Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« The Stranger and Crystal Meth | Update to You Want Art? »

Friday, July 13, 2007

Bad News

posted by on July 13 at 15:31 PM

Another political sex scandal: a politician in Indiana was found in a seedy motel room with a 15 year-old boy and drugs. Unfortunately he’s a Democrat.

RSS icon Comments

1

That poor boy. :( I wonder if the pills were for the Councilman or the boy.... :(

Posted by Phelix | July 13, 2007 3:58 PM
2

In politics it's better to be caught with a dead girl than a live boy. Guess he didn't get that memo.

Posted by free advice | July 13, 2007 4:16 PM
3

There's your third, Dan. Careful what you put out into the universe, eh?

Democrat or not, I'm glad a sex offender is now in the hands of the law.

Posted by OddlyEnough | July 13, 2007 7:13 PM
4

The party affiliation isn't what matters. What I want to know is his stance on gay issues, what he thinks the age of consent should be, and position on drugs. By which I mean: is he a hypocrite or not?

Posted by east coaster | July 13, 2007 8:49 PM
5

I've spent the week helping a woman find her 15 year old, gay runaway son (the cops picked him up in Volunteer Park), and I'm just happy I didn't see this before he was found.

Posted by Gitai | July 13, 2007 10:45 PM
6

Can't win 'em all.

Posted by MBI | July 14, 2007 9:49 AM
7

Unfortunately, he's a democrat? How about, unfortunately, there's a 15-year-old boy involved?

Partisanship is all well & good, but what does it say about your moral position when you forget to acknowledge what's vastly more unfortunate about the situation?

Posted by Eric Arrrrr | July 14, 2007 10:08 AM
8

What's it say about your moral position when you need to have it pointed out to you? The vastly more unfortunate part of the situation should be readily apparent to anyone who can read; Dan Savage shouldn't need hand-hold you through an explanation of the obvious.

Posted by Darcy | July 14, 2007 10:51 AM
9

yeah it's too bad for that 15 yr old that this won't get to be used for political gains for the democrats.

Posted by coolidge | July 14, 2007 12:19 PM
10

"Unfortunately he's a democrat"? No love lost there: the demmy-crats are pretty fucked up too. They are as much on the corporate take as the reppy-ublicans. They are equally invested in keeping the sheeple distracted and confused so they can pad their bank accounts and play games with each other. Fuck 'em both.
Why doesn't America have REAL political parties? France has 7 major ones.. and we have 6x as many cityoens as France.
"Democracy", my ass.

Posted by treacle | July 14, 2007 2:21 PM
11

So to Dan, the real problem is that the guy is a democrat.

Apparently, the problem is because sex with 15 year olds and drug use is acceptable to him, but that people over react and will nail the democrat to the wall.

Or perhaps he hates sex with kids but is willing to use someone elses tradgedy to further his own political gains.

Either way, Dudes got some seriously misplaced priorties...

Posted by ecce homo | July 14, 2007 6:01 PM
12

I am outraged that Dan Savage thinks that the biggest issue here is that this man is a Democrat! OUTRAGED! Horrified! Scandalized!

Lighten up, folks.

Posted by Michigan Matt | July 14, 2007 6:58 PM
13

treacle-No. 10

We don't have more political parties because our system if "first past the post." Whoever wins a majority get the seat. We don't do representational apportionment (where you vote for a party, and every party gets seats based on how it does). With a system that rewards only those who place first, there is a lot of pressure for people to make compromises and form alliances. Which is what we get--two large, alliance based parties with strong regional variation.

In order to get more parties, we would have to abandon the idea that people for people, not parties.

Posted by prometheusnox | July 15, 2007 7:29 AM
14

Has any of you self-righteous morons complaining about the phrase "unfortunately he's a democrat" ever heard of a "tongue-in-cheek" statement?.

Doesn't it make more sense that this was not meant to be taken seriously? that it was said facetiously? in layman's terms: THAT IT WAS A F***ING JOKE?. Jesus Christ on a baby doll!! >_>

Later ^_^

Posted by Malchik | July 15, 2007 7:37 AM
16

Thank God he's a Republican!

Posted by Michigan Matt | July 15, 2007 10:58 AM
17

Yeah, one of 3 on hte NYC council.

Posted by mike | July 15, 2007 11:26 AM
18

Ah don't be upset it's a democrat, they're pretty much all the same anyway.... At least a pervert is caught!

Posted by 2lesmoms | July 16, 2007 2:22 PM
19

To give Dan credit, the article he linked assumed the guy was a republican and was edited when it turned out he was a democrat.

Posted by Ex-Conservative | July 18, 2007 5:41 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).