Good old Republican family values

[freethefly 6]

Rep. Paying Ex-Mistress About $500K
Nov 2, 5:59 PM (ET)

By MICHAEL RUBINKAM

ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) - A Republican congressman accused of abusing his ex-mistress agreed to pay her about $500,000 in a settlement last year that contained a powerful incentive for her to keep quiet until after Election Day, a person familiar with the terms of the deal told The Associated Press.

Rep. Don Sherwood is locked in a tight re-election race against a Democratic opponent who has seized on the four-term congressman's relationship with the woman. While Sherwood acknowledged the woman was his mistress, he denied abusing her and said that he had settled her $5.5 million lawsuit on confidential terms.

The settlement, reached in November 2005, called for Cynthia Ore to be paid in installments, according to a person who spoke on condition of anonymity because the deal is confidential. She has received less than half the money so far, and will not get the rest until after the Nov. 7 election, the person said Thursday.

A confidentiality clause requires Ore to forfeit some of the money if she talks publicly about the case, according to this person and two other people familiar with elements of the case.

It is common in settlements for payments to be made in installments and for the parties to be held to confidentiality.

Sherwood admitted no wrongdoing, a standard provision in such agreements, this person said.

Sherwood, a 65-year-old married father of three who is considered a family-values conservative, had one of the safest seats in Congress until Ore sued him in June 2005, alleging he physically abused her throughout their five-year affair.

Reached by telephone Wednesday, the congressman and successful car dealer said: "I can neither confirm nor deny because this was a private settlement. If I'd like to talk to you about it, I can't."

The Associated Press has been trying for months to find out the terms of the settlement.

According to a police report, Ore called 911 on her cell phone from the bathroom of Sherwood's Capitol Hill apartment in 2004 and reported that Sherwood had choked her while giving her a back rub. Sherwood admitted having an affair with the woman, but vehemently denied ever hurting her, and criminal charges were never filed. But Ore, now 30, sued for damages.

Sherwood's challenger, Chris Carney, has hammered the congressman over the affair in TV ads, calling Sherwood a hypocrite who brought "Washington values" to his rural northeastern Pennsylvania district.

Sherwood responded with his own ad, in which he looked directly into the camera and apologized for his conduct. Last month, his wife mailed a letter to voters that accused Carney of "needlessly cruel" campaign tactics.

Although GOP voters greatly outnumber Democrats in his conservative district, many people have said they would not vote for him again because of the affair.

Even before Ore settled, the congressman tried to keep a tight lid on the case. His lawyer asked a judge to prohibit disclosure of materials from the case, warning that Sherwood's opponents might try to use the information to harm him politically.

The lawyer, Bobby Burchfield, was especially adamant that any videotaped deposition of Sherwood not be released, saying the footage could be used against him in negative political ads.

Ore's attorney, Ning Ye of New York, declined to say where she is living now or how she can be reached.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[billvon 3,116]

This guy's not a republican leader, but the story is ironic nonetheless:


------------------------------------
Haggard steps down amid gay affair inquiry

Denver Post Staff Writers
Article Last Updated:11/02/2006 05:15:40 PM MST

Ted Haggard, one of the most prominent evangelical pastors in the nation, resigned today as president of the National Association of Evangelicals amid allegations that he carried on a three-year sexual relationship with a male prostitute.
-------------------------------------

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4588998?source=email

[Amazon 7]

Quote

This guy's not a republican leader, but the story is ironic nonetheless:

Hey are the republicans trying to tell everyone that they have a big tent and are inclusive of everyone???

Guess not.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Quote

This guy's not a republican leader, but the story is ironic nonetheless:

Hey are the republicans trying to tell everyone that they have a big tent and are inclusive of everyone???

Guess not.

They definitely seem to be pitching a tent for everyone, regardless of gender.

I thought only the Democrats did that.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Lucky... 0]

And the Republican people wonder why there is such a trunabout. Geez people, the fraud has been uncovered, this isn't 1 or 2 guys, this is a trend.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

And the Republican people wonder why there is such a trunabout. Geez people, the fraud has been uncovered, this isn't 1 or 2 guys, this is a trend.

Yeah, they're trying to play catch-up with the Dems so that there really IS no difference between the parties.

Still a way to go, though... maybe they should put cordons around Rock Creek Park and Chappaquiddick....

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

And the Republican people wonder why there is such a trunabout. Geez people, the fraud has been uncovered, this isn't 1 or 2 guys, this is a trend.

Yeah, they're trying to play catch-up with the Dems so that there really IS no difference between the parties.

Still a way to go, though... maybe they should put cordons around Rock Creek Park and Chappaquiddick....

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

Then they try to justify it by saying it's OK for us to be hypocrites if that person is a hypocrite.

-

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

In a way I agree with you. I do think there in these two cases there is a bit of a difference. That difference being that these two people have publicly and vocally denounced the exact things they were found doing.

The Republican was known for his vocal stance and support of "family values" fucking your mistress (never mind if he really abused her) is not really part of those grand "family values"

The priest guy, was a very vocal opponont of anything to do with homosexuality. Next thing you know, turns out he has been paying a guy to have sex with him.

I do think that creates a bit of a different situation. Otherwise, I would wholehartedly agree with you.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

In a way I agree with you. I do think there in these two cases there is a bit of a difference. That difference being that these two people have publicly and vocally denounced the exact things they were found doing.

The Republican was known for his vocal stance and support of "family values" fucking your mistress (never mind if he really abused her) is not really part of those grand "family values"

The priest guy, was a very vocal opponont of anything to do with homosexuality. Next thing you know, turns out he has been paying a guy to have sex with him.

I do think that creates a bit of a different situation. Otherwise, I would wholehartedly agree with you.

Which means you are also in agreement that it's OK to be a hypocrite as long as the other person is one also? I think that's a pretty childish attitude.

-

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

In a way I agree with you. I do think there in these two cases there is a bit of a difference. That difference being that these two people have publicly and vocally denounced the exact things they were found doing....

The priest guy, was a very vocal opponont of anything to do with homosexuality. Next thing you know, turns out he has been paying a guy to have sex with him.

From what I've read the claims have been denied by Haggart and the alleged gay lover has failed a polygraph test.

I'm wonder about the whole burden of proof aspect.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Which means you are also in agreement that it's OK to be a hypocrite as long as the other person is one also? I think that's a pretty childish attitude.

No, I don't agree with that part.

I agree that "what a person does in their personal life is nobody's business". These people have made value judgements about other people's personal life though. I believe that once you do that, that portion of your personal life becomes open for judegment as well.

If I am a very vocal supporter of PETA, my personal actions in my personal life become relevant.

If I am openly anti-gay, then my own sexual preferences become relevant.

If I am openly supporting traditional family values and publicly run an a campaign based on that. Then, my own personal behaviour relating to family values become relevant.

I don't care this priest paid to get fucked up the ass. I do think that it is important to point out such a public person is a hypocrite.

I doin't care this politician was banging his mistress (don't know enough about the abuse thing), I do think it is important to point out the guy his a hypocrite.

In summary, when you are very vocal about a certain issue, your private life as it relates to that issue no longer is private in my eyes.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

From what I've read the claims have been denied by Haggart and the alleged gay lover has failed a polygraph test.

I'm wonder about the whole burden of proof aspect.

Then, I withdraw my statements about the priest dude until more is known. The concept stands though.

[freethefly 6]

Quote

From what I've read the claims have been denied by Haggart and the alleged gay lover has failed a polygraph test.

I'm wonder about the whole burden of proof aspect.

Haggard admitted this morning that the allegations are true. He has been using crystal meth and having sex with a male prostitute. What a freaking hypocrit. So much for Bushyboi's favorite hatemonger!!!!LOL

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Haggard admitted this morning that the allegations are true. He has been using crystal meth and having sex with a male prostitute.

CITE?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

CITE

Here ya go cupcake

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/03/haggard.allegations/index.html

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado (CNN) -- The president of the National Association of Evangelicals resigned Thursday after accusations by a male prostitute that the pastor paid him for sex over three years.

The Rev. Ted Haggard said he also is temporarily stepping aside from the pulpit of his church in Colorado Springs pending an internal investigation by the church.

The church official who temporarily has assumed Haggard's post said late Thursday that there has been "some admission of guilt," but not to all of the allegations. He did not give any more details

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

And the Republican people wonder why there is such a trunabout. Geez people, the fraud has been uncovered, this isn't 1 or 2 guys, this is a trend.

Yeah, they're trying to play catch-up with the Dems so that there really IS no difference between the parties.

Still a way to go, though... maybe they should put cordons around Rock Creek Park and Chappaquiddick....

Exactly, try to pull us down with your party's slime.... won't work. Look, the Dem had the market cornered on sex deviance, the right had corruption and murder. Now the right is encroaching on us and which makes them the slimy full package. Too bad, it's gonna change and all you can do is to watch - deal with it the best you can.

Quote

Chappaquiddick....

Perhaps you missed thepost I entered where I wrote that the Dems used to be the party to ignore, now they're the party to choose.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

Then they try to justify it by saying it's OK for us to be hypocrites if that person is a hypocrite.

To flip, hpw far we've come from the aveage Republican saying, "It DOES matter what a politician does in his private life" and now you say it doesn't. Careful of teh witch hunt, you may one day be laberled a witch.

[billvon 3,116]

Haggard Has Now 'Admitted' To Some Gay Hustler's Accusations
November 3, 2006 - 9:30 am ET, Update 11:00 am ET

(Denver, Colorado) Evangelist Ted Haggard has admitted to some of the accusations made by a former gay escort, according to the pastor who has stepped in to replace him.

. . .

In an email sent late Thursday night to parishioners of Haggard's New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Acting Senior Pastor Ross Parsley said that Haggard has acknowledged some of the allegations made by

"It is important for you to know that he confessed to the overseers that some of the accusations against him are true," Parsley said in the e-mail.

"[Haggard] has willingly and humbly submitted to the authority of the board of overseers, and will remain on administrative leave during the course of the investigation," the email said.

The email did not indicate what Haggard had admitted to, however.

-----------------------------

I believe the correct talking point will be "we in no way condone or defend what Haggard did - but the Democrats are worse. Clinton. Chappaquiddick. Kennedy and Marilyn. ACLU. Activist judges. Cut and run. Next question?"

[freethefly 6]

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/10231729/detail.html?rss=den&psp=news

From the article;
On Wednesday he denied the allegations:: "I've never had a gay relationship with anybody, and I'm steady with my wife. I'm faithful to my wife."

However, the acting senior pastor at New Life, Ross Parsley, said in an e-mail sent to parishioners late Thursday that Haggard admitted to some of the accusations:

"It is important for you to know that he confessed to the overseers that some of the accusations against him are true," Parsley said in the e-mail.

Considering that there are only two allegations against him and that he admits to "some" of them well, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

In a way I agree with you. I do think there in these two cases there is a bit of a difference. That difference being that these two people have publicly and vocally denounced the exact things they were found doing.

The Republican was known for his vocal stance and support of "family values" fucking your mistress (never mind if he really abused her) is not really part of those grand "family values"

The priest guy, was a very vocal opponont of anything to do with homosexuality. Next thing you know, turns out he has been paying a guy to have sex with him.

I do think that creates a bit of a different situation. Otherwise, I would wholehartedly agree with you.

And that's what I've said forever, there IS a very distinct and justifyable double standard when you advocate theheads rolling for all offenders, then you become one. Tough shit to the violators, learn to not protest so loudly.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Which means you are also in agreement that it's OK to be a hypocrite as long as the other person is one also? I think that's a pretty childish attitude.

It is not childish, I'm rubber you're glue,........ neener-neener-neener

[Amazon 7]

Hey.. next thing you know.. the Right will come out with some semantic bullshit that hypocrisy is actually good and godlike.


Do as they say... not as they do....

Every good right winger should know this one.

In the latter days... you will know them by their deeds.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

Then they try to justify it by saying it's OK for us to be hypocrites if that person is a hypocrite.

To flip, hpw far we've come from the aveage Republican saying, "It DOES matter what a politician does in his private life" and now you say it doesn't. Careful of teh witch hunt, you may one day be laberled a witch.

Haggard has stepped down and Sherwood has admitted it and apologized. The voters will decide his fate.

And Clinton, Kennedy, etc... did what??

-

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Oh, how far the Libs have come since they days of

"what a person does in their personal life is nobodys business".

In a way I agree with you. I do think there in these two cases there is a bit of a difference. That difference being that these two people have publicly and vocally denounced the exact things they were found doing....

The priest guy, was a very vocal opponont of anything to do with homosexuality. Next thing you know, turns out he has been paying a guy to have sex with him.

From what I've read the claims have been denied by Haggart and the alleged gay lover has failed a polygraph test.

I'm wonder about the whole burden of proof aspect.

Then put down the Christian Science Monitor. This morning it was reported on the news that he partially admitted something was true about it, then stepped down.

I like, in this case, the ole smoke theory... (smoke/fire)


I do see a correaltion that you guys here on this forum are defending his morality the same way you guys defended Foley's criminality.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Which means you are also in agreement that it's OK to be a hypocrite as long as the other person is one also? I think that's a pretty childish attitude.

No, I don't agree with that part.

I agree that "what a person does in their personal life is nobody's business". These people have made value judgements about other people's personal life though. I believe that once you do that, that portion of your personal life becomes open for judegment as well.

If I am a very vocal supporter of PETA, my personal actions in my personal life become relevant.

If I am openly anti-gay, then my own sexual preferences become relevant.

If I am openly supporting traditional family values and publicly run an a campaign based on that. Then, my own personal behaviour relating to family values become relevant.

I don't care this priest paid to get fucked up the ass. I do think that it is important to point out such a public person is a hypocrite.

I doin't care this politician was banging his mistress (don't know enough about the abuse thing), I do think it is important to point out the guy his a hypocrite.

In summary, when you are very vocal about a certain issue, your private life as it relates to that issue no longer is private in my eyes.

This is my point that the Repubs here won't address. You have the microscope turned on you with more intensity when you view others with it with great intensity. I wonder if they will ever address that????