Romney Tape Came From Estate Of Sex-Party-Throwing Hedge Fund Manager

nt

He didn't do the speech at one of these parties, did he?

Because if not, who cares?

Is someone having or attending a sex party shameful?

Why in the world is this even an issue?

does Romney have a person fundraising for him that is known for throwing sex parties.

I was under the impression that one of the core beliefs of the Democratic party was that your sex life was nobody else's business. Am I wrong?

For example...
David Vitter
Anthony Weiner
Mark Sanford
and a hundred others.

I think that the news of Romney having a person that fundraisers for him that is known for sex parties IS NEWS,
considering he and the republican party are always spouting off about being the party of 'values'.

And I didn't understand it then either. It almost seems some Democrats support a very selective right to privacy.

I don't know what to say that would help you understand.

Have a great evening.

I guess I'm just seeing something here that others aren't.

At any rate, good evening to you as well.

You don't think David Vitter should be forced to resign when he runs his campaign on "family values" while visiting prostitutes?

The hypocritical rich Republicans think they can live by one set of rules while the lowly peasants have to live by another (which does not, I can tell you, allow for things like this.)

Let the Reps talk about this if they wish. I thought Democrats supported a person's right to privacy regarding their sex life.

If a politician decides to be a hypocrite in telling everyone else they should act one way, then acting another way, that deserves to be exposed.

That same hypocrisy probably applies to their thinking of the law as president.

If our stated position is that a person's sex life is private then isn't an attack based on someone's sex life hypocritical?

As a general rule, someone's sex life is their own and is not relevant to most discussions.

However, the one exception to the general rule is when a politician or party that has engaged in discriminatory practices against others is caught acting hypocritically and in contradiction to their stated public positions.

I think what people above are pointing out is that the GOP is the party of 'family values' and the party that reprimands gay people and gay marriage as being wrong etc. and yet here we have another example of the Republican Party engaging in sexual behavior which is totally at odds with their supposed 'family values'.

And of course, the Republicans also have a lot of nerve criticizing celebrities in Hollywood for being promiscuous considering how much sleeping around they seem to do themselves.

That reminds me - was Newt Gingrich at this sex party?

Yet somehow we get a pass when we use a person's sex life to attack them because the other side is bigger hypocrits, or something.

I give up.

He will point out that for people like him and his partner (who got married in Canada a few years ago) they find it appalling and hypocritical to watch people in the Republican Party denouncing them as immoral etc. and then find out that on top of that the same people who want to deny them sexual liberation have no problem enjoying that same sexual liberation themselves.

Republicans never seem to have any trouble enjoying the benefits of the sexual revolution themselves, but what to deny those benefits to others. And people are sick of it. Especially gay people, women etc.

It's attacking their hypocrisy.

We're not saying the sex stuff is wrong. We're saying being hypocritical about what you tell others to do vs what you yourself do is wrong.

given the number of times you've flagellated the deceased equine in a vain attempt to chastise democrats. See ya 'round!

It's my personal opinion that saying "A person's sex life is private and should be off-limits for political attacks" when what you really mean is "A person's sex life is private and should be off-limits for political attacks, unless they do something I disagree with and then it's on like Donkey Kong" is a bit hypocritical.

You don't see the conundrum there?

If it works, then we should use it. If not, we shouldn't... but for no other reason.

First off, the guy hired RUSSIAN dancers!!! How dare he not hire AMERICANS???!!! Has he not seen Jersey Shore? We have PLENTY of women who will perform sex acts in pools and dance on platforms! This is ridiculous!!! He outsourced our floozie positions to Russia of all places!!! No wonder unemployment is 80%!

Second off, how come we don't have parties like this? Maybe that's the reason we're behind Romney in big-money donors (besides not being pro-Israel fanatics, nutcases, or overly greedy)! We need to bridge this gap with BETTER sexually explicit parties!
Though I admit these parties MIGHT offend the feminists... we have to bridge the missile/shelter... er, Playboy wanna-be gap!

These are Russian prostitutes that are often enslaved by their pimps. I don't think white slavery is quite consenting adults. At the very least they are illegal. You approve of that? However, let's face it, they probably couldn't find any women who would freely consent to entertain a bunch of old, pot bellied, lecherous men.

without looking into what is really going on. I don't believe this was between consenting adults like a swingers' party.

... a tape of the sex party is going to be released?

My invitation must have been lost in the mail.