Post:44496 Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 10:40 am Post subject: Moral
Turpitude!! Reply with quote
The question I have is... would the USCF be better or worse? If we
elect a person that has no morals(however you deem them) in their
personal life. If a person was cheating on their wife(with children
involved). This leading to divorce. If that person married the woman
they were cheating with,(but refused to admit to that marrage). If
that person were to run for election to the EB of the USCF, let's
complicate it a little more, lets just say that his wife was running
also, and neither, of them disclosed their relationship (legal or
common law, which is accepted in most states) Lets complicate it a
little more,say it was legal(in another country)
Could we expect openess and honesty in their dealings on the EB.
Would the USCF be better or worse??? Would we want open and honest
candidates or MORAL TURPITUDE.??? It is just a question! I just
wondered how far some of us would allow the USCF to slide, to be
popular. Could the attack on a person(however dissident they
themselves maybe), be because that person is getting to close to the
truth.

In love of the game
Harry Payne
_________________
Being the best you can be is your responsibility. Few others will lend
a hand.
In love of the game. Harry Payne

"Vote for Sam Sloan: proud to have had sexual relations with minors!"

This platform has already garnered its share of supporters....

samsloan wrote:
Post:44496 Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 10:40 am Post subject: Moral
Turpitude!! Reply with quote
I just
wondered how far some of us would allow the USCF to slide, to be
popular. Could the attack on a person(however dissident they
themselves maybe), be because that person is getting to close to the
truth.

That would depend now wouldn't it?Glittering Generalities aside don't
"imply" something you are not brave enough to say directly. Question:"
Are all "Samites" smarmly little cowards?


In love of the game
Harry Payne
_________________
Being the best you can be is your responsibility. Few others will lend
a hand.
In love of the game. Harry Payne

You are assuming that Harry Payne was referring to me. He was not
referring to me. Here is the reply that I posted:

I think I know to whom you are referring and it is not me.

My answer is that the fact that a man or a woman is cheating on his or
her spouse has no relevance. None whatever.

I do believe however that if two candidates for the same elective
office are married to each other, it should be disclosed to the
voters.

Sam Sloan

On May 4, 11:49 am, samsloan wrote:
You are assuming that Harry Payne was referring to me. He was not
referring to me. Here is the reply that I posted:

I think I know to whom you are referring and it is not me.

My answer is that the fact that a man or a woman is cheating on his or
her spouse has no relevance. None whatever.

I do believe however that if two candidates for the same elective
office are married to each other, it should be disclosed to the
voters.

Sam Sloan

Are you married to someone Sam?

Was it not Diogenes who was searching for an "honest man"?

I do not think he ever found one.

Where will we ever find this person of "sound character"?

What if it turns out, as is likely, that he is just a fool?

Actually, I should remain silent as this thread is to my advantage,
since it is obvious that you are directing your remarks to a certain
political opponent of mine.

Sam Sloan

On May 4, 3:30 pm, samsloan wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry Payne Quote: Originally Posted by ueschessmom I hope this doesn't cross the line into unacceptable political commentary and moderators feel free to pull this and/or lock it if you think it does. I don't condone marital infidelity and having worked in a matrimonial law firm in a previous life, I can attest to the havoc it wreaks on families and children but at least from my blue state perspective, we've had some strong U.S. presidents whose marital records were less than pristine and some overwhelmingly weak ones with apparently clean records with respect to infidelity. ueschessmom, This was just a question, on ethics ,what is and is not exceptable.There is not, nor was there meant to be a politial commentary. I agree wholeheartlly with your statement right up to the "but" . Character is the question, "but" is not the answer. A person either has or doesn't have character. I usually find "but" when we hate admitting the truth or, hate finding fault in a loved one. Excample; " My son may have stolen that "but" he is not a thief. I hear alot of condemnation coming from the blue states in relationship to the character of the current President. The red states at this point are the "but" states." But "he is sincere, "but "someone had to do something. The question is, and will be do we want someone of dobious character. Or someone of sound character on the EB. Do we want someone who hipocritically attacks another persons character. Or someone with sound , honest character. In love of the game. Harry payne

Was it not Diogenes who was searching for an "honest man"?

I do not think he ever found one.

Where will we ever find this person of "sound character"?

What if it turns out, as is likely, that he is just a fool?

Actually, I should remain silent as this thread is to my advantage,
since it is obvious that you are directing your remarks to a certain
political opponent of mine.

Sam Sloan

doubtful

You are obviously a Republican and one of the very few remaining Bush
supporters. Otherwise, you would know that the popularity of Clinton
both in the USA and world-wide went UP not down during the Lewinsky
scandal.

The idea that politicians are crooks goes back hundreds of years and
is nothing new.

Nobody has accused Bush adultery, only of drunk driving, yet his
popularity is dropping daily and he has far fewer supporters than
Clinton had even during the lowest point of his presidency.

Your posting tells us more about your character or lack of it than it
does about any person in political office.

Sam Sloan

Anybody who supports the War in Iraq, as you do, is a nut.

I am glad that you have made your politics clear in view of your
support for Paul and Suzie.

No. I am not part of the left-wing spectrum. I am a registered
Republican. I am extremely conservative, both personally and
financially. I am opposed to spending money, both my own money and
other people's money.

That I is why I am running for election. I am opposed to the big
spenders on the USCF Executive Board, who have been freely spending
USCF membership dues money, who have been running up huge deficits,
who will lose money again this year, and who have been all too willing
to give huge amounts of membership dues money to Paul and Susan.

Sam Sloan