The plot thickens; the noose tightens.

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Dire, "so's yer ole man". Is that your only justification?

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

jtdavis posted:

Dire, "so's yer ole man". Is that your only justification?

No, practicing double standards and being a hypocrite.  To which, I now add being a blue nosed old biddy.

This post is funny.

Some dude, posting an interest in an OL' Governor of Alabama's "perks".

Yet, seems OK with Ol' Bill getting a BJ in the Oval Office.

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

jtdavis posted:

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

Memphis, the only nearby city where I might actually use my CCW license, has that been cleaned up yet?  Otherwise, why is a Tennessee scalawag interested in Alabama?

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

Memphis, the only nearby city where I might actually use my CCW license, has that been cleaned up yet?  Otherwise, why is a Tennessee scalawag interested in Alabama?

No answer. You ain't really looked for dumb Tennessee republican behavior.        What's a CCW license? Counter Clock Wise, or Cranky Conservative Whacko?

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

Correction:  "more or less"

This will prevent undue exuberance on Best's part.

jtdavis posted:

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

Yep... You missed the bus, I hear little rock calling, your name.

jtdavis posted:

Memphis, the only nearby city where I might actually use my CCW license, has that been cleaned up yet?  Otherwise, why is a Tennessee scalawag interested in Alabama?

No answer. You ain't really looked for dumb Tennessee republican behavior.        What's a CCW license? Counter Clock Wise, or Cranky Conservative Whacko?

No, I'm wondering why a denizen of Tennessee is so obsessed with Alabama, when Memphis is burning down with crime and corruption.

CCW license -- Concealed carry weapon license.  Tennessee reciprocates with Alabama.  The main reason I have one is to not run afoul of Alabama law when carrying a bag to and from my car at the shooting range.

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

__

My predictions are not conclusions.  That you do not see the difference simply shows once more that you are stretching mightily to indict me for something I have not said. Your quote, above, from my prior post, is not "advice." It is fact.

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

__

My predictions are not conclusions.  That you do not see the difference simply shows once more that you are stretching mightily to indict me for something I have not said. Your quote, above, from my prior post, is not "advice." It is fact.

Condie certainly obsesses over the sexual exploits of Republicans.

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

__

My predictions are not conclusions.  That you do not see the difference simply shows once more that you are stretching mightily to indict me for something I have not said. Your quote, above, from my prior post, is not "advice." It is fact.

Condie certainly obsesses over the sexual exploits of Republicans.

___

And if so, then do  YOUR references to the sexual excesses of FDR, JFK, and RFK have nothing to to with obsession?  Your problem, dire, is that you just can not seem to stand it when someone with whom you are  politically simpatico gets him/herself embroiled in trouble or controversy and is called out for same. Your trite and predictable response to that is to denounce the messenger(s) who cite such bad behavior.  Such childishness and irrelevancy have become your stock in trade. Truly pitiful!

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

__

My predictions are not conclusions.  That you do not see the difference simply shows once more that you are stretching mightily to indict me for something I have not said. Your quote, above, from my prior post, is not "advice." It is fact.

Condie certainly obsesses over the sexual exploits of Republicans.

___

And if so, then do  YOUR references to the sexual excesses of FDR, JFK, and RFK have nothing to to with obsession?  Your problem, dire, is that you just can not seem to stand it when someone with whom you are  politically simpatico gets him/herself embroiled in trouble or controversy and is called out for same. Your trite and predictable response to that is to denounce the messenger(s) who cite such bad behavior.  Such childishness and irrelevancy have become your stock in trade. Truly pitiful!

I'll answer with a comment I made earlier today, as it applies:

"Contemduhh, review my posts.  I've rarely, if ever, initiated comments on the sexual peccadillos of persons, at all. Merely, pointed out when others obsess on those of Republicans or those they don't like.  As, I stated about such matters in general, I don't care to be regaled with such.  Don’t like my pointing out your obsessions – then, don’t give me the ammo."

I remember a bit from Abnormal Psychology -- "obsession is usually over what we desire, but can't obtain."  Sorry, you're so lonely in the home. 

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

__

My predictions are not conclusions.  That you do not see the difference simply shows once more that you are stretching mightily to indict me for something I have not said. Your quote, above, from my prior post, is not "advice." It is fact.

Condie certainly obsesses over the sexual exploits of Republicans.

___

And if so, then do  YOUR references to the sexual excesses of FDR, JFK, and RFK have nothing to to with obsession?  Your problem, dire, is that you just can not seem to stand it when someone with whom you are  politically simpatico gets him/herself embroiled in trouble or controversy and is called out for same. Your trite and predictable response to that is to denounce the messenger(s) who cite such bad behavior.  Such childishness and irrelevancy have become your stock in trade. Truly pitiful!

I'll answer with a comment I made earlier today, as it applies:

"Contemduhh, review my posts.  I've rarely, if ever, initiated comments on the sexual peccadillos of persons, at all. Merely, pointed out when others obsess on those of Republicans or those they don't like.  As, I stated about such matters in general, I don't care to be regaled with such.  Don’t like my pointing out your obsessions – then, don’t give me the ammo."

I remember a bit from Abnormal Psychology -- "obsession is usually over what we desire, but can't obtain."  Sorry, you're so lonely in the home. 

_______

I said nothing about your INITIATING such references.  I merely referred to your making references to the three presidents you listed above.  And I did so in response to YOUR invalid assertion that I was obsessing about the "sexual excesses of Republicans, the  point being that if I was obsessing, then you, by  the same standard,were also. 

It is becoming painfully obvious on this forum that certain participants, including you and Best, find it exceedingly convenient to assert that I am somehow obsessed  when I post negative information on persons or issues you favor, as though such assertions had any argumentative merit relative to the facts and circumstances I cite.  Both of you need to grow up and embrace some polemical integrity instead of relying on such failed and transparent stratagems as that. Again--Grow up!.

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

__

My predictions are not conclusions.  That you do not see the difference simply shows once more that you are stretching mightily to indict me for something I have not said. Your quote, above, from my prior post, is not "advice." It is fact.

Condie certainly obsesses over the sexual exploits of Republicans.

___

And if so, then do  YOUR references to the sexual excesses of FDR, JFK, and RFK have nothing to to with obsession?  Your problem, dire, is that you just can not seem to stand it when someone with whom you are  politically simpatico gets him/herself embroiled in trouble or controversy and is called out for same. Your trite and predictable response to that is to denounce the messenger(s) who cite such bad behavior.  Such childishness and irrelevancy have become your stock in trade. Truly pitiful!

I'll answer with a comment I made earlier today, as it applies:

"Contemduhh, review my posts.  I've rarely, if ever, initiated comments on the sexual peccadillos of persons, at all. Merely, pointed out when others obsess on those of Republicans or those they don't like.  As, I stated about such matters in general, I don't care to be regaled with such.  Don’t like my pointing out your obsessions – then, don’t give me the ammo."

I remember a bit from Abnormal Psychology -- "obsession is usually over what we desire, but can't obtain."  Sorry, you're so lonely in the home. 

_______

I said nothing about your INITIATING such references.  I merely referred to your making references to the three presidents you listed above.  And I did so in response to YOUR invalid assertion that I was obsessing about the "sexual excesses of Republicans, the  point being that if I was obsessing, then you, by  the same standard,were also. 

It is becoming painfully obvious on this forum that certain participants, including you and Best, find it exceedingly convenient to assert that I am somehow obsessed  when I post negative information on persons or issues you favor, as though such assertions had any argumentative merit relative to the facts and circumstances I cite.  Both of you need to grow up and embrace some polemical integrity instead of relying on such failed and transparent stratagems as that. Again--Grow up!.

Contenduhh, now you are on your bloviating merry-go-round. You assume that mode when you have nothing else to add.  Unless, you do, I see no reason to continue here.

Plot thickens, noose tightens, on Hillary?

jtdavis posted:

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

Plot thickens, noose tightens, on Hillary? Didn't they impeach Bill Clinton? How did that work out? I think you miss a lot.

giftedamateur posted:

jtdavis posted:

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

Plot thickens, noose tightens, on Hillary? Didn't they impeach Bill Clinton? How did that work out? I think you miss a lot.

_____

Yes, they impeached Clinton, but the Senate, which tries impeachments, found no reason to remove him from office.  Hillary's issues are still pending.  Don't get your hopes up too high.  After all, haven't  your  winger friends told you that the fix is in with the Attorney General and she will not be prosecuted.  Don't you believe your wingnut buddies and all the wingnut web sites and blogs that are parroting that notion all over the place?  Oh ye of little faith  in your wacko brethren!

Contendahh posted:

giftedamateur posted:

jtdavis posted:

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

Plot thickens, noose tightens, on Hillary? Didn't they impeach Bill Clinton? How did that work out? I think you miss a lot.

_____

Yes, they impeached Clinton, but the Senate, which tries impeachments, found no reason to remove him from office.  Hillary's issues are still pending.  Don't get your hopes up too high.  After all, haven't  your  winger friends told you that the fix is in with the Attorney General and she will not be prosecuted.  Don't you believe your wingnut buddies and all the wingnut web sites and blogs that are parroting that notion all over the place?  Oh ye of little faith  in your wacko brethren!

Contendahh posted:

giftedamateur posted:

jtdavis posted:

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

Plot thickens, noose tightens, on Hillary? Didn't they impeach Bill Clinton? How did that work out? I think you miss a lot.

_____

Yes, they impeached Clinton, but the Senate, which tries impeachments, found no reason to remove him from office.  Hillary's issues are still pending.  Don't get your hopes up too high.  After all, haven't  your  winger friends told you that the fix is in with the Attorney General and she will not be prosecuted.  Don't you believe your wingnut buddies and all the wingnut web sites and blogs that are parroting that notion all over the place?  Oh ye of little faith  in your wacko brethren!

What winger friends Mr. Nasty? What wacko friends Mr. Crazy? We know the Democrats are slimy, slippery, terrorist loving anti-American criminals that cover up for each other, we see that for ourselves. Unlike the "led by the nose Democrats" that depend on their evil masters to tell them what to think.

giftedamateur posted:

Contendahh posted:

giftedamateur posted:

jtdavis posted:

The Governor has impeachment charges brought against him by the speaker of the house who is facing abuse of power charges and it will be heard by a judge who has already been removed  from office twice for illegal actions.                         Did I miss anything?

Plot thickens, noose tightens, on Hillary? Didn't they impeach Bill Clinton? How did that work out? I think you miss a lot.

_____

Yes, they impeached Clinton, but the Senate, which tries impeachments, found no reason to remove him from office.  Hillary's issues are still pending.  Don't get your hopes up too high.  After all, haven't  your  winger friends told you that the fix is in with the Attorney General and she will not be prosecuted.  Don't you believe your wingnut buddies and all the wingnut web sites and blogs that are parroting that notion all over the place?  Oh ye of little faith  in your wacko brethren!

What winger friends Mr. Nasty? What wacko friends Mr. Crazy? We know the Democrats are slimy, slippery, terrorist loving anti-American criminals that cover up for each other, we see that for ourselves. Unlike the "led by the nose Democrats" that depend on their evil masters to tell them what to think.

_____

My my!  Those panties must be so tightly wadded up after that that only drilling and blasting could free them up!

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Contendahh posted:

direstraits posted:

Condie will ignore the dalliances of FDR and his two mistresses (he died in Warm Springs, Georgia in the arms of the second one), not to mention Eleanor's mistress.  JFK had so many, not all are yet known.  Most were reportedly quite pleased. RFK, on the other hand, was a bit a crass pig, not to mention murdering one of them.  Bubbah had a number, most, but all were reportedly willing.  Then, there's Hillary with her bit of Huma. 

Double standard, hypocrite! 

____

Such twaddle, dire.  I ignored nothing.  It is utterly irrational to insist that for balance I must recount the past moral or criminal excesses of persons  of your choice with Democratic roots when discussing a very CURRENT event of high interest to Alabamians. There is no double standard here. Apparently you failed to take note that in listing governors who ran afoul of the law, I included TWO DEMOCRATS, Edwards and Blanton, both of whom I referenced within the actual CONTEXT of my post--the impeachment or potential impeachment or conviction of chief executives of various states. Thus, by any rational standard, I achieved balance without any element of "double standard" or hypocrisy.

Keep your irrelevant, over-reaching cavils to yourself and perhaps you will look a bit less  clueless. 

Entirely relevant, thank you!  Except for RFK's mistress's sudden demise, I only included those guilty of having lovers, other than their spouses.  Until, I see state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner, I will continue to state double standard, blue nosed hypocrite.

_____

And you will thus continue to show yourself to be struggling to portray a state of parity (better known as "so's your old man") more of less as regards  moral deficiencies in the two parties, something that has long existed and finds no particular relevance in discussions of the Guv'nah's current woes. Be patient; it is very highly probable that you will soon see the details of "state funds or other assets used in an illegal manner." As with the helicopter/billfold incident, there are numerous other state employees who can, and who I confidently predict will, attest to taxpayer resources being used to accommodate and facilitate the Guv'nah's shabby romantic excursions. And the legislature, and perhaps ultimately the courts, will find no compulsion to take into account the sexual misadventures of any other public officials in deciding the Guv'nah's ultimate fate.  They don't play your silly "so's yer old man" game.

No matter what you try to hide behind, you still remain a double standard practicing, blue nosed hypocrite.

Until I see actual misuse of state funds or property, I suggest you follow your own advice:

"The raw, undocumented, unproven assertions of a sexual relationship between Ms. Clinton and Ms. Abedin continue to be circulated by unscrupulous scum like YOU!  Have you no decency? Probably not!"

__

My predictions are not conclusions.  That you do not see the difference simply shows once more that you are stretching mightily to indict me for something I have not said. Your quote, above, from my prior post, is not "advice." It is fact.

Condie certainly obsesses over the sexual exploits of Republicans.

___

And if so, then do  YOUR references to the sexual excesses of FDR, JFK, and RFK have nothing to to with obsession?  Your problem, dire, is that you just can not seem to stand it when someone with whom you are  politically simpatico gets him/herself embroiled in trouble or controversy and is called out for same. Your trite and predictable response to that is to denounce the messenger(s) who cite such bad behavior.  Such childishness and irrelevancy have become your stock in trade. Truly pitiful!

I'll answer with a comment I made earlier today, as it applies:

"Contemduhh, review my posts.  I've rarely, if ever, initiated comments on the sexual peccadillos of persons, at all. Merely, pointed out when others obsess on those of Republicans or those they don't like.  As, I stated about such matters in general, I don't care to be regaled with such.  Don’t like my pointing out your obsessions – then, don’t give me the ammo."

I remember a bit from Abnormal Psychology -- "obsession is usually over what we desire, but can't obtain."  Sorry, you're so lonely in the home. 

_______

I said nothing about your INITIATING such references.  I merely referred to your making references to the three presidents you listed above.  And I did so in response to YOUR invalid assertion that I was obsessing about the "sexual excesses of Republicans, the  point being that if I was obsessing, then you, by  the same standard,were also. 

It is becoming painfully obvious on this forum that certain participants, including you and Best, find it exceedingly convenient to assert that I am somehow obsessed  when I post negative information on persons or issues you favor, as though such assertions had any argumentative merit relative to the facts and circumstances I cite.  Both of you need to grow up and embrace some polemical integrity instead of relying on such failed and transparent stratagems as that. Again--Grow up!.

Contenduhh, now you are on your bloviating merry-go-round. You assume that mode when you have nothing else to add.  Unless, you do, I see no reason to continue here.

Dire blithers as follows:

"Contenduhh, now you are on your bloviating merry-go-round. You assume that mode when you have nothing else to add.  Unless, you do, I see no reason to continue here."

______

Good riddance.  Your "contributions" to the discussion consisted of little more than insults and trite permutations on the "So's your old man" theme. 

LOL!

Contendahh posted:

Dire blithers as follows:

"Contenduhh, now you are on your bloviating merry-go-round. You assume that mode when you have nothing else to add.  Unless, you do, I see no reason to continue here."

______

Good riddance.  Your "contributions" to the discussion consisted of little more than insults and trite permutations on the "So's your old man" theme. 

Just what is the "so's yer old man theme" besides an excuse not to answer for the things you lefties do. It's like that tired worn out old race card you all fling when we all know the lefties are the most racist bunch in the country. You proved your racism a few days ago. (Thanks for proving what I have been saying about your racist a****). You need a new "catch phrase". Maybe a little truth would work, how bout you just admit you have no defense and no argument, you have nothing but insults, and puffing, and put the tired old "so's yer old man" weak *** argument out to pasture where it, and you, belong.

Bestworking posted:

Contendahh posted:

Dire blithers as follows:

"Contenduhh, now you are on your bloviating merry-go-round. You assume that mode when you have nothing else to add.  Unless, you do, I see no reason to continue here."

______

Good riddance.  Your "contributions" to the discussion consisted of little more than insults and trite permutations on the "So's your old man" theme. 

Just what is the "so's yer old man theme" besides an excuse not to answer for the things you lefties do. It's like that tired worn out old race card you all fling when we all know the lefties are the most racist bunch in the country. You proved your racism a few days ago. (Thanks for proving what I have been saying about your racist a****). You need a new "catch phrase". Maybe a little truth would work, how bout you just admit you have no defense and no argument, you have nothing but insults, and puffing, and put the tired old "so's yer old man" weak *** argument out to pasture where it, and you, belong.

________________________________________

You may now un-wad those harridan panties!

Contendahh posted:

Bestworking posted:

Contendahh posted:

Dire blithers as follows:

"Contenduhh, now you are on your bloviating merry-go-round. You assume that mode when you have nothing else to add.  Unless, you do, I see no reason to continue here."

______

Good riddance.  Your "contributions" to the discussion consisted of little more than insults and trite permutations on the "So's your old man" theme. 

Just what is the "so's yer old man theme" besides an excuse not to answer for the things you lefties do. It's like that tired worn out old race card you all fling when we all know the lefties are the most racist bunch in the country. You proved your racism a few days ago. (Thanks for proving what I have been saying about your racist a****). You need a new "catch phrase". Maybe a little truth would work, how bout you just admit you have no defense and no argument, you have nothing but insults, and puffing, and put the tired old "so's yer old man" weak *** argument out to pasture where it, and you, belong.

________________________________________

You may now un-wad those harridan panties!

You un-wad the harridan's panties, I'm not touching your wife's old nasty drawers. After you do hers, get her to return the favor and un-wad your crusty old underwear.

Bestworking posted:

Contendahh posted:

Bestworking posted:

Contendahh posted:

Dire blithers as follows:

"Contenduhh, now you are on your bloviating merry-go-round. You assume that mode when you have nothing else to add.  Unless, you do, I see no reason to continue here."

______

Good riddance.  Your "contributions" to the discussion consisted of little more than insults and trite permutations on the "So's your old man" theme. 

Just what is the "so's yer old man theme" besides an excuse not to answer for the things you lefties do. It's like that tired worn out old race card you all fling when we all know the lefties are the most racist bunch in the country. You proved your racism a few days ago. (Thanks for proving what I have been saying about your racist a****). You need a new "catch phrase". Maybe a little truth would work, how bout you just admit you have no defense and no argument, you have nothing but insults, and puffing, and put the tired old "so's yer old man" weak *** argument out to pasture where it, and you, belong.

________________________________________

You may now un-wad those harridan panties!

You un-wad the harridan's panties, I'm not touching your wife's old nasty drawers. After you do hers, get her to return the favor and un-wad your crusty old underwear.

_____

How creative and original you ....AREN'T!!!