Lauren Boebert Caught Fondling Date’s Genitals During Family-Friendly Musical

[Gowebb11 9,882]

12 hours ago, aubaseball said:

So, let me get this straight….one woman is single and messes around in a theater and she is the bad person, while one does online porn for money is the good person?!

That’s one perspective. Here’s mine. The one single person you reference is an active sitting member of Congress who constantly parades her Christianity, family values, and righteous approach, while tearing down gays and cross dressers as the sure downfall of our society and threats to our children. But it’s okay to grope your date in public, smoke in the presence of a pregnant lady (not too pro-life), and lie about it. Politics and party affiliation aside, where is her shame? She’s a mom for God’s sake and having herself publicly groped while groping her boyfriend in a crowded public forum. She should resign from shame alone. But she won’t. She will send out some tweets of herself wearing a cross necklace, draped in a flag, and holding a gun, thus meeting the requirements of standing up for ‘family values’. I can tolerate imperfection as someone who is imperfect, but I hate a hypocrite. Especially noisy ones like her who like to flaunt their self righteousness and refusing to be accountable for their trashiness. 

As for the whataboutism democratic candidate, feel free to start a separate thread on her. I’ll be happy to share an equally harsh critique of her. We deserve better from our leaders on both sides and from any political party.

[I_M4_AU 8,943]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

parents can choose to take their children to cross dresser shows or not if they desire. 

Nobody at the theater gave permission to see their Christian Republican congresswoman get her boobs fondled while she gives her boyfriend a handjob in the front seats. 

Got it.  As long as the left approves of the sex act, it’s OK.

For the record, what Boebert did was ridiculous and she should have a Republican challenger in the next primary.

[CoffeeTiger 5,883]

16 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Got it.  As long as the left approves of the sex act, it’s OK.

A drag show isn't a sex act. 

 

[I_M4_AU 8,943]

1 minute ago, CoffeeTiger said:

A drag show isn't a sex act. 

 

It is a graphic display of a sex act to an audience that may have children in it.

[CoffeeTiger 5,883]

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

It is a graphic display of a sex act to an audience that may have children in it.

again, drag itself is not a sex act.

Regular drag shows do not usually contain stripping of nudity of any kind. Adult themed shows or specifically burlesque shows might, but children shouldn't be taken to those shows anyway. 

 

No different than R rated movies that may have sex and nudity in them. Children usually shouldn't be allowed to view them but sometimes parents will bring their kids anyway. 

[TexasTiger 14,310]

1 hour ago, arein0 said:

I was kind of waiting for the "it's the Democrats fault" line.

He corrupted her gentle spirit.

[I_M4_AU 8,943]

25 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

again, drag itself is not a sex act.

Regular drag shows do not usually contain stripping of nudity of any kind. Adult themed shows or specifically burlesque shows might, but children shouldn't be taken to those shows anyway. 

 

No different than R rated movies that may have sex and nudity in them. Children usually shouldn't be allowed to view them but sometimes parents will bring their kids anyway. 

Again, children are being taken to these burlesque type shows and the left does not discourage this behavior.  Anytime the right objects; the left is upset and believes it falls under the free speech umbrella, which porn clearly does not.

An R rated movie may have sex and nudity, but it is not live and shoved in your face throughout the entire performance.

[SaltyTiger 8,579]

Pretty disgusting public display. Norm thinking adults would not be seen like that even when impaired. 10 plus venue multiplies the disgust. She should be ushered out of office immediately. 

[aubaseball 2,829]

6 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Pretty disgusting public display. Norm thinking adults would not be seen like that even when impaired. 10 plus venue multiplies the disgust. She should be ushered out of office immediately. 

Meanwhile…a sitting US President takes advantage of an intern in the Oval Office and everything is cool.   Got it!  Thanks. 

[SaltyTiger 8,579]

4 minutes ago, aubaseball said:

Meanwhile…a sitting US President takes advantage of an intern in the Oval Office and everything is cool.   Got it!  Thanks. 

Was not cool with me baseball and I am certainly no Clinton fan. Never voted democrat on anything. Granted she was intern but she was an adult and they did not put on a public display.

[CoffeeTiger 5,883]

A few people have mentioned it already, but aside from the sex stuff, there is also the issue of Boebert and her campaign so readily and easily lying about what happened when the story first broke. 
 

she was removed from the theater primarily for vaping, but her and her campaign at first said she was absolutely not vaping….then video came out showing her vaping…and then her office doubled down on the lie and said it was a ‘smoke machine’ that made it look like she was vaping.
 

Boebert is now trying to say that she was so excited about the show that she “forgot” that she was vaping and ‘didn’t mean’ to lie. I don’t think anyone with a brain will actually believe that excuse, but I guess she had to find some way to weasel out of the situation once she learned it was all publicly available on tape. 
 

if she so easily lies about something as minor as blowing a vape pen at a theater, just imagine what lies she’s willing to tell (or has told) in regards to her job or to her constituents. She’s like a child that can’t even tell the truth when she’s caught with her hand directly in the cookie jar. 

[TitanTiger 21,249]

4 hours ago, aubaseball said:

Meanwhile…a sitting US President takes advantage of an intern in the Oval Office and everything is cool.   Got it!  Thanks. 

You seem confused. 

[AU9377 6,037]

5 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Again, children are being taken to these burlesque type shows and the left does not discourage this behavior.  Anytime the right objects; the left is upset and believes it falls under the free speech umbrella, which porn clearly does not.

An R rated movie may have sex and nudity, but it is not live and shoved in your face throughout the entire performance.

Where is this happening and who is taking them? 

Funny thing is that I am from a small rural town in Georgia... around 7,000 people.  When I was a kid, the local Lion's club used to put on a fund raiser.  Men from the area would literally dress like women and perform a comedy skit or sing on stage.  It was hilarious.  The men that participated ranged from a church pastor to the local barber.  All were the straightest men you could ever find.  That is what made it hilarious. 

It has been 20 years since they had that fund raiser and won't likely ever do it again, but I laugh thinking about what some would say if the completely harmless event was held today.

[AU9377 6,037]

18 hours ago, aubaseball said:

Meanwhile…a sitting US President takes advantage of an intern in the Oval Office and everything is cool.   Got it!  Thanks. 

He didn't do that.  He was acquitted in the Senate.  Isn't that the way it works?

***This is sarcasm on my part.

Edited September 19, 2023 by AU9377

[aubaseball 2,829]

1 hour ago, AU9377 said:

Where is this happening and who is taking them? 

Funny thing is that I am from a small rural town in Georgia... around 7,000 people.  When I was a kid, the local Lion's club used to put on a fund raiser.  Men from the area would literally dress like women and perform a comedy skit or sing on stage.  It was hilarious.  The men that participated ranged from a church pastor to the local barber.  All were the straightest men you could ever find.  That is what made it hilarious. 

It has been 20 years since they had that fund raiser and won't likely ever do it again, but I laugh thinking about what some would say if the completely harmless event was held today.

They used to do that in schools too.   It’s called a joke.   What is happening with the trans thing is promoting a lifestyle.   Completely different.   It’s the same as black face.   It’s called a joke.   

[TitanTiger 21,249]

10 hours ago, AU9377 said:

He didn't do that.  He was acquitted in the Senate.  Isn't that the way it works?

Actually he did do what aubaseball said.  He was acquitted in the Senate of lying and obstruction of justice, which were the basis for the articles of impeachment.  But he absolutely abused his position of power in having a sexual relationship with a 20-year old intern and post #MeToo, if he were the CEO of any company in America, he'd rightly be fired without question or hesitation.  

But like hypocritical Trump voters and supporters do now to justify voting for a three-time-divorced, serial adulterer and sexual predator, Democrats of the time were more concerned about keeping the White House in Democratic hands than they were their new cause célèbre in wake of the Anita Hill hearings - sexual harassment.

[TexasTiger 14,310]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

Actually he did do what aubaseball said.  He was acquitted in the Senate of lying and obstruction of justice, which were the basis for the articles of impeachment.  But he absolutely abused his position of power in having a sexual relationship with a 20-year old intern and post #MeToo, if he were the CEO of any company in America, he'd rightly be fired without question or hesitation.  

But like hypocritical Trump voters and supporters do now to justify voting for a three-time-divorced, serial adulterer and sexual predator, Democrats of the time were more concerned about keeping the White House in Democratic hands than they were their new cause célèbre in wake of the Anita Hill hearings - sexual harassment.

Actually, most Democrats roundly condemned the behavior and made no excuses for it. The Senate determined it was not impeachable. They also thought it a bad precedent to have a years long investigation nominally into something like whitewater to only find an unrelated personal failure which while inappropriate, was totally consensual. This was not a #metoo scenario. She readily admitted she pursued him, so I’m not sure all CEOs would have necessarily been fired for it. But CEO’s generally serve share holders and sell products, so a company might give him a golden parachute and send him to his next job if they thought it best for sales. He was a political target in a relentless pursuit and his wrongdoing was not about abusing his power in relation to his duties to the country. His behavior was not that different than countless other Presidents.

[SaltyTiger 8,579]

Rid of the democrat. Back to impeachment work. Guess all is good now.

https://www.businessinsider.com/lauren-boebert-ditched-democrat-who-fondled-her-beetlejuice-2023-9

[TexasTiger 14,310]

9 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Rid of the democrat. Back to impeachment work. Guess all is good now.

https://www.businessinsider.com/lauren-boebert-ditched-democrat-who-fondled-her-beetlejuice-2023-9

At least she’s resolved the real problem.

[CoffeeTiger 5,883]

I heard her date picked this shirt up from the Merch tent before they were kicked out of the show. 

[TexasTiger 14,310]

[TitanTiger 21,249]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Actually, most Democrats roundly condemned the behavior and made no excuses for it. The Senate determined it was not impeachable. They also thought it a bad precedent to have a years long investigation nominally into something like whitewater to only find an unrelated personal failure which while inappropriate, was totally consensual. This was not a #metoo scenario. She readily admitted she pursued him, so I’m not sure all CEOs would have necessarily been fired for it. But CEO’s generally serve share holders and sell products, so a company might give him a golden parachute and send him to his next job if they thought it best for sales. He was a political target in a relentless pursuit and his wrongdoing was not about abusing his power in relation to his duties to the country. His behavior was not that different than countless other Presidents.

Yeah, I guess I was also thinking of the multiple credible accusations of sexual assault on top of him abusing a power differential with Lewinsky, yet Democrats remaining resolutely in his corner through it all.

[AU9377 6,037]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Actually he did do what aubaseball said.  He was acquitted in the Senate of lying and obstruction of justice, which were the basis for the articles of impeachment.  But he absolutely abused his position of power in having a sexual relationship with a 20-year old intern and post #MeToo, if he were the CEO of any company in America, he'd rightly be fired without question or hesitation.  

But like hypocritical Trump voters and supporters do now to justify voting for a three-time-divorced, serial adulterer and sexual predator, Democrats of the time were more concerned about keeping the White House in Democratic hands than they were their new cause célèbre in wake of the Anita Hill hearings - sexual harassment.

That was sarcasm on my part.  I should have made that clear.    Yes, he absolutely did what he was accused of doing.  He actually ended up getting a boost from it all, but I'm certain he would rather it had not happened and that his zipper had remained in the closed position.  That was always his biggest weakness.

Clinton's actual accomplishments provided him with a powerful argument that the majority of Americans agreed with.  He was balancing the budget, the economy was roaring and most didn't believe that impeachment was the right thing to do over what, in 1994, was seen as more of a personal domestic issue than one warranting impeachment.

Edited September 19, 2023 by AU9377

[TexasTiger 14,310]

32 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Yeah, I guess I was also thinking of the multiple credible accusations of sexual assault on top of him abusing a power differential with Lewinsky, yet Democrats remaining resolutely in his corner through it all.

Which ones did you deem “credible.”

[TitanTiger 21,249]

10 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Which ones did you deem “credible.”

Juanita Broaddrick was probably the main one.  I don't think Paula Jones was lying about him either.  A good writeup reflecting on his accusers is below.  I'm not saying Kathleen Willey or Leslie Millwee's accusations are lies, but it's harder to gauge those.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/20/arts/television/paula-jones-monica-lewinsky-bill-clinton.html

In the end, taking it all together - him getting a hummer from an intern in the Oval Office, the affair with Gennifer Flowers, the lying under oath about all of it...he doesn't come off as a man to believe when he says he didn't commit sexual assault.  His behavior reads like a licencious, entitled man who doesn't really care as long as he gets what he wants from women sexually.  He doesn't have the requisite track record of character to believe him when he says there were lines he wouldn't cross such as groping women or pressuring subordinates for sex.