Jon Matthews Houston Rt Wing Talk Radio Host Indicted: Indecency w. a Child

that and the fact he admitted he was gloating in a later post in this very thread.

"Giddyup, you accused me of gloating. That caught my attention. You know I guess you are right, though I would say anger is mixed with the gloating."

 

Ah, I totally missed that.

Still, gloating never entered my mind when I read the original post.

 

Just shows the difference between the two sides... liberals are willing to consider viewpoints that might show them in an unfavorable light while the right would immediately react with loud and tortured language...

 

Damn, that giddyup has insticts!

I went with the gloating because I've never even heard of this guy and glynch (whom I do like as an internet creature even while disliking his politics) identifies him as one of my "heroes."

This is just a gross generalization-- emphasis gross.

You guys can try to glom this onto the conservatives, but understand this: it is no different than the pedophiles who "beard" themselves as youth leaders, teachers, or coaches to insinutate themselves into a youthful population to satisfy their perversions.

Being a conservative "icon" gives them a headstart on the benefit of the doubt until they are caught with their pants down.

We <b>all</b> should be outraged at the abuse of power or cause... instead of chortling and generalizing.

This is nothing about conservatism except the convenience of the shield it provides and to victimize it for someone's own prurient interest or prediliction.

 

again..please tell me you're not serious.

 

OK, you lost me on that one...

 

Originally posted by glynch:

Hey there are worse things than gloating. A little gloating never hurt anyone. .

<b>No problem, I agree.</b>

Beating off in front of minors for instance is worse . Or trying to minimize the damage that could be done to an impressionable minor as Jorge and his cohorts do

<b>That deserves a retraction. How does Jorge damage minors? You're not saying....?</b>

Noone responded to the fact that I'm sick of the "family values" crap from conservatives whose personal morals are no better than the average liberals'.

<b>There you go generalizing again.</b>

Beating up on me for gloating is just another variant of shooting the messenger.

<b>I didn't beat you up; I kidded you good naturedly. I don't think anyone else beat you up either...</b>

Fess up, you guys gloated over Monica Lewinski. I know Madmax will admit to only profound sorrow for the fate of the nation as a whole, its effect on the the presidency as an insitutuion or the insult to the legal system, but I'm talking about the rest of you conservatives.


<b>I was irked to watch Clinton lie to the nation and before a Grand Jury. There was nothing to gloat about. He got away with it.</b>

As a liberal I would advocate a relatively light sentence for Matthews, who seems to be a relatively non-violent offender. Perhaps if we can get him some treatment, he will be able to decrease his self hatred and become more

<b>How do you know about his self-hatred?</b>

 

giddyup, if you're not going to use the quote method, could you at least not use it the same way others don't use it?

 

I don't recall gloating over Monica, especially since I thought it was a bad political move that was managing to make Clinton into a victim.

Not only was it a bad thing for our public institutions, but it also wasn't even a good political move, especially elevating everything to the level it was elevated to (the story hurt Clinton - there are many people who didn't like what he had done, but turning it into the circus it became negated a good bit of the damage that would've been done just by the story. It becomes an issue where people who disagreed with the President's behavior were defending him because it felt like he was being picked on).

But hey, I agree on the family values thing. There are a good many conservatives I know who are horrible to their familes and a few liberals who are among the most devoted familiy people I know (Hecjk, my mother is very liberal, and she's about as devoted to what we would consider "family values" as anyone I know. My father, who is on his third marriage, is very conservative and hasn't done so well in the "family values" department - especially that whole not committing adultery thing).

Of course, I never understood why "family values" was a political issue anyway. I do want my leaders to have personal morals, but I don't see the specific lawmaking issues that come with having good personal morals.

 

Family Values is as much of a code word as inner city.

 

I once asked you to instruct me on this fine art. You ignored me, so I continue to do it the only way I know how. Do you really have a hard time with it or are you just picking?

 

I don't but there must be somewhere to be between "pleased with himself and self-hatred. I thought conservatives were too prone to seeing things as black or white?

 

Isn't "family values" as espoused by the conservative cause more about preserving the traditions of marriage and nuclear families rather than opposing pedophilia-- everybody does that!

 

I know you know this, but I'll point it out anyway.

Those who quote other people, but don't use the quote function tend to bold the statement of the person to whom they're about to respond. Then respond in normal font and emphasis.

For example:

I once asked you to instruct me on this fine art. You ignored me, so I continue to do it the only way I know how. Do you really have a hard time with it or are you just picking?

I know you know this, but I'll point it out anyway.

Those who quote other people, but don't use the quote function tend to bold the statement of the person to whom they're about to respond.

 

Nothing on that list includes exposing himself to a minor.

 

Speaking of, I was reading the Dallas Morning News online, and they have a story about Wal-Mart trying to build in the "inner city" again, and I hate to admit that my first thought was of them going in to Oak Cliff or some other poor, minority-majority neighborhood.

Turns out, the Morning News actually meant the inner part of the city (though I don't know that I'd consider this area the "inner" part of Dallas), actually an upscale neighborhood just off North Central Expressway near Mockingbird.

I guess I've fallen for the code words.

 

Oops. I misread the story. It's near McKinney Ave, not Mockingbird. So that is closer to downtown.