a repubican. The Democratic governor would replace him with a Democrat - the repubicans would lose a seat, so the repubicans are NOT calling for Vitter to resign. If Craig were to resign, a repubican governor would replace him with another repubican - no loss of seat.

Is not a hypocrit

LOL

True, Frank has been candid about being queer, whereas Craig has worked hard to against queer marriage and opposes extending special protections to queer and lesbian crime victims.