The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Johnny does Whatshername (Sen. Ensign has an affair. Blackmail involved)

ElkiElki get busyModerator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
edited July 2009 in Debate and/or Discourse
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23813.html

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) acknowledged Tuesday that he had “violated the vows” of marriage by having an affair with a campaign staffer.

blah blah blah

Some time later, a Nevada source said, Ensign met with the husband of the woman involved and had what this source described as a positive encounter. Sources said that the man subsequently asked Ensign for a substantial sum of money — at which point Ensign decided to make the affair public.

Ensign did not provide specifics about the affair Tuesday, nor did he identify the woman involved, except to say that she and her husband “were close friends, and both of them worked for me.”

Oh snap!

Just watched the video of him admitting it is the now standard prop-wife (her name is Darlene, and I don't know why I find that funny).
A born-again Christian, Ensign has been a member of the Promise Keepers, a male evangelical group that promotes marital fidelity.
Top that, Onion News.

So, I know jack shit about Nevada, and want someone to give me the breakdown on how it might play out. It seems that he has plenty of time to work this out before the next election.

smCQ5WE.jpg
Elki on
«1

Posts

  • Lady EriLady Eri Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    If only Rygar were here to enlighten us.

    Lady Eri on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I'm thinking about interning in DC next summer.

    I'm guessing I should stock up on condoms before I leave.

    moniker on
  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    As a registered voter in Nevada it will be interested to see how many people actually care.

    Detharin on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Ahh, Schadenfreude. The best kind of Freude.

    shryke on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    shryke wrote: »
    Ahh, Schadenfreude. The best kind of Freude.

    Way better than Sigmund.

    moniker on
  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    edited June 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Ahh, Schadenfreude. The best kind of Freude.

    Way better than Sigmund.

    I don't know, Sigmund could be a damn entertaining fellow when he was hopped up on coke.

    As for Sen. Ensign, considering he comes from a state with legalized prostitution and the largest center of gambling in the United States, I doubt it'll harm his image with the voting public there too much.

    BlackDragon480 on
    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    From the article it sounds like he was separated from his wife at the time, and had been for several months. When he reconciled with his wife he immediately broke things off with the woman, and fired her with a severance package.

    I think the only thing that he really needed to say was "We were on a break."

    Detharin on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Nevada's Senators have to make that state proud. Harry Reid and this jackass.

    Also moniker: to reinforce that, have you ever heard this story?

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    As for Sen. Ensign, considering he comes from a state with legalized prostitution and the largest center of gambling in the United States, I doubt it'll harm his image with the voting public there too much.

    Voters can forgive a lot of sins, but the one that always tends to stick is hypocrisy. If he wasn't part of that Promise Keepers thing I'd say you'd probably be right, but this might stick now because of it. Of course, he isn't up next, Reid is, so by the time his seat rolls around it might be too old to drag up.

    moniker on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Nevada's Senators have to make that state proud. Harry Reid and this jackass.

    Also moniker: to reinforce that, have you ever heard this story?

    There are endless cavalcades of sex between politicians and staffers/interns/pages. It seems like DC is, as a city, simultaneously sexually repressed and extremely kinky.

    moniker on
  • OremLKOremLK Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Promise Keepers promotes marital fidelity but it's not about marital fidelity. It's just your basic giant inspirational conference for male protestants.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise_Keepers

    OremLK on
    My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited June 2009
    OremLK wrote: »
    Promise Keepers promotes marital fidelity but it's not about marital fidelity. It's just your basic giant inspirational conference for male protestants.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise_Keepers

    Oh, I see. Love the subtitle on the logo.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Still, when will politicians realize that people tend to hate holier than thou bullshit like that? Nobody's gonna care if you fuck around and are an Elk or a Lion or part of the Key Club.

    Hell, I think that's the point of that last one.

    moniker on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    The best part is that this was one of the guys calling for Clinton's balls on a platter after the Lewinsky thing hit the news.

    It's like these people are addicted to hypocrisy.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    The best part is that this was one of the guys calling for Clinton's balls on a platter after the Lewinsky thing hit the news.

    It's like these people are addicted to hypocrisy.

    That was 11 years ago. You can't call someone a hypocrite because their life views changed in 11 years.

    If Detharin is right, he'll probably get away scot-free. As he should, if Deth is right.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • deowolfdeowolf is allowed to do that. Traffic.Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    But, but - they were on a break!

    Who gives a shit?

    deowolf on
    [SIGPIC]acocoSig.jpg[/SIGPIC]
  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Jesus, I was sick of that break shit just from Friends, and I didn't even watch Friends.
    evilintent wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    The best part is that this was one of the guys calling for Clinton's balls on a platter after the Lewinsky thing hit the news.

    It's like these people are addicted to hypocrisy.

    That was 11 years ago. You can't call someone a hypocrite because their life views changed in 11 years.

    This is assuming that his life view changed, which is unlikely.

    Cervetus on
  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    [Colbert] Senator or Ensign, pick a side! [/Colbert]

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • urahonkyurahonky Cynical Old Man Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Hmm. Break or not, it's still cheating if you're still legally married.

    urahonky on
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    urahonky wrote: »
    Hmm. Break or not, it's still cheating if you're still legally married.

    Separated people are legally married. FYI.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • urahonkyurahonky Cynical Old Man Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Hmm. Break or not, it's still cheating if you're still legally married.

    Separated people are legally married. FYI.

    Oh I know, that's what I mean. :)

    urahonky on
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    urahonky wrote: »
    evilintent wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Hmm. Break or not, it's still cheating if you're still legally married.

    Separated people are legally married. FYI.

    Oh I know, that's what I mean. :)
    Legal separation (sometimes "judicial separation", "separate maintenance", "divorce a mensa et thoro" or "divorce from bed-and-board") is a legal process by which a married couple may formalise a de facto separation whilst remaining legally married. A couple may obtain a legal separation, as an alternative to divorce, based on moral or religious objections to divorce.


    It's not cheating if they're separated. That's what I meant.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • urahonkyurahonky Cynical Old Man Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Ah okay. But they obviously can't get married again till they are divorced right? (Just out of curiosity)

    Now were they legally separated, or "we need to take a break"?

    urahonky on
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    urahonky wrote: »
    Ah okay. But they obviously can't get married again till they are divorced right? (Just out of curiosity)

    Now were they legally separated, or "we need to take a break"?

    Legally separated people can go back to being non-separated without doing anything specific. All they need to do is agree that they're back together.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    The best part is that this was one of the guys calling for Clinton's balls on a platter after the Lewinsky thing hit the news.

    It's like these people are addicted to hypocrisy.

    That was 11 years ago. You can't call someone a hypocrite because their life views changed in 11 years.

    If Detharin is right, he'll probably get away scot-free. As he should, if Deth is right.

    So it's only hypocrisy if you're advocating against an action while you are actually doing it? Because I think you'd be amazed at the number of people who suddenly had an enlightened change of heart about something just moments before they got caught.

    moniker on
  • urahonkyurahonky Cynical Old Man Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Ah okay. But they obviously can't get married again till they are divorced right? (Just out of curiosity)

    Now were they legally separated, or "we need to take a break"?

    Legally separated people can go back to being non-separated without doing anything specific. All they need to do is agree that they're back together.

    I learn way too much from a gaming forum. Thanks :)

    urahonky on
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    evilintent wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    The best part is that this was one of the guys calling for Clinton's balls on a platter after the Lewinsky thing hit the news.

    It's like these people are addicted to hypocrisy.

    That was 11 years ago. You can't call someone a hypocrite because their life views changed in 11 years.

    If Detharin is right, he'll probably get away scot-free. As he should, if Deth is right.

    So it's only hypocrisy if you're advocating against an action while you are actually doing it? Because I think you'd be amazed at the number of people who suddenly had an enlightened change of heart about something just moments before they got caught.

    What the?

    Guy bashes the president for having an affair with an intern. Don't see anything bad about that, pretty much the entire world bashed him.
    Guy that is separated from his wife/taking a break from his wife meets woman, sparks fly, he sleeps with her. Don't see anything wrong with that, either.

    If he's a hypocrite for anything, it's this:
    When former Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in an airport men’s room in the summer of 2007, Ensign was among Craig’s toughest critics, saying Craig should step down because he had been charged with a crime.

    “I wouldn’t put myself, hopefully, in that kind of position, but if I was in a position like that, that’s what I would do,” Ensign told The Associated Press at the time.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    evilintent wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    The best part is that this was one of the guys calling for Clinton's balls on a platter after the Lewinsky thing hit the news.

    It's like these people are addicted to hypocrisy.

    That was 11 years ago. You can't call someone a hypocrite because their life views changed in 11 years.

    If Detharin is right, he'll probably get away scot-free. As he should, if Deth is right.

    So it's only hypocrisy if you're advocating against an action while you are actually doing it? Because I think you'd be amazed at the number of people who suddenly had an enlightened change of heart about something just moments before they got caught.

    What the?

    Guy bashes the president for having an affair with an intern. Don't see anything bad about that, pretty much the entire world bashed him.
    Guy that is separated from his wife/taking a break from his wife meets woman, sparks fly, he sleeps with her. Don't see anything wrong with that, either.

    Personally I don't care who he puts his dick into, but apparently he thinks (or thought) that I should. And people shouldn't be held to an arbitrary standard, they should be held to their own. His standard is that public officials should not be having extramarital affairs with members of their staff. He then went and had an extramarital affair with a member of his staff. Now, if you have any evidence that he did publicly change his mind at any point between Lewinsky and last week that's one thing. If he only had a change of heart once he's the one that got caught it's quite another.
    If he's a hypocrite for anything, it's this:
    When former Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in an airport men’s room in the summer of 2007, Ensign was among Craig’s toughest critics, saying Craig should step down because he had been charged with a crime.

    “I wouldn’t put myself, hopefully, in that kind of position, but if I was in a position like that, that’s what I would do,” Ensign told The Associated Press at the time.

    That just doubles the fun.

    moniker on
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    evilintent wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    evilintent wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    The best part is that this was one of the guys calling for Clinton's balls on a platter after the Lewinsky thing hit the news.

    It's like these people are addicted to hypocrisy.

    That was 11 years ago. You can't call someone a hypocrite because their life views changed in 11 years.

    If Detharin is right, he'll probably get away scot-free. As he should, if Deth is right.

    So it's only hypocrisy if you're advocating against an action while you are actually doing it? Because I think you'd be amazed at the number of people who suddenly had an enlightened change of heart about something just moments before they got caught.

    What the?

    Guy bashes the president for having an affair with an intern. Don't see anything bad about that, pretty much the entire world bashed him.
    Guy that is separated from his wife/taking a break from his wife meets woman, sparks fly, he sleeps with her. Don't see anything wrong with that, either.

    Personally I don't care who he puts his dick into, but apparently he does. And people shouldn't be held to an arbitrary standard, they should be held to their own. His standard is that public officials should not be having extramarital affairs with members of their staff. He then went and had an extramarital affair with a member of his staff. Now, if you have any evidence that he did publicly change his mind at any point between Lewinsky and last week that's one thing. If he only had a change of heart once he's the one that got caught it's quite another.
    If he's a hypocrite for anything, it's this:
    When former Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in an airport men’s room in the summer of 2007, Ensign was among Craig’s toughest critics, saying Craig should step down because he had been charged with a crime.

    “I wouldn’t put myself, hopefully, in that kind of position, but if I was in a position like that, that’s what I would do,” Ensign told The Associated Press at the time.

    That just doubles the fun.

    Oh double entendre, you can be so much fun.

    DoctorArch on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    Personally I don't care who he puts his dick into, but apparently he does. And people shouldn't be held to an arbitrary standard, they should be held to their own. His standard is that public officials should not be having extramarital affairs with members of their staff. He then went and had an extramarital affair with a member of his staff. Now, if you have any evidence that he did publicly change his mind at any point between Lewinsky and last week that's one thing. If he only had a change of heart once he's the one that got caught it's quite another.

    Therein lies our problem. I don't think the president, who's supposed to be a role-model for hundreds of millions of people, and a senator, are on par.

    What the president does impacts everything from public trust in the government to foreign affairs (at the very least least with religious zealot nutjob-led countries).

    It's not the same thing if Clinton does it or some senator does it in my book, but apparently it is in yours. We'll just have to agree to disagree. And I don't think he ever mentioned that public officials shouldn't be having extramarital affairs, I think it was just a pet peeve about what Clinton did.

    Sure, it's a double-standard (President does it, it's bad; senator does it, no biggie), but it doesn't make him a hypocrite in my book. The fact that he more than likely won't step down, though, does.

    Couple that with the fact that we don't know if they were legally separated or not, and we have too many variables for anyone to be able to say anything conclusive about it lest they know the senator.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Personally I don't care who he puts his dick into, but apparently he does. And people shouldn't be held to an arbitrary standard, they should be held to their own. His standard is that public officials should not be having extramarital affairs with members of their staff. He then went and had an extramarital affair with a member of his staff. Now, if you have any evidence that he did publicly change his mind at any point between Lewinsky and last week that's one thing. If he only had a change of heart once he's the one that got caught it's quite another.

    Therein lies our problem. I don't think the president, who's supposed to be a role-model for hundreds of millions of people, and a senator, are on par.

    What the president does impacts everything from public trust in the government to foreign affairs (at the very least least with religious zealot nutjob-led countries).

    It's not the same thing if Clinton does it or some senator does it in my book, but apparently it is in yours. We'll just have to agree to disagree. And I don't think he ever mentioned that public officials shouldn't be having extramarital affairs, I think it was just a pet peeve about what Clinton did.

    Sure, it's a double-standard (President does it, it's bad; senator does it, no biggie), but it doesn't make him a hypocrite in my book. The fact that he more than likely won't step down, though, does.

    Couple that with the fact that we don't know if they were legally separated or not, and we have too many variables for anyone to be able to say anything conclusive about it lest they know the senator.
    Public Official #1 uses the condemnation of Public Official #2 for Act X as a campaign plank.
    Public Official #1 commits Act X.
    Public Official #1 is a hypocrite.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    evilintent wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Personally I don't care who he puts his dick into, but apparently he does. And people shouldn't be held to an arbitrary standard, they should be held to their own. His standard is that public officials should not be having extramarital affairs with members of their staff. He then went and had an extramarital affair with a member of his staff. Now, if you have any evidence that he did publicly change his mind at any point between Lewinsky and last week that's one thing. If he only had a change of heart once he's the one that got caught it's quite another.

    Therein lies our problem. I don't think the president, who's supposed to be a role-model for hundreds of millions of people, and a senator, are on par.

    What the president does impacts everything from public trust in the government to foreign affairs (at the very least least with religious zealot nutjob-led countries).

    It's not the same thing if Clinton does it or some senator does it in my book, but apparently it is in yours. We'll just have to agree to disagree. And I don't think he ever mentioned that public officials shouldn't be having extramarital affairs, I think it was just a pet peeve about what Clinton did.

    Sure, it's a double-standard (President does it, it's bad; senator does it, no biggie), but it doesn't make him a hypocrite in my book. The fact that he more than likely won't step down, though, does.

    Couple that with the fact that we don't know if they were legally separated or not, and we have too many variables for anyone to be able to say anything conclusive about it lest they know the senator.
    Public Official #1 uses the condemnation of Public Official #2 for Act X as a campaign plank.
    Public Official #1 commits Act X.
    Public Official #1 is a hypocrite.

    Are you blind, or just suffering from acute selective readism? Limed for you.

    Reading comprehension, not everyone has it.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Ensign was also not legally separated so that's irrelevant(nor is that the normal usage of the term).

    "There's too many people that paint with a broad brush that we're all corrupt, we're all amoral," he said. "And having these kinds of things happen, whether it's a Republican or Democratic senator — we certainly have had plenty of Democratic scandals in the past — we need people who are in office who will hold themselves to a little higher standard."

    He has run on a "family values" plank. He's a hypocrite, its obvious and its a story that comes out more than once a year.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    evilintent wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Personally I don't care who he puts his dick into, but apparently he does. And people shouldn't be held to an arbitrary standard, they should be held to their own. His standard is that public officials should not be having extramarital affairs with members of their staff. He then went and had an extramarital affair with a member of his staff. Now, if you have any evidence that he did publicly change his mind at any point between Lewinsky and last week that's one thing. If he only had a change of heart once he's the one that got caught it's quite another.

    Therein lies our problem. I don't think the president, who's supposed to be a role-model for hundreds of millions of people, and a senator, are on par.

    What the president does impacts everything from public trust in the government to foreign affairs (at the very least least with religious zealot nutjob-led countries).

    It's not the same thing if Clinton does it or some senator does it in my book, but apparently it is in yours. We'll just have to agree to disagree. And I don't think he ever mentioned that public officials shouldn't be having extramarital affairs, I think it was just a pet peeve about what Clinton did.

    Sure, it's a double-standard (President does it, it's bad; senator does it, no biggie), but it doesn't make him a hypocrite in my book. The fact that he more than likely won't step down, though, does.

    Couple that with the fact that we don't know if they were legally separated or not, and we have too many variables for anyone to be able to say anything conclusive about it lest they know the senator.
    Public Official #1 uses the condemnation of Public Official #2 for Act X as a campaign plank.
    Public Official #1 commits Act X.
    Public Official #1 is a hypocrite.

    Are you blind, or just suffering from acute selective readism? Limed for you.

    Reading comprehension, not everyone has it.
    And I'm saying you're wrong. The local dog catcher can be just as much of a hypocrite as the president of the United States if they say one thing and do another. It's not relative to personal importance.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Ensign was also not legally separated so that's irrelevant(nor is that the normal usage of the term).
    Really? Pray tell, what is the normal usage of the term "legal separation", if not the label applied to a couple that is still legally married, but can do each whatever they want with whoever they want?
    PantsB wrote: »
    "There's too many people that paint with a broad brush that we're all corrupt, we're all amoral," he said. "And having these kinds of things happen, whether it's a Republican or Democratic senator — we certainly have had plenty of Democratic scandals in the past — we need people who are in office who will hold themselves to a little higher standard."

    He has run on a "family values" plank. He's a hypocrite, its obvious and its a story that comes out more than once a year.

    Another sufferer of ASR. I never said he's not a hypocrite, I said he's not a hypocrite for bashing Clinton during the Lewinski scandal.


    I'm going to get myself an ASR awareness bracelet now.


    And I'm saying you're wrong, Zed. Our arguments hold just about as much water. You think that who Tim the gardener sleeps with has the potential to shape international policy-making, I don't.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Well regardless of what the senators marital status was, wasn't the woman he was fucking also married? So shouldn't he have respected the sanctitity of his friends marriage?

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • evilintentevilintent Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Preacher wrote: »
    Well regardless of what the senators marital status was, wasn't the woman he was fucking also married? So shouldn't he have respected the sanctitity of his friends marriage?

    Sure. Unless the guy is a dickweed who's trying to blackmail a US senator, after he was all chummy with him after said senator slept with dickweed's wife.

    evilintent on
    6a00d83451c45669e2011571303907970b-.jpg
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Ok so its ok to cheat if the guys wife you are fucking plans to blackmail you afterward. Man I need to read the bible over again because these religious types have so many outs.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    And I'm saying you're wrong, Zed. Our arguments hold just about as much water. You think that who Tim the gardener sleeps with has the potential to shape international policy-making, I don't.
    Your argument boils down to a combination of "only important people have to practice what they preach" and "United States Senators aren't important people."

    You'll excuse me if I find that silly on multiple fronts.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    evilintent wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Well regardless of what the senators marital status was, wasn't the woman he was fucking also married? So shouldn't he have respected the sanctitity of his friends marriage?

    Sure. Unless the guy is a dickweed who's trying to blackmail a US senator, after he was all chummy with him after said senator slept with dickweed's wife.

    Errm, what? So the senator's thought process was "This guy seems like a dickweed who will try to blackmail people; I'll screw his wife, that'll show him!"?

    KalTorak on
Sign In or Register to comment.