Friday, March 02, 2012

Just wondering

In 2002, Roy Blunt, sponsor of "No Contraceptives on your Insurance Companies Dime" dumped his wife of 35 years, shortly thereafter he married a much younger lobbyist named Abigail Pearlman (so biblical). As they were suspected of dating while the pious ol' Blunt was still married, one does wonder what birth control was used by the then 40-year old Ms. Perlman, and what insurance company picked it up...because I bet it wasn't Roy going to Osco for a trojan.
BOTOX...MAKES...SKIN...SO...TIGHT. EYES...BECOMING...LIKE...FLOUNDER.

 I apologize to the second Mrs. Blunt if there is a factually incorrect statement in this allegation...but not to her significant hypocrite.

7 comments:

jimmiraybob said...

Regardless of how he manages the seed-egg courtship phase of his relationships, I have to commend the Roy Blunt commitment to protecting the sanctity of marriage. Not having gone for additional divorces and marriages shows a dedicated culture warrior walking the walk.

Although, by the Limbaugh* rule, he's clearly entitled to two more. Maybe more, has Limbaugh divorced #4 yet? [shuffling for Republican sanctity of marriage-warrior score card]

Moral leader and slut czar of the GOP

Montag said...

Sometimes I do wish there were a god, especially one that personally dealt out retribution to hypocrites.

The YouTube video of Blunt exploding would get a bunch of hits.

jimmiraybob said...

There was supposed to be an asterisk in front of "Moral leader and slut czar of the GOP" so as to indicate that the comment was directed toward Limbaugh. But upon instant replay I ask, does it even matter which of the fearless leaders it was directed to?

pansypoo said...

the lazy eye tilts rite.

Anonymous said...

You assume that Blunt's Little Blunt actually worked. Maybe they just passed the time in intimate conversation as she flicked the little darling from side to side.

Robert said...

Also Blunt slipped in a managers amendment helpful to a firm she represented without telling anyone. Managers amendments aren't debated and are supposed to be technical. This was an ethical violation on the order of handing out lobbyists checks on the floor of the house (as Boehner did) and may be the reason that Boehner not Blunt was chosen by the House Republican caucus to replace DeLay ( they were trying to avoid even more scandal)
http://www.firedupmissouri.com/blunts_corrupt_posse
They have a link to an LA Times article. See also CREW for example here http://www.citizensforethics.org/crookedcandidates2010

Robert said...

Also Blunt slipped in a managers amendment helpful to a firm she represented without telling anyone. Managers amendments aren't debated and are supposed to be technical. This was an ethical violation on the order of handing out lobbyists checks on the floor of the house (as Boehner did) and may be the reason that Boehner not Blunt was chosen by the House Republican caucus to replace DeLay ( they were trying to avoid even more scandal)
http://www.firedupmissouri.com/blunts_corrupt_posse
They have a link to an LA Times article. See also CREW for example here http://www.citizensforethics.org/crookedcandidates2010