Wisconsin AFL-CIO Leader Busted in Prostitution Sting

If paying hookers to have sex with him was not a bad thing, then why did the guy "express extreme sorrow"? Why did he say he has "extreme personal baggage"?

He clearly knows he did wrong, unlike those coming to his defense here.

If it turns out he is married, would that make a difference to his apologists? Did it even occur to them to wonder if he is married, or are they so debased in their morals it never crossed their minds?

Let us all pray that if he is married he did not infect his wife with AIDS from a hooker.
.

Probably because he felt he did something wrong. Maybe he's married. Who knows and I still don't care.

If he is married, it's between him and his wife.

I have always believed that a person who breaks a sacred vow to the person closest to them won't hesitate to violate their duties to their constituents.

.
 
What kind of screwed up person breaks his wife's heart that way? What kind of man sets such a poor example for his sons?

Is it really that difficult for men to treat women with respect and honor? I mean I seriously can't be the only one in this world who thinks that.

You're not.

.
 
It's funny. Even though we now know the guy was married and cheated on his wife, and even though we know he engaged in activity which exploits the hell out of women, his apologists still say "So what?"

And it's Republicans who are at war with women? :lol:

.
 
Last edited:
Nice to see the Sex Police are out in force.
Funny how libtards will defend these idiots on the left and blast ann for dating someones else while mitt is gone and they were not even married. The left's double standard is really old.

When have I ever done that.

I am honestly sorry Ann didn't escape the whacky cult when she had the chance.
 
Incidently, I have even said a few kind words in defense of walker. I thought recalling him was an abuse of that provision of the law, and I have no problem with the fact he had to bring spending under control in that state. (I have property in Wisconsin, and the property taxes are outrageous! Five times what they are for my Condo in Chicago.)
So, you are one of the rich that the left hates? Or just another lefty hypocrite?[/QUOTE]

Not at all.

My family owns a cabin in Vilas county. My father bought the property back in the 1950's when we used to have a Middle Class in this country and a man could buy a fishing cabin. Except since then, all the douchebag rich folks have bought these cabins they rarely visit, hense why the property values went up (at least until the market crashed.)

Yeah, I could get a quarter million for my share if I sold it. (I co-own with four other people) But we aren't going to ever sell. Not after my sister scattered her late husband's ashes up there.

Still, I do better than most. I have an office job, a college degree and am a veteran. So I've done nicely for myself.
 
What kind of screwed up person breaks his wife's heart that way? What kind of man sets such a poor example for his sons?

Is it really that difficult for men to treat women with respect and honor? I mean I seriously can't be the only one in this world who thinks that.

I think if you're a stuck up prude, yeah. Maybe.

I don't go around worrying about what other people are doing in their sex lives and I'm not sure why you care so much.

A puritan is someone who lives in mortal fear someone else might be enjoying himself.
 
Maybe some knees need to be broken...

Joe, can't you be objective about anything? If someone in Walkers administration was arrested for the same thing, you wouldn't be taking this so calmly, now would you?

Actually, I've made my position on this subject pretty clear.

I think prostitution should be legalized and regulated.

I don't think there is anything morally wrong with it.

It's utterly ridiculous to make accepting money for something a crime when it's perfectly legal to do it for free.

I might comment on the hypocrisy of family values types who get caught with hookers, as soooo many of them do.

Incidently, I have even said a few kind words in defense of walker. I thought recalling him was an abuse of that provision of the law, and I have no problem with the fact he had to bring spending under control in that state. (I have property in Wisconsin, and the property taxes are outrageous! Five times what they are for my Condo in Chicago.)

Except for the part about corrupt crook, Walker, I agree.

If it were men who sold sex, it would be legal.

but, of course, rw's think they have the right to control everyone's sex lives. Probably because they're not getting any.

rw's are nothing more than Peeping Tom's.

and there you go AFO CIO , this is where some of your DUES are going

op, where's your proof of this?
 
Incidently, I have even said a few kind words in defense of walker. I thought recalling him was an abuse of that provision of the law, and I have no problem with the fact he had to bring spending under control in that state. (I have property in Wisconsin, and the property taxes are outrageous! Five times what they are for my Condo in Chicago.)

Except for the part about corrupt crook, Walker, I agree.

If it were men who sold sex, it would be legal.

but, of course, rw's think they have the right to control everyone's sex lives. Probably because they're not getting any.

rw's are nothing more than Peeping Tom's.

Parts of what Walker did were right on the money. Expenses had to be contained. Taxes were too high, and it was putting a drag on the state.

Look, I drive through Wisconsin every year... they have problems that long preceded Scott Walker.

I don't think much of him for using the crisis to try to undercut the unions, but as someone said, "Never let a crisis go to waste."
 
Incidently, I have even said a few kind words in defense of walker. I thought recalling him was an abuse of that provision of the law, and I have no problem with the fact he had to bring spending under control in that state. (I have property in Wisconsin, and the property taxes are outrageous! Five times what they are for my Condo in Chicago.)
So, you are one of the rich that the left hates? Or just another lefty hypocrite?

Not at all.

My family owns a cabin in Vilas county. My father bought the property back in the 1950's when we used to have a Middle Class in this country and a man could buy a fishing cabin. Except since then, all the douchebag rich folks have bought these cabins they rarely visit, hense why the property values went up (at least until the market crashed.)

Yeah, I could get a quarter million for my share if I sold it. (I co-own with four other people) But we aren't going to ever sell. Not after my sister scattered her late husband's ashes up there.

Still, I do better than most. I have an office job, a college degree and am a veteran. So I've done nicely for myself.

I split my time between two homes and own other properties, travel quite a lot now that I'm retired, and when I wrote about our two weeks in the Caribbean, some rw said I must be one of the 1% and actually got pretty snotty about it.

I've worked since I was 13, was homeless at 16 and swore I would never again be financially helpless. I've worked and saved and invested. I own our properties outright and have always bought additional lots next to the house I wanted because I like my privacy and really like living in a park.

I'm not rich, I worked my way through college and got scholarships and grants.

My question is, WHY do rw's always have to whine about successful libs?
 
Last edited:
If paying hookers to have sex with him was not a bad thing, then why did the guy "express extreme sorrow"? Why did he say he has "extreme personal baggage"?

He clearly knows he did wrong, unlike those coming to his defense here.

If it turns out he is married, would that make a difference to his apologists? Did it even occur to them to wonder if he is married, or are they so debased in their morals it never crossed their minds?

Let us all pray that if he is married he did not infect his wife with AIDS from a hooker.
.

Probably because he felt he did something wrong. Maybe he's married. Who knows and I still don't care.

If he is married, it's between him and his wife.

I have always believed that a person who breaks a sacred vow to the person closest to them won't hesitate to violate their duties to their constituents.

.

And I am of the belief that a person's personal sexual behavior does not affect their ability to govern. Both JFK and Bill Clinton are evidence of that.

It is very likely that 50% of the signers of the Constitution had a "little on the side". So?
 
I've never understood why prostitution is illegal.

Because it debases and exploits women.


You wouldn't want to be caught approving a war on women, now would you?

.

I think "debase and exploit" are opinions, and could be put to a number of things. However I also think adults should have the right to sell a service to other consenting adults. I suppose I simply don't see women as so meek and helpless as to need the goverment to step in and declare them incapable of deciding what's best for them.
 
I've never understood why prostitution is illegal.

Really? You think it's OK for a pimp to hold young girls hostage, and make money off of them? Um...OK.

You watch too many lifetime movies.

So have inside knowledge?

There is a lot of exploitation of women, many women suffer other numerous issues and according to research, most have pimps or madams.

Just saying, it's a very complex issue with many side effects, legal or not.
 

Forum List

Back
Top