Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Boogieman

No, Boogieman, you’re accepting the Obama shills’ claim of what it was.

The man was a good looking but unexciting midwesterner, married to a gorgeous Hollywood actress, and he saw his marriage failing. He thought she was being lured by the excitement of Hollywood, so he, in a desperate attempt to show that he was more hip than he was, took her to a couple of wild clubs. He mistakenly thought that was what she wanted. (and they turned out to be wilder than he realized or intended).

Instead of being applauded for having tried - however clumsily - to save his marriage, it became the only sex scandal in American history that didn’t involve actual sex.

A PR disaster, and the GOP’s inept response led to the national stature of the very undeserving Barack Obama.


3 posted on 08/22/2012 8:20:28 AM PDT by jfd1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: jfd1776

It’s not the “Obama schills’” claim, it’s what was in the divorce papers that got released. Of course, since it was a divorce, there is a he said/she said element, so what really happened is open for debate. Still, saying he was just trying to save his marriage and leaving out the key fact that he was taking his wife to sex clubs where people engage in public sex acts is skipping over the debate entirely.


5 posted on 08/22/2012 8:34:21 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson