If true, why did`nt Brooks tell the Senator to remove his hand?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
To: chessplayer
To: chessplayer
If true, why not name him?
3 posted on
07/11/2009 7:25:05 AM PDT by
raybbr
(It's going to get a lot worse now that the anchor babies are voting!)
To: chessplayer
That’s what I said. I dont’ care WHO it is...you DO NOT put up with that kind of perverted nonsense. Makes one wonder if this story is true or not. Sensationalism maybe??
To: chessplayer
Sen. Larry “Wide Stance” Craig?
5 posted on
07/11/2009 7:26:10 AM PDT by
behzinlea
To: chessplayer
Brooks is disappointed it didn't lead to any real action.
6 posted on
07/11/2009 7:26:24 AM PDT by
Petronski
(In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
To: chessplayer
Also he said: “Ehhh, like get me outta here????” I know what I would have done. This is bogus...put the story out there with no fact to back it up. Then he won’t name the guy? Bogus, bogus, bogus.
To: chessplayer
Rumors coming true of Lindsey Graham?
8 posted on
07/11/2009 7:28:07 AM PDT by
VicVega
(Join Jihad, get captured by the US and resettled in the best places in the world. I love the USA)
To: chessplayer
Where was david’s hand...
9 posted on
07/11/2009 7:28:37 AM PDT by
novemberslady
(leap of faith...)
To: chessplayer
they were waiting for Chrissy Matthews to have a tingle
10 posted on
07/11/2009 7:28:55 AM PDT by
MissDairyGoodnessVT
(Mac Conchradha - "Skeagh mac en chroe"- Skaghvicencrowe)
To: chessplayer
12 posted on
07/11/2009 7:29:09 AM PDT by
maggief
To: chessplayer
Similar to the “unnamed sources” ruse. As long as they’re unnamed, they don’t have to be real. Our side should take a stand on this: if they’re not going to name them, WE should not assume they’re telling the truth.
13 posted on
07/11/2009 7:30:25 AM PDT by
MizSterious
(Impeach Barak "let them eat cake" Obama, while there's still something of our Republic to save.)
To: chessplayer
14 posted on
07/11/2009 7:31:25 AM PDT by
TexasM1A
To: chessplayer
This is the guy who’s “truth” changes with his politics.
ESPECIALLY when is comes to sexual exploits!
15 posted on
07/11/2009 7:31:52 AM PDT by
G Larry
(ObamaCare = "DYING IN LINE!")
To: chessplayer
Pretty talented guy who only uses one hand to complete a full meal. I wonder if he had steak? I’d like to have seen that accomplishment. I think this story is BS. Since when is the NY Times worried about secrecy?
16 posted on
07/11/2009 7:32:08 AM PDT by
mass55th
(Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway...John Wayne)
To: chessplayer
A diversionary tactic to change the subject from O’s ungentlemanly behaviour towards the junior G8 attendee.
17 posted on
07/11/2009 7:32:20 AM PDT by
Carley
(OBAMA IS A MALEVOLENT FORCE IN THE WORLD)
To: chessplayer
This says a lot about Brooks.
To: chessplayer
Now that I’ve made myself irrelevant by conforming my views to those of my employer, the NYT, maybe I’ll just jump a shark or two.
19 posted on
07/11/2009 7:32:47 AM PDT by
olrtex
To: chessplayer
Why of course...I totally believe that a male US Senator would rest his hand on a
male NY Times columnist's leg throughout an entire dinner. Sure, makes perfect sense...
/sarc...just in case
To: chessplayer
It says more about David Brooks than it does about an un-named senator.
23 posted on
07/11/2009 7:34:15 AM PDT by
lonestar
(Obama is turning Bush's "mess" into a catastrophe.)
To: chessplayer
If true, why did`nt Brooks tell the Senator to remove his hand? Maybe he will claim Stockholm Syndrome.
24 posted on
07/11/2009 7:34:22 AM PDT by
Always Right
(Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
