ANOTHER GOP sex scandal, this time with an underage boy.

[ViolaLee]

What is it with the Republicans and young boys and gay sex scandals? Is it the same phenomenon as Catholic priests?

Brown County political leader faces sex charges

Gannett Wisconsin Newspapers

GREEN BAY — The chairman of the Republican Party in Brown County faces criminal charges for allegedly fondling a 16-year-old Ethan House runaway and providing him with beer and marijuana late last year.

Donald Fleischman, 37, of Allouez, was charged last month with two counts of child enticement, two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a child and a single charge of exposing himself to a child.

If convicted on both felonies and all three misdemeanors, Fleischman faces up to 52 years in prison.

Fleischman’s attorney, Jeff Jazgar, said he plans to confront the charges at the preliminary hearing set for Oct. 29.

“My client is innocent of the charges,” Jazgar said Friday. “Our plan is to get some witnesses to testify and present enough information to dismiss the case.”

Efforts to reach Fleischman were unsuccessful.

Fleischman has resigned his post with the Brown County Republicans, said Kirsten Kukowski, communications director for the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

The teen, now 17, told authorities Fleischman took him to a hotel in Appleton during that time and then to a cabin near Florence for several days before returning to Fleischman’s Allouez home. The boy said Fleischman provided him with beer and marijuana, the complaint said.

The boy told police that when he would go to bed, Fleischman would fondle him and that on one occasion he awoke to find Fleischman at the foot of his bed masturbating.

http://www.thenorthwestern.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071015/OSH/310150043/1987

Please Republican political leaders, stop with the children at least. Mark Foley, Donald Fleischman, find men your own age, or at least legal age like Larry Craig and Ted Haggart did, but find them legally. What's with all the illegal sex Republicans leaders?

[underdawg]

It is like an epidemic amoung republicans. Here in Washingtom state another republican resigns because of a homosexual sex scandal.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hi5eZOrtHs2NAhldX5tp4so8EROgD8SKHU800

[ViolaLee]

Yeah I made a thread about him too.

It is an epidemic.

[Anti-Racism]

This thread is anti-Semitic.

Fleischmann is a famous Jewish name. I think this is a smear by Republican, Christian anti-Semites against one who they view infiltrated their party.

[ViolaLee]

This thread is anti-Semitic.

Fleischmann is a famous Jewish name. I think this is a smear by Republican, Christian anti-Semites against one who they view infiltrated their party.

That's a stretch. Are you kidding? If you're serious, please back it up with some proof. Because it's a very strange accusation. This is about a child molester. It has nothing to do with his religion or nationality.

Or maybe it's a conspiracy by the butter corporations who hate margarine. Fleischmann is a famous margarine name.

There's Fleischmann yeast too. Maybe it's an anti-bread conspiracy.

[jafar00]

This thread is anti-Semitic.

Fleischmann is a famous Jewish name. I think this is a smear by Republican, Christian anti-Semites against one who they view infiltrated their party.


Why do people pull out the anti-semite card to avoid dealing with the real issues? It doesn't work with most of us.

This is another elected member of the US Government who has been caught up in yet another underage gay sex scandal.

You can call out anti-semite and mention the holocaust all you like. It still doesn't address the welfare of an abused child.

[ViolaLee]

This republican political leader didn't only sexually molest a young boy, he gave the kid drugs and alcohol too.

When will the republican party do something about their sexual deviants?

[Alonzo]

I propose making a forum for Republican sex scandals. From the looks of things it would be one of the most active sections.

[Wndrtch]

This republican political leader didn't only sexually molest a young boy, he gave the kid drugs and alcohol too.

When will the republican party do something about their sexual deviants?


We do when we find them, unlike Dems who support people like the "Rapist in Chief" and "Captain Kennedy".

So, when are you guys going to do something about "Killer-Kennedy"? He gets wasted, starts driving think'n he's going to get lucky with an intern, runs off a bridge, then goes home to sleep off his drunken stupor. Mary-Jo survives for an hour, breathing in an air-pocket that was trapped, until the CO2 build-up knocks her unconscious and she drowns. HE HAD AN HOUR TO SAVE HER AND DIDN"T EVEN TRY! He did say he was sorry though. :sick:

You Dems act like he's some kind of Saint, because he calls Conservatives bad names. We've been waiting 40 years to see the right thing happen there. Before you start throwing stones, you should pick-up your own messes first, so you won't be such a hypocrite yourself.

[Deadshot]

I can't argue Kennedy. I have to agree with the evidence that because of his name and Money he got away with murder...but "Rapist and Chief"?

Can you back that up? Rape is forcible sex. He's called "Slick Willie" for a reason. I don't think he forced anyone, do you have proof that he did?

[Labrocca]

When will the republican party do something about their sexual deviants

You mean like convict them and place them in jails? Yeah I guess they are just covering it up right? Maybe a public lynching would satisfy you?

If convicted on both felonies and all three misdemeanors, Fleischman faces up to 52 years in prison.

I bet a liberal judge gives him 2 weeks counseling.

[Wndrtch]

I can't argue Kennedy. I have to agree with the evidence that because of his name and Money he got away with murder...but "Rapist and Chief"?

Can you back that up? Rape is forcible sex. He's called "Slick Willie" for a reason. I don't think he forced anyone, do you have proof that he did?


Check out Juanita Broderick. There was a Dateline interview with Lisa Meyers, but NBC pulled all videos, and all mention of the interview. Hillary's pretty tight with "Old Media".

http://www.deletehillary.com/rape.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ix1uCqKzVI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KZ8ICvutc0

Inside Cover NewsMax.Com 1/17/99 ".Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon told the Arizona Republic it left him "nauseated". Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays told the New York Times it was "horrific". Those are just two of the on the record reactions from House members who have viewed the evidence now being kept under lock and key in D.C.'s Gerald Ford Building -- about a rape allegedly committed in 1978 by then- Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton. Now Inside Cover has learned that the secret House material on the alleged rape of Jane Doe #5, a.k.a. Juanita Broaddrick, is so powerful and convincing that it actually reduced another House member -- a man -- to tears. Thursday night, on CNBC's "Hardball," host Chris Matthews alluded to an unnamed Representative who Matthews said was brought to tears as he reviewed the Broaddrick material.."

He's called "Slick-Willie" because he gets away with criminal activity.

[ViolaLee]

The Clinton smear is off topic and a well known conspiracy theory. And what a huge waste of money that smear campaign was.

Our nation spent more tax money conducting Ken Starr's investigation of President Bill Clinton's affair with intern Monica Lewinsky, than they did in the investigation of the September 11th 2001 attacks on the United States.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/october172007/repub_scandals_10_17_07.php


I propose making a forum for Republican sex scandals. From the looks of things it would be one of the most active sections.
Great idea. There are so many I've lost track.

Larry Craig
Mark Foley
Ted Haggard
Bob Allen
Glenn Murphy Jr
Donald Fleischman (the underage boy)
Richard Curtis (the blackmail)
David Vitter

http://www.badmouth.net/top-five-republican-gay-sex-scandals/



So, when are you guys going to do something about "Killer-Kennedy"?


Maybe when you do something about "Killer-Laura Bush" who also had a car accident in which a person died.

[ECW]

This republican political leader didn't only sexually molest a young boy, he gave the kid drugs and alcohol too.

When will the republican party do something about their sexual deviants?


We do when we find them, unlike Dems who support people like the "Rapist in Chief" and "Captain Kennedy".

So, when are you guys going to do something about "Killer-Kennedy"? He gets wasted, starts driving think'n he's going to get lucky with an intern, runs off a bridge, then goes home to sleep off his drunken stupor. Mary-Jo survives for an hour, breathing in an air-pocket that was trapped, until the CO2 build-up knocks her unconscious and she drowns. HE HAD AN HOUR TO SAVE HER AND DIDN"T EVEN TRY! He did say he was sorry though. :sick:

You Dems act like he's some kind of Saint, because he calls Conservatives bad names. We've been waiting 40 years to see the right thing happen there. Before you start throwing stones, you should pick-up your own messes first, so you won't be such a hypocrite yourself.


How does a sex scandal in the year 2007 get rated with the Chappaquiddick tragedy? Does every rightwinger that gets caught with his wang in the wrong underaged hole get to bring up Ted Kennedy as an excuse for his own behavior? How many times does this comparison get made before they are not valid anymore? Is the Kennedy sex scandal worth 100 Republican sex scandals? Is Ted Kennedy so influential that he inspired every sexually preverted repressed rightwinger to commit their dispicable deed? What happenend to the Party of Personal Responsibility? (It's a fine slogan until you have to actually put up or shut up.) So many questions. So few answers.

[Deadshot]

Check out Juanita Broderick. There was a Dateline interview with Lisa Meyers, but NBC pulled all videos, and all mention of the interview. Hillary's pretty tight with "Old Media".

Inside Cover NewsMax.Com 1/17/99 ".Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon told the Arizona Republic it left him "nauseated". Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays told the New York Times it was "horrific". Those are just two of the on the record reactions from House members who have viewed the evidence now being kept under lock and key in D.C.'s Gerald Ford Building -- about a rape allegedly committed in 1978 by then- Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton. Now Inside Cover has learned that the secret House material on the alleged rape of Jane Doe #5, a.k.a. Juanita Broaddrick, is so powerful and convincing that it actually reduced another House member -- a man -- to tears. Thursday night, on CNBC's "Hardball," host Chris Matthews alluded to an unnamed Representative who Matthews said was brought to tears as he reviewed the Broaddrick material.."

He's called "Slick-Willie" because he gets away with criminal activity.


I found this in another source, Slate.com "Juanita Broderick, named in the Paula Jones suit only as "Jane Doe No. 5." This is the most controversial and damning of the allegations. Paula Jones' lawyers contend that Clinton violently forced himself on Broderick 20 years ago, when he was attorney general of Arkansas and she was a campaign worker, and then bribed and intimidated her into silence. Broderick's friends, who were interviewed by the Jones lawyers and the media, claim to have heard the story first hand. But last winter Broderick signed an affidavit denying that Clinton made any sexual advances towards her. Then, a few months later, she told the Office of the Independent Counsel that the affidavit was false. Like Monica Lewinsky, Broderick was granted immunity from prosecution by Starr. "

Now poo-poo the Liberal source, but it is true the Broderick got immunity, several other sources say the same thing. So where's the Rape conviction?

I've met a few rape victims, they want their attacker jailed and/or punished. This has bullshit written all over it.

If you want to believe it, and you do, I won't stop you. But if Ken Starr and the Republican Congress can come one vote shy of impeaching a hated rival over lying over a blowjob, the GOP must be incompetant indeed to not be able to get a conviction or impeach someone lying about a rape.

Your scenario is simply not plausible.

[gemosological]

Quoting Jafar00, post #6:

You can call out anti-semite and mention the holocaust all you like. It still doesn't address the welfare of an abused child.

...or the sickness of the self-righteous and sanctimonious perpetrators.

RRD
Grrrr........:fight:[hr]
I propose making a forum for Republican sex scandals. From the looks of things it would be one of the most active sections.


You might be right, Alonzo. But, hey, they made their beds so it's only right that they be forced to sleep in them.

RRD.
:clapper:

[piratemonkey]

You Dems act like he's some kind of Saint, because he calls Conservatives bad names. We've been waiting 40 years to see the right thing happen there. Before you start throwing stones, you should pick-up your own messes first, so you won't be such a hypocrite yourself.


Notice how some conservatives love pulling out decades old examples of wrong-doing to justify their current wrong-doing?

There's more than on logical problem with that argument...

[PatrickHenry]

You Dems act like he's some kind of Saint, because he calls Conservatives bad names. We've been waiting 40 years to see the right thing happen there. Before you start throwing stones, you should pick-up your own messes first, so you won't be such a hypocrite yourself.


Notice how some conservatives love pulling out decades old examples of wrong-doing to justify their current wrong-doing?
I did notice! It's a dishonest debate tecnique called a red herring. Otherwise known as derailing the thread... :grrrr:

[ECW]

You Dems act like he's some kind of Saint, because he calls Conservatives bad names. We've been waiting 40 years to see the right thing happen there. Before you start throwing stones, you should pick-up your own messes first, so you won't be such a hypocrite yourself.


Notice how some conservatives love pulling out decades old examples of wrong-doing to justify their current wrong-doing?
I did notice! It's a dishonest debate tecnique called a red herring. Otherwise known as derailing the thread... :grrrr:


Locking these preverts up would be a good start but every last one of them acts like they are not criminals and that their status as elected officials ought to protect them from spending time in prison. They had no trouble talking the talk when running for election about locking criminals up but now when they are the criminals they want to go to a treatment facility or have probation or home arrest. Slime buckets.

[I Like Beer]

I posted this in another thread. For all those conservatives who bash gays a little too much ;).

From the Journal of Abnormal Psychology....

http://www.oogachaga.com/downloads/homop...rousal.pdf


The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.


Is there really anything else to say?

[Pookie]

I don't think this is anti-semitic. I don't think the Catholic priests' sex scandals with boys were anti-Catholic. What we're talking about here is idiot, uncaring and irresposible adults who ruin childrens' entire lives because of their enjoyment of an absolute perversion. Republican, Democrat, Jewish or Catholic, it's the same thing: abuse.
And anyone who performs these sick acts on children should become Bubba's girlfriend in a state pen.
Purrs,

[Interrested]

I find this disturbing. However, this man's actions are in no relation whatsoever to the republican party. He is simply a sick and twisted individual who happens to be a Republican party leader. The article doesn't have anything to do with Republicans, it is more of a subtle attempt by the media to portray the party in a negative way.

[preservanation]

Subtlety is not the media's strong point, especially when it comes to the GOP.
It is obvious and well documented that the media is liberal.
What's sad is that they try to make us believe that this fact doesn't cloud or influence their reporting on events.
Riiiight....
Not only are they biased, but they are also a poor judge of the American intellect and perception.

[Interrested]

No, subtlety certainly is not their strong point. Which is why I included "attempt" in my original post. The problem is, they aren't a poor judge of the majority of American citizens. It bothers me how blind and misinformed people are today. Especially because there are a lot of people who would read this article and think that because they included that he was a republican, it means that fact had some importance in the event.

[preservanation]

I agree sir!
The media seems to be the only business which thinks their customers are idiots and need not appeal to their wants and desires.
How most of them stay in business is a mystery to me.

[Alonzo]

The papers who cater to wants and desires are often laughing stalks like the Boston Herald. It often puts insults in the headline on the front page, and covers lots of celebrity news. Even many who buy it compare it to a tabloid.

The general public wants dumbed down news. Those who give it to them tend to gain readers.

[Interrested]

I agree sir!
The media seems to be the only business which thinks their customers are idiots and need not appeal to their wants and desires.
How most of them stay in business is a mystery to me.


Because there's not much of an alternative, unfortunately.

[gemosological]

I find this disturbing. However, this man's actions are in no relation whatsoever to the republican party. He is simply a sick and twisted individual who happens to be a Republican party leader. The article doesn't have anything to do with Republicans, it is more of a subtle attempt by the media to portray the party in a negative way.


If the current incarnation of the Republican Party and the current Administration hadn't gone around and proclaimed themselves as the Party of "Family Values", hadn't gone around proclaiming themselves as the "Faith-Based" Party, hadn't gone and condemned Clinton for having an extra-marital affair, something that somewhere between 50-70% of the American public will do at some point in their marriages, or lie about it after getting caught- something else the vast majority of that 50-70% of the American public will do when caught- then maybe the Republicans wouldn't be feeling such heat about all these sick and twisted minds.

Don't forget that adage that says that every time you point the finger at somebody else you will have three more fingers pointing right back at you.
What you're seeing here is that principle at work in a very tangible and uncomfortable way.

RRD
:D

[Interrested]

Your post has only further proven my point, by showing that the media is using this man as a public example of what they would like the people to view the republican party as. You've also proven my point further by showing that this man isn't showing himself on behalf of the republican party, because "Family Values" don't involve a perverted relationship with a 16-year-old. Plus, you may have attempted to show me that I'm wrong, but you're using percentile statistics that have no back to them. Show me proof that 50-70% of the American people are going to have a marital-affair in their lives and maybe that statement will actually have some meaning. The party may have condemned Clinton because as the president he needs to be a role model, and his marriage with Hillary is merely for the political image - its rare to see the two of them holding hands walking on the beach.

[lily]

Interrested are you trying to tell me that if this was a Democrat, the headline or the article wouldn't mention his political party?

[gemosological]

Your post has only further proven my point, by showing that the media is using this man as a public example of what they would like the people to view the republican party as. You've also proven my point further by showing that this man isn't showing himself on behalf of the republican party, because "Family Values" don't involve a perverted relationship with a 16-year-old. Plus, you may have attempted to show me that I'm wrong, but you're using percentile statistics that have no back to them. Show me proof that 50-70% of the American people are going to have a marital-affair in their lives and maybe that statement will actually have some meaning. The party may have condemned Clinton because as the president he needs to be a role model, and his marriage with Hillary is merely for the political image - its rare to see the two of them holding hands walking on the beach.


My figures may have been a little high, but here is a link and some figures you might find interesting:

link (www.adulthoodwonderful.com/survive%20affairs/who_has_affairs_-_and_why.htm)

3. How Prevalent are Affairs?
Conservative estimates are that 60 percent of men and 40 percent of women will have an extramarital affair. These figures are even more significant when we consider the total number of marriages involved since it's unlikely that all the men and women having affairs happen to be married to each other. If even half of the women having affairs (or 20 percent) are married to men not included in the 60 percent having affairs, then at least one partner will have an affair in approximately 80 percent of all marriages.

But we need to take a closer look at the statistics on affairs to determine what they can contribute to an understanding of our sexual patterns. While affairs happen in non-marital, "committed" relationships as well as within marriage, most of the statistics deal only with "extramarital" affairs. These statistics began with Kinsey's reports in the 1940's and early 1950's. Kinsey's samples included 5,000 men and showed that by age 40, 50 percent of the men had experienced extramarital sexual intercourse. Kinsey's original samples of 6,000 women showed that by age 40, 26 percent of the women had experienced extramarital sexual intercourse.

Later studies dealing exclusively with men indicate a continuous increase in the number of men having extramarital affairs. The increase for women having affairs has been even more significant. Some of the statistics, both for men and for women, are extremely high and legitimately debated, but many people question any statistics on extramarital affairs, arguing that statistics are unreliable and confusing and that no one knows precisely how prevalent affairs are. While there are slight differences in the estimates based on clinical studies and questionnaires, the bottom line is compelling in showing an extremely high (and rising) incidence of extramarital affairs.

RRD
:shock: :question: