Pickering cast himself as a defender of decency, particularly on television and the Internet, and was among House members urging then-President George W. Bush to declare 2008 "the National Year of the Bible."

Pickering meant to say that 2008 will be the year that Bible Spice becomes an international laughingstock.

#1 --

After languishing on the Back Page for a while ReinWienieRobot thinks he can post to his own thread and maybe stir up some traffic.

Maybe you'd get more interest if you didn't post the same fucking shit each day.

LOOK! LOOK! A bad person!

And L~O~O~K!!!!!!!!!

He's a Republican! That says it all!!!!!!

This is your life? Spending hours online trying to find the 'naughty Republican' of the day?

"History will find that the twelve apostles were actually women and Jesus boinked them all."

The C Streeters for Salvation (of Their Careers)

Family values!

A related story.
Morals aside.

Moral superiority(a trademark of the Republican Party)

LOOK! LOOK! A bad person!
And L~O~O~K!!!!!!!!!
He's a Republican! That says it all!!!!!!
This is your life? Spending hours online trying to find the 'naughty Republican' of the day?
#2 | Posted by vernon at 2009-07-17 10:26 AM

Why defend them whatsoever? Are you in favor of adultery? You don't see the hypocrisy in Pickering attempting to pass "National Year of the Bible"?

Have we finally seen the last of the Republican party yet? Let it die already.

This is your life? Spending hours online trying to find the 'naughty Republican' of the day?

---------

No asshole.

The reason that it's interesting is because they are all self-righteous hypocrites.

Pretty soon, the odd man out will be the politician who is faithful to his wife.

Come on, the C-Street guys... they were all about Christian Fellowship, Bible study and prayer.

These stories only come out because you crazy lefties are willing to believe.

Call me when somebody has a DNA verified love-child.

- The right

Yeah, small 'r'.

Not really pancho. There has always been a double standard in the incipit idea of marriage. i.e. people don't change regardless of how many veils you throw on them.

Pickering, 45, was elected to Congress in 1996, retired in January and is now a lobbyist in Washington for Cellular South, the company Byrd's family owns.

he should sue his girlfriend for sexual harrassment. He didn't want to keep boinking her, but it came with the job. He has a long history of whoring himself out to the bimbo's family though...

You gotta wonder - when they got together, did they say prayers, praise the Lord a lot, and then exchange tips on how to bag the best babes?

Maybe this is a reflection of the article that was on here a week or two ago - the bit about 'methinks thou dost protest too much' - how the most sanctimonious moralists are in fact the most hopelessly unable to abide by their own rules.

Chicken or egg? They preach it because they're always tempted. Or maybe they're tempted all the time because they can't shut their yaps about it.

At least he wasn't ass-raping some little boy....

I know! I know!
That'd make him a REAL he-man Hero of the Right.

I'm Just Lovin' this "Biblical Proportion" disaster Stuff!

Sincerely

Butch

I get the feeling that the journalists (sarcasm intended)over at AP get a sick delight out of writing these stories.

You gotta wonder - when they got together, did they say prayers,

Oh lord, wont you find me a nice piece of ass ?
My roomies all bang bimbos, I must have a lass.
Worked hard all my lifetime, and bribes from lobbyists,
So lord, wont you find me a nice piece of ass ?

Oh lord, wont you find me a nice comfy job ?
Some telecom with money to bribe little me.
I wait for payolay each day until three,
So oh lord, wont you get out of Street C ?

Oh lord, wont you get me a bimbo in town ?
Im counting on you, lord, please tell my wife.
Prove that you love me and get me some fun,
Oh lord, wont you get me a bimbo in town ?

I don't know NMG, but I sure do.

Hypocrites are my favorite punching bag.

Frank gets sarcastic, "I know! I know!
That'd make him a REAL he-man Hero of the Right."

Leftists won't get this, of course, and since they'll all be nodding their collective head, like a bobble toy on a Chevy (state owned socialism) dashboard.

They can't quite make the mental leap to realize that 'foot tapping' makes Republicans abandon their fellow politician and force their resignation, while Democratics are *PROUD* of their politician pedophiles and re-elect them over-and-over; they like Democratic anal abuse of underage boys, ala Jerry Studds and his slick-licking actions which got him unendicted and elected after the crime ...

The party of Hypocrites is the Democratic party, that's a fact ...

I don't know NMG, but I sure do.

Hypocrites are my favorite punching bag.

#18 | Posted by BenFranklinn

Really?

Then show us your posts on Al Gore.

Private jets, several mansions, stretch limos - pretty hypocritical of Saint Global-Warming wouldn't you say?

Or...

...do you only punch "conservative" hypocrites?

#17 | Posted by northguy3

Janis is rolling in her grave.

The party of Hypocrites is the Democratic party, that's a fact ...
#19 | Posted by tadowe at 2009-07-17 12:40 PM

What does that make the Republican party?

...do you only punch "conservative" hypocrites?
#20 | Posted by BENDOR at 2009-07-17 12:42 PM

What makes these hypocrites "conservative"?

This doesnt surprise me. Those dam Pubs preach from the Christian right aboout family values then run to Washington DC and take a mistress on the side. Voting republican is a vote for undoing faamily values in this country and you heard the truth here.

"what makes hypocrites conservative" .....all the lawmakers since Clinton that have been caught are republican. Even at the height of the Clinton hearing Newt Gingrich one of Clintons biggest critics was having an affair secretly while preaching family values out the other side of his mouth.

Janis is rolling in her grave.

#21 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

Rolling what?

"Rolling what?"

Family values!

#4 | Posted by 726

At least not the Barney Frank kind. Did he ever boot his lover out of the apartment for running that Gay escort service?

Did he ever boot his lover out of the apartment for running that Gay escort service?

Dubya's squeeze Jeff Gannon lived with barney frank? Who knew. I mean, other than mark Foley and Larry Craig....

Rolling what?
#26 | Posted by northguy3

She was a drinker, not a toker.

Who knew.
Posted by northguy3

Nobody.

"She was a drinker, not a toker."

She was a drinker and a toker and a shooter-upper.

"The official cause of death was an overdose of heroin, possibly combined with the effects of alcohol."

You've accounted for the SoCo and the horse, but not the MJ... unless you're counting tobacco.

#20 - I'll play, Bendor. Gore is a hypocrite.

Your turn.

Hello? Is this thing on?

...Brought to you by the GOP, making heterosexual marriage safe for adultery...

The party of Hypocrites is the Democratic party, that's a fact ...

Damn you must be smoking some good shit if you think any party has a lock on hypocrisy.

...Brought to you by the GOP, making heterosexual marriage safe for adultery...

Well, it was all the gay pressure made them have to prove they gay by banging other women. I'm sure there's a "proving you're straight" exemption in their Bible somewhere, even if they had to pencil it in.

Look Marsha, here it is John 3some:69. "Thou mayest lay with other women to prove you don't layeth with other men. Or sheep, if thou livest south of the Mason-Dixon Line".

Redlight says, "What does that make the Republican party?"

You can't say? I suppose that is because you have to get fundamentalistic, in a political way, and compare the degree of hypocrisy exhibited by Democrats with that displayed when Republicans find themselves in similar circumstances.

Let's start with homosexual pedophilia:

Wow Taddy, going back 30 years to find something to whine about.
I'm a little surprised (not) you didn't mention Rep. Crane. But then again, he was a GOPper and you are a puling hypocrite.

Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal, when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors.Crane was accused of having a consensual sexual relationship in 1980 with a 17-year-old female congressional page and was censured by the House in 1983.

In fairness, guys like Sanford and Pickering just want women with something their southern wives don't have.

Teeth.

How do you get into this club? Sounds like a lot
of fun.

Redlight says, "What does that make the Republican party?"

You can't say? I suppose that is because you have to get fundamentalistic, in a political way, and compare the degree of hypocrisy exhibited by Democrats with that displayed when Republicans find themselves in similar circumstances.
Let's start with homosexual pedophilia:
1. Mark Foley wrote suggestive emails to an adult congressional page, but did not have sexual relations. Forced to resign by the GOP.
2. Gerry Studds, guilty of fornicating with underage congressional page(S) but remained in office and unendicted and elected over-and-over by the party of hypocrites.
One huge hypocrisy checkmark for the Democratic party. And, such lists can go on-and-on ad infinitum and the result will be an overwhelming recognition that not only is the Democratic party the Hypocrite Party, but also the party over nation rebellion party; from the Civil War they started and right up to the present in trying to lose a war because a Republican was the commander in chief ...
... now they fail to protest, and loyally refuse to conduct the same political speech now that their dictatorial figurehead is president ...
... hypocrites, party over nation scum, and intransigent vermin of the neo-socialism they hope to advance to communism ...
#39 | Posted by tadowe at 2009-07-17 02:16 PM

Let's also agree that Democrats are aware of much of the Republicans ill-doing but do little to nothing to stop them until it's a made into a public scandal to point at. Mainly, because Republican scandals involve hookers, children, hard drugs, fetish of bizarre proportions and incalculable theft public funds. Most Dems are happy with an extra-marital affair and lobbyist bribes.

Also, you entirely missed the Larry King scandal. Care to explain to the audience why that is?

What do you believe Gannon's White House "layovers" were all about?

North gets sarcastic, "...Brought to you by the GOP, making heterosexual marriage safe for adultery..."

Here is another example, if Gerry Studds wasn't enough!

The Democratic party defends adultery when their "guy" is involved and lies through his Cuban-dildo smoking lips, while they spit on any Republican for telling the truth about their affair(s).

The Dems transgressions are just as bad, but since they don't preach the holier-than-thou crap, it removes the hypocracy.

Tad-that comment wasn't mine, though it could have been. Whenever you think of Clinton, remember Bob Barr's criticism of him, while Bob, biggest supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act, was using money from anti-abortion groups to pay for his wife's abortion so he could dump her, like the previous wife he dumped her for, so he could marry some other bimbo. And he was a REPUBLICAN.

That, my dear Taddy, is the definition of hypocrisy.

Ah, the flesh is weak. That's why we preach forgiveness.

Continual inveighing against proscribed activities may indicate a high libidinous urge and the need to be vigilant against succumbing. We are all material creatures and are driven by our desires, those of us who are not asexual.

What's the point of condemnation of those who have fallen despite personal efforts to not succumb to temptation. "Get thee behind me Satan," may not always insure success in avoiding yielding. The fact that folks are human and fallible just demonstrates that we need to be ever alert and strive to assist our society to prevail over destructive conduct by enacting laws, having folkways, and embracing moral and ethical values that condemn such behavior.

Ah, the flesh is weak. That's why we preach forgiveness.
Continual inveighing against proscribed activities may indicate a high libidinous urge and the need to be vigilant against succumbing. We are all material creatures and are driven by our desires, those of us who are not asexual.
What's the point of condemnation of those who have fallen despite personal efforts to not succumb to temptation. "Get thee behind me Satan," may not always insure success in avoiding yielding. The fact that folks are human and fallible just demonstrates that we need to be ever alert and strive to assist our society to prevail over destructive conduct by enacting laws, having folkways, and embracing moral and ethical values that condemn such behavior.
#47 | Posted by Johnson at 2009-07-17 04:20 PM

Your excuses for these atrocities are ridiculous. "Yield not to temptation".. be it hookers in Brazil sucking ice cream out each others asshole or snorting cocaine off a childs corpse. I can't understand you, nor should I "desire" to.

Judge not, lest ye become a subject of ridicule on the Retort.

HA HA!! This is all the libs have to feel good about is bashing a former congressman? If the DR libs are feeling this unglued now, what's gonna happen after the bloodbath, er, I mean, the mid-term elections?? Sometimes I don't know whether to laugh or feel sorry for libs. But, since I started things off with a laugh, we'll just go with that.

The Democratic party defends adultery when their "guy" is involved...

Umm no, in terms of around here most lefties are intellectually honest enuff to be openly critical of folk on the left who do wrong while righties show a far more pronounced tendency to try to defend the indefensible purely based on their own partisan politics.

But as has been previously mentioned it's the hypocrisy that makes cheating Rtards like Ensign, Pickering or Sanford et al the laughingstocks they are.

The difference between their public personas and their private practises are night and day.

They do not practise wot they preach.

Worth noting.

Be Well.

HA HA!! This is all the libs have to feel good about is bashing a former congressman? If the DR libs are feeling this unglued now, what's gonna happen after the bloodbath, er, I mean, the mid-term elections?? Sometimes I don't know whether to laugh or feel sorry for libs. But, since I started things off with a laugh, we'll just go with that.
#50 | Posted by justanoversight at 2009-07-17 05:39 PM

If the DR libs are feeling this unglued now, what's gonna happen after the bloodbath, er, I mean, the mid-term elections??

Funny, we heard the same things in October 2006. Not so much after November 2006 though...

Alinsky's Rule for Radicals:

RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

The black-is-white award for 2009 goes to a Tadowe who sees the incessant chain of Republican peccadillos as proof of Democratic frailties. And yet ... one again, folks ... extramarital sex is between the screwer and the screwee. What We LibRads condemn is the hypocrisy of saying one thing and doing another. And THAT trait , folks, belongs to Republicans, sweet and simple. herm

Fresno says, "The Dems transgressions are just as bad, but since they don't preach the holier-than-thou crap, it removes the hypocracy."

See? Clinton goes to church, prays to God in speeches, and fornicates with pages in his executive office ... fine and permissable because he isn't "holier-than-me-or-you". He can lie under oath because he isn't "holier". He can try and defame and discredit those telling the truth about his seminal discharges and that's "okay" by these idiots, because he isn't "holier-than-thou".

Perjury is "okay" when you're a Democrat, but telling the truth when you're a Republican and the Democrats demand your removal .... because a Republican, by the ilk's definition, are "holier-than-thou" ...

That defines hypocrite, and you reveal yourself as one ...

North says, "... Whenever you think of Clinton, remember Bob Barr's criticism of him, while Bob, biggest supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act, was using money from anti-abortion groups to pay for his wife's abortion so he could dump her..."

So what? The point is a matter of degree - as I stated previously. When Democrats conduct themeselves in this manner, you and the ilk 'forgive' them and 'understand' that they are immoral with which to begin!

However, any Republican who might attempt some honesty in confession is "holier-than-thou" no matter what they say and should be removed from office for being an adulterer, and which you cretins consider to be a disqualification for office when a Republican is involved.

In the meantime? You re-elect and forgive a Democratic, homosexual pedophile over-and-over, because they were "honest" in their homo child anal probing ... and defend using Cuban dildos on Whitehouse pages as "private conduct".

"That, my dear Taddy, is the definition of hypocrisy."

You should know, since you are one of that ilk, yourself, and as can be seen by your party excusing tripe ...

but telling the truth when you're a Republican and the Democrats demand your removal ....

No Dem demanded this dude's removal, Tad. Or Sanford's(though GOPpers did). Or Vitter's. Or Ensign's. GOpers did though, in some form or another.

But they all demanded Clinton's.

North does stand-up, "Judge not, lest ye become a subject of ridicule on the Retort."

Funny! You can be very droll, North, and mock yourself/yellow-dog partisans, here.

Deth likes to lie, "Umm no, in terms of around here most lefties are intellectually honest enuff to be openly critical of folk on the left who do wrong while righties show a far more pronounced tendency to try to defend the indefensible purely based on their own partisan politics."

Yeah, when Republicans get in trouble, ala Mark Foley, the Democrats go wild and demand the resignation of this scurrilous, verminous homo; even though the "crime" is suggestive email to an officially adult male page.

Meanwhile, the intellectually "honest" Democrats re-elect Gerry Studds over-and-over even though he fornicated with UNDERAGE pages ... no demand for a Democrat pedophile to resign ... he isn't "holier-than-thou" so is exempt from any criminal action, much less lose his "job" ...

However, you creepy Canadian leftists come into American politics and lie for Democratics! What a rotten potato head you make of yourself.

Go smoke your plastic pipe, foreign agent tuber ...

One of the Democratic hypocrites says, "The black-is-white award for 2009 goes to a Tadowe who sees the incessant chain of Republican peccadillos as proof of Democratic frailties."

Wait! When did the chain of Democratic "peccadillos" stop?

Wasn't Gerry Studds a Democratic homo pedophile, before these "chains" of Republican private conduct began? Was he forced to resign by the DNC?

NO! He kept his seat in Congress and continued to be elected by Democratic hypocrites and pedophile supporters in his district!

Wasn't Kennedy's fornication with a continuous chain of bimbos, as history reveals an example of corruption and amoral conduct? No condemnation for his Catholic, holier-than-thou, rich guy elitist adulterer. Clinton trumped his action in a small way ... while you and your ilk claimed that all of that was PRIVATE CONDUCT and acceptable; even the perjury under oath ...

Creep liars come out when the country faces a long night of such political, intransigent, hatemongering and dictatorial governing.

fucking bush--what an asshole

sorry--felt good so i did it....

"Meanwhile, the intellectually "honest" Democrats re-elect Gerry Studds..."

It was the voters of his district who re-elected him. Intellectually "honest" or not, it was their choice.

Mr. Reagan, in a restatement of a past position, said the limitation interfered with the right of the people to ''vote for someone as often as they want to do.'

North lies, "No Dem ..."

I've seen claims from Dems, here, which have demanded his resignation, or any "holier-than-thou" Republican who might get involved with the "crime" of foot tapping, or emailing adult pages.

While Clinton was trying to defame and revile Anita Hill for claiming sexual harassment by him when governor of Arkansas, the DNC was gathering women who might claim sexual harassment by Republican Packwood of Oregon and which eventually forced his resignation via blackmail ...

... and you, you base liar claim "No Dem ..." like some turd-sucking sycophant for the Democratics ... and act-out as another Democratic holier-than-any-Republicans asswipe, claiming you know that *no* Dem demands resignations of Republicans; specifically "this" one.

What a tool for party over morality creep you make of yourself by doing so ...

While Clinton was trying to defame and revile Anita Hill for claiming sexual harassment by him when governor of Arkansas,

I thought that was Clarence Thomas.
Or maybe that "whore" really got around

"I thought that was Clarence Thomas."

Oops. And newsworthy, bruceaz.

Truth demonstrates his lack of intellectual honesty, "It was the voters of his district who re-elected him. Intellectually "honest" or not, it was their choice."

As mentioned, the Democratics support child rape when a Democratic member of congress performs the anal probings of children. No charges were brought for butt-fucking male children ...

... no, because the DNC needed him and forgave the multiple counts in the crime of pedophilia done by Studds ...

Intellectually honest Democratic is a political oxymoron, and as can be seen with these party over law excuses are offered by Democratics ...

"Truth demonstrates his lack of intellectual honesty, "

Says the author of "While Clinton was trying to defame and revile Anita Hill for claiming sexual harassment by him when governor of Arkansas,"

Call me devastated.

Tadowe if you want to go back all the way to 1983 what about Dan Crane who was a republican. He also was screwing minors.

butt-fucking male children

talk to dr goathead about your projection issues

"As mentioned, the Democratics support child rape when a Democratic member of congress performs the anal probings of children. No charges were brought for butt-fucking male children ..."

Was Studds' sex partner a minor under state law?

"Tadowe if you want to go back all the way to 1983 what about Dan Crane who was a republican. He also was screwing minors."

Good call, and newsworthy

Of course, admitting that requires intellectual honesty.

LOL

"Was Studds' sex partner a minor under state law?"

Good call. And another newsworthy post.

Of course, admitting that requires intellectual honesty. LOL!

The misdirection begins in earnest, "I thought that was Clarence Thomas. Or maybe that "whore" really got around."

Did I misattribute? Sure, did.

Paula Jones, but Anita Hill is a good example of the Democratics who are not intellectually honest and will use any excuse to revile and hate a conservative/Republican ... lying about them and coducting a conspiracy to hound them out of office.

However, it is nice of you to indicate that Anita was nothing better than a ho who gotaround ...

Was Studds' sex partner a minor under state law?

#72 | Posted by Danforth

Nope he 17, consent under the law was 16. It wasn't anything to be proud of but no laws were broken.

However, it is nice of you to indicate that Anita was nothing better than a ho who gotaround ...

that was sarcasm.
If I drank coffee I would buy your cup

Danforth displays his lack of intellect, much less honesty, "Was Studds' sex partner a minor under state law?"

See? Here is one of the 'holier-than-thou' defending pedophilia and quibbling about what age constitutes being a minor and can consent to being butt-fucked by a Democratic congressman if they are over the "limit".

Meanwhile, Mark Foley sends suggestive emails to adult male pages, and that qualifies for his ouster ...

... can you spell "hypocrite"? Or, is that word only applied to Republicans?

Have any children, Donner? What age would it be okay by you to have them getting fucked by a Democratic congressman?

Tadowe you are intellectually dishonest by not admitting your side has done just as much. The difference is our side never claims to be the family values crowd.

Jackass defends, "Nope he 17, consent under the law was 16. It wasn't anything to be proud of but no laws were broken."

So, it is okay for Democratic congressmen to fornicate with a number of male pages, at 17, but Mark Foley must resign for sending suggestive emails ...

Wow! The intellectual honesty is getting pretty deep in here with all these apologies for party over morality vermin.

That's what "progressive" means: Democrats can do anything, but Republicans must not ....

Petty tyrants of the neo-socialist regime ... stupid, on top of that ...

demo congressman are not fucking our children tadpole. repub bible thumpers are making asses of themselves at the moment and we are all laughing at them/you. what a total asshole you are

congessman=men

or women for that matter--watch out for bachman tho...

"See? Here is one of the 'holier-than-thou' defending pedophilia"

Sorry pal, but those words already have definitions, and the fact he was over the age of consent makes your claims about "child-rape" nothing more than vicious lies. Had you made that claim in a court of law, YOU would be the one going to jail.

Are you ready to admit it wasn't child-rape, or will you continue with your blatant lie? A conscientious adult would retract their statement; what will you do?

Danforth proves my point, "Sorry pal, but those words already have definitions, and the fact he was over the age of consent ..."

So, that makes it okay for Studds to conduct homosexual affairs with multiple male pages ...

... meanwhile Mark Foley must resign for emailing male pages ...

Thanks for this demonstration of the sheis you leftist creeps call "honesty" ...

What a pack of whining curs, these yellow-dogs just happen to be, lapping their collective balls and growling at carpetbaggers ...

"So, that makes it okay for Studds to conduct homosexual affairs with multiple male pages ..."

If they're over the age of consent...and they consent...yes.

But since you called it "child-rape", that makes you a liar. No matter how one feels about Studds or his behavior changes the fact that you leveled a vicious, bogus charge.

So again...are you going to retract, or remain a liar?

Donner will never understand, "But since you called it "child-rape", that makes you a liar."

You attempt to use the color of the law to hide the fact that in my state, any minor under 18 is considered a "child". Indeed, most states consider 18 to be the age of consent, and all under that limit are minors.

You quibble over words, I know you don't know what that means, in order to hide the scurrilous efforts to punk the underage by your Democratic and verminous congressman ... you sociopathic zealots defend.

It is pedophilia, and all of you jerks know that but hold party above all decency ...

... and you? You're filth in your defense of this crime, and along with every single person that voted and supported this subhuman asswipe with their vote ...

Tadowe-
re: .. meanwhile Mark Foley must resign for emailing male pages ...

Actually:

[Mark Foley]Maf54 (7:46:33 PM): did any girl give you a haand job this weekend

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:38 PM): lol no

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:40 PM): im single right now

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:57 PM): my last gf and i broke up a few weeks agi

Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): are you

Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny

Xxxxxxxxx (7:47:29 PM): lol...a bit

Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself

Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:04 PM): no

Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy

Maf54 (7:48:33 PM): wow...

Maf54 (7:48:34 PM): i am never to busy haha

Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:51 PM): haha

Maf54 (7:50:02 PM): or tired..helps me sleep

Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:15 PM): thats true

Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:36 PM): havent been having a problem with sleep though.. i just walk in the door and collapse well at least this weekend

Maf54 (7:50:56 PM): i am sure

Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:57 PM): i dont do it very often normally though

Maf54 (7:51:11 PM): why not

Maf54 (7:51:22 PM): at your age seems like it would be daily

Xxxxxxxxx (7:51:57 PM): not me

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:01 PM): im not a horn dog

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:07 PM): maybe 2 or 3 times a week

Maf54 (7:52:20 PM): thats a good number

Maf54 (7:52:27 PM): in the shower

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:36 PM): actually usually i dont do it in the shower

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:42 PM): just cause i shower in the morning

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:47 PM): and quickly

Maf54 (7:52:50 PM): in the bed

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:59 PM): i get up at 530 and am outta the house by 610

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:03 PM): eh ya

Maf54 (7:53:24 PM): on your back

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:30 PM): no face down

Maf54 (7:53:32 PM): love details

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:34 PM): lol

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:36 PM): i see that

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:37 PM): lol

Maf54 (7:53:39 PM): really

Maf54 (7:53:54 PM): do you really do it face down

Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:03 PM): ya

Maf54 (7:54:13 PM): kneeling

Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:31 PM): well i dont use my hand...i use the bed itself

Maf54 (7:54:31 PM): where do you unload it

Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:36 PM): towel

Maf54 (7:54:43 PM): really

Maf54 (7:55:02 PM): completely naked?

Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:12 PM): well ya

Maf54 (7:55:21 PM): very nice

Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:24 PM): lol

Maf54 (7:55:51 PM): cute butt bouncing in the air

Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:50 PM): but you cn find something softer than a towell i guess

Maf54 (7:58:59 PM): but it must feel great spirting on the towel

Xxxxxxxxx (7:59:06 PM): ya

Maf54 (7:59:29 PM): wow

Maf54 (7:59:48 PM): is your little guy limp...or growing

Xxxxxxxxx (7:59:54 PM): eh growing

Maf54 (8:00:00 PM): hmm

Maf54 (8:00:12 PM): so you got a stiff one now

Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:19 PM): not that fast

Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:20 PM): hey

Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:32 PM): so you have a fetich

Maf54 (8:00:32 PM): hey what

Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:40 PM): fetish**

Maf54 (8:00:43 PM): like

Maf54 (8:00:53 PM): i like steamroom

Maf54 (8:01:04 PM): whats yours

Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:09 PM): its kinda weird

Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:14 PM): lol

Maf54 (8:01:21 PM): i am hard as a rock..so tell me when your reaches rock

Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:23 PM): i have a cast fetish

Maf54 (8:01:27 PM): well tell me

Maf54 (8:01:32 PM): cast

Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:44 PM): ya like...plaster cast

Maf54 (8:01:49 PM): ok..so what happens

Maf54 (8:01:58 PM): how does that turn you in

Maf54 (8:03:32 PM): me 2

Maf54 (8:03:42 PM): cast got you going

Maf54 (8:03:47 PM): what you wearing

Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:04 PM): normal clothes

Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:09 PM): tshirt and shorts

Maf54 (8:04:17 PM): um so a big buldge

Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:35 PM): ya

Maf54 (8:04:45 PM): um

Maf54 (8:04:58 PM): love to slip them off of you

Xxxxxxxxx (8:05:08 PM): haha

Maf54 (8:05:53 PM): and gram the one eyed snake

Maf54 (8:06:13 PM): grab

Xxxxxxxxx (8:06:53 PM): not tonight...dont get to excited

Maf54 (8:07:12 PM): well your hard

Xxxxxxxxx (8:07:45 PM): that is true

Maf54 (8:08:03 PM): and a little horny

Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:11 PM): and also tru

Maf54 (8:08:31 PM): get a ruler and measure it for me

Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:38 PM): ive already told you that

Maf54 (8:08:47 PM): tell me again

Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:49 PM): 7 and 1/2

Maf54 (8:09:04 PM): ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Maf54 (8:09:08 PM): beautiful

Xxxxxxxxx (8:09:38 PM): lol

Maf54 (8:09:44 PM): thats a great size

Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:00 PM): thank you

Maf54 (8:10:22 PM): still stiff

Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:28 PM): ya

Maf54 (8:10:40 PM): take it out

Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:54 PM): brb...my mom is yelling

Maf54 (8:11:06 PM): ok

Xxxxxxxxx (8:14:02 PM): back

Maf54 (8:14:37 PM): cool hope se didnt see any thing

.....

Or, as Tadowe put it:

"emailing male pages"

"in my state, any minor under 18 is considered a "child""

That's fine. But in that state, he was considered an adult. And you're invoking a legal term -- rape -- that is absolutely not correct.

"most states consider 18 to be the age of consent, and all under that limit are minors."

Yet you and I both respect state's rights.

That means your charge is not true. Your charge of rape is false.

Will you retract?

Danforth-
re: Will you retract?

#93 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-07-18 01:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

No. He'll attack you personally, and then claim that you hate him because you are a commie stooge, or something like that.

"you are a commie stooge"

Hey!

That's Mister commie stooge to you, bub.

LOL. See ya around, sir.

It's interesting that I never see a mention of any liberal lawmaker in D.C. seek solace, comfort, guidance or take up residence at the "C" Street building.

Gee, I wonder why that is.

/snark/

Twin,

You are utterly delusional if you believe that the RNC has a monopoly on lewd behaviour in DC.

"You are utterly delusional if you believe that the RNC has a monopoly on lewd behaviour in DC."

Well it certainly seems of late they've landed Boardwalk, Park Place, and all the Railroads.

JEFF

I didn't say anything about a "monopoly."

From what I'm reading, the "C" Street building seems to be a hide-away used exclusively by Republican lawmakers so they can ply their little adulterous behavior in secret with the mistress d'jour.

Not to mention with the blessing of their fellow compatriots.

It must be an "invitation only" thingy.

Birds of a feather and all that stuff.

"...Continual inveighing against proscribed activities may indicate a high libidinous urge and the need to be vigilant against succumbing. We are all material creatures and are driven by our desires, those of us who are not asexual. ...Posted by Johnson..."

Blah blah blah, ***spuuuurt***** Ahhhhhh....

What a Moron.

Excellent riposte, Dumpling, and a demonstration of your intellectual acumen.

Remember Dumpling that if homosexual marriage is recognized and if you marry, you may be put at risk. I wonder if it would be adultery if a bisexual male in a "marriage relationship" with a homosexual male had an affair with a heterosexual female? Should the "spouse" be aggrieved, or is promiscuity such a common feature of gay culture that marital infidelity is of no moment?

Should the "spouse" be aggrieved, or is promiscuity such a common feature of gay culture that marital infidelity is of no moment?

Should the Congressman's wife be aggrieved, or is promiscuity such a common feature of Republican culture that marital infidelity is of no moment?

LOL, Snoofy!