AT&T, Inc. Message Board
-
Things we can all learn from Senator Bob
If you agree to pay two #$%$ $500 each and you only pay them $100 each, then don't be surprised if they rat you out.
If you tell two #$%$ how beautiful and nice you think they are, and then you disrespect them after you have your way with them, then don't be surprised if they rat you out.
If you treat your constituents like you treat #$%$, then don't be surprised if they rat you out.
The Frogg-
...
“If you treat your constituents like you treat (blank), then don't be surprised if they rat you out.” – frog clown
“In interviews, the two women said they met Menendez around Easter...They claimed Menendez agreed to pay them $500, but in the end they each received only $100. The women spoke through a translator in the company of their attorney, Melanio Figueroa. Both asked that their identities remain obscured for fear of reprisals in the Dominican Republic.
When shown a photograph of Sen. Menendez, the women said they recognized him as the man with whom they’d had s--ual relations...Neither knew the identity of the man at the time. Both claimed to recognize him later as Sen. Menendez.”
Hey, gremlin...Is this really your best shot? Two anonymous #$%$ who refuse to be identified making claims about something that happened last Spring in the Dominican Republic? Whether or not a single politician on vacation (he’s not cheating, as he’s divorced) paid for a prostitute in the Dominican is really not any of my business nor my concern. You probably would have spent more money trying to wine them and dine them, lavish them with gifts, dinner and dancing ‘til the wee hours, simply hoping they might blow the warts off your tadpole...same difference, more expensive.
Hey, if you really want to make an argument, why not defend them with Lily Ledbetter pay discrepancies? Funny how, in the midst of your War on Women, you somehow turn into a total hypocrite like Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich while they were going after Clinton with their overzealous moral fervor:
“Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said on Fox news (March, 2011) that it wasn't hypocritical of him to lead impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton in the 1990's, even though he was having an extramarital affair at the time, because the impeachment case was ‘not about personal behavior.’
So, if a spokesperson and potential candidate for your cause says it’s not about personal behavior, what’s your point? Oh, silly me... of course...pointless propaganda when there’s not much else left.- 3 Replies to echo2165
-
“Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said on Fox news (March, 2011) that it wasn't hypocritical of him to lead impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton in the 1990's, even though he was having an extramarital affair at the time, because the impeachment case was ‘not about personal behavior.’
That is because it was about the President having an extramarital affair ON THE DESK in the oval office of the nation’s highest office and LYING about it to Congress, the public and a Federal court. It was about the expectations of behavior of the nation’s leader being violated, disparaged and dishonored publicly.
What part of history do you not understand? Oh I forgot, you didn't misunderstand, you just conveniently forgot, misstated, or lied like a Clinton. -
Wow echo, you sure did tell me off, and I am sure that Senator Bob will appreciate the fact that you got all of the facts and his full name out there for everyone to see. Good going guy.
I know this won't fit your narrow view of hypocracy, but I seem to remember Senator Bob calling for the firing of some Secret Service agents back in April for their unpardonable sins.
Wow echo, you sure did tell me off,
The Frogg
-