Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
12264 Followers
David Sullivan
4983 Followers
xproofFeb 6, 2012
As Monica Lewinsky once said: “ ... this is not hard to swallow ... “
pivenFeb 6, 2012
LOL
Monica Lewinsky once said ... this is not hard to swallow
crashdvisFeb 5, 2012
I'm calling BS on this story. Kennedy was no choir boy and neither was is brother, but this is ridiculous. The guy has been dead almost 50 years. Why has it taken so long for her story to come out? Give me a break. Let the guy rest in peace already.
piddlydFeb 5, 2012
Sounds plausible to me. The guy had incredible power and an insatiable libido - and ran in circles where the casual recreational use of "legitimate" recreational drugs (abuse of pharmaceutical as opposed to street) drugs was common and relatively acceptable. He was a risk taker who seemed to be an adrenaline junkie. It fits the profile for the kind of guy with the ambition to rise to such a position of power (and to do so well in that seat) for JFK to be this kind of thrill seeker. It isn't like the Kennedy family is free from this kind of scandal that involves drug use and inappropriate sexual liaisons already. I think the tendency to want to call BS on it is rooted in a strong desire to make JFK out to be a saint. He was a politician from a wealthy family with various dubious connections. This isn't really surprising or shocking at all. It probably didn't come out until now because this woman was probably afraid of the potential repercussions. At this point, she may not really have nothing to lose by coming forward with this story.
dividebyoFeb 5, 2012
My reason to call BS on this has nothing to do with wanting JFK to be a "saint" or anything. It is because someone has come out with a - get your panties in a bunch, supposed tell-all book, 50 freaking years after the fact. My thoughts of BS come more from a viewpoint of seeing someone wanting to cash in on a famous historical person, who has no opportunity to defend themselves.
laborerFeb 5, 2012
SOUND THE ALARMS!
DAAAMAAAGEE CONTRROOLLL!!!
------------
ALERT LIBERAL COMMAND>
MOBILIZE TASK FORCE FOXTROT
WE ARE A GO
particleman420Feb 6, 2012
you sure have said a lot of nothing at all in this thread.
wait, that's *every thread you comment in.
*most
laborerFeb 6, 2012
Id say the same about Digg and most Diggers.
particleman420Feb 6, 2012
i dont think i would disagree with that.
mlw4428Feb 6, 2012
@laborer
So GTFO then. Leave, no one FORCES your moronic ass to stay here.
mlw4428Feb 6, 2012
I think something similar happened with the Cain Train...choo choo *crash*.
superkendallFeb 6, 2012
Why not 50 years? In fact that makes it more likely to be real, as there are a lot fewer repercussions from releasing this now than there might have been 40 years ago.
asfinktersezwutFeb 6, 2012
Lol...yup the same guys that insist Newt's ex-wife is lying, believe the words of a mistress from 50 years ago. This place makes me laugh.
Ouzel7Feb 6, 2012
I think she might have waited because for a long time his widow was alive. His son has gone...and his brother. I think the Kennedys probably knew most of this already.
drich255Feb 6, 2012
What were you guys saying about Herman Cain?
ageofmasteryFeb 5, 2012
"You might never think of JFK the same again"
Because before this there were never any stories of JFK being a womanizer and party animal...
sgb5874Feb 5, 2012
JFK you dog you
dividebyoFeb 5, 2012
I'm with Crash on this one... bunch of BS - article buried
laborerFeb 5, 2012
Democratic party damage control?
skews13Feb 5, 2012
So using your logic, everyone is supposed to be under the impression that the Democratic Party has been damaged based upon a story that come's out 50 years later on a President who was assassinated, and has been dead in that time frame? LMAO. To the contrary. The Republican Party is obviously still in damage control over that assassination. The Democratic Party has suffered no damage at all. To use this story in some lame attempt to cast a shadow on the Democrats at this time, is grasping for straw in a very desperate way.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 5, 2012
....?
Did you just fire at me a conspiracy theory?
I had to ruin your day, but the killer, it was LBJ.
superkendallFeb 6, 2012
You seem to be the one reacting as if that is the case. Otherwise, why object so strenuously to old material?
cowicideFeb 5, 2012
No supporting evidence on hearsay? BURIED.
stevanoskiFeb 5, 2012
YOu!? Care about evidence? LOLOLOLOL
cowicideFeb 5, 2012
Quit projecting, Steve. Your desperate laugh betrays you.
fertilebastardFeb 5, 2012
"We don't need no stinkin evidence"... Herman Cain accusers.
laborerFeb 5, 2012
Liberal brains are actually a collection of paradoxical Escher-esque tubes.
Hypocrisy is not a concept, it is a way of life.
pc25Feb 6, 2012
what evidence, she was a mistress
MrFrogyFeb 6, 2012
The last time a mistress provided evidence against a Democratic president she was mocked for it, and Democrats said it was not about perjury, but about Republicans minding their own business. Don;t pretend you want evidence, because if she had some you would just find another excuse.
fertilebastardFeb 5, 2012
At least he didn't leave her to be drowned after he drove his car off a bridge.
adaguyFeb 6, 2012
I hear that this book will be published by WESAYSO Inc.
sbuckley00Feb 5, 2012
This all could be true or maybe not. I think the point here is who the f**k cares?? Like seriously, do you people think that just because someone becomes president they cease to be human? Well they do not and honestly, is what he did all that bad; cause most of us have stories like this.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerFeb 5, 2012
If it were about a Republican President, Im sure Digg's reaction would be different.
particleman420Feb 5, 2012
because then it wouldnt be an underaged mistress it would have been an underaged boy.
laborerFeb 5, 2012
Very mature.
Liberals love to use ugly humor and logic just as much as conservatives, they just do better to not get called out on it.
ChuppacabraFeb 6, 2012
Another sideways slander of homosexuality.....
But Gay is perfectly OK, remember?
particleman420Feb 6, 2012
so which is it flipfloppacabra?
are you antigay or pro gay? you cant switch between stances depending on the argument.
ChuppacabraFeb 7, 2012
pot-kettle.
definitely.
particleman420Feb 7, 2012
why did i know that you wouldnt address anything, say anything of worth, and stick to your "i know you are but what am I?" classic fallback to every question directed at you in any topic whatsoever?
tehravenFeb 6, 2012
AHAAAAAAAAA!
tehravenFeb 6, 2012
Yes, because there are no Republicans on Digg . . . NONE AT f**kING ALL! I see none here on this page . . . I'm not writing to one right now . . .
bluto36Feb 6, 2012
hey look whose getting angry
better go cheat on your wife with some teen
tehravenFeb 9, 2012
Hey, I wish! But I definitely aint livin presidential!
particleman420Feb 6, 2012
because he was a democrat. he cheated on his wife so he's unworthy of any praise ever and worthy of attacks 50 years in his grave.
then you have serial cheater, the corrupt Newt who is a valid presidential candidate for some reason.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tehravenFeb 6, 2012
Duh, he's a little troll like the rest of em *rimshot*
tehravenFeb 6, 2012
OLD NEWS! *pfft* *pfft* I'm so clever~
publikjohn9Feb 6, 2012
So she was JFK's little whore, big deal!
bluto36Feb 6, 2012
the big deal is she lived...
Dem whores have a way of ending up dead
Kennedy whores double whammy
publikjohn9Feb 7, 2012
I see what you did there. LOL