Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rpm on March 10, 2008, 03:11:12 PM

Title: More Hypocrisy
Post by: rpm on March 10, 2008, 03:11:12 PM
link (http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1062947520080310)
If you're going to be "Mr. Law and Order", you might want to stay away from prostitutes.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: SWrokit on March 10, 2008, 03:17:02 PM
Yep.........kind of like getting caught with your pants down  :D

<S>
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: ROX on March 10, 2008, 03:26:35 PM

Ya know why the DC prostitute never fully got up to speed?

She had a governor on her.




Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Jackal1 on March 10, 2008, 03:31:55 PM
Shame he didn`t do this a little earlier. Silda could have gotten into the prez race with Hillary. Eliot and Bill could have  hung out together.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Ripsnort on March 10, 2008, 03:33:18 PM
Two things reading this story:

A) rpm is plenty pissed that this guy wasn't a republican.

B) Does anyone ever notice that when the press brings up a story of scandal with a republican involved, they immediately identify the politician as "Republican" within the first sentence of said story...but when its a Democrat, you have to read into about the 7th paragraph to find out their a democrat.

Nah, no transparent media bias there.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Nilsen on March 10, 2008, 03:35:35 PM
Two things reading this story:

A) rpm is plenty pissed that this guy wasn't a republican.



How can you read that out of rpm's post?
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: rpm on March 10, 2008, 03:39:12 PM
Two things reading your post Drip,

a) you really have a thing for me don't ya? Sorry I get under your skin so badly.

b) you are relieved it's a Democrat and angry that it's not a gay sex scandal.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: indy007 on March 10, 2008, 03:46:50 PM
I've always wondered why the anti-gay-rights party has so many gay scandals, yet the pro-gay-rights party always has straight sex scandals.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bustr on March 10, 2008, 03:50:22 PM
 :huh HUH  :huh

I dont get it. He's a democrat and she's just a..aa....a..aa...aaaaa.....  I dont get it. I thought the Dems and Rep's had this all worked out. Dems can fornicate with prostitutes, boyfreinds, midgets, donkey's, your wife or daughtor if shes 18, and small furry animals on prime time as long as they don't use raceial slurs during intercorse. Reps are the ones who have to follow the 10 commandments or be cast into the burning pit by the Liberal media....I just don't get it..... :uhoh

Are pigs flying and singing hymns now?.......... :noid
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bustr on March 10, 2008, 03:57:32 PM
I've always wondered why the anti-gay-rights party has so many gay scandals, yet the pro-gay-rights party always has straight sex scandals.

Hey you know how it is....gays stealth into the republican party to be with all the straight men and eventually get caught being themselves somewhere public. It's a shame conservitive christians take people on thier word and trust them to be who they say they are. Guess thats why dems and liberals always seem to pull the wool over their eyes so easily. It's that trusting compassionate nature of christians that gets'em in trouble every time....... Kinda like how the U.S. signed the geneva convention and terrorists lie all the day long......:devil
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: AWMac on March 10, 2008, 04:07:39 PM
Imagine that...

Hell I always thought politicians were too busy just screwin the Country over.

Your tax dollars at work.

Mac
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: john9001 on March 10, 2008, 04:19:32 PM
i for one am really surprised it is a democrat, i thought only neocons did that sort of thing.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Ripsnort on March 10, 2008, 04:28:54 PM
Two things reading your post Drip,

a) you really have a thing for me don't ya? Sorry I get under your skin so badly.

b) you are relieved it's a Democrat and angry that it's not a gay sex scandal.

You're responding to my post after I made an observation. Perhaps its me who gets under your skin judging by the tone above. ;)
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Charon on March 10, 2008, 05:04:49 PM
What gets me is that these people think they can get away with it. Sexual compulsions can be very strong, of course, but so can a desire for power among politicians. If you are a celebrity or a politician or anyone of note, such as a televangelist, you have a target on your back for any misstep. And people recognize you and understand the opportunity. Yet they still do this stuff. What do you want to bet it was no accident he got caught in this particular sting. And even if it was, he was obviously heavily exposed to the risk from accidental discovery.

Charon
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: JB88 on March 10, 2008, 05:08:21 PM
one word.

darn that was two...no six..er 8....aaaaarggghhh!

Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: texasmom on March 10, 2008, 05:19:29 PM
.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: DieAz on March 10, 2008, 05:24:36 PM
 that . tells me you are biting your tongue, TxMom.
might as well say something anyway.
yeah yeah yeah no delete button.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Ack-Ack on March 10, 2008, 05:41:51 PM
I've always wondered why the anti-gay-rights party has so many gay scandals, yet the pro-gay-rights party always has straight sex scandals.

Are you implying that within every Republican there is a closet homo just waiting to come out and prance?


ack-ack
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Yeager on March 10, 2008, 05:43:03 PM
none of this should come as a suprise to anyone.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Swager on March 10, 2008, 05:50:35 PM
He is from New York, just like Hillary.

My state is sooooo screwed up!!

Embarrassing!

Maybe Hillary was one of the pros,

No, no, that is just disgusting!

Maybe she hired one of the pros!
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: texasmom on March 10, 2008, 05:54:22 PM
that . tells me you are biting your tongue, TxMom.
might as well say something anyway.
yeah yeah yeah no delete button.
:) Yep, I "deleted" my original post, and replaced it with the period.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bustr on March 10, 2008, 06:47:16 PM
Are you implying that within every Republican there is a closet homo just waiting to come out and prance?


ack-ack

Comon Ack-Ack. The republicans have known for years the gays infiltraited the party to give it some color and timed scandles to make the democrats look like paragons of virtue. Other wise it would still be the party of boring old white men who sleep with their wives. I just pity the poor ladies they lied to for so many years as stealth hetero husbands waiting for the right time to poop(oopsy,,) popp a scandle bomb....... :devil

By the way wasnt the first intern scandle by a dem who popped one of his boys in the closet during a recess, but got off the child molestation charges because the intern was consenting and 18?
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: rpm on March 10, 2008, 07:07:02 PM
You're responding to my post after I made an observation. Perhaps its me who gets under your skin judging by the tone above. ;)
Typical. All hat and no cattle.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: crockett on March 10, 2008, 07:08:09 PM
Two things reading this story:

A) rpm is plenty pissed that this guy wasn't a republican.

B) Does anyone ever notice that when the press brings up a story of scandal with a republican involved, they immediately identify the politician as "Republican" within the first sentence of said story...but when its a Democrat, you have to read into about the 7th paragraph to find out their a democrat.

Nah, no transparent media bias there.

The only difference I see, is when it's Democrats get caught it with a women.. When it's Republicans it's typically with a gay man.

 :rofl
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Mini D on March 10, 2008, 07:11:53 PM
How can a politician see visiting a hooker as anything other than political russian roulette?
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Ripsnort on March 10, 2008, 07:13:39 PM
The only difference I see, is when it's Democrats get caught it with a women.. When it's Republicans it's typically with a gay man.

 :rofl
Does McGreevey ring a bell? ;)
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bj229r on March 10, 2008, 07:32:27 PM
How can a politician see visiting a hooker as anything other than political russian roulette?
Esp since he busted a prostitution ring in 2004 :rofl
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: rpm on March 10, 2008, 07:37:46 PM
Esp since he busted a prostitution ring in 2004 :rofl
Bingo!
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: eagl on March 10, 2008, 08:37:22 PM
They just need to legalize prostitution and regulate the hell out of it.  We'd quit criminalizing what appears to be a natural behavioral impulse, there would be less prostitution-related crime, less disease transmission, and the govt would get some more tax revenue.  Everyone wins except for the prudes and religious whackjobs, and who gives a flying F*** about them anyhow.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: DREDIOCK on March 10, 2008, 09:43:19 PM
Its NY

What the hell you guys expect?
When rudy cleaned up the city.
He just moved the hookers to the governors mansion.  ;)
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Nilsen on March 11, 2008, 02:31:40 AM
They just need to legalize prostitution and regulate the hell out of it.  We'd quit criminalizing what appears to be a natural behavioral impulse, there would be less prostitution-related crime, less disease transmission, and the govt would get some more tax revenue.  Everyone wins except for the prudes and religious whackjobs, and who gives a flying F*** about them anyhow.


Quoted for truth!
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bozon on March 11, 2008, 02:47:21 AM
So he wanted a buttery buttery with a hooker. What's the big deal? That he was against it before? He was probably against it because that was what poles said the public wanted to hear.

and I totally support Nilsens quote of eagl.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Jackal1 on March 11, 2008, 02:51:43 AM
He was probably against it because that was what poles said the public wanted to hear.

Freudian slip.  :rofl :devil
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: ROX on March 11, 2008, 07:38:50 AM
Skuzzy is gonna be busy this morning.

Fire up the coffee maker in Grapevine.

ROX
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: myelo on March 11, 2008, 07:40:27 AM
Quote
The meeting apparently lasted from 9:36 p.m. ET, when Kristen arrived, until 12:02 a.m..

Two and a half hours.

Indict him? I <S> him.






Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Rolex on March 11, 2008, 08:10:52 AM
The outrage should be that his bank ratted him out for having the audacity to withdraw cash from his account. The Stasi federal government agencies proceeded to tap his phones, his email, capture his banking, credit card, travel records and spend who knows how much money on this.

Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: JBA on March 11, 2008, 08:26:52 AM
Two things reading this story:

A) rpm is plenty pissed that this guy wasn't a republican.

B) Does anyone ever notice that when the press brings up a story of scandal with a republican involved, they immediately identify the politician as "Republican" within the first sentence of said story...but when its a Democrat, you have to read into about the 7th paragraph to find out their a democrat.

Nah, no transparent media bias there.
In addition to that Rip, Has anyone used in the Media used the word Hypocrite yet.  If it were a Republican we would have heard it right out of the box, the headlines would have read "Republican Family values Senator Hypocritical actions.....blah blah"
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: crockett on March 11, 2008, 08:32:16 AM
Does McGreevey ring a bell? ;)

Yes so 1 Democrat was caught with a gay guy.. How many Republicans? lol I lost count.. However I do remember 1 of the Republican caught was with a women. So it's 1 for 1.  :lol
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: ROX on March 11, 2008, 09:45:00 AM
The outrage should be that his bank ratted him out for having the audacity to withdraw cash from his account. The Stasi federal government agencies proceeded to tap his phones, his email, capture his banking, credit card, travel records and spend who knows how much money on this.




They changed some of the federal banking regs a few years back in an effort to find drug dealers and crime syndicates.  Any HUGE deposit or HUGE withdrawal throws up a red flag now. 

It's not brain surgery...most smart people just stagger out the big deposits or withdrawls over a matter of days.



ROX
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Rolex on March 11, 2008, 10:13:12 AM
It isn't that HUGE!  ;)

$3,000 makes you a suspected terrorist, money launderer, tax evader or drug dealer. I don't know how you folks have accepted and tolerated the indignity of that.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: john9001 on March 11, 2008, 01:03:12 PM
he was making withdrawals of large amounts of CASH to pay his hooker, he did that to lose the paper trail of credit cards, checks, etc. Moving cash around is the way people launder money, the FBI thought he might be taking bribes and moving the money this way, the original investigation was not about hookers, it was about bribes and money laundering.


:don't let the little head do the thinking for the big head.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bustr on March 11, 2008, 01:34:50 PM
He should have thought ahead and made one large withdrawal. But then as gov he had to sign antilaundering papers and some other criminal activity type of agreements like folks who work in banks. Wife works for WaMu I worked for BofA. But then one large withdrawal a year is not looked at that closely if you keep it $50k or under. It throws a flag, but you need a pattern which was his downfall. After all he has money and spending it is expected for his lifestyle.

On another note...How come all the gays, pedifiles, and perverts want to hang out with republicans and conservitives. Didn't they get the memo that the democrates will look the other way and welcome them in with open something and somethings and those rubber slippy things...... :rolleyes:
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Shuffler on March 11, 2008, 02:18:30 PM
Does anyone ever notice that when the press brings up a story of scandal with a republican involved, they immediately identify the politician as "Republican" within the first sentence of said story...but when its a Democrat, you have to read into about the 7th paragraph to find out their a democrat.

Nah, no transparent media bias there.

Absolutely correct. It may never even say he is a Dem.

For those thinking this is just a prostitution ring.. it's not. They specialize in rape type prostitution
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: JBA on March 11, 2008, 02:30:07 PM
The Boston Globe doesn’t mention he’s a Democrat until the jump page, that’s when a story carries over from the first page to the next deeper pages. It’s the 8th paragraph.

The New York times dose a little better, it’s in the 6th paragraph but still on the first page.

Not contrast that to Larry Craig. It was mentioned in the first paragraph or even the Headline that he was a Republican, with a  wide stance.

A few examples:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347/

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/28/craig.arrest/

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3611682

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294852,00.html

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/27/craig.arrest/index.html



Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: midnight Target on March 11, 2008, 02:37:09 PM
I checked this also, unfortunately you are correct.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bustr on March 11, 2008, 02:46:17 PM
NOW FREEKIN WAY.......


the mainstream media is       BIASED           :rock
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Charon on March 11, 2008, 04:28:34 PM
It's always a bit sad how these threads evolve to: my turd doesn't smell as bad as your turd; or the press favors your turd over my turd.

We need to reach across the aisle, cross the partisan barrier and have some solid bipartisan contempt for the whole uniparty, crooked, lying, self interested Washington political mess we allow ourselves to endure.

Charon
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: rpm on March 11, 2008, 04:36:11 PM
It's always a bit sad how these threads evolve to: my turd doesn't smell as bad as your turd; or the press favors your turd over my turd.

We need to reach across the aisle, cross the partisan barrier and have some solid bipartisan contempt for the whole uniparty, crooked, lying, self interested Washington political mess we allow ourselves to endure.

Charon
Amen to that!
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: JB88 on March 11, 2008, 04:40:08 PM
what charon said.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: AWMac on March 11, 2008, 04:46:03 PM
what charon said.


Ditto
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: bustr on March 11, 2008, 04:49:08 PM
Charon what an excellent idea.

Hows about the remaining boring monogamas one spouse members of [/]both parties[/b] out the pedofiles, skirt chasers, freak soliciters, closet\outta closet gays and lesbians, animal freakers, NAMBLA members, dirty old men\women, teen page poachers, S&M prostitute and regulare prostitute of both sex users, bad check passers, bad gass passers, money addicts, drug addicts, power addicts and basic liers. Then make them get their own party called...hmmm...lets see....the Sodom and Gamorrah Party. Or better yet the American Morality and Truth Party for the advancement of sick Human Beings.

This list seems to be all we have as choices in our government these days if you wait long enough for them to goof up in public.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Elfie on March 11, 2008, 05:00:41 PM
It's always a bit sad how these threads evolve to: my turd doesn't smell as bad as your turd; or the press favors your turd over my turd.

We need to reach across the aisle, cross the partisan barrier and have some solid bipartisan contempt for the whole uniparty, crooked, lying, self interested Washington political mess we allow ourselves to endure.

Charon

No doubt, that whole freakin mess of a political machine in Washington just makes me wanna puke
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Holden McGroin on March 11, 2008, 08:51:06 PM
Been gone for a few days...  Good to see bipartisanship indignation.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: SirLoin on March 12, 2008, 04:18:01 AM
is it just me or does anyone else think what two consenting adults do in a hotel room is not a crime?
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: doogan on March 12, 2008, 04:34:57 AM
See Rules #4, #5
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: doogan on March 12, 2008, 04:40:34 AM
See Rules #4, #5
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Ripsnort on March 12, 2008, 06:47:52 AM
is it just me or does anyone else think what two consenting adults do in a hotel room is not a crime?
The real crime is the money transfer of $4300 for a 4 hour hooker. Last time I checked, prostitution is illegal in NY.  Tax payer money paid for the hooker (and probably hookers in the past too) After all, his paycheck comes from the taxpayers.

Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Chairboy on March 12, 2008, 07:11:27 AM
Why does it matter where his paycheck comes from?  If you work for Pepsi, does that mean you can't buy a Coke?

The developing story now is that he was caught because his bank reported suspicious cash transfers to the IRS.  Not even 10K, which is the point they're required to report at.

I want to know who he banked with.  If it's my bank, then maybe I should change to another one that's less cozy with the feds.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: JBA on March 12, 2008, 07:54:39 AM
Why does it matter where his paycheck comes from?  If you work for Pepsi, does that mean you can't buy a Coke?

The developing story now is that he was caught because his bank reported suspicious cash transfers to the IRS.  Not even 10K, which is the point they're required to report at.

I want to know who he banked with.  If it's my bank, then maybe I should change to another one that's less cozy with the feds.
The bank reported suspicious wire transfers to accounts of companies that didn’t exist, they suspected money laundering of bribes and kick backs. Not money for Boobs and kinkiness.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Shamus on March 12, 2008, 09:26:46 AM
Not that I like the guy, I think it is fitting that he got popped by the same tactics that he so vigorously employed against others when he was AG.

I does show just how "free" our society is tho when you have a guy that makes 4-5 million a year being watched closely enough to have a few grand kicks off the bells and whistles.

shamus
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Jackal1 on March 12, 2008, 09:44:06 AM
Why does it matter where his paycheck comes from?  If you work for Pepsi, does that mean you can't buy a Coke?

Naaaah...you buy coke on nearly every street corner now.

 :D
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: indy007 on March 12, 2008, 11:01:12 AM
Are you implying that within every Republican there is a closet homo just waiting to come out and prance?


ack-ack

Take what you will from it. I don't like elephants or donkeys... but it's hysterical to me that there's been so many... pink elephants... popping up over the last few years, when it's been over a decade for the donkeys.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: JBA on March 12, 2008, 12:41:38 PM
Not that I like the guy, I think it is fitting that he got popped by the same tactics that he so vigorously employed against others when he was AG.

I does show just how "free" our society is tho when you have a guy that makes 4-5 million a year being watched closely enough to have a few grand kicks off the bells and whistles.

shamus
News is it was not just a "few Grand" but 85K over ten years. He's a cuddlinghunk.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Shamus on March 12, 2008, 02:28:47 PM
News is it was not just a "few Grand" but 85K over ten years. He's a cuddlinghunk.

Alright then, 85k over 10 years is still nothing concerning a guy making the kind of money he did over the same period.

A 10 year history had nothing to do with the investigation, it was a SAR report for a "few Grand" that opened the investigation.

shamus
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: john9001 on March 12, 2008, 02:52:44 PM
he married into money.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: SirLoin on March 12, 2008, 08:00:25 PM
i think if u make prostitution illegal...so should you adultry.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Ripsnort on March 12, 2008, 08:05:04 PM
Why does it matter where his paycheck comes from?  If you work for Pepsi, does that mean you can't buy a Coke?

The developing story now is that he was caught because his bank reported suspicious cash transfers to the IRS.  Not even 10K, which is the point they're required to report at.

I want to know who he banked with.  If it's my bank, then maybe I should change to another one that's less cozy with the feds.

It's called E-T-H-I-C-S. You should try it some time.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Chairboy on March 12, 2008, 08:14:15 PM
It's called E-T-H-I-C-S. You should try it some time.
Explain, with specifics, your statement and how it relates to me.  If you're able.  If you're not able and were talking out of your rectum, just make a snarky reply or dodge this with another question.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Ripsnort on March 12, 2008, 08:15:59 PM
Explain, with specifics, your statement and how it relates to me.  If you're able.  If you're not able and were talking out of your rectum, just make a snarky reply or dodge this with another question.
The "You should try it" was sarcasm. Sorry that I couldn't paint a better picture for you. 
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Chairboy on March 12, 2008, 08:21:26 PM
Well, your statement clearly indicates that you believe I lack ethics or act in an unethical manner.  I'll give you a second shot at answering the question, if it was unclear or hard to understand.
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: MORAY37 on March 13, 2008, 02:10:19 AM
They just need to legalize prostitution and regulate the hell out of it.  We'd quit criminalizing what appears to be a natural behavioral impulse, there would be less prostitution-related crime, less disease transmission, and the govt would get some more tax revenue.  Everyone wins except for the prudes and religious whackjobs, and who gives a flying F*** about them anyhow.



Definately.   :salute
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: SIG220 on March 13, 2008, 02:18:06 AM
link (http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1062947520080310)
If you're going to be "Mr. Law and Order", you might want to stay away from prostitutes.


Unless, of course, you live in Nevada.   There is it only illegal in the cities of Las Vegas, Reno, and Carson City.   

Don't you ever watch the "Cathouse" show on HBO??   I used to live just a few miles from the location of the Bunny Ranch.

The owners of the ranch even shoot at the shotgun range that I used to frequent.  Here is a recent photo of them at that range:


(http://www.bunnyranch.com/phpAlbum/main.php?cmd=image&var1=DanHagerty_Dennis_MikeHagerty_07-30-2005.jpg)



Even the popular conservative talk host Sean Hannity hangs out at the Bunny Ranch.   Here is a photo of him with his favorite Bunny, a girl who goes by the name "Air Force Amy":


(http://www.bunnyranch.com/phpAlbum/main.php?cmd=image&var1=Dennis_Hannity_AFA.jpg)
_____________________________ ______________
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: SIG220 on March 13, 2008, 03:42:58 AM
Well, "Kristen" has been outted.   She is a 22 year old woman who goes by the name Ashley Alexandra Dupre.   All of her Myspace photos are now removed, but earlier yesterday the press managed to download some from her pages.

Here is a close-up of her:


(http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/images/attachement/jpg/site1/20080313/0013729e45180942c81116.jpg)



And a shot of her in a bathing suit:


(http://www.theimproper.com/Images/Art/kristen1.jpg)



BTW:  Did you notice how the boat that she is on towers above all of the other yachts in the harbor?   It must be HUGE!   I guess someone who could afford a boat like that could afford her also.


And here is another close-up of her face:


(http://gaysocialites.com/photos/govspitzkristen.jpg)


_____________________________ __________
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: Jackal1 on March 13, 2008, 07:43:25 AM
 :rofl

Sig you got a love connection going or something?
Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: SIG220 on March 13, 2008, 07:48:32 AM
Have you heard the latest on this scandal?

It turns out that the Escort Service had a system of grading the girls, and charged according to their grade.  Girls were rated as being worthy of 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 Diamonds.

It turns out that "Kristen" was of the cheapest grade: only 3 Diamonds.  Yet, the hourly rate for just the 3 Diamond girls was still $1,000 an hour.  A 4 Diamond girl's rate was $1,200/hr, a 5 Diamond girl charged $1,500/hr, a 6 Diamond girl was $2,100/hr, and a 7 Diamond girl's fee was $3,100/hr!!!

So on top of everything else, the Governor threw away his career for  the cheapest grade!!

I wonder why he did not spend more money, and get one of the better looking women?

_____________________________ _____________________________ __________________


Title: Re: More Hypocrisy
Post by: SIG220 on March 13, 2008, 07:56:39 AM
:rofl

Sig you got a love connection going or something?


No, I never actually set foot on the Bunny Ranch myself.   I never ever gambled at all while I lived in Nevada either.

I talked to numerous men who did go into the place, though.   One co-worker was quite a regular, in fact.   He bragged and bragged about trying out each new lady that they hired.   He was very proud of himself, despite the fact that he was paying all of these women to have sex with him.