Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Another judge rules against the moritorium.
#21

Anhil8tor Wrote:Vitter is handing Charlie Melancon his ass down here.... These are the ads Vitter is running

[video=youtube;KScrceDpXI8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KScrceDpXI8[/video]

It shows how morally bankrupt your state is if you support Vitter.

See You In Toledo
Reply
#22

If you want an indicator of the terrible state the GOP is in take a look at the emails by the GOP nominee for governor of New York, the financial capital of the world and the 16th largest economy on earth.They are really NSFW.Why would a potential governors email be not safe for work?That would be the indicator I'm talking about in the first sentence of this post.

http://wnymedia.net/paladinoporn/

See You In Toledo
Reply
#23

Who is London Rayne? (And what is her connection with David Vitter?)
by: Daily Kingfish
Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 12:00:00 PM CDT
She's a high-class call girl with a 'few advanced degrees.' She doesn't mind gifts, but don't dare buy her anything made by Coach - waaaayy too tacky! She selectively entertains out-of-town customers who have just as much to lose as she does. Ladies and gentlemen, meet London Rayne.

Though undoubtedly a nom de guerre, as it were, her name seems to have been popping up all over the place. The Kingfish has been buzzing for quite some time with anonymous suggestions that there was another shoe to drop for David Vitter -- another lady of the night set to come forward to tell her story. Of course, we have no way of knowing if there's a connection, but London Rayne's name has been sent our way too much to ignore.

So, we thought it would be best just to ask David Vitter a few simple questions to clear things up, once and for all.

Senator Vitter:

-- Have you ever met London Rayne?
-- Did Brent Furer help arrange out-of-town meetings between you and London Rayne?
-- Has London Rayne ever contacted your Senate campaign? If so, what did she say?
-- Have you ever used a New Orleans company called Crescent City Catering for any events, or have you ever attended an event hosted by them?
-- In December of 2008, did you spend any time in Louisville, Kentucky?


[Image: erosblur3.jpg]

http://www.dailykingfish.com/

Looks like your personal savior who wears diapers is in trouble again, 8.I found this on a website you should check out that covers progressive issues in your state.Lets just assume its written by a gay or black so you can save time by automatically discounting everything on there.

See You In Toledo
Reply
#24

off topic
anybody see this?
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/Oly...ent-101910
what is going on?
Reply
#25

Its the only black guy ever to take penis enlargement pills.not strange at all.

See You In Toledo
Reply
#26

whats wrong with vitter tapping that?
Reply
#27

The Nation -- In the fall of 1998, David Vitter felt compelled to weigh in on the national debate over the possible impeachment of President Bill Clinton for lying about sex. Vitter was not yet a member of Congress; he was a Republican state representative. And in an October 29, 1998, opinion piece for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Vitter took issue with a previous article, written by two law professors who had argued that impeachment "is a process of removing a president from office who can no longer effectively govern; it is not about punishment." Given that Clinton was still a capable chief executive, they had maintained, impeachment was not in order.

Vitter, a graduate of Harvard University and Tulane law school and a Rhodes scholar, was aghast at this amoral position. He blasted the law professors for criticizing those congressional Republicans pushing for Clinton's impeachment. Their argument that impeachment is "not primarily about right and wrong or moral fitness to govern," he wrote, was utterly wrongheaded. He continued:

Some current polls may suggest that people are turned off by the whole Clinton mess and don't care -- because the stock market is good, the Clinton spin machine is even better or other reasons. But that doesn't answer the question of whether President Clinton should be impeached and removed from office because he is morally unfit to govern.

The writings of the Founding Fathers are very instructive on this issue. They are not cast in terms of political effectiveness at all but in terms of right and wrong -- moral fitness. Hamilton writes in the Federalists Papers (No. 65) that impeachable offenses are those that "proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust."

In considering impeachment, Vitter asserted, Congress had to judge Clinton on moral terms. Decrying the law professors' failure to see this, Vitter observed, "Is that the level of moral relatively and vacuousness we have come to?" If no "meaningful action" were to be taken against Clinton, Vitter wrote, "his leadership will only further drain any sense of values left to our political culture."


I've already accepted you are willing to support hypocrites so I don't expect the above to even make a tiny dent in the twisted logic you use to make yourself not feel sleazy.

See You In Toledo
Reply
#28

Have you seen pictures of vitters wife? She makes Hiliary look like a prom queen.
Reply
#29

If you're a fiscal conservative who expects a Republican majority in Congress next year, Phil Klein at the American Spectator provides a good reason to not get your hopes up, even if the GOP does win




[Image: 2009budget.jpg]

The blue parts of that chart are the parts Republicans have said they won't cut. The red slice, well that's fair game. Klein writes:

Even if you were to eliminate this entire slice of the budget (meaning you're willing to gut the Department of Homeland Security and defund all other federal agencies and departments) it wouldn't even eliminate half of last year's deficit.

So, yeah. Change.


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinio...81798.html

See You In Toledo
Reply
#30

I'm not sure what i'm sposed to argue here. I thought we were discussing whether or not vitter shoulda tapped that ass.

[video=youtube;lELfC4dG1Kw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=lELfC4dG1Kw[/video]
Reply
#31

Quints talking about black guys cock and I'm discussing whatever I feel like.

I don't get how you can back someone who's a known liar.Heres where you say "all politicians are liars" like thats cover for some guy using you like a bitch.

See You In Toledo
Reply
#32

We all know that everyone that has ever been in office has lied. Typically democrats lie more.
Reply
#33

You totally have facts to back that up as usual.

If a man basically lied through his teeth to me we wouldnt be doing business.You are his bitch.

See You In Toledo
Reply
#34

President Harry Truman, August 6, 1945
The lie: "The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, in so far as possible, the killing of civilians."
The truth: Though Hiroshima was the headquarters of a number of military units, it was mostly a civilian city. In fact, Hiroshima was rated a low military priority by the U.S. Army; that's why it hadn't been bombed yet. 140,000 people, almost all civilians, died as a result of the bombing.
The excuse: None. He never changed his story
The consequences: None for President Truman.

President John F. Kennedy, April 18, 1961
The lie: "I have previously stated and I repeat now that the United States intends no military intervention in Cuba."
The truth: Not only was the Bay of Pigs invasion organized and funded by the CIA, but Americans flew combat missions as well. One day after Kennedy made the above statement, an American pilot was shot down on a bombing mission over Cuba. Castro recovered the pilot's bodies and kept it -- frozen -- for the next 18 years as proof. (He returned the body when he heard that the pilot's daughter was looking for her father who, she had been told, disappeared on a training flight.) Over 100 Cuban exiles, 14 Americans, and an unreported number of Cubans died in the invasion.
The excuse: None, he never got busted.
The consequences: None (though some folks believe that Cuban exiles played a part in Kennedy's assassination).

President Lyndon Johnson, August 5, 1964
The lie: "As President and Commander in Chief it is my duty to the American people to report that renewed hostile actions against United States ships on the high seas in the Gulf of Tonkin have today required me to order the military forces of the United States to take action in reply."
The truth: There was no unprovoked Vietnamese attack on a U.S. warship. President Johnson ran with the untrue story to gain support for American involvement in Vietnam.
The excuse: None needed. The press didn't follow up until after Johnson left office.
The consequences: None for President Johnson. The lie resulted in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which authorized the president to use "all necessary measures" to defend U.S. forces. Johnson later compared the resolution to "grandma's nightskirt -- it covered everything." 58,214 Americans died in the Vietnam War.
Reply
#35

President Harry Truman, August 6, 1945
The lie: "The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, in so far as possible, the killing of civilians."
The truth: Though Hiroshima was the headquarters of a number of military units, it was mostly a civilian city. In fact, Hiroshima was rated a low military priority by the U.S. Army; that's why it hadn't been bombed yet. 140,000 people, almost all civilians, died as a result of the bombing.
The excuse: None. He never changed his story
The consequences: None for President Truman.

President John F. Kennedy, April 18, 1961
The lie: "I have previously stated and I repeat now that the United States intends no military intervention in Cuba."
The truth: Not only was the Bay of Pigs invasion organized and funded by the CIA, but Americans flew combat missions as well. One day after Kennedy made the above statement, an American pilot was shot down on a bombing mission over Cuba. Castro recovered the pilot's bodies and kept it -- frozen -- for the next 18 years as proof. (He returned the body when he heard that the pilot's daughter was looking for her father who, she had been told, disappeared on a training flight.) Over 100 Cuban exiles, 14 Americans, and an unreported number of Cubans died in the invasion.
The excuse: None, he never got busted.
The consequences: None (though some folks believe that Cuban exiles played a part in Kennedy's assassination).

President Lyndon Johnson, August 5, 1964
The lie: "As President and Commander in Chief it is my duty to the American people to report that renewed hostile actions against United States ships on the high seas in the Gulf of Tonkin have today required me to order the military forces of the United States to take action in reply."
The truth: There was no unprovoked Vietnamese attack on a U.S. warship. President Johnson ran with the untrue story to gain support for American involvement in Vietnam.
The excuse: None needed. The press didn't follow up until after Johnson left office.
The consequences: None for President Johnson. The lie resulted in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which authorized the president to use "all necessary measures" to defend U.S. forces. Johnson later compared the resolution to "grandma's nightskirt -- it covered everything." 58,214 Americans died in the Vietnam War.
Reply
#36

the difference here being you know the guy is lying to you right now.And you just sit there and take it like a good little bitch.

See You In Toledo
Reply
#37

This video is great.Watch the whole thing.Shows the differences in the two parties.

[video=youtube;abIntiCAmX8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abIntiCAmX8&feature=player_embedded[/video]

See You In Toledo
Reply
#38

this may be the most boring fucking thread on this board. christ you guys are fucking idiots.


except quint. he brought the black cock. always a hit.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread / Author Replies Views Last Post
Last Post by who
11-25-2008, 12:05 AM
Last Post by who
11-02-2008, 04:40 AM
Last Post by Sassy
06-05-2007, 07:44 PM
Last Post by Paddy
03-10-2007, 05:39 PM
Last Post by who
01-02-2007, 09:43 PM
Last Post by leeman
10-23-2006, 02:09 PM
Last Post by Sassy
10-20-2006, 08:20 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)