actually, i'm surprised he is. what with cognitive dissonance being the oxygen republicans breathe these days, i'd expect him to fully chastise these agents for availing themselves of the local talent.

Nabb1: To the relief of God knows how many men in the DC area...

And we'll never know the extent. Like I said (Vitter involvement or not), fishy.

AeAe: HellRaisingHoosier: The women the D.C. Madam used were hot as hell.
I'd call him gay for denying it, but he WAS plowing some hot chicks instead of top-tapping bathrooms like most "moral" Republicans.

Hot as hell you say? I'd like to see some pictures. and ... a phone number, please.

Fun Fact: Vitter's Co-Sponsor on the defense of marriage bullcrap? Larry Craig.

Brings a whole new dimension to the phrase, "paying lip service".

Agent Smiths Laugh: Remind me again why I am supposed to care if secret service agents were farking?

Selling is legal, farking is legal, so why isn't selling farking legal?

Because the Secret Service protects important people like the President, and if agents are sleeping with prostitutes, that information could potentially be used as leverage/blackmail against them and in turn compromise the people they're sworn to protect.

Halstread: Diogenes: Magorn: Like he said, a traditionalist...

(psst Right Wingers who haven't studied their history: For the better part of its existence everywhere, and still in most of the world today "traditional marriage" is a financial transaction arranged between the parents, one that shares a whole lot of commonality with chattel slavery)

Funny you mention that. That was the norm not all that long ago, even here in the US.

I'm reading a book on the lives of the signers of the Constitution. Nearly all of those that were married did so for financial concerns.

Except maybe Gouverneur Morris. He was just a cad. And even wrote in his diary about wanting to put the moves on Dolley Madison.

"Morris even set his sights on Dolley Madison (wife of fellow signer James Madison) and at one point writes in his diary of seeing her in a low-cut dress and wondering if she is 'amenable to seduction.'"

Might I know the name of that book?

It's not quite as good as I hoped but a nice quick read. It's my "car book" because you can pick it up whenever you want and polish off a signer at a time. I wish it went into more detail about the convention itself, but instead gives a 4-5 page synopsis of each signer.

But hey! You get awesome little fun facts like that one, to share with and impress your friends!

Signing Their Rights Away.

Magorn: Like he said, a traditionalist...

(psst Right Wingers who haven't studied their history: For the better part of its existence everywhere, and still in most of the world today "traditional marriage" is a financial transaction arranged between the parents, one that shares a whole lot of commonality with chattel slavery)

Funny you mention that. That was the norm not all that long ago, even here in the US.

I'm reading a book on the lives of the signers of the Constitution. Nearly all of those that were married did so for financial concerns.

Except maybe Gouverneur Morris. He was just a cad. And even wrote in his diary about wanting to put the moves on Dolley Madison.

"Morris even set his sights on Dolley Madison (wife of fellow signer James Madison) and at one point writes in his diary of seeing her in a low-cut dress and wondering if she is 'amenable to seduction.'"

Diogenes: Paris1127: //damn you Diogenes!

If I had more time I probably could have had some fun with that. Maybe not. I can't keep up the act consistently enough to be a truly effective troll.

Not compared to some of the talent we got around here!

Although now that you mention Clinton, I could take that and run further back to Bush I's presidency, the Lincoln bedroom, underage rent boys for visiting important and Hunter S. Thompson.

Think I'm kidding? Let the Googles be your window on that insanity!

Important and Hunter S. Thompsons can be so picky sometimes...
I presume you're talking about this:

Diogenes: Same-sex marriage

In 2003, Vitter proposed to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.[68] In 2004, he said, "This is a real outrage. The Hollywood left is redefining the most basic institution in human history...We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts's values."[69] In June 2006, he said "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one ... I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."[70] In 2006, he told The Times-Picayune, "I'm a conservative who opposes radically redefining marriage, the most important social institution in human history."[71]

[Source]

He won't redefine it. He just violates it with a prostitute then arranges to have her killed. Real stand up guy.

Like he said, a traditionalist...

(psst Right Wingers who haven't studied their history: For the better part of its existence everywhere, and still in most of the world today "traditional marriage" is a financial transaction arranged between the parents, one that shares a whole lot of commonality with chattel slavery)

Paris1127: //damn you Diogenes!

If I had more time I probably could have had some fun with that. Maybe not. I can't keep up the act consistently enough to be a truly effective troll.

Not compared to some of the talent we got around here!

Although now that you mention Clinton, I could take that and run further back to Bush I's presidency, the Lincoln bedroom, underage rent boys for visiting important and Hunter S. Thompson.

Think I'm kidding? Let the Googles be your window on that insanity!

Nabb1: Diogenes: Nabb1: Diogenes: Same-sex marriage

In 2003, Vitter proposed to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.[68] In 2004, he said, "This is a real outrage. The Hollywood left is redefining the most basic institution in human history...We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts's values."[69] In June 2006, he said "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one ... I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."[70] In 2006, he told The Times-Picayune, "I'm a conservative who opposes radically redefining marriage, the most important social institution in human history."[71]

[Source]

He won't redefine it. He just violates it with a prostitute then arranges to have her killed. Real stand up guy.

Do what, now? I voted against the guy last time around because he is an embarrassment to the state, but that's a new one.

I'm playing a bit of a game. But I am disturbed there wasn't a more vigorous investigation into her death by suicide. Not to say he had any personal involvement. I still think the whole thing was fishy.

If it had been almost anyone but you who took that hook, I would have reeled you in with "I'm just asking questions" trolling ;-)

Heh. Yeah, it took me a second and then I remembered that DC madam killed herself. To the relief of God knows how many men in the DC area...

I don't know if that's true. Has he ever denied killing her? Why hasn't he spoken about this? He really should clear his name here, otherwise these questions could impact his political career.

/not above "just asking questions"
//does Vitter have bladder problems?

Vodka Zombie: I guess it Depends, subby. I mean, it's not like he Pampers the Secret Service for being Cruisers out looking for Huggies and whatnot.

Diogenes: Nabb1: Diogenes: Same-sex marriage

In 2003, Vitter proposed to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.[68] In 2004, he said, "This is a real outrage. The Hollywood left is redefining the most basic institution in human history...We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts's values."[69] In June 2006, he said "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one ... I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."[70] In 2006, he told The Times-Picayune, "I'm a conservative who opposes radically redefining marriage, the most important social institution in human history."[71]

[Source]

He won't redefine it. He just violates it with a prostitute then arranges to have her killed. Real stand up guy.

Do what, now? I voted against the guy last time around because he is an embarrassment to the state, but that's a new one.

I'm playing a bit of a game. But I am disturbed there wasn't a more vigorous investigation into her death by suicide. Not to say he had any personal involvement. I still think the whole thing was fishy.

If it had been almost anyone but you who took that hook, I would have reeled you in with "I'm just asking questions" trolling ;-)

Heh. Yeah, it took me a second and then I remembered that DC madam killed herself. To the relief of God knows how many men in the DC area...

Nabb1: Diogenes: Same-sex marriage

In 2003, Vitter proposed to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.[68] In 2004, he said, "This is a real outrage. The Hollywood left is redefining the most basic institution in human history...We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts's values."[69] In June 2006, he said "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one ... I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."[70] In 2006, he told The Times-Picayune, "I'm a conservative who opposes radically redefining marriage, the most important social institution in human history."[71]

[Source]

He won't redefine it. He just violates it with a prostitute then arranges to have her killed. Real stand up guy.

Do what, now? I voted against the guy last time around because he is an embarrassment to the state, but that's a new one.

I'm playing a bit of a game. But I am disturbed there wasn't a more vigorous investigation into her death by suicide. Not to say he had any personal involvement. I still think the whole thing was fishy.

If it had been almost anyone but you who took that hook, I would have reeled you in with "I'm just asking questions" trolling ;-)

Diogenes: Same-sex marriage

In 2003, Vitter proposed to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.[68] In 2004, he said, "This is a real outrage. The Hollywood left is redefining the most basic institution in human history...We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts's values."[69] In June 2006, he said "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one ... I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."[70] In 2006, he told The Times-Picayune, "I'm a conservative who opposes radically redefining marriage, the most important social institution in human history."[71]

[Source]

He won't redefine it. He just violates it with a prostitute then arranges to have her killed. Real stand up guy.

Do what, now? I voted against the guy last time around because he is an embarrassment to the state, but that's a new one.

Same-sex marriage

In 2003, Vitter proposed to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.[68] In 2004, he said, "This is a real outrage. The Hollywood left is redefining the most basic institution in human history...We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts's values."[69] In June 2006, he said "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one ... I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."[70] In 2006, he told The Times-Picayune, "I'm a conservative who opposes radically redefining marriage, the most important social institution in human history."[71]

[Source]

He won't redefine it. He just violates it with a prostitute then arranges to have her killed. Real stand up guy.

As if shame has ever prevented Senator Pampers from sticking his dick where it doesn't belong before.