When Al Franken said that he has been married for 31 years

I was thinking that the Clintons, too, have been married for more than 30 years, the Obamas, Edwards.. all have endured long lasting marriages with, of course, the ups and downs of every marriage.

And then, we have the candidates of the "family values" - past and present - with multiple spouses, for whatever reason.

Franken, by the way, who is running to unseat Norm Coleman as representing Minnesota in the Senate, was very good. Yes, with some rye jokes, satires. At least, he does not need a speech writer to script jokes for him.

"The Republicans say that government does not work, and then they get the power and proves this."

He was talking about his wife, Franny, whose dad, a WWII veteran, died young, leaving a widow with four kids. But they had a Social Security survivor benefit and this is what kept them afloat and allowed the kids to go to college, some at Pell Grant which, in those days, paid 90% of tuition. Today it is less then 40%.

Republicans, he said, wanted us to pull ourselves by the boot straps. But Franny's family did not have any boots, but they got Social Security survivor benefits to help them. And isn't this what we, as a society, all about? He asked.

He talked about special activities fees for schools which, of course, did not exist when he went to school. $600 for one kid to participate in an activity (I do not remember the exact one)? he asked. Where else do we want our kids to be between 3 and 6 in the afternoon if not involved in school activities?

We need Al Franken in the US Senate!

http://www.alfranken.com/pages/issues/

He's a bit too centrist for me, but I respect him for the progressive that is deep down within him. It needs to come out more before I can give him any Act Blue change. However, I will endorse him over the current sitting alternative.

I caught his appearance in NYC shortly before he declared his candidacy and also got to meet him briefly:

http://vastleft.blogspot.com/2006/09/franken-privilege.html

In his books, he speaks so eloquently about his admiration for Paul Wellstone and about how crudely Norm Coleman exploited the senator's tragic death. Here's hoping he takes back this seat for the Democrats!

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

Bill Clinton, i.e, Jennifer Flowers (10 years off and on) and Monica Lewinski at a minumum. :wow: We know that the Clintons have an "open marriage" so let's drop the facade of assuming that HRC's husband, has been, or is being, 100% faithful? Despite his high intelligence, Bill Clinton has a decades long compulsion that HRC has been aware of and turned a blind eye to. :shrug:

know them personally or are you basing this on the tabloids? Sheesh.Flowers was never proven to be anything but a liar and so Bill likes sex so what? And I don't think Hillary has turned a vblind eye to anything since she was blindsided by Monica. But I suppose you prefer the RW version of this story.

:shrug:

I almost didn't vote for Clinton the second time due to Jennifer Flowers affair that went on for over a decade.

Yes, I'm aware that one's physical unfaithfulness to one's spouse is not considered, by most democrats as "a problem" ... but to me, it is a problem.

Jennifer Flowers was a grown woman but THINK for one small moment about Monica Lewinsky and how her life is totally trashed by this affair? Albeit she was 22 years old at the time of their affair, she was still quite young. Do you HONESTLY believe that HRC truly believed that, with Bill's past, he was not unfaithful these past two times while he was serving as President?

I voted for Bill Clinton the second time because, you're right, someone's personal life should NOT be at issue. However, and this is important, HRC using "her husband's" credentials to prop herself up is disconcerting to me.

I guess, despite their high intelligence, I'm honestly burned out with The Clinton Dynasty. Part of me even hopes that New York State grows tired of their machine.

A final reason I won't vote for HRC because she is DLC and will continue to support the wealthy american above all else, i.e., destroying the middle class.

Gennifer Flowers came to public attention early in the 1992 primaries. And contrary to what the other poster said, Bill Clinton admitted to that affair.

Maybe the two of you are thinking of Paula Jones? The evidence in the Jones case leans pretty heavily in Clinton's favor. Her testimony, which she admits to having been paid for, was inconsistent. The other witness recanted. Etc.

As to feeling sorry for Monica Lewinsky, she took the job at the White House for the specific purpose of getting her, "presidential kneepads". She told her friends before ever stepping foot in the White House that she was planning to nail the president.

I am one of those Democrats who don't give a shit about anyone else's marriage but my own. I think it reflects rather poorly on your character that you do go around sticking your nose into other people's relationships.

of the duration Floers claimed and her "telephone tapes " were proved to be doctored, Just saying.That is what I meant by her lying.

but Bill was getting head from an intern in the oval office.


Al has my $$ and all my support. I hope to campaign for him if i can make it out to minnesota

You are embracing a Republican talking point. (Which they don't even believe in, because as we know, all the Republicans were getting their vines shined while they were pursuing Clinton.)

troubles me, then I'm spewing a right wing talking point?

Hey! After he was elected, I agree, his scoring head in the oval office was none of our business.

However, this thread is quite insincere since after numerous affairs, their thirty year marriage may be that of best friends, but sexual faithfulness is NOT part of the marriage.

Now that Bill Clinton is up for "first man" and HRC shamelessly uses his accomplishments and makes it her own, let's NOT go down that road again.

No, sex should not be an issue, but it IS an issue when you are referring to martial fidelity.

I'm sorry, but personally I'm troubled by their "marriage of convenience" and HRC's warmongering tough talk and swagger.

Give me Nancy Pelosi in the white house any day but please don't force The Clintons "DLC machine" on us again? :shrug:

You make a lot of assumptions based on NO knowledge. Jennifer Flowers was a known "liar" and much of what she claimed was debunked. In any event what has any of this to do with the current state of the Clinton's marriage? You have no evidence whatsoever to make any claims about their marital fidelity or lack of it. It is equally possible that they have acheievd forgiveness and are faithful to each other, as are any of your allegations.And it is troubling that you insist on spewing RW screed.(And who exactly are you to admit to any compulsions for Bill Clinton? That would be his right not yours)

and it's none of my business anyway.

(Although, regarding Gennifer Flowers - I think what ended up happening there is that Bill admitted the affair but said that it had been a short one, rather than the 12-year one that she had claimed. Whatever. They're the only two who know the truth on that one.)

I don't understand why you feel you have a right to that.

I am with you on the political dynasty issue, but I really don't understand why the details of anyone's marriage matters to you.

i dont care about their sex life.


im not a hillary hater, i think she would be fine as prez

have resources. Ala Social Security Survivor Benefits. Look at all the Benefits Corporate America has because they have spokes people-Lobiest. There our few spokespersons for those who are without. I think that the last real advocate was before my time. That was Eleanor Roosevelt. She was a women who lead a very financial comfortable life. Yet her insight into the Hover days gave her the inspiration to give a voice to these people.

I could care less.

But remember, he had to fight impeachment and, perhaps, missed capturing or killing bin Laden at the same time so he won't be accused as "wagging the dog."

All the time, all those "family values" congressmen went after him. And, Bush got many votes, at least in 2000, by "promising" to restore "honor," or whatever, to the white house.

Yes, it is not our business, until the other side uses it to bring great harm.