Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » A whole Lott of love

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: A whole Lott of love
Storm Saxon
Member
Member # 1070

 - posted      Profile for Storm Saxon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://tinyurl.com/2n6wzk

Oh, man. Hilarious.

Posts: 2936 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I like how they point out that Lott and Craig were good friends.. hehe. Maybe a little trysting was going on between passing bills in those sweet Senatorial bathhouses?
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WeAreAllJust LooseChange
Member
Member # 3411

 - posted      Profile for WeAreAllJust LooseChange         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Quote from comments from the link:

"GOP is truly the Gay Old Party indeed!!!"

I didn't know that ?!?!


[LOL]

Posts: 174 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So...perhaps I'm missing something...but that link appears to consist of a report that a famous gay prostitute has said he has "no current relationship" with Lott. Well, I have "no current relationship" with either dude. Does that mean I'm gay?
Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Possibly.
Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
but that link appears to consist of a report that a famous gay prostitute has said he has "no current relationship" with Lott. Well, I have "no current relationship" with either dude

Th key word, of course, is current. They DID have some kind of relationship.

quote:
However, e-mail and other records confirm that the two have met on at least two occasions.
Does that mean that "Benjamin" is a lobbyist for gay hustlers?

POssibly [Wink]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
it's word weaseling. claims to respect confidentiality so he applies a thin veneer of discretion to an obvious attempt at outing: no current relationship.

Why would we believe the guy? If there was a past relationship, he would presumably know he's implying such by saying "no current relationship." On the other hand, if there wasn't a past relationship, he can stir up some excitement without technically lying by saying "no current relationship."

To me it smells like an attempt to generate some gossip without any basis in reality...from a known attention whore. (shrug) Not that I care about Lott, or whether he's gay. Just seems like people are quick to believe that ANY male religious conservative is getting gay sex on the sly, with the scantest of evidence. Good times, I guess.

Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mariner
Member
Member # 1618

 - posted      Profile for Mariner   Email Mariner       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Far be it for me to defend a schmuck like Lott, but isn't it rather convenient that this guy who's all about protecting his clients' privacy does the whole "no comment wink wink nudge nudge" bit? Don't you think you ought to check whether this guy is trustworthy before assuming it's all true? I know, I know, there is no place for skepticism when it comes to Republicans...

Kenmeer, since you seem so darned sure that they had a relationship, can you provide your complete reasoning for this accusation, and can you give this Benjamin guy an absolutely clean bill of health when it comes to his trustworthiness? Are you absolutely certain that this random website is telling the truth when it says that emails confirm the meeting, with absolutely no proof to back it up? Are you as equally convinced of a big Clinton sex scandal story being held by the LA Times, or the fact that Hillary's involved in a lesbian sex scandal? That site's reporting on those too y'know?

Or is absolute certainty when it comes to gay sex only reserved for Republicans? And why do we care, anyway? Can't we just be happy he's resigning?

Posts: 538 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's not just weasel words, it's pure fabricated crap. Benjamin Nicholas is flat out denying that he's ever met Trent Lott, and while the guy who runs Big Head DC is standing by the quality journalism of his site, he hasn't shown any of the emails he allegedly received to any outside bloggers or journalists.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Far be it from me to defend a schmuck like Ken... [Big Grin]

He's saying homeboy is SAYING he had a former relationship with Lott, not saying he believes it to be his very own voice from a burning bush.

Besides, everyone knows that rumors that Hillary is involved in "a" Lesbian sex scandal are proven false by the use of the singular.

If she is a disciple of Sapho, she'd have way more than one scandal to her credit - after all, she's a pushy broad, that one.

[ November 28, 2007, 09:47 PM: Message edited by: Jesse ]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mariner
Member
Member # 1618

 - posted      Profile for Mariner   Email Mariner       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Th key word, of course, is current. They DID have some kind of relationship.
Sounds like ken's pretty certain to me.

Either way, I (and scifibum, presumably) am just making sure people are staying intellectually honest and all. Things like this deserve a very healthy dose of skepticism, and Rallan's post seems to indicate that said skepticism is perfectly justified in this case. No harm and being skeptical, is there? [Smile]

KE posted awhile back worrying about the liberalization of Ornery. Whenever a singular viewpoint dominates, confirmation bias and lack of objectivity inevitably follow. As one of the conservative minority (and judging by how often I post, admittedly part of the problem...), I'm just trying to keep you all on your toes [Smile]

But anywho, Lott resigned. Yay! Hopefully whoever replaces him will be slightly more ethical and slightly less power hungry...

Posts: 538 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Why would we believe the guy? If there was a past relationship, he would presumably know he's implying such by saying "no current relationship." On the other hand, if there wasn't a past relationship, he can stir up some excitement without technically lying by saying "no current relationship."

If you'll reread the article, you'll notice it's written by someone else, not Mr. Benjamin, who is merely maintaining his already well-established professional reticence in the face of prying journalists.

"Kenmeer, since you seem so darned sure that they had a relationship, can you provide your complete reasoning for this accusation,"

The article says:

quote:
However, e-mail and other records confirm that the two have met on at least two occasions.
IN the context of the article, if there's anything it claims (that isn't already public knowledge, like who Benjamin is and that Lott recently announced his retirement) the most valid-seeming claim is the above sentence. It promises confirmability. It's not the usual 'reliable anonymous sources'.

Now, as to what that alleged relationship is: who knows? Hardly an accusation that Trent is queer. But don't let me impede your outrage against me for making "this accusation". Go for it. Get all foamy. It's exciting stuff, this political tabloidism, eh? Can't blame you for getting all sweaty over it.

Meanwhile! Reliable Rallan informs us that according to Benjamin, the Lott angle is pure shyte. So now the email statement loses virtually all credibility. Hail Rallan!

"Sounds like ken's pretty certain to me."

Far be it from me to take the word of a schmuck like me. Or "a known attention whore" who says, on his own site, that BigHead's lying.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A little gay sex could do Trent Lott a world of good, in my opinion. Hard to maintain the facade of moral crusader for long when you can't stop thinking about steamy gay love.

My question is, how many times do Republicans have to HAVE gay sex, before they start to think "hey, maybe this isn't so bad"? [Big Grin]

btw, this post is meant to be funny, I neither know nor really care whether Lott actually hooked up with this dude.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Storm Saxon
Member
Member # 1070

 - posted      Profile for Storm Saxon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.slate.com/id/2178712/nav/tap3/
Posts: 2936 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
State Farm is gay?
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Storm Saxon
Member
Member # 1070

 - posted      Profile for Storm Saxon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just giving a little more info about Lott's resignation in general, not the specific allegations in this thread.
Posts: 2936 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
State Farm *isn't* gay?

I'm confused [Wink]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lott seems to be resigning over some shennanigans which his brother is being investigated. No doubt some of the mud their will find it's way to Lott.

This innuendo is more of the Juanita Broderick type then anything else. Considering the full court press the GALA/Clinton front is pulling out (re Republican debate), can we dispense a trace of skepticism pending real evidence? I'm still waiting for the Rather documents...

[ November 29, 2007, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Considering the full court press the GALA/Clinton front is pulling out (re Republican debate), can we dispense a trace of skepticism pending real evidence? "

Better yet, can we dispense with the "Considering the full court press the GALA/Clinton front is pulling out (re Republican debate)" and simply dispense a trace of skepticism pending real evidence?" on the merits of that alone?

Even Trent Lott is innocent until proven guilty, with or without a Democratic Greek chorus. Why, even if all his fellow Republicans stood by him (*snerk*) or denounced him en masse (*shurg*), skepticism would be as valuable.

Still: is State Farm gay? Or simply Republican? [Wink] (Now THAT was snark, fly. YOu have such difficulty distinguishing facetiousness, sarcasm, parody and irony in the service of dispelling confusion and misleading innuendo, from mere digs. When I'm merely digging, it's SO obvious: either I make us laugh, or get threatened by OM with banning.)

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My comments were pretty much addressed to the intial post. It isn't always about you, ken.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OH, fiddlesticks! I'm not State Farm and I ain't gay nuther! Well, not practicing, anyway.
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't know if it's the same, but "practicing" in most of the fun.

Hate Lott. But just because you have a gay friend doesn't mean squaduche.

I love you guys!

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Storm Saxon
Member
Member # 1070

 - posted      Profile for Storm Saxon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OMG, KE is gay!
Posts: 2936 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Well, not practicing, anyway."

Why, have your perfected your technique? [Wink]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No, strictly amateur. IN fact, it is only as I grow old that I really become comfortable and familiar with my inner faggot.

But I became comfortably in touch with my inner Republican first [Wink]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well today's check on Google and it looks like the scandal's even deader than it was yesterday, thanks largely to an ongoing conspicuous lack of evidence.

Meanwhile, some tidbits.

Big Head DC is ran by one Rob Capriccioso, who was fired from Radar Magazine earlier this month for making similar unsubstantiated claims about another scandal (which is getting convoluted indeed, as Hustler have since confirmed that they had evidence that former ABC anchor Sam Donaldson was having a relationship with the DC Madame, so I guess even a broken muckraking blog gets it right occasionally).

Meanwhile Larry Flynt and Hustler Magazine have been reluctantly dragged into the ring on the Trent Lott scandal because various folks have cleverly decided that if there's real dirt on a prominent Republican, Larry'll have it somewhere. Hustler are saying absolutely nothing except to confirm that they've been investigating Trent Lott for quite a while now and have anonymous sources. They don't say what those sources have told them, what scandalous behavior they may have uncovered, whether they can confirm or deny the Benjamin Nicholas thing, or indeed whether their investigation has turned up any suspicious behavior at all. This hasn't stopped the folks at Big Head DC from loudly declaring that Hustler have confirmed the scandal though.

Meanwhile on the rest of Google, the story's going nowhere fast. Benjamin Nicholas still denies everything. Nobody can get anything more out of Hustler except variations on the "we've investigated Lott, but we ain't telling you if we found anything" theme. The only people running with the story at all are a few blogs chewing over whether or not its genuine (and generally coming to the conclusion that it probably ain't), and a few GLBT publications that really really hope the scandal's true but are forced to concede that nobody can find a smoking gun.

And the mainstream press has yet to touch the story at all, because the only sources they've got are the dubious Big Head DC, the denials of the male escort who was named, and the completely noninformative remarks of Hustler.

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Well today's check on Google and it looks like the scandal's even deader than it was yesterday"

It's so cool how google is changing mediated reality.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Nobody can get anything more out of Hustler except variations on the "we've investigated Lott, but we ain't telling you if we found anything" theme."

Considering his known hostility, can anyone imagine Larry Flynt sitting on a story or even some meaty innuendo about Lott?

Translation: We'd love to nail him on something but we can't. Since we're asked the question, we'll give a non denial denial, much like the Benjamin fellow.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, it's obvious that any news outlet looking to sell ads would be all over this if it were valid, including FOX. Lott's a Grade-A target.

Weird Conspiracy murmur: maybe Lott paid BigHead to do the gay rumor to deflect heat off his bro-in-law situation?

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1