Yeah, going to AA always helps...

Since when does going to AA help someone who is homosexual pedophile?

[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_go_co/congressman_e_mails[/url]
AA seems to have become the universal cure all for anyone who has a ghastly
problems. Next it will be the cure for cancer.

"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1tSUg.2072$uJ2.1572@dukeread03...[color=blue]
> Since when does going to AA help someone who is homosexual pedophile?
>
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_go_co/congressman_e_mails[/url]
> AA seems to have become the universal cure all for anyone who has a
> ghastly problems. Next it will be the cure for cancer.[/color]

Aren't you aware that if congressman Foley completes his tour of the drying
out clinic, he will automatically lose all interest in being a pedophile?
I love the ways creeps defend their actions ...because they're alcoholics,
because they were molested by clergy, because they never ate asparagus as
children, because they got a "C" in civics in junior high, because they went
to a segregated school, because, because, because.

Why can't they simply say, "I do these things because I'm a warped, twisted,
pathological sonofabitch!"[color=blue]
>
>[/color]

Reasoned Insanity, 10/4/2006, 1:47:01 PM,
<1tSUg.2072$uJ2.1572@dukeread03> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Since when does going to AA help someone who is homosexual pedophile?
>
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_go_co/congressman_e_mails[/url]
> AA seems to have become the universal cure all for anyone who has a
> ghastly problems. Next it will be the cure for cancer.[/color]

Firstly, I am in no way defending this guy for his actions. I think
they should throw the book at him, or better, let the dad and uncles
have a few hours with him in a locked room.

This fellow is going to a treatment center, not Alcoholics Anonymous.
There is a BIG difference between the two. Treatment centers are
basically a drying out place where they probe your inner feelings and
force you to admit there is something wrong with yourself. They think
they can teach you behavior modifications that will enable you to
control yourself. The better ones realize they can't make you do
anything and they strongly suggest you begin attending AA immediately
upon your release.

The problem is all sorts of sick people get sent to AA because it is
the only program that seems to work long term. Unfortunately AA does
not work for people who are not alcoholic and are not completely
convinced they cannot drink safely anymore. AA does not cure the
alcoholic of his illness, it only helps him to depend upon a Higher
Power to solve his problem.

Being a recovered alcoholic I speak to you from experience regarding
these things. I have personally heard many traumatic experiences of
alcoholics who did things under the influence that they would never
have done when sober. Alcohol erases all inhibitions and deepens the
nooks and crannies that we hide our secrets in. The Twelve Steps
illuminate those areas and we are forced to flush them out and become
responsible for our actions.

Mark Foley has more problems than alcoholism and he will not ever
recover from them unless he admits defeat, has a spiritual experience,
cleans up his past, makes restitution, and commits his life to helping
others. Hopefully those that he harmed will be able to put these
experiences behind them somehow and not let them affect the rest of
their lives.

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0es2n3xt0pwx700b@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Reasoned Insanity, 10/4/2006, 1:47:01 PM,
> <1tSUg.2072$uJ2.1572@dukeread03> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Since when does going to AA help someone who is homosexual pedophile?
>>
>> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_go_co/congressman_e_mails[/url]
>> AA seems to have become the universal cure all for anyone who has a
>> ghastly problems. Next it will be the cure for cancer.[/color]
>
> Firstly, I am in no way defending this guy for his actions. I think
> they should throw the book at him, or better, let the dad and uncles
> have a few hours with him in a locked room.
>
> This fellow is going to a treatment center, not Alcoholics Anonymous.
> There is a BIG difference between the two. Treatment centers are
> basically a drying out place where they probe your inner feelings and
> force you to admit there is something wrong with yourself. They think
> they can teach you behavior modifications that will enable you to
> control yourself. The better ones realize they can't make you do
> anything and they strongly suggest you begin attending AA immediately
> upon your release.
>
> The problem is all sorts of sick people get sent to AA because it is
> the only program that seems to work long term. Unfortunately AA does
> not work for people who are not alcoholic and are not completely
> convinced they cannot drink safely anymore. AA does not cure the
> alcoholic of his illness, it only helps him to depend upon a Higher
> Power to solve his problem.
>
> Being a recovered alcoholic I speak to you from experience regarding
> these things. I have personally heard many traumatic experiences of
> alcoholics who did things under the influence that they would never
> have done when sober. Alcohol erases all inhibitions and deepens the
> nooks and crannies that we hide our secrets in. The Twelve Steps
> illuminate those areas and we are forced to flush them out and become
> responsible for our actions.
>
> Mark Foley has more problems than alcoholism and he will not ever
> recover from them unless he admits defeat, has a spiritual experience,
> cleans up his past, makes restitution, and commits his life to helping
> others. Hopefully those that he harmed will be able to put these
> experiences behind them somehow and not let them affect the rest of
> their lives.[/color]


Congrats for having the strength to come to the point where you no longer
depend on alcohol. I personally have never known the "pleasure" of being
drunk. One thing I will say about this particular event though is that if
liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support what
folley did. They support children being to have sex and they also support
homosexuals. Why are they making such a big deal out of children having sex
with adults of the same sex?

Reasoned Insanity, 10/4/2006, 3:11:32 PM,
<EJTUg.2073$uJ2.37@dukeread03> wrote:
[color=blue]
> One thing I will say about this particular event though is that if
> liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support
> what folley did. They support children being to have sex and they
> also support homosexuals. Why are they making such a big deal out of
> children having sex with adults of the same sex?[/color]

That's because liberals don't give a damn about Foley, it's Hastert
they want. They are merely using Foley as a way to weaken the
Republican leadership.

--
"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts."
~ Will Rogers

"Reasoned Insanity" wrote >
[color=blue]
> if liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support[/color]
what[color=blue]
> folley did. They support children being to have sex and they also support
> homosexuals.[/color]

When you post a crock of shit like this it supports your use of insanity as
part of your moniker, but there is not a whit of evidence to support your
use the 'reasoned' qualifier.

--
wiNGNut
"of no ilk"

"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:EJTUg.2073$uJ2.37@dukeread03...[color=blue]
>
> Congrats for having the strength to come to the point where you no longer
> depend on alcohol. I personally have never known the "pleasure" of being
> drunk. One thing I will say about this particular event though is that if
> liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support what
> folley did. They support children being to have sex and they also support
> homosexuals. Why are they making such a big deal out of children having
> sex with adults of the same sex?[/color]

Hey, that's it! Post it again this week and demonstrate that you are a dumb
shit twice!

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0es2o4jt21mzh00e@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Reasoned Insanity, 10/4/2006, 3:11:32 PM,
> <EJTUg.2073$uJ2.37@dukeread03> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> One thing I will say about this particular event though is that if
>> liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support
>> what folley did. They support children being to have sex and they
>> also support homosexuals. Why are they making such a big deal out of
>> children having sex with adults of the same sex?[/color]
>
> That's because liberals don't give a damn about Foley, it's Hastert
> they want. They are merely using Foley as a way to weaken the
> Republican leadership.
>
> --
> "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts."
> ~ Will Rogers[/color]

It's not even Denny Hastert they really want. They want Bush's head on a
charger. And they don't dance near as good as Salome. . . .

Charles of Schaumburg

"Wingnut" <bigdogr@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:FSTUg.25449$DU3.13592@tornado.texas.rr.com...[color=blue]
>
> "Reasoned Insanity" wrote >
>[color=green]
> > if liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support[/color]
> what[color=green]
>> folley did. They support children being to have sex and they also support
>> homosexuals.[/color]
>
> When you post a crock of shit like this it supports your use of insanity
> as part of your moniker, but there is not a whit of evidence to support
> your use the 'reasoned' qualifier.[/color]


Yeah yeah yeah, keep pulling your BS out your ass. You know it's true that
liberals generally don't have a problem with kids having sex. You know it's
true that liberals generally support gays. With both of the above being
true, it is logically consistent to say that liberals support kids having
sex with gays, adult or otherwise. That is of coarse, unless you want to
tell kids that they can have sex with only certain people. Sounds like you
have a consistency problem. Have you tried ex-lax?

"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ubZUg.2086$uJ2.569@dukeread03...[color=blue]
>
> "Wingnut" <bigdogr@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:FSTUg.25449$DU3.13592@tornado.texas.rr.com...[color=green]
>>
>> "Reasoned Insanity" wrote >
>>[color=darkred]
>> > if liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support[/color]
>> what[color=darkred]
>>> folley did. They support children being to have sex and they also
>>> support homosexuals.[/color]
>>
>> When you post a crock of shit like this it supports your use of insanity
>> as part of your moniker, but there is not a whit of evidence to support
>> your use the 'reasoned' qualifier.[/color]
>
>
> Yeah yeah yeah, keep pulling your BS out your ass. You know it's true that
> liberals generally don't have a problem with kids having sex. You know
> it's true that liberals generally support gays. With both of the above
> being true, it is logically consistent to say that liberals support kids
> having sex with gays, adult or otherwise. That is of coarse, unless you
> want to tell kids that they can have sex with only certain people. Sounds
> like you have a consistency problem. Have you tried ex-lax?
>[/color]

One more time...what liberal has stated that kids having sex is OK?

"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Ae%Ug.2093$uJ2.1409@dukeread03...[color=blue]
>
> "Truckdude" <notl@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:opZUg.9104$753.1657@trnddc05...[color=green]
>>
>> "Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:ubZUg.2086$uJ2.569@dukeread03...[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> "Wingnut" <bigdogr@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
>>> news:FSTUg.25449$DU3.13592@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>>>>
>>>> "Reasoned Insanity" wrote >
>>>>
>>>> > if liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully
>>>> > support
>>>> what
>>>>> folley did. They support children being to have sex and they also
>>>>> support homosexuals.
>>>>
>>>> When you post a crock of shit like this it supports your use of
>>>> insanity as part of your moniker, but there is not a whit of evidence
>>>> to support your use the 'reasoned' qualifier.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah yeah yeah, keep pulling your BS out your ass. You know it's true
>>> that liberals generally don't have a problem with kids having sex. You
>>> know it's true that liberals generally support gays. With both of the
>>> above being true, it is logically consistent to say that liberals
>>> support kids having sex with gays, adult or otherwise. That is of
>>> coarse, unless you want to tell kids that they can have sex with only
>>> certain people. Sounds like you have a consistency problem. Have you
>>> tried ex-lax?
>>>[/color]
>>
>> One more time...what liberal has stated that kids having sex is OK?[/color]
>
>
> There were a lot of them complaining recently when the KS attourney
> general tried to get access to abortion clinic records looking for
> evidence of rape. They based their arguement on the "fact" that kids have
> the "right" to privacy. You won't can many conservatives supporting
> NAMBLA.
>[/color]

That is the second or third time one of you cons has mentioned this NAMBLA.
I googled it. Who knew there was such an organization? Oh, that's
right...you and badgolferman knew about it. It would be quite interesting
to find out the political leanings of its members.

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0es2o4jt21mzh00e@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Reasoned Insanity, 10/4/2006, 3:11:32 PM,
> <EJTUg.2073$uJ2.37@dukeread03> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> One thing I will say about this particular event though is that if
>> liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support
>> what folley did. They support children being to have sex and they
>> also support homosexuals. Why are they making such a big deal out of
>> children having sex with adults of the same sex?[/color]
>
> That's because liberals don't give a damn about Foley, it's Hastert
> they want. They are merely using Foley as a way to weaken the
> Republican leadership.
>[/color]

Psssst...the repugs are doing it all by themselves. The Democrats only have
to sit back and watch it unfold.

Reasoned Insanity wrote:
[color=blue]
> You know it's true that liberals generally don't have a problem with kids having sex.[/color]

Where do you get your information?

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0es2n3xt0pwx700b@news.readfreenews.net...[color=blue]
> Reasoned Insanity, 10/4/2006, 1:47:01 PM,
> <1tSUg.2072$uJ2.1572@dukeread03> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Since when does going to AA help someone who is homosexual pedophile?
>>
>> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_go_co/congressman_e_mails[/url]
>> AA seems to have become the universal cure all for anyone who has a
>> ghastly problems. Next it will be the cure for cancer.[/color]
>
> Firstly, I am in no way defending this guy for his actions. I think
> they should throw the book at him, or better, let the dad and uncles
> have a few hours with him in a locked room.
>
> This fellow is going to a treatment center, not Alcoholics Anonymous.
> There is a BIG difference between the two. Treatment centers are
> basically a drying out place where they probe your inner feelings and
> force you to admit there is something wrong with yourself. They think
> they can teach you behavior modifications that will enable you to
> control yourself. The better ones realize they can't make you do
> anything and they strongly suggest you begin attending AA immediately
> upon your release.
>
> The problem is all sorts of sick people get sent to AA because it is
> the only program that seems to work long term. Unfortunately AA does
> not work for people who are not alcoholic and are not completely
> convinced they cannot drink safely anymore. AA does not cure the
> alcoholic of his illness, it only helps him to depend upon a Higher
> Power to solve his problem.
>
> Being a recovered alcoholic I speak to you from experience regarding
> these things. I have personally heard many traumatic experiences of
> alcoholics who did things under the influence that they would never
> have done when sober. Alcohol erases all inhibitions and deepens the
> nooks and crannies that we hide our secrets in. The Twelve Steps
> illuminate those areas and we are forced to flush them out and become
> responsible for our actions.
>
> Mark Foley has more problems than alcoholism and he will not ever
> recover from them unless he admits defeat, has a spiritual experience,
> cleans up his past, makes restitution, and commits his life to helping
> others. Hopefully those that he harmed will be able to put these
> experiences behind them somehow and not let them affect the rest of
> their lives.[/color]

It's great to see a 'Friend of Bill W' here.

In article <M71Vg.16162$3T2.5612@trnddc06>, "Truckdude" <notl@cox.net>
wrote:
[color=blue]
> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:xn0es2o4jt21mzh00e@news.readfreenews.net...[color=green]
> > Reasoned Insanity, 10/4/2006, 3:11:32 PM,
> > <EJTUg.2073$uJ2.37@dukeread03> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> One thing I will say about this particular event though is that if
> >> liberals want to be logically consistant, they should fully support
> >> what folley did. They support children being to have sex and they
> >> also support homosexuals. Why are they making such a big deal out of
> >> children having sex with adults of the same sex?[/color]
> >
> > That's because liberals don't give a damn about Foley, it's Hastert
> > they want. They are merely using Foley as a way to weaken the
> > Republican leadership.
> >[/color]
>
> Psssst...the repugs are doing it all by themselves. The Democrats only have
> to sit back and watch it unfold.[/color]

Psssssssst....Hastert says the meeting never took place.
--