Allegedly "Conservative" Republican CA Assemblyman Quits Over Sex Tape

[jasonk282]

Really? What time and place is there to talk about repeatedly cheating on your wife to a colleague when you're supposed to be a staunch, family values conservative?

In a bar so you can blame that you were drunk:nanner:. Where does it say that his was "a staunch, family values conservative"?

There is a time and place for a private conversation, not my fault the guy could not keep his dick in his pants, he quit and i am sure his mistress with get canned as well.

 

[jasonk282]

Holy Shit I don't believe I missed this!
You mean a guy cheated on his wife?
In California?
No fucking way!

Next who knows, maybe we will someday have a President who cheats on his wife.
Maybe even in the White house.
But I doubt that will ever happen.

You mean like JFK or Bill Clinton?
Or do you Reagan and Bush

Sometimes I get the cheaters confused

 

[Sicario]

Self-righteous hypocrite. What a piece of shit....

Are you talking about politicians or priests? :dunno:

 

[Hot Mega]

In a bar so you can blame that you were drunk. Where does it say that his was "a staunch, family values conservative"?

The clown's district includes my city and here's where it says so,

The Capitol Resource Institute, a conservative, self-described "pro-family" advocacy organization that had given Duvall a "100%" score for his voting record on issues of concern to the group

 

[bodie54]

Maybe even in the White house.
But I doubt that will ever happen.

Like assemblyman Duvall, Bill Clinton's an adulterer, and a liar. The one obvious and significant difference between the two is that Clinton never dedicated himself to denying the civil rights of others in order to "defend the sanctity of marriage" like this hypocritical prick.

Wow, a Republican in a sex scandal that isn't homosexual in nature. Proof of evolution

:1orglaugh

Gay marriage ruined his marriage.

:rofl:

 

[jasonk282]

The clown's district includes my city and here's where it says so,

So the CRI is "pro-family" the artical never say's that the assemblyman is "pro-family".

If the republicans are "pro-family", then the Dems are "Anti-family" :dunno:since that would be the opposite of the Republicans.

 

[jasonk282]

Also when people come out saying that they are social conservatives or family-orientated, whcih this assemblyman did not. the CRI is family orientated, we just assumed he would be to by association.

They are opening up a huge can of worms, they better have a clean past or they are going to be run through the media.

 

[Hot Mega]

So the CRI is "pro-family" the artical never say's that the assemblyman is "pro-family".

You're kidding right? Uh, Jas...what is CRI's relationship to this story....In other words, why are they even mentioned in this story about this Assemblyman??

If the republicans are "pro-family", then the Dems are "Anti-family" :dunno:since that would be the opposite of the Republicans.

Well, I can't tell as this article and so many like it prove the opposite. Or at minimum "pro-family" applies to neither.

Also when people come out saying that they are social conservatives or family-orientated, whcih this assemblyman did not. the CRI is family orientated, we just assumed he would be to by association.

They are opening up a huge can of worms, they better have a clean past or they are going to be run through the media.

Do you know this guy?? Had you ever heard of this guy before this story broke?? My assumption is no. So how do you know anything about his voting record and/or what he's said in the past?? Like I said before, my city is in this guys district and he is my Assemblyman (or the Assemblyman my district voted into office) so I'm familiar which how he's voted but more importantly what he's said with respect to "family values".

Since CRI is conservative and so called "pro family" (aka their version of "family values") and they rate politicians based on their votes along those lines we don't assume anything as he has no apparent association to them.

The association is their judging of his voting record among other things to determine his adherence and support for issues they consider conservative and "pro-family". By their standard they rate him 100...the highest score.

 

[jasonk282]

.The association is their judging of his voting record among other things to determine his adherence and support for issues they consider conservative and "pro-family". By their standard they rate him 100...the highest score.

So because they are a family values group his association with said group makes him a family values guy? Or because they judge him to be family values based on his votes and comments in the past?

 

[Hot Mega]

So because they are a family values group his association with said group makes him a family values guy? Or because they judge him to be family values based on his votes and comments in the past?

In my opinion you're judge by what you do, say and represent in public (after all that's all we have to go by)...by that standard and what I know of this guy who is now my former Assemblyman, he is judged by the voters in his district to be a so called "family values" conservative. That opinion is back up by the fact that an organization like CRI, a so called "pro-family" (aka "family values) conservative organization gives him their top rating on conservative, "family values" issues.

I don't know what if any association he has to them but their association to him is their judging of what he says and how he votes.

He votes consistently with every issue conservatives consider "family values" issues.

Is that clear enough for you Jas..?:wave2:

 

[Facial_King]

So the CRI is "pro-family" the artical never say's that the assemblyman is "pro-family".

If the republicans are "pro-family", then the Dems are "Anti-family" :dunno:since that would be the opposite of the Republicans.

Also when people come out saying that they are social conservatives or family-orientated, whcih this assemblyman did not. the CRI is family orientated, we just assumed he would be to by association.

They are opening up a huge can of worms, they better have a clean past or they are going to be run through the media.

Oh god....the stupid - it actually HURTS!

I love your mathematical formula there.

So, if one is or can only be a social conservative or "family-orientated" by declaring so directly (i.e. "I am a family-orientated social conservative") then does that mean that one can only be a liberal, a leftist, "a secular", a progressive, a communist, a fascist, a terrorist, etc. by declaring so directly and unambiguously?? Give me a freakin' break!

Also, I'm guessing it won't be the least bit difficult to find something that Duvall said to insinuate himself with the family values crowd, unless he was only talkative when the subject was how his mistress was complaining that his cum was oozing out of her in the hours/day following one of their trysts.
(!!)

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/breaking-news/oc-assemblyman-in-bed-with-lob/

Just as one doesn't get a 100% rating with ACLU, or NOW, or Defenders of Wildlife without saying and doing things that effectively advocate for those causes, I doubt that Duvall got his perfect rating with that group merely by chance.

 

[Hot Mega]

Oh god....the stupid - it actually HURTS!

I love your mathematical formula there.

So, if one is or can only be a social conservative or "family-orientated" by declaring so directly (i.e. "I am a family-orientated social conservative") then does that mean that one can only be a liberal, a leftist, "a secular", a progressive, a communist, a fascist, a terrorist, etc. by declaring so directly and unambiguously?? Give me a freakin' break!

Also, I'm guessing it won't be the least bit difficult to find something that Duvall said to insinuate himself with the family values crowd, unless he was only talkative when the subject was how his mistress was complaining that his cum was oozing out of her in the hours/day following one of their trysts.
(!!)

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/breaking-news/oc-assemblyman-in-bed-with-lob/

Just as one doesn't get a 100% rating with ACLU, or NOW, or Defenders of Wildlife without saying and doing things that effectively advocate for those causes, I doubt that Duvall got his perfect rating with that group merely by chance.

Yeah, I suppose we can't trust who the NRA gives their highest ratings to actually believe how they vote or what they say....

But cut ol' Jas... a break. He IS allegedly a former Demo who supported Clinton, didn't vote for Bush and actually voted for Obama...His words not mine...:1orglaugh (Any takers on this bridge to nowhere I have for sale too?).:rofl:

 

[jasonk282]

In my opinion you're judge by what you do, say and represent in public (after all that's all we have to go by)...by that standard and what I know of this guy who is now my former Assemblyman, he is judged my the voters in his district to be a so called "family values" conservative. That opinion is back up by the fact that an organization like CRI, a so called "pro-family" (aka "family values) conservative organization gives him their top rating on conservative, "family values" issues.

I don't know what if any association he has to them but their association to him is their judging of what he says and how he votes.

He votes consistently with every issue conservatives consider "family values" issues.

Is that clear enough for you Jas..?:wave2:

Yep crystal clear thanks.

So when Rezko, Ayers, Emil Jones Jr, Rashid Kahaild and Rev. Pfleger all have had fundraisers and/or influenced our POTUS in some fashions it's ok but when we point out that they are extreamist we are either racist, or fear-mongers. I would think they have some influence on how he votes, or more importanly his 30ish number of czars, oops I mean "advisors", why even have a cabinet then, must tell him how to vote.

thanks for clearing it all up for me:thefinger

 

[Hot Mega]

Yep crystal clear thanks.

So when Rezko, Ayers, Emil Jones Jr, Rashid Kahaild and Rev. Pfleger all have had fundraisers and/or influenced our POTUS in some fashions it's ok but when we point out that they are extreamist we are either racist, or fear-mongers.

thanks for clearing it all up for me:thefinger

:1orglaugh Poor Jas...:laugh:

Could you define the exact, analogous points where Duvall is considered a "family values" conservative by his constituents based on what he says and how he votes....to Rezko, Ayers, etc. supporting Obama?

After all, they could merely have supported Obama simply because the didn't like the alternative..among other reasons right? Or did you think that far ahead?

 

[Friday on my mind]

If the republicans are "pro-family", then the Dems are "Anti-family" :dunno:since that would be the opposite of the Republicans.

Just to respond to this part Jason I would say that the republicans really have tried to depict it that way.Namely that they are pro-family and the democrates are not.

Whats the old biblical saying."Let he who is without sin cast the 1st stone"?

Thats the issue many of us have with these holier then thou "pro-family" types.They cast lots of stones but are just as much sinners as anyone else.

Pro-family,traditional values whatever you want to call it I think we get what they really are trying to say.It's a manifestation of resentment against all the societal changes that have occurred in the last 50 years or so in the US.The sexual revolution,civil rights movement for minorities and gays etc.They want the "Leave it to Beaver" world of everybody who counts is straight and white and only have sex in marriage back,even though that world never really existed.The old guns ,gays and god mantra that the republicans used quite effectively to win elections in the past is slipping away from them as americans (even if they still kind of agree with the the tradiational values line) now see they have bigger concerns (economic) then such things and the republicans really have not crafted a platform that begins to address them.They may be successfull in blocking what the dems are trying to do to address them such as blocking meaningfull health care reform,but the question is will that be something voters think is a real accomplishment? I don't think just being the party of "No" is a very positive winning message to win elections on.So all those hoping republicans are going to be the majority party again based on such are mistaken IMO.

 

[Hot Mega]

The old guns ,gays and god mantra that the republicans used quite effectively to win elections in the past is slipping away from them as americans (even if they still kind of agree with the the tradiational values line) now see they have bigger concerns (economic) then such things and the republicans really have not crafted a platform that begins to address them.

I would add that it's stories like this and many others which exposes them as being hypocrites which makes the water toting increasingly more difficult for their apologists.

 

[thinger]

The Dems are "Anti-family" :dunno:since that would be the opposite of the Republicans.

This is so dumb. Where does it say that Democrats have to be the direct opposite of Republicans. They're political parties, it's not as simple as that. Especially in America where everything is skewed to the right. The 'opposite of the republicans', if it existed... well, it wouldn't even be a political party.

 

[Facial_King]

Oh, I give up on jasonk - he's just too committed to ignorance.

Anyway, as for Duvall - I don't know if adultery is actually illegal in California, but if so, he can be added to the ever-expanding list of Republican Sex Offenders!

http://www.republicansexoffenders.com/

It's a fun read, in any case!

 

[titsrock]

Let's get back to seeing if these lobbyist babes are actually worth the resulting career-goes-up-in-flames-while-I-embarrass-myself-and-my family...

TMZ doesn't have anything...there's gotta be some pics of these ladies around...

I saw a photo of Sanford's Argentinian soul mate...hmm...not worth the flamethrower to the career and family, imo...

Will Big Daddy Duvall have a better taste in women?

 

[Facial_King]

His boasts about cheating, and the sexual details boasting (she was dripping his jizz - ever heard of pads, lady?) were really nasty...