General Discussion

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)

409. I would suggest

Fri Oct 31, 2014, 01:18 PM

Oct 2014

that a marriage (partnership) is over when the partners agree it is as well. Both partners contributed during that period, and both enjoyed whatever benefits accrued during that period. Why do you assume that it is 'fair' that one partner continues to contribute to the other afterwards, but (I assume, correct me if I'm wrong) the other partner is not likewise responsible for continuing to 'contribute' to the other after?

The non-SAHP obviously was 'contributing' money during the marriage. You want them to continue 'contributing' money to the other partner after the marriage ends. So for 'fairness', surely the other partner should be 'contributing' whatever it was that they 'contributed' during the marriage, right? So what are you suggesting they should continue 'contributing' after the end of the marriage, for the sake of fairness?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

613 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

WTF? Alan Grayson's estranged wife is getting food stamps [View all] cali Oct 2014 OP

Divorce jehop61 Oct 2014 #1

I am sorry but she is not getting $120,000 a year. dilby Oct 2014 #2

Why doesn't she give Grayson the kids like he wants? Why isn't she working? nt valerief Oct 2014 #4

Did she have 5 kids with her "real husband" dilby Oct 2014 #7

Sorry, but I updated the post before I saw your response. I found out she eventually valerief Oct 2014 #8

WHO Was Her Real Husband?? ChiciB1 Oct 2014 #34

Some guy named Carson. I forget his first name. She was married to Grayson for years valerief Oct 2014 #35

Which in effect means she was never married to Grayson and is the basis for his claims now stevenleser Oct 2014 #107

I don't know what if anything he's giving her. I think he might want his kids. valerief Oct 2014 #196

Agree in general. I won't take anything from her at face value after the abuse lie stevenleser Oct 2014 #227

Wow. nt TBF Oct 2014 #12

Not many job opportunities for a woman who was a stay at home mom for 29 years. dilby Oct 2014 #14

I didn't know she was unemployable. However, he wants to raise the young valerief Oct 2014 #17

You are going to take away the kids she gave birth to TBF Oct 2014 #24

You're going to leave the kids with someone who conveniently lied for years that she was already stevenleser Oct 2014 #57

We have no idea who to believe here - TBF Oct 2014 #66

There is an article in the Orlando Sentinel that explains it all. She lied and she knew she lied. stevenleser Oct 2014 #68

That is Alan's lawyers interpretation - TBF Oct 2014 #78

And will be very easy for the courts to verify and thus highly likely that they are correct. stevenleser Oct 2014 #109

Best interests of the child factors treestar Nov 2014 #608

Grayson made his fortune wholesaling international long-distance service Sen. Walter Sobchak Oct 2014 #158

I know he's a wealthy politician in FL TBF Oct 2014 #166

Actually he made much of his money doing what Dems cheered him for, going after sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #590

If she gave up the kids she is giving up the only leverage she has when it comes to a divorce. dilby Oct 2014 #28

If she was still married when she and Grayson "Married" then she and Grayson were never married. stevenleser Oct 2014 #58

Are you sure it isn't just a case of his lawyers finding a t not crossed on her first divorce? kcr Oct 2014 #60

Apparently not since she then went back and got a divorce from her first husband. stevenleser Oct 2014 #61

Still doesn't explain the 29 years that have passed kcr Oct 2014 #62

Here is the article in the Orlando Sentinel that explains it. She lied and she knew she lied. stevenleser Oct 2014 #67

THat is an article about Grayson's accusation. kcr Oct 2014 #69

And it refers to court documents he provided that are easy for the court to look up. stevenleser Oct 2014 #71

I'm not on anyoen's side. I'm simply not knee jerk jumping to defend Grayson kcr Oct 2014 #73

You are clearly on the wife's side. There is no evidence supporting her and plenty supporting him.nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #74

I'm on anyone's side if their spouse is trying to screw them over on a technecality kcr Oct 2014 #75

A technicality? Lying about being married and getting married again? Wow... stevenleser Oct 2014 #84

If he can leave his family in such deplorable conditions, then I don't believe him about anything kcr Oct 2014 #86

To quote you,but reversing the gender, "That is HER story" & you are buying it hook line and sinker stevenleser Oct 2014 #88

It may be about the gender to you. It isn't to me. Go ahead and reverse the genders. I don't care. kcr Oct 2014 #89

Its obviously about gender for you. I'm following the facts. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #93

You're believing Grayson kcr Oct 2014 #103

This time. I withheld judgement initially with the abuse allegations. Then we found out she lied. stevenleser Oct 2014 #105

That's not how I remember it kcr Oct 2014 #110

Then you remember it wrong. She lied, she got caught, she dropped the allegation. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #114

Because domestic violence victims never drop charges n/t kcr Oct 2014 #116

Because the video proved she lied. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #136

It did no such thing kcr Oct 2014 #157

Ssshhhhh! NanceGreggs Oct 2014 #566

As Stevenleser points out... Scootaloo Oct 2014 #526

I'm not disputing the existence of any documents kcr Oct 2014 #531

Think for a moment Scootaloo Oct 2014 #534

Think for a moment kcr Oct 2014 #536

Could be any number of reasons Scootaloo Oct 2014 #538

You can believe a divorce is final. kcr Oct 2014 #539

I don't care if she had sex with the whole Florida State Football team in 1994. dilby Oct 2014 #90

What you care about is not what is at issue. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #92

A man who does not take care of his family? Because I think that is the issue. dilby Oct 2014 #98

That allegation comes from someone who we know has lied in accusations against him several times and stevenleser Oct 2014 #104

So she is lying that she qualifies for food stamps and free lunches at school? dilby Oct 2014 #113

No, no and no. stevenleser Oct 2014 #118

Wow, just wow. dilby Oct 2014 #121

You want her to profit from the lies and fraud? And you claim to be impartial? stevenleser Oct 2014 #123

There is no such thing as profit. dilby Oct 2014 #125

Now you are just spinning for the sake of spinning. You are wrong. Admit it. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #127

No I am talking about a human being who he was with for 29 years. dilby Oct 2014 #132

And lied and committed fraud to enable that relationship of 29 years. The time makes it worse not stevenleser Oct 2014 #134

He did not seem to notice for 29 years. dilby Oct 2014 #139

That's the point of fraud and deception. To deceive. You make my point. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #141

So should he have to pay for his illegitimate kids? dilby Oct 2014 #151

Are you the type that says things like "Marriage is just another form of prostitution?" kcr Oct 2014 #131

No, and that has nothing to do with this discussion. stevenleser Oct 2014 #133

It has everything to do with it kcr Oct 2014 #144

Nope, I won't let you hijack the discussion down a meaningless tangent. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #145

I'll post whatever I like kcr Oct 2014 #153

So he's lying too, then? kcr Oct 2014 #129

Again, now you are just spinning for the sake of spinning. Admit you are wrong and move on. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #135

No. I'm just being a typical human being with ethics and a conscience. kcr Oct 2014 #140

If you have ethics and a conscience, you are ignoring them here. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #142

Really? Show me how? kcr Oct 2014 #146

You are arguing in favor of a woman who subjected her children to this horrible lie. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #147

The horrible lie there is no evidence of kcr Oct 2014 #149

I believe Grayson lost his money Generic Other Oct 2014 #137

I looked it up he is worth $16.69 million. dilby Oct 2014 #143

He lost the money last year Generic Other Oct 2014 #205

he was worth $34 million and lost $18. dilby Oct 2014 #206

He should spring for the kids' lunch money then Generic Other Oct 2014 #209

She says her former husband filed those 1994 papers, without her involvement. She also says he tblue37 Oct 2014 #148

A thousand thank yous kcr Oct 2014 #152

Hopefully he has to surender all his "#1 Dad" mugs. dilby Oct 2014 #160

+ 1000 nt riderinthestorm Oct 2014 #169

Very insightful Generic Other Oct 2014 #208

Thank you for your post, tblue Cha Oct 2014 #220

You forgot several important things. The primary one being we know she is a liar from the abuse stevenleser Oct 2014 #231

that's pretty much how I feel hfojvt Oct 2014 #331

Excellent analysis! NanceGreggs Oct 2014 #542

Yes, a technicality. It's like "it's just a flesh wound." closeupready Oct 2014 #507

ROFLMAO, exactly. The nonsense put forth by those trying to justify Lolita's actions is stevenleser Oct 2014 #545

people have believed they were divorced and remarried only to discover the state they DeadEyeDyck Nov 2014 #584

When my father passed ... NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #603

That's bullshit. No one is on either "side" - TBF Oct 2014 #79

Your attempt to claim you aren't biased is what is bullshit. And its obvious. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #85

most men wont cotton to a father allowing children to be in mold infested house while sittin on mils seabeyond Oct 2014 #171

Allowing?? He's asking the court to take them from that house. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #183

more nasty shit. he is letting the kids sit in the filth as punishment to the wife. MOST PARENTS, seabeyond Oct 2014 #186

righteous rant LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #207

+1 nt laundry_queen Oct 2014 #212

Yes, "righteous rant"! Cha Oct 2014 #221

If I was married to a man who was still married Mojorabbit Oct 2014 #330

Absolutely kcr Oct 2014 #333

Very well and succinctly put. Add the lie on the abuse allegation, and you see the kind of person stevenleser Oct 2014 #335

Kudos to Rove and the Koch's, they really hate Alan because he tells the truth, surprised randys1 Oct 2014 #388

in Florida, both sides get a copy of the final judgment notice/decree steve2470 Oct 2014 #490

It would be a pretty hard thing to hide then, wouldn't it? kcr Oct 2014 #500

it's possible she provided a fake address steve2470 Oct 2014 #508

That's my point. There are multiple possibilities. We don't know what that filing means. kcr Oct 2014 #514

It was a divorce filed in Guam. I agree she should have made sure the ex msanthrope Nov 2014 #579

Exactly. Her whole motivation. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #150

Yeah her whole motivation was to have 5 kids from this guy so she can get everything he had. dilby Oct 2014 #155

IKR? laundry_queen Oct 2014 #213

Well, the tactic seems to be working with you. You forgive every lie and scummy act by her stevenleser Oct 2014 #264

"by the judge of his character"? demwing Oct 2014 #215

She was the primary caregiver to those young kids. it would be to their benefit pnwmom Oct 2014 #501

The long term unemployed are UglyGreed Oct 2014 #44

Yup, they throw the ex and their own children into poverty. The lawyers and judges let them do it. Dont call me Shirley Oct 2014 #80

I understand he has petitioned for custody. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #154

ohhh. a new low. nt seabeyond Oct 2014 #156

Indeed. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #165

Wow - I think you forgot a few of the TBF Oct 2014 #168

If Lolita Grayson is the standard by which you want women judged, that's your call. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #176

There are two sides to every story - TBF Oct 2014 #189

That may be best for the children. Kids raised in poverty have a difficult childhood, Dont call me Shirley Oct 2014 #240

Whoah treestar Nov 2014 #609

Not the only factor? lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #610

None of that affects the children treestar Nov 2014 #611

Domestic violence doesn't affect the kids? Did you seriously just say that? lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #612

I just quoted what is seriously Florida law treestar Nov 2014 #613

hold out on being a decent guy to get what you want? nah. shouldnt work that way. seabeyond Oct 2014 #30

we all know raising kids and looking after a house is not 'real' work. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #197

His kids to him? Why not? And when the government PAYS us to raise kids and valerief Oct 2014 #199

I don't want to talk to you. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #201

Are you kidding? Demsrule86 Oct 2014 #371

Maybe she could downgrade from a fucking $10,000 a month residence joeglow3 Oct 2014 #11

He owns the house. dilby Oct 2014 #16

Then why is he cool with septic leaks and "mold in every room"? joeglow3 Oct 2014 #19

Probably because he does not live there. dilby Oct 2014 #22

The rational mind would direct that particular query to Grayson himself, yes? LanternWaste Oct 2014 #55

Cool. Got his phone number? joeglow3 Oct 2014 #56

Isn't he a member of DU? Jamastiene Oct 2014 #170

He is, yes. In fact, he posted MineralMan Oct 2014 #391

Can she get a job, like most everyone else? closeupready Oct 2014 #509

I am sure she is working on it. Resume is a little bleak though kind of looks like: dilby Oct 2014 #511

Or, maybe she's not working on work. closeupready Oct 2014 #512

At 53 most people are looking towards retirement. dilby Oct 2014 #524

If there's no annulment she'll get Social Security just by being Grayson's spouse for ten years. ancianita Oct 2014 #525

Really? kcr Oct 2014 #516

We get it. We get you support her unconditionally. closeupready Oct 2014 #523

No. I responded to a post asking why can't she work. kcr Oct 2014 #527

Thank God. My daughter 840high Oct 2014 #29

A lot of women are and it's sick. dilby Oct 2014 #31

Often a spouse like that limits TBF Oct 2014 #39

Having a job would have hurt her when going for alimony. dilby Oct 2014 #41

Interesting - TBF Oct 2014 #48

Yeah I tried to be as fair as possible for my ex when we divorced. dilby Oct 2014 #51

There isn't going to be alimony because there is no marriage to dissolve. She was already married. stevenleser Oct 2014 #106

That will be for the Judge to decide. dilby Oct 2014 #117

No, it won't. There is no legalized multiple marriage in Florida. It's a done deal. stevenleser Oct 2014 #119

Yes, because we should just automatically believe everything Grayson's laywer says as fact kcr Oct 2014 #128

You're argument is so desperate as to be pathetic. This will be very easy for the court to verify.nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #138

Okay kcr Oct 2014 #172

Well, aside from the now multiple lies she has told affecting him and the kids... stevenleser Oct 2014 #232

They're only lies if you believe Grayson kcr Oct 2014 #233

No, no faith in Grayson is required. We have her abuse lie on video, her divorce case we can look up stevenleser Oct 2014 #236

Nothing, including the video, shows these things. kcr Oct 2014 #238

Yes, it does. And she and her attorney know it, thats why they immediately dropped the request stevenleser Oct 2014 #239

You choose to believe his lawyers and the scummy tactics. Whatever floats your boat. kcr Oct 2014 #241

LOL, "don't believe your lying eyes, believe me!" No, sorry. All evidence is with Alan Grayson here stevenleser Oct 2014 #242

Again. No evidence. kcr Oct 2014 #244

See my #245 below in response to your other post. What you assert is ridiculous stevenleser Oct 2014 #247

I saw it. Nothing at all ridiculous about what I'm asserting. kcr Oct 2014 #290

It's completely ridiculous and by now, you know it. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #298

FWIW.. I don't think you sound "desperate" at all. I've enjoyed reading what you and dilby have Cha Oct 2014 #222

Thank you kcr Oct 2014 #235

Of course she does Cha. Their attempts to explain the bigamy away require magical thinking. stevenleser Oct 2014 #252

You are the one ignoring the fact that marriages happen when divorces weren't final kcr Oct 2014 #299

Nope, I never did that. I object to your magical thinking for the events after that. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #303

There's a whole thread of posts of you doing that. n/t kcr Oct 2014 #309

Nope, I never once said that. I said that her actions afterward shows that she knew. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #310

But you don't say what actions those are. kcr Oct 2014 #317

Yes I have repeatedly. And I brought them all together in #302 below. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #319

No, you haven't. Not once. kcr Oct 2014 #321

I'm very happy to stand on what I wrote in #302 to let people see how insane your argument is. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #323

As is your right. But it doesn't show any evidence that she lied. kcr Oct 2014 #324

I'm very happy to stand on what I wrote in #302 to let people see how insane your argument is. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #325

Yes, totally insane. kcr Oct 2014 #326

I don't know about Florida's laws back at the time when her first marriage was Nay Oct 2014 #271

No, Florida has not had common law marriage since 1968. stevenleser Oct 2014 #272

Could she be charged with bigamy? JVS Nov 2014 #581

If she really is on food stamps and the house mould conditions... LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #81

But there's an article in an Orlando paper showing a divorce judgment from 1994 kcr Oct 2014 #83

I noticed, like that has anything to do with mould and food stamps. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #91

She has no right to be in that house. She needs to get out or pay rent. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #120

Wow. Women who have been homemakers and child rearers for years have no rights. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #122

So now you compare all women to this woman who lied and committed bigamy and subjected stevenleser Oct 2014 #124

Why do you hate This Particular woman so much? LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #126

Two reasons. #1 As I just said to you, she subjected her children and Grayson to the consequences of stevenleser Oct 2014 #130

It would seem apparent ... NanceGreggs Oct 2014 #552

Sorry, Steve....I respect your opinion in many things. But no good father msanthrope Nov 2014 #576

On the money ... NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #604

Did Grayson know of her divorce in 1994? If so, why didn't he re-marry her? snappyturtle Oct 2014 #289

Call me crazy, but most people don't think in terms of their eventual divorce. They just don't. kcr Oct 2014 #292

I'm not saying that. I think he well knew of the divorce....so he perpetuated the snappyturtle Oct 2014 #300

See, I think he knew about the divorce and now that their marriage is ending kcr Oct 2014 #301

I tend to agree with you on this. tammywammy Oct 2014 #313

Yep. To be clear, I'm not saying I think she's perfect. kcr Oct 2014 #316

Yea! We agree on all of it. nt snappyturtle Oct 2014 #314

It is to her benefit to be on food stamps, PDJane Oct 2014 #479

People who claim she lied and Grayson does not, ever lie LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #482

Sorry, no. I didn't say Grayson never lied nor was a perfect innocent. PDJane Oct 2014 #487

No sympathy? Only from a certain kind of person kcr Oct 2014 #492

Nor do I mention stay-at-home parents. Do you get any exercise at all but jumping to conclusions? PDJane Oct 2014 #520

You can certainly blame Grayson's acts on Grayson kcr Oct 2014 #521

How do we know that? What evidence do we have for that? PDJane Oct 2014 #530

How do we know what? kcr Oct 2014 #541

No. Just no. PDJane Oct 2014 #553

It says she is getting $592 x 5 kids, with no household expenses. IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #50

Probably one of the kids is over 18 so he does not have to pay child support. dilby Oct 2014 #53

No living expenses, either, if he is paying the bills. IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #54

I get more than that too laundry_queen Oct 2014 #214

Yep, we're supposed to believe that constitutes being a deadbeat dad and justifies hating Grayson stevenleser Oct 2014 #338

Its an angry, bitter divorce. I quoted her line that she just "wants to live nice" -- IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #418

He is paying child support. What is she doing with that, she should be buying food for sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #191

So do you think she is a welfare queen? dilby Oct 2014 #194

You betcha she is using the timing...wisely...it could be her only leverage. nt snappyturtle Oct 2014 #294

If Grayson's children are on a school food program Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #200

Agreed on so many levels, I am a father and can't imagine doing that. n/t dilby Oct 2014 #203

I am a divorced father of two Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #204

This message was self-deleted by its author Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #226

Grayson is paying 10,000/month. Warren Stupidity Oct 2014 #3

He is not paying 10,000 a month. dilby Oct 2014 #9

Courts consider that support. She is living there. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #363

Whether true or not, my estimation of Mr. & Mrs. Grayson continues to plummet. I'll admit... Tarheel_Dem Oct 2014 #5

Why would anyone attempt to smear Grayson? brooklynite Oct 2014 #13

I was never very fond of him. NaturalHigh Oct 2014 #18

Rich people stay rich by spending other peoples money. dilby Oct 2014 #21

Well put. NaturalHigh Oct 2014 #25

Yes, its called 'leverage' in the financial world. former9thward Oct 2014 #36

I've heard about his blue wall of "Donate Now" links. I don't click on his posts for that reason. Tarheel_Dem Oct 2014 #47

Well, so far, each time she has tried to allege bad behavior, it turns out she was the one stevenleser Oct 2014 #101

It's a mess, and if nothing else, someone should be setting example for the kids. Tarheel_Dem Oct 2014 #115

"but this looks like bullshit to me" Then why spread it around 4 days before the midterms? FSogol Oct 2014 #6

Early voting in Fl. Hopefully he's already locked it up. But really disappointed he's not taking Fla Dem Oct 2014 #15

because it's news and I'm so fucking tired of the ridiculous fucking claim cali Oct 2014 #26

Maybe one day you'll find some "news" that hurts the GOP and post it right before the election. FSogol Oct 2014 #46

Much like Weiner, Grayson is becoming a liability. Ykcutnek Oct 2014 #10

I tend to agree with this assessment. n/t Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #461

She is a piece of crap, based upon closeupready Oct 2014 #20

I've always thought he was a sleaze but that doesn't mean she isn't as well. cali Oct 2014 #27

Or maybe some people are simply protecting a favored politician who is Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2014 #43

I think you hit the nail on the head. Puzzledtraveller Oct 2014 #49

Every pot has its lid. He stayed with her for 29 years. nt msanthrope Nov 2014 #577

Before anyone kneejerk rushes to defend Grayson, know that we don't have the whole story. chrisa Oct 2014 #23

Don't Know The Real Story, But Who Really Is Smearing Who? ChiciB1 Oct 2014 #33

The one thing that is not in dispute is that she lied about being married and got married again to stevenleser Oct 2014 #59

which has nothing to do with house mould and food stamps. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #82

Sure it does. It shows she lied like she lied when she said she was being abused. She is a liar. stevenleser Oct 2014 #97

What I believe is that Grayson is not a decent man LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #99

Everytime wrongdoing has been alleged on his part, it has been proved false. Not only that stevenleser Oct 2014 #102

and he has the money for lawyers and influence. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #108

Which have nothing to do with her lies and her bigamy. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #112

He's a multimillionaire right? How did he get such low child support? n/t tammywammy Oct 2014 #32

Millionaires can buy good lawyers. former9thward Oct 2014 #37

Yeah. I looked at the pictures. tammywammy Oct 2014 #40

That is not the way it works in Florida Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #202

His income from Congress puts him in the 1%. former9thward Oct 2014 #217

I'm not arguing that Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #223

I thought about this as well. dilby Oct 2014 #45

Child support is based on your income gerogie2 Oct 2014 #167

Just based on his salary of $174k/year he should be paying much more. n/t tammywammy Oct 2014 #173

Most likely it's not court ordered since they are not divorced. dilby Oct 2014 #291

This is why I try to avoid the private, personal lives of politicians. arcane1 Oct 2014 #38

Rick Scott would help any way possible to make her look desperate. lpbk2713 Oct 2014 #42

She's certainly vindictive. elleng Oct 2014 #52

Oh, and by the way all, we all already know this person lied about Grayson abusing her. stevenleser Oct 2014 #63

No, not everyone. kcr Oct 2014 #64

LOL. Right, seeing her hitting him, that was just love pats. She dropped the DV charge after the stevenleser Oct 2014 #70

You can see jumpy, edited video that shows her shoving him away after the edited part kcr Oct 2014 #72

+1 Steve. Not worth (I don't think) energy to wrangle with closeupready Oct 2014 #77

You're probably right. They're trying to pretend they are oh so impartial. Yeah right! stevenleser Oct 2014 #87

So she has no living expenses, gets almost $600 per kid a month... LostInAnomie Oct 2014 #65

She is only getting $2,400 a month so I guess one of the kids is over 18. dilby Oct 2014 #76

Didn't he lose a huge boodle of money in some suspicious sounding investment couple years ago? LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #94

Well he has to be broke. dilby Oct 2014 #95

Damn right that's plenty of money. LostInAnomie Oct 2014 #182

24k out of 170k a year. dilby Oct 2014 #185

Bullshit. LostInAnomie Oct 2014 #187

A woman who was with a man for 29 years. dilby Oct 2014 #188

How many of those years were they legally married? LostInAnomie Oct 2014 #192

Do you think he learned about this last week or maybe in 1994? dilby Oct 2014 #193

So she's a bigamist that tried to hide her marriage, but he's scum? LostInAnomie Oct 2014 #195

Yep, that logic is special, isn't it? stevenleser Oct 2014 #229

24k with no expenses and crying poverty? 24k + living expenses and you are trying to cry deadbeat? TheKentuckian Oct 2014 #528

Yep, $36K/yr, no living expenses, lied about being abused, lied about not being married, committed stevenleser Oct 2014 #96

$28k a year. dilby Oct 2014 #100

I hope he gets sympathy votes over having to extricate himself from this fraud. Yep, I do. ancianita Oct 2014 #111

She is a domestic abuser. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #159

Man she beat his ass. dilby Oct 2014 #162

Hopefully the court awards custody to the partner who isn't violent. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #164

I wonder if the court will have access to the unedited video n/t kcr Oct 2014 #174

I have a feeling the court will side with the Mom. dilby Oct 2014 #175

Of course they will. Because "male privilege". n/t lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #177

Male privilege. When it just burns one to no end that a woman just might prevail n/t kcr Oct 2014 #181

Male Privilege is having a woman give you 5 children, dilby Oct 2014 #184

And your kids will always honor you and remember this about you Generic Other Oct 2014 #211

+1 nt laundry_queen Oct 2014 #216

well put thank you nt ALBliberal Oct 2014 #219

^^ this. a thousand times. this. ^^ Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #369

Welcome to HelenReddyUnderground. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #550

She is a very tiny Asian woman Generic Other Oct 2014 #210

Someone that size could beat any human to death in less than 5 minutes. stevenleser Oct 2014 #228

why do you automatically assume she is a "good mom", maybe she was a lazy angry fool? snooper2 Oct 2014 #269

There is a very good chance that Grayson will get the kids for that very reason; Nay Oct 2014 #293

Why would she move from the 5300sf house? lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #551

Oh, sure, it does give her some sort of advantage -- I guess. But if she insists Nay Nov 2014 #592

A gallon of Kilz paint costs about $20 at my hardware store. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #597

And the leaky roof and busted sewer? Like I said, If Alan had a brain in his Nay Nov 2014 #599

and whoever edited that tape is an abuser of truth. LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #588

Help clarify. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2014 #596

without sound and the vid before the slap LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #598

Came back to say that his FB page has become nasty with heavy trolling. Any DU help? ancianita Oct 2014 #161

Sorry I am busy posting nasty comments about this dead beat on his facebook page. dilby Oct 2014 #163

Nice to see you're making full use of Democratic Underground. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #178

Turncoat. ancianita Oct 2014 #179

I am a father before I am a Democrat. dilby Oct 2014 #180

Liberal ideas don't include lying about abuse and bigamy and putting your family through that. stevenleser Oct 2014 #234

Steven, do you have an ex-wife or kids? dilby Oct 2014 #304

Divorced twice, child with the first, gladly paying to put that child through private college. stevenleser Oct 2014 #307

This +10,000 wickerwoman Oct 2014 #554

What is really sad is to think if he was an NFL Player dilby Oct 2014 #556

Ridiculous comment - you put party TBF Oct 2014 #190

sorry, dilby seems like a decent person that takes his responsibilties seriously LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #198

Grayson is self-serving douchebag. NanceGreggs Oct 2014 #218

In past three decades, every time I thought I knew what was going on in a friend/colleague divorce, hlthe2b Oct 2014 #224

+1000. Best statement in response to this OP! nt adirondacker Oct 2014 #342

I agree that one can never really know ... NanceGreggs Oct 2014 #513

And, there it is.. Thank you, Nance. Cha Oct 2014 #558

+1 nt snappyturtle Oct 2014 #312

How refreshing. You usually only crawl out of your self imposed (but not unappreciated) exile to.... Hassin Bin Sober Oct 2014 #360

Seriously. The timing of this mess plays right into fair weather Dems agendas. ancianita Oct 2014 #368

Who is also a DU member if I'm not mistaken Capt. Obvious Oct 2014 #438

I haven't "crawled" out from anywhere, thank you. NanceGreggs Oct 2014 #557

Well done. Cha Oct 2014 #561

Amazing how the ... NanceGreggs Oct 2014 #563

You sure have a good way with words, NG LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #600

Lots of people disagree with Grayson's actions here,Hass. Your "crawl out of your self-imposed.. Cha Oct 2014 #560

I've missed your posts - TBF Oct 2014 #394

+1. Thank you! Tarheel_Dem Oct 2014 #522

Well, exactly. He's acting like an MRA asshole. His wife is an obvious mess, but Nay Nov 2014 #595

It's amazing how some humans Shankapotomus Oct 2014 #225

Mess indeed. But there are some seriously stupid comments under this OP. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #230

Yep, that is a lie you cannot get past, although some here are trying real hard. stevenleser Oct 2014 #237

While others aren't trying at all. Where's the evidence she lied about that? kcr Oct 2014 #243

As I keep telling you, your narrative doesn't work because she hid it. Here's proof... stevenleser Oct 2014 #245

No kcr Oct 2014 #249

Yes. stevenleser Oct 2014 #250

That's what they should have done. kcr Oct 2014 #257

Yes, it is evidence considering the other factors. They both went down the road of divorce knowing stevenleser Oct 2014 #258

Couples make decisions knowing they're going to divorce in the future? kcr Oct 2014 #259

No, I mean now. According to you, they know their marriage isnt valid but they went down the road of stevenleser Oct 2014 #260

Well, yes, now they know they're getting a divorce, duh. nt kcr Oct 2014 #265

A divorce from what? According to you, both know no marriage exists. stevenleser Oct 2014 #267

Whuuuu? kcr Oct 2014 #270

No, according to you she told him she was still married to her first husband in 1993/1994 stevenleser Oct 2014 #274

No. They thought she was divorced kcr Oct 2014 #279

And that means their marriage was never valid and both know that so why are they filing for divorce? stevenleser Oct 2014 #281

Because it's a good faith marriage kcr Oct 2014 #283

Right, everything about this smacks of good faith from both sides. Yeah, thats the ticket. stevenleser Oct 2014 #284

Actually, it does kcr Oct 2014 #286

No, it doesn't. Your narrative requires magical thinking at every step. It doesn't work. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #288

Hardly. You are taking it entirely on faith that she lied and he didn't know. n/t kcr Oct 2014 #295

No, I never take things on faith. Her own actions prove the deception. You can't get around that. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #296

Her actions do not prove the deception. They do no such thing. kcr Oct 2014 #306

Yes they do. I lay it out in #302 below. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #308

A good faith marriage? First I ever heard of any such concept and suddenly it is a base requirement TheKentuckian Oct 2014 #562

I've taken the liberty of showing your posts to the brick wall next to me. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #421

ROFLMAO stevenleser Oct 2014 #436

A brick wall has more compassion than someone who thinks it's okay kcr Oct 2014 #463

They shouldnt be receiving a free lunch. Her filing is or at least should be fraudulent along with stevenleser Oct 2014 #467

Her filing for that is fraudulent? You have proof of that? n/t kcr Oct 2014 #498

The thing is, these things happen all the time. kcr Oct 2014 #261

It is very infrequent. And it is completely rare to lie about it with your new partner. stevenleser Oct 2014 #262

But again. No evidence of the lie kcr Oct 2014 #263

The evidence of the lie is there in her efforts to proceed with a divorce where no marriage exists. stevenleser Oct 2014 #266

But why do that? kcr Oct 2014 #268

For one reason. Because he didn't know, and she hoped to get a big divorce settlement. stevenleser Oct 2014 #276

She hoped for this in 94? kcr Oct 2014 #277

Nope, in 94 she hoped nothing would ever go wrong and her lie would never be discovered. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #278

So why file again? kcr Oct 2014 #280

I already explained. She filed for divorce from Grayson because she thought no one would find out stevenleser Oct 2014 #282

It would make even more sense to do nothing at all if she wanted no one to find out kcr Oct 2014 #285

No, it points to deception in the original marriage and deception now to try to get money. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #287

The fact is people get married thinking a divorce was final when it wasn't kcr Oct 2014 #297

No, it is completely impossible given the chain of events. I'll take you through it again. stevenleser Oct 2014 #302

The possibilities are not insane kcr Oct 2014 #315

Yes, they are completely insane. Just from an Occam's razor perspective, its obvious that stevenleser Oct 2014 #318

It's only insane if viewed through a very warped bias kcr Oct 2014 #320

I'm very happy to stand on what I wrote in #302 to let people see how insane your argument is. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #322

AFAIK, his lawyer must proceed with the case, using the facts of the case. Neither Nay Oct 2014 #393

I don't think he has to sue her for all the money back and claim he doesn't owe child support kcr Oct 2014 #397

I agree, and that's why I have tentatively declared him a jerk. Maintain the stupid Nay Oct 2014 #401

Yes. His actions aren't helping him at all. kcr Oct 2014 #403

Must be great to be a mind reader. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #327

Nope, not a mind reader. The chain of events only supports one conclusion. See my #302. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #328

Yes, post 302. Where you outline a rational, believable scenario kcr Oct 2014 #345

I will let what you just wrote, and my #302 stand for themselves. stevenleser Oct 2014 #346

Also rather astonishing how many folks think that marriage Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #329

And even if you believe that, which I can live with, there was no marriage here because of her lie stevenleser Oct 2014 #334

Actually, it's possible there was later, depending on state law. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #337

No, there hasn't been common law in Florida since 1968 so even that doesnt work. stevenleser Oct 2014 #339

You know what? Even if we go with your premise that she lied kcr Oct 2014 #340

That makes it worse, don't you understand that? Allowing that lie to go on for 29 years and stevenleser Oct 2014 #341

No. I don't understand that. kcr Oct 2014 #343

Your husband wouldn't do that? Wouldn't pay support? Why are you with him? stevenleser Oct 2014 #344

He wouldn't leave his own children in mold and rot kcr Oct 2014 #347

She is getting $3000 a month and leaving the kids in mold and rot. What is she doing with the money? stevenleser Oct 2014 #348

Why do you lie about the amount? It's $2400... dilby Oct 2014 #349

I saw $595/kid posted elsewhere. And yes, if he is paying for the place where she lives, its support stevenleser Oct 2014 #350

Black mold is not keeping a house clean, that requires professional services. dilby Oct 2014 #352

That's nice. He is still paying support and does not deserve to be called a deadbeat dad. stevenleser Oct 2014 #355

Her moldy housing is being paid for. Great. kcr Oct 2014 #353

She doesn't have to live there. There are great apartments in the area for $600/month. stevenleser Oct 2014 #356

So that excuses him letting the place deteriorate? kcr Oct 2014 #377

SHE is letting the place deteriorate. He is paying her $600/child and she has no housing expenses stevenleser Oct 2014 #378

She is? kcr Oct 2014 #381

Yes, she is. stevenleser Oct 2014 #383

Or he could make repairs now. Because his kids are there. kcr Oct 2014 #385

How does that not go both ways? How come the working parent's choice is never a factor for some? kcr Oct 2014 #336

Why should the fact that you chose to stay at home Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #354

And of course, when you committed fraud to enter the relationship to begin with... stevenleser Oct 2014 #357

Fraud or not, the children don't disappear kcr Oct 2014 #365

And he is paying $600/mo per child and $10,000 per month to house them. Thats plenty... stevenleser Oct 2014 #366

He's vastly underpaying for the amount he makes and is worth kcr Oct 2014 #370

$12500 a month is underpaying? No, I don't think so. Not even a nice try. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #372

It sure is. He should be paying much more than that. n/t kcr Oct 2014 #375

LOL, yeah, you go with trying to convince DUers that paying $12500 a month makes you deadbeat stevenleser Oct 2014 #376

No problem. Not all DUers think child support is for gold diggers. kcr Oct 2014 #379

Yep, please tell DUers that she is suffering on $12500 a month. Please proceed. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #380

No, hyou're doing a good job kcr Oct 2014 #382

No, you keep going. Tell the DUers here making minimum wage and not much more that she is suffering stevenleser Oct 2014 #386

You think people making minimum wage will think much of dads who leave their kids in moldy buildings kcr Oct 2014 #389

You think people who make minimum wage will think $12500 in support puts her in "poor me" conditions stevenleser Oct 2014 #420

He's not paying 12,500 in support. Hyuck hyuck. No one is buying that. kcr Oct 2014 #423

Hyuck, hyuck, Support is exactly how a court would see it. Hyuck, hyuck. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #430

I thought we were talking about people making minimum wage? kcr Oct 2014 #431

Why even have divorce laws, then kcr Oct 2014 #362

At a guess, we have divorce laws Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #400

Your last paragraph. How is it not a matter of fairness? kcr Oct 2014 #402

I would suggest Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #409

A marriage is over. But there are divorce laws. Are you suggesting they should be abolished? kcr Oct 2014 #411

I see you don't want to answer my question. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #425

I am answering your question. It's an equitable settlement. How is it not fair? kcr Oct 2014 #429

You keep saying things I agree with, then turning them on their head. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #434

he is campaigning and living in wa. she is at home raising the kids. sure, she could work and be a seabeyond Oct 2014 #439

No. You do not agree with me. Not one little bit. kcr Oct 2014 #444

NO, I see that too. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #454

Number one, I have never said forever kcr Oct 2014 #457

give her half of the reported 17 million or whatever, and she can then take care of herself. seabeyond Oct 2014 #435

If he earned it while they were married, sure. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #450

then we are done. damn easy. nt seabeyond Oct 2014 #453

Yup. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #460

But the damage occured while they were married kcr Oct 2014 #459

What is this 'damage' you are talking about? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #462

The damage from being out of the workforce kcr Oct 2014 #465

yes. when i was married i owned own home, to last forever, income i could live on and seabeyond Oct 2014 #466

50/50 is shorthand Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #480

Yep. But they were never married. So... stevenleser Oct 2014 #468

lawyer cheap tricks. shady lawyer. everyone sees it. do not tie yourself to that and not expect seabeyond Oct 2014 #473

Nope, she willfully entered into a marriage already married and then tried to hide it. Here is stevenleser Oct 2014 #474

The posts that say raising a family of 5 kids isn't real work... LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #358

I haven't seen those posts. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #361

The posts that say the SAHM isn't entitled speak for themselves kcr Oct 2014 #367

Only in really old-fashioned chauvanistic marriages. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #405

Hardly. But even if that's the case kcr Oct 2014 #406

By agreeing to a divorce, both partners are 'tossing the other aside'. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #410

But that's not all that's happening. kcr Oct 2014 #414

Are you reversing what you want? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #428

How is that "reversing what I want?" kcr Oct 2014 #433

You both claim that marriage is Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #443

50/50 give her her money. are you saying a couple should not split assets 50/50? nt seabeyond Oct 2014 #445

Assets gained during the marriage? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #448

Marriage is a type of contract. Both parties cannot just walk away scot free. kcr Oct 2014 #446

Again, you say something that sounds like something I could agree with, but you don't mean it. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #449

How do I not mean it? kcr Oct 2014 #452

If they actually agreed, there would be no fighting. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #476

Well, of course. But there you are. Divorce. kcr Oct 2014 #485

I still don't see why the onus is placed upon Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #503

I don't get what's so hard to see kcr Oct 2014 #505

Because I don't see it as 'you' (the non-SAHP) as being the one causing the pickle. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #515

Alimoney is based on what a person makes. So if one is destitue themselves they won't pay. kcr Oct 2014 #518

btw, seabeyond brought up a good point. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #451

Not everyone has millions kcr Oct 2014 #455

correct. and this is when a different story is told. as a matter of fact, he will probably have to seabeyond Oct 2014 #458

Then he should be paying interest as well. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #464

yes. absolutely. i would be throwing all that stuff in. sure. but. right now, until divorce, seabeyond Oct 2014 #469

There is no divorce. They are not married. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #471

Actually, they are still married. There's been no ruling yet. n/t kcr Oct 2014 #489

That's like saying someone isn't dead until declared so. They are not married. A dead person is stevenleser Oct 2014 #548

I sympathize. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #470

grayson chose this cause it makes her cash poor, and takes away any option for herself, to get seabeyond Oct 2014 #456

Grayson chose this because they are not married and she lied and committed bigamy stevenleser Oct 2014 #472

he is lookin really.... greasy now. keep it up, steven... off to lunch. seabeyond Oct 2014 #475

I see, so if someone already married marries one of your kids, you will blame your kid. stevenleser Oct 2014 #478

He doesn't realize that the harder he defends him, the worse it looks kcr Oct 2014 #488

The kids owe him too, I suppose. That explains why he's punishing them. n/t kcr Oct 2014 #486

exactly. nt lumberjack_jeff Oct 2014 #424

Post removed Post removed Oct 2014 #246

You really ought to see what you are defending before you level accusations. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #248

All I needed to do was read this thread. JTFrog Oct 2014 #253

I am glad it is out in the open too, because the outcome is obvious. Alan is in the right. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #256

Bookmarking... SidDithers Oct 2014 #251

Sid, regardless of what any of us think of Grayson, he is going to be vindicated 100% here. stevenleser Oct 2014 #254

Steve, you know I have the utmost respect for you... SidDithers Oct 2014 #273

He is supporting them with $600 per month each. Plus paying $10K/mo for their housing. stevenleser Oct 2014 #275

Yes, either he is paying that much per child PLUS all the other expenses or he isnt, and if he is randys1 Oct 2014 #396

+1 n/t JTFrog Oct 2014 #255

That's what food stamps are there for, so use them. Sunlei Oct 2014 #305

Never let Grayson for Congress get your phone number. CrispyQ Oct 2014 #311

LOL what an idiot. And watch him get re-elected. maced666 Oct 2014 #332

He's way ahead in the polls - TBF Oct 2014 #390

One thing I always say. dilby Oct 2014 #351

One thing I always say. Each situation should be investigated on its own for its merits. stevenleser Oct 2014 #359

Grayson is acting like a Repuglican would. Progressive ideals? ha! LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #364

I think most progressives see him for what he is. dilby Oct 2014 #374

I'm troubled by this thread. MineralMan Oct 2014 #373

Since he is the one running/holding public office, I would think he would want his actions to be Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #384

I think he is completely above being suspect and no one should have any questions. stevenleser Oct 2014 #404

Her actions do not concern me. Not my business. She is not seeking office. However, since HE is Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #407

Please, there are folks that believe all kinds of crazy things. The fact that... stevenleser Oct 2014 #408

steven. you do not tell me what I can and can not do. Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #412

I can tell you exactly what you should do, and you can try to tell me what to do, as long as stevenleser Oct 2014 #415

I am only asking questions, Steven. Tell me again. I love it when you lord over me, my master. Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #416

Awww how sweet. stevenleser Oct 2014 #417

Tell me how Seaworld has nothing whatsoever to do with Alan's character referral, snookums. Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #419

Bahahahahahahaha stevenleser Oct 2014 #427

! Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2014 #437

Alan Grayson is also a member of DU. MineralMan Oct 2014 #387

I don't think Grayson should get protection in that way. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #392

Agreed. He is a public political figure. kcr Oct 2014 #399

i am bothered that this has been allowed to become his very playground on possibly screwin his seabeyond Oct 2014 #395

There is a rule about respecting members privacy - TBF Oct 2014 #398

It must be hard to be his poor soon-to-be-ex-wife with BROKEN FINGERS that can't dial a phone IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #413

The backflips and twisting to make her the villain. It's amazing. kcr Oct 2014 #422

He is not living there. She is and KNOWS there is mold. If you can't fix it yourself -- IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #491

Those are his kids, too. kcr Oct 2014 #495

The point is this: She doesn't HAVE to live with Mold. IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #496

He isn't doing a damn thing about it. On purpose. kcr Oct 2014 #497

You keep repeating the same stuff, and now I am, too. IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #529

The fact that she can fix it is irrelevant kcr Oct 2014 #532

No, it is NOT irrelevant. IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #537

Yes, it is. He should be maintaining that house and he isn't kcr Oct 2014 #543

You're arguing with someone who is not interested in the facts here. stevenleser Oct 2014 #549

I was a little slow on the clue train. IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #555

Irrelevant? kiva Oct 2014 #564

So you support slumlords who do not perform the necessary repairs on buildings they own. dilby Oct 2014 #499

Actually, I can tell her to fix it now, and send him the bill.... IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #533

Why don't you then? n/t kcr Oct 2014 #547

I doubt she had to call a reporter. tammywammy Oct 2014 #426

Are you missing the point? She can walk a reporter around the "moldy place" IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #493

Excellent point. You would think she would have an estimate to show us. It doesnt cost anything to stevenleser Oct 2014 #432

you said: But she has no interest in actually getting the mold removed LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #440

Actually taking the history of someone's actions into account allows you to do that, yes. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #441

I'm in the construction business. If I had a dollar for every time someone threw "mold"around as a . Hassin Bin Sober Nov 2014 #574

Was she asked to show an estimate? If not, it might not have occured to her to whip one out. kcr Oct 2014 #442

Damned right. We need Democrats, period. This is exactly the wrong time to withdraw DU support! ancianita Oct 2014 #477

Well, the reasons may be complex. I won't say what I think the reasons MineralMan Oct 2014 #481

The Party is more important than one Candidate. dilby Oct 2014 #502

Bad apple? You presume standards that used to be off the table, now put front and center by cowards ancianita Oct 2014 #510

Supporting dems does not have to mean supporting acts one finds abhor ant. kcr Oct 2014 #544

no clue what the whole truth is but.... steve2470 Oct 2014 #447

I've contacted the Florida Attorney General's office to find out if they plan to prosecute Lolita stevenleser Oct 2014 #483

Good luck with that Republican's 'timely response.' I wonder if Nejame has contacted her, as well. ancianita Oct 2014 #484

Are you rubbing your hands together in eager anticipation? n/t kcr Oct 2014 #494

crikies, that's borderline worrisome, stevenleser. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #504

It explains a lot n/t kcr Oct 2014 #506

"Christmas present." What a trifling interpretation toward someone who has made the best case ancianita Oct 2014 #517

Best case? I and others disagree. You can have your opinion tho, that is quite fine. LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #535

I've said it to dilby and I'll say it to you. Support your fellow Democrats and stop falling for ancianita Oct 2014 #540

I've actually gotten a couple of nice PMs from DUers thanking me for taking the time to go through stevenleser Oct 2014 #546

is grayson pm'ing you what to say, lol. come on steven, you can tell us seabeyond Oct 2014 #565

Not cool. ancianita Oct 2014 #568

Cool or not, I think it is relevant enough for me to ask. seabeyond Oct 2014 #572

A joke about it is relevant. To ask if he's speaking for another DU'er who's more than capable ancianita Oct 2014 #573

Nope, but I've reached out to his folks. He was on my show last year around this time if you recall. stevenleser Oct 2014 #569

No. I do not recall. Though I am not surprised with your manner of defense. seabeyond Oct 2014 #571

They are. DU history is also that Democrats support their candidates near voting time. ancianita Oct 2014 #567

If I didn't know better I'd say someone was on Grayson's payroll. cherokeeprogressive Oct 2014 #519

By the same logic, are you implying we have Republican employees in this thread? IdaBriggs Nov 2014 #582

This might be the first time I've ever seen someone post over 100 times in a single thread... cherokeeprogressive Nov 2014 #585

I am glad you know better. IdaBriggs Nov 2014 #586

Be sure to ask them to investigate how she benefited. dilby Oct 2014 #559

No. nt stevenleser Oct 2014 #570

Proves my point. dilby Nov 2014 #575

Actually, it doesn't prove your point. IdaBriggs Nov 2014 #583

Thank you. Glad for all your persuasiveness and new information here. ancianita Nov 2014 #589

do you view women as property? dilby Nov 2014 #594

And now you are insulting ME by implying I think women are PROPERTY? IdaBriggs Nov 2014 #602

Did you ask for prosecution of Mr. Carson, too? nt msanthrope Nov 2014 #578

it's not about him being a millionaire ALBliberal Nov 2014 #580

She does not have that 10 thou a month, Alan pays that directly. LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #587

he is mean ALBliberal Nov 2014 #606

he is not giving her 10k a month. he is giving her 2k a month. how much for a place 6 people seabeyond Nov 2014 #591

and I praised him how? ALBliberal Nov 2014 #605

i do not know about hte house, the shape it is in, what is required, if she can hire, seabeyond Nov 2014 #607

How is this relevant? True Blue Door Nov 2014 #593

Has the truth about this come out yet? Has this harmed one of the ONLY real liberals in our randys1 Nov 2014 #601