jump to last post 1-16 of 16 discussions (88 posts)

Ted Kennedy Brothel Memo Unveils Party

  1. Stacie L profile image88
    Stacie Lposted 6 years ago

    some history isn't always good

    Ted Kennedy Brothel. Ted Kennedy arranged to rent a brothel for a night while on a visit to Latin American countries. It happened decades ago, according to a 1961 State Department memo obtained and published by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

    Judicial Watch released several documents said to be from Kennedys FBI file. The group said it obtained a cleaner copy of the State Department memo after a mostly redacted version was made public earlier.

    The Dec. 28, 1961, memo described a tour of several Latin American countries Kennedy made while he was an assistant prosecutor with Suffolk County, Mass.


    http://www.newsoxy.com/politics/ted-ken … 20209.html

    Joe Kennedy was a "ladies man" so his sons followed in his footsteps....
    it's no wonder Ted's wife drank...

    1. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Aww...say it ain't so, Joe! 
      Democrats never do anything...gulp....wrong. Never never never....especially the Kennedys...
      wink

      1. Greek One profile image78
        Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        gulp?

        No one said anything about oral sex

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          "gulp" was just an expression of irony, sarcasm, whatever.
          YOU are the one who mentioned oral...

          How are you today, Greek One?  Still feisty as ever, I see.  big_smile

          Well, the Kennedys have had problem after problem, scandal after scandal.  Yet they're still considered almost "American royalty"....I don't get it, but anyway their name is historically famous.

          1. Greek One profile image78
            Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Hi Brenda

            I'm happily married, so I don't have to have sex anymore...
            but I do remember it fondly.

            As for the Kennedy's and their scandals, it's not surprising...
            politicians are used to screwing the public every chance they get.

            1. profile image0
              Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Was the Chappaquiddic (sp?) incident ever really resolved?
              ...I think he was drunk and flipped the car, right?

              1. Greek One profile image78
                Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I wouldnt call the lady he was with that night a 'car'

              2. dutchman1951 profile image60
                dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Mary Jo Kopeckney Was an Aid to one of his associates. She was Invited to a Party at a Summer House on the Island next to Chappaquidick Island. He had the hots for her for awile and His associate introduced them formaly with intentions of them being togeather for the night.

                During the party, he offerd to drive her to a rented House out on the Island off the Land cut where she and her friends were staying,  and he was probably drunk, and he missed the Turn onto the Wooden Bridge cross over, going on to the island. Small beach back roads, tight corners etc...

                The Road makes a sharp short hard turn onto the bridge there, and It had no Guard rails and the car straddled the edge of the bridge and one side slipped off. It fliped and went into the backwater creek that seperated the Island from the mainland.

                He paniced and pulled himself out, but Mary Jo fliped over  the back of Her seat and into the back seat as it rolled upside down, with the windows up. and was caught in the back seat.

                Ted got out, then paniced because she never came out. It was never proven that he tried to go back in the water to save her, but he in shock walked to the house she rented and asked her Girlfriend to call Fire and Rescue. Then He walked back to the car, and then back to the Party at his Political associates house and told Him what happened.

                They supposidly called the Local Sherrif and Magistrate from that house, and then and then they all walked back to the car to meet there.  They suspected the State Senator and Ted both used influence on the magistrate and corener..

                By that time they came back to the car the second time,  she had drowned. The Local Sherrif there controled the investigation, and the Boston Globe said or tried valiently to save her, and tried to imply She was to Drunk to swim and help herself. And suposidly Ted tried to save her in vein and was hurt himself?

                It was rumored that she and they had been togeather many times in DC and were an item,  and that she was Pregnant, I do not know if that was ever confirmed true or not. And that she told Him at the Party she was and they left togeather after that? Suposidly arguing when they left?

                It was a conspiracy from the get go, because of the Kennedy family.

    2. Ralph Deeds profile image71
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Speaking of "dirt" here's a bit on the Bush family-

      http://www.slate.com/id/2106773/

      1. profile image51
        ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        What does that have to do with Kennedy?

        1. bgamall profile image84
          bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Actually, because Republicans are the party of morals, they seem to never live up to them. The more you try to keep an external law, the more you fail. That is the essence of Republicanism as keeper of morals. They fail frequently and then get voted out.

          Be careful before you hold yourself up as infallible.

          1. profile image51
            ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Are you saying that democrats are the party of immorality?

            1. profile image65
              logic,commonsenseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              They are proud of it!

              1. profile image51
                ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Can we get a democrat here to confirm this?

            2. Flightkeeper profile image73
              Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Or he could be saying that the democrats are the party of amorality.

              1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
                Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The Democrats aren't always braying about family values. They just practice family values, and when they don't at least they aren't hypocrites like Gingrich who's working on this third or fourth wife, and while trying to crucify Clinton was screwing one of his staffers. That is hypocrisy.

                1. Flightkeeper profile image73
                  Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this



                  Yeah, and if the democrats practice like their heroes Bill and Ted, they have excellent family values indeed. lol lol lol

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image71
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Nothing. Except that Stacie was digging dirt on a prominent Democrat, so I merely pointed out a bit of dirt on the Bushes, a prominent GOP family. Apparently you don't want to hear dirt about Republicans???

          1. Stacie L profile image88
            Stacie Lposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            FYI; I did not dig for dirt, it was on the front page of yahoo.
            I don't play favorites when it comes to politicians.
            I think most are self-serving and paid for by big corporation..

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well, being a Democrat, I just thought I'd add a little balance to the thread.

              1. Stacie L profile image88
                Stacie Lposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                so am I Ralph,so am I...

      2. profile image65
        logic,commonsenseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So does that mean what the Kennedy's did is okay, since Bush had his flaws?

        1. junko profile image62
          junkoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Common sence could tell you that man has lust after woman since the begining. The younger the man the less morality he wanted. Those that were moral Fail to be immoral in most cases. Check out your own morality. Are you as moral as the accused? Logic? Stacie?

          1. profile image65
            logic,commonsenseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            If I had as little moral turpitude as the Kennedy's, I'd shoot myself.  I'm no saint, but my transgressions pale to those of the majority of the people in this world.

            1. junko profile image62
              junkoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Shawn Hannity say he's got a lot of moral turpitude also. O'k Logic, you can cast the first stone, you are holy enough.

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image71
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Of course not. But Kennedy and most Dems aren't hypocrites like the family values guys who get caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

          1. profile image51
            ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Really? Most dems proclaim their intention to violate their marriage vows and tout their amorality as a campaign issue? Would a poll of most dems reveal that most are opposed to commitment to one's family and keeping one's promises?

          2. profile image65
            logic,commonsenseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Of course they are not.
            Oh except for perhaps what Sen. Harkin of Iowa says.  On his webpage he excoriates the Republicans for using the filibuster to prevent the Dems from moving their legislation forward.
            "The filibuster rule has become an absurd and destructive anachronism.  At issue is a fundamental principle of our democracy—rule of the majority in a legislative body. We simply cannot govern a 21st Century superpower when a minority of just 41 senators, representing potentially as little as 11 percent of the population, can dictate action—or inaction—not just to the majority of senators but to a majority of the American people. The Senate cannot continue down this path of obstruction, paralysis and de facto minority rule.” – Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA)
            Hmmmm, sounds familar in Wisconsin and Indiana I imagine.  A minority of legislators causing obstruction, parlysis and de facto minority rule.  And correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the D stands for Democrat.
            Smells like hypocrisy to me.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Has Harkin been involved in the situation in Wisconsin or taken a position on it? He might say that unusual measures are justified to resist the governor's harsh proposal to take away the rights of some government employees. I'm not aware that the Democratic Wisconsin senators have taken a position one way or the other wrt U.S. Senate filibusters. So, I'm not sure it's accurate to accuse them of hypocrisy.

              1. profile image65
                logic,commonsenseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Apparently you don't get the point.  Harkin is calling out the Republicans for doing essentially the same thing the Dems in Wisconsin and Indiana are doing.  A minority creating de facto minority rule.
                Think about it.  Try to look at objectively if that is possible.

                1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
                  Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Are you saying Harkin is a hypocrite because of the actions of the Dem senators in Wisconsin? Or are you saying the Dem senators are hypocrites because they aren't following Harkin's position on filibusters?

      3. weholdthesetruths profile image61
        weholdthesetruthsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It's highly unlikely much of Kelly's "telling" is true.

      4. DTR0005 profile image83
        DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Damn Ralph, that's quite the link!

    3. Ralph Deeds profile image71
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      As long as we're digging up dirt here's some on the Bushes

      http://www.slate.com/id/2106773/

      Page 261-68: George W. at Yale. A witness remembers a "roaring drunk" Bush doing the Alligator at a fraternity kegger. A frat brother says Bush "wasn't an ass man." Another friend concurs: "Poor Georgie. He couldn't even relate to women unless he was loaded. … There were just too many stories of him turning up dead drunk on dates." W. lovingly tends to his frat brothers but derides other Yalies as "liberal pussies."

      Page 49: Prescott Bush frequently shows up drunk at the lavish Hartford Club and never tips the bellboys. "Finally we figured out how to exact revenge," says one bellboy. "Whenever he came in drunk and wanted to go upstairs, we'd take him in the elevator and stop about three inches from his floor. He'd step out and fall flat on his face."

      Page 209: In the early 1960s, H.W. has an affair with an Italian woman named Rosemarie and "promise[s] to get a divorce and marry her." Bush ends the affair in 1964; the woman asks the attorney if she can sue Bush for breaking their engagement.

      Page 327-30; 341-42; 353: Now ambassador to China, H.W. has a relationship with his aide Jennifer Fitzgerald. Around the same time, Barbara disappears from Peking for three months. "Everyone knew that [Fitzgerald] was George's mistress," says a source.

      Page 375-76: James Baker refuses to run Bush's 1980 presidential campaign if Fitzgerald is around; Bush concedes but pays her a salary. After becoming vice president, Bush gets into a traffic accident while riding with his "girlfriend"; he calls Secretary of State Alexander Haig to help him shoo away the Washington, D.C., police. Fitzgerald isn't Bush's only dalliance: A divorcee from North Dakota moves to Washington to be with the veep. Kelley says Nancy Reagan, who reviles the Bushes, delights in the gossip.

      Page 266: George W. and cocaine. One anonymous Yalie claims he sold coke to Bush; another classmate says he and Bush snorted the drug together. Sharon Bush, W.'s ex-sister-in-law, tells Kelley that Bush has used cocaine at Camp David "not once, but many times." (Sharon has since denied telling Kelley this.)

      Page 304: While working on a 1972 Alabama Senate campaign, Bush, witnesses say, "liked to sneak out back for a joint of marijuana or into the bathroom for a line of cocaine."

      Page 575: A friend says Laura Bush was the "go-to girl for dime bags" at Southern Methodist University.

      Ibid.: George and Laura visit Hall of Fame pitcher Sandy Koufax and his girlfriend Jane Clark in the Caribbean and attended pot parties.

      1. profile image51
        ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Off the topic?

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I interpreted the topic to be dirt on prominent politicians. Tit for tat, so to speak.

          1. profile image51
            ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            The title did not indicate the thread was about anything but Kennedy's whore-mongering.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You are nit picking. Your privilege.

              1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Mr. Pot meet Mr. Kettle. Mr. Kettle, Mr. Pot.

              2. profile image51
                ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I'm not nitpicking. This thread was not about "yeah but what about the other guy!" I would think that it would be more appropriate to start a new thread to discuss another matter rather than sounding like a little kid trying to deflect responsibility by crying "but Bobby did it too!"

                That's all I'm saying.

    4. uncorrectedvision profile image60
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Funny how the most outrageous thing about Ted Kennedy, aside from drowning Mary Jo, doesn't come out until after his death.  If he had been a Republican he would never have gotten away from such a story - I mean Mary Jo.  The Whore house story would sink their whole party since he was "the lion of the Senate" and such a prominent Republican.  Just like powerful and influential Republican leader Mark Foley.

      The truth is the disgusting behavior of Ted Kennedy was ignored by the Press for decades.  Democrats save their most appalling behavior for the Congress where they take our money, tell us we are stupid and insulate themselves from the consequences of their disastrous policies. 

      The Press elected the brother of the martyred Saint Jack just as they have elected Shining Handsome Obama

    5. Shahid Bukhari profile image61
      Shahid Bukhariposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It might to some, be a juicy reading ...  but we should let alone the dead ... for they are now answering God, about their doings ...

      None, amongst humankind, is exempt  from The Ordained Answer-ability, of their worldly doings ... including, Edgar Hoover, Joseph, and Ted Kennedy ...

      I mean, you can flaunt your Powers here ... as they flaunted ... but this is not the case, in the Hereafter.

  2. Stacie L profile image88
    Stacie Lposted 6 years ago

    dems and republicans are only human..

  3. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago

    You shouldn't believe everything you read...

    1. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Let's see.  It's on official record that he left the scene of the accident and didn't call the police til morning. 
      Why wouldn't I believe the news about that, along with the question of why anyone would delay notifying about someone drowning?

      1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
        Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I am talking about the OP.

        I agree it was wrong but none of us can say what we would do under the circumstances. We would all like to think we would do the right thing...

        And why is this not in the political forum?

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Oh. Okay I understand.

      2. dutchman1951 profile image60
        dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I think the Boston Globe had some info on that Brenda, about what happend and why no call to the Police Chief till the morning.

        Also I think the NY times got into it as well. The Globe was slanted toward the Kennedy's so it may be over- edited for lack of a better word..

  4. Evan G Rogers profile image78
    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago

    News: A lot of men who have money like to pay for sex.

    I know it's hard to understand this, but... it will come with time

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      LOL.

      They won't believe you Evan.
      After all, republicans don't do sex, it's a wonder they are still around smile

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
        Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        All Republicans are created through miraculous conception, right?

        JESUS WUZ A REPUB'KEN!!!

  5. Flightkeeper profile image73
    Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago

    lol lol But the Loony Left says that it was only Republicans who cheat on their wives. lol lol

  6. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
    The Kennedys and the Bushes are both families of privilege and influence and frankly, widespread distasteful, immoral and in some cases illegal behavior. When you breathe that rarified air, the rules don't apply to you....

    I'm not saying those things didn't happen, but Kitty Kelly needs to be taken with a grain of salt. For the most part, the Bush clan has done a good job keeping most of their exploits out of the public eye.
    The Kennedys were "luckier" in that there simply wasn't the widespread media access in the 1950s and 1960s that there is now.
    I imagine that with 2013 -- JFK assassination 50th anniversary --around the corner, more files like the one in the OP will come to light.
    Seek and ye shall find scandal....

    1. Doug Hughes profile image60
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Serious studies of the life of Thomas Jefferson turn up several sex scandals. Not only does DNA testing confirm he fathered children by a slave he owned, on more than one occasion, he had to apologise for advances he made to married women who were guests at the White House. Some refused, but it makes you wonder who accepted. Don't get me wrong. Thomas Jefferson is my favorite president, but he was no saint.

      The legitimate problem, as Ralph pointed out, is candidates who declare specific characteristics of morality as part of their qualifications, and then violate those rules. As far as I am concerned, if any candidate declares that his sex life is his own business, and not the property of the voter, the press has no business there. Neither does the voter.

    2. Evan G Rogers profile image78
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      blah blah blech.

      Men like sex.

      Men generally make more money than women.

      Women generally prefer men who make more money.

      It's not rocket science.

  7. knolyourself profile image61
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "Off the topic?" Now that's a short story.

    1. profile image51
      ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      A true story.

  8. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Couldn't agree more, Doug!
    I just assume that infidelity is rampant in Washington -- on both sides of the aisle and in both houses.
    As long as you're doing the job you were elected to do, then who cares (besides your wife, I guess) who you boff on the side? Not I.
    It only becomes an issue when you say (and vote) one way publicly and turn around and do the opposite in your personal life. And then get caught with your pants down.
    Same goes for money scandals. Don't be all sanctimonious about govt spending, pork barrels, greed and corruption, etc. in front of the microphone when you've got your own hand in the till!!!

    If there's one thing that bugs me it's hypocrisy. Guess I'd last about 5 seconds inside the Beltway, eh lol???

  9. profile image54
    cobbjoe1posted 6 years ago

    Jesus is a Majority of One. He is the President of The Theology Party. If we
    heeded the advice in the Bible, we wouldn't have to worry about political parties.

  10. profile image54
    cobbjoe1posted 6 years ago

    But is men making more money really right ?

  11. Stacie L profile image88
    Stacie Lposted 6 years ago

    The Head of the FBI, J.Edgar Hoover, a had many skeletons in his closet, and  kept files on major politicians and kept control over them.
    maybe that's why his secrets about his sexuality remained a secret for so long.
    he had dirt on the Kennedy s and everyone else ,for that matter.

    1. junko profile image62
      junkoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Sex is the first addiction of man and mankind, the original crack habit.

      1. profile image51
        ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I'm not sure that'a a valid comparison. Crack is not essential to the propagation of the species.

        1. junko profile image62
          junkoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          ShortStory: The addictiveness of crack as far as it is said, once you try it you can be hooked for life. In comparison a lot of people get hooked for life on sex after the first try. Crack is not used propagation of the species. ShortStory, sex in connection with this thread is used for recreation not propagation. Did I or did you get this forum wrong?

          1. profile image51
            ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            The comparison still does not hold up. Some people claim to be addicted to exercise, but exercise in itself is a good thing - like sex. There is no positive or moderate use of crack.

            1. junko profile image62
              junkoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              ShortStory: I'm talking addiction, uncontroled compulsion, not a desire and a habit to exercised. The desire for sex can be compared with drug addiction. Crack is a unique drug unlike any other. Sex is a unique activity  Crack use and sex both are addictions. I could have said drugs and not crack. I didn't say drugs because I hate what crack has done and wanted to give it the high light. ShortStory if you just take the time to read my hub, underclass view of american slavery, I also mention crack in relationship to slavery. To mention crack and sex and crack in slavery is like mentioning sex and slavery things can be cross reference to make all kinds of points.

              1. profile image51
                ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                There are some people who are legitimately (at least as legitimately as the same regarding sex) addicted to exercise.

                In any case, it seems to me you are stretching a point beyond reason, but I'll have a look at your hub to give it a fair reading.

                1. junko profile image62
                  junkoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Stretching a point... in a political forum.  Is that not how points are made on threads c'mon be real. I'll allow you to grade my paper, but I got to do me.

                  1. profile image51
                    ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Um...ok?

    2. Ralph Deeds profile image71
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hoover was apparently a cross-dresser.

      http://www.google.com/images?q=J+Edgar+ … mp;bih=760

    3. uncorrectedvision profile image60
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The J. Edgar Hoover stories are inventions.

      http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea … ss-dresser

  12. Doc Snow profile image96
    Doc Snowposted 6 years ago

    Why is a "watchdog" group resurrecting 50-year old history?  And are they in any sense reliable?  Has this been fact-checked?  And why should we care, anyway?

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That's a good question. Tearing down the Kennedys is apparently a cottage industry. Probably financed by the Kocks or Dickie Mellon Scaife or someone of their ilk.

      1. profile image51
        ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You really think this is not a story worthy of note?

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It belongs in the National Enquirer or some other tabloid. Ted Kennedy was a great senator, and I fail to see the relevance dredging up his escapades from 60 years ago. I feel the same way about prying into any celebrity's or politician's personal life except for "family values" Republicans who get caught trolling in airport men's rooms or screwing their secretaries or pages.

          1. profile image51
            ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Are you saying the story isn't true? Are you saying that this, along with sooooo many other 'escapades,' doesn't say something about his character? You may think he was a great senator because of your political leanings, but to pretend this is not newsworthy is a bit disengenuous. And to revert - AGAIN - to the childish "but teacher, Bobby was doing it too!" is unbecoming and mitigates nothing, as you know.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image71
              Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              If you re-read my comment you will see that I didn't say I don't think it's true. It may be true or it may not. I have no idea. All I'm saying is that I find that kind of muck raking distasteful, except in cases like the gay anti-gay rights senator caught trolling in the Minneapolis airport men's room. He has every right to be gay, but his hypocrisy was showing. Kennedy was a ladies man. Martin Luther King committed adultery. Eisenhower is said to have had an affair with his woman driver when he was in Europe. All were great Americans.

              1. profile image51
                ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                It's distasteful except when you decide it's not? Come on man, you can't find that a reasonable position. It's fine that you have a sharply defined political bias, but don't be unreasonable.

  13. AnnCee profile image71
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    Gee whiz, you missed the biggest Bush dirt of all!  Well two things.

    Aleister Crowley is W's great granddad.

    The Bush's have bought a massive aquafer under a 100,000 acre ranch in Paraguay.  T.Boone expects to make far more money off his Texas aquafer than he EVER did off oil.  You might be able to do without oil, but try doing without water.  http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2011/2/24/8d5a249a-afe3-4cc9-ab5c-32307fc6501b.jpg

  14. knolyourself profile image61
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "Aleister Crowley is W's great granddad".
    Well that's a new one. Hadn't heard that one before.

  15. AnnCee profile image71
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/03/us/po … r=2&hp

    Aww, poor Teddy.  Wasn't able to fully participate in a lynching. sad

    1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
      Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So, you are defending Mr Thomas's sexual practices while condemning another's.

      1. AnnCee profile image71
        AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I think Mr. Thomas was unfairly maligned by a bunch of liberal lunatics.

  16. AnnCee profile image71
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    Oh okay then, waitress sandwich anyone?

    http://www.moonbattery.com/in-the-tank.jpg

    http://sonsoftherepublic.blogspot.com/2 … style.htmlblahblah blahblah. . . .

    Oh eeeuuwwww!http://modernreject.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/yuck.jpg

 
working