What an asshole. You'd think he could at least show the decency to keep quiet about this.

Jim McGreevey, the former governor of New Jersey, has confirmed reports that he and his wife had sexual encounters with a male aide while he was serving as a local official and running for governor, according to the Associated Press.

"This happened, this happened in the past, and now we need to move on with our lives," McGreevey tells the wire service.

His ex-wife, Dina Matos McGreevey, tells the wire service that the published claims are "completely false."

So, he pressures his wife into having these gay-sublimation threeways and then he confirms the story to embarrass her further.

Nevermind the kids. They have kids, don't they? He has to put it out there that oh, not only is your dad gay, but mommy was a whore and daddy and mommy used to have "Friday Night Specials" with their driver/hustler?

And yeah, he pressured her, of course. I can't imagine threeways were her idea; women usually aren't agitating for the kinky stuff. And I can't imagine she was all that thrilled to see her husband getting busy with a dude, either.

So, just to be an extra special douche, he cops to it. Bragging. Wow. What a playa.

But the real shock is that the AP story notes he was a "Democratic politician" in the fourth paragraph.

Thanks to Slublog.

Ick.

They Are In Divorce Proceedings... I guess that's why he admitted it. Gettin' at his ex-wife.

But does that make sense? He used her as a beard and now feels he has to get back at her?

Posted by: Ace at 12:16 PM | Comments (47)
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.

Scared to speak, he says.

Why? Would that be anti-semitism that many left-indoctrinated blacks are reluctant to to express out loud?

Well, Obama's 20 year political ally and spiritual mentor encourages his flock not to be scared of saying that dirty word.

Via eMute Videos.

Damn Jewish interlopers, coming into our neighborhoods and stealing our money.

If only someone in the crowd had a match and some gasoline -- then we'd be cooking. With gas.

What was it that Wright himself said? Something like "The moment my sermons come out, Obama's Jewish support is going to melt like a snowball in hell"?

Yes, I do believe that's the approximate quote.

But you can count on Obama to support Israel. This is merely his "Crazy Uncle Jerry" who supports the Palestinian terrorists over Israel. It's got nothing at all, nothing I tell you, to do with Obama.

I mean, look, the other day I was getting a handjob from David Duke. Sure, it was nice and all, but that doesn't mean we like each other or anything. We have nothing at all in common, really. Except for some occasional guy-fun.

PS, that doesn't make me gay. I wasn't the one with my hands full.

Thanks to IreneFingIrene.

BTW: You know what else Wright and his church hates, apart from whites, Jews, and America? "Middleclassness."

Oh yeah. Ohhhhh fuckin' yeaahhhh.

From that Trinity Chuch fact-sheet PDF -- they disappeared it, but not completely.

Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”

Classic methodology on control of captives teaches that captors must keep the captive ignorant educationally, but trained sufficiently well to serve the system. Also, the captors must be able to identify the “talented tenth” of those subjugated, especially those who show promise of providing the kind of leadership that might threaten the captor’s control.

Those so identified as separated from the rest of the people by:

Killing them off directly, and/or fostering a social system that encourages them to kill off one another.

Placing them in concentration camps, and/or structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.

Seducing them into a socioeconomic class system which while training them to earn more dollars, hypnotizes them into believing they are better than others and teaches them to think in terms of “we” and “they” instead of “us”.

So, while it is permissible to chase “middle-incomeness” with all our might, we must avoid the third separation method-the psychological entrapment of Black “middleclassness”: If we avoid the snare, we will also diminish our “voluntary” contributions to methods A and B. And more importantly, Black people no longer will be deprived of their birthright, the leadership, resourcefulness, and example of their own talented persons.

Hm! Sure sounds like a classic political moderate to me.

As far as I'm concerned, this just proves that Obama is even more centrist.

Oh, PS? Jesus said the middle-class sucked too. It's in the Bible. Go look it up.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:26 AM | Comments (128)
Post contains 554 words, total size 4 kb.

Patterico: LA Times deliberately obscuring, censoring the most inflammatory parts of Wright's sermons in order to leave its readers with the impression that this is far less damning a situation than it really is.

The L.A. Times reports on the Obama/Wright firestorm, giving Obama cover by failing to report the facts that should most concern Americans. The story, titled “Obama renounces his pastor’s remarks,” downplays the 20-year relationship Obama has had with the pastor, and fails to report or accurately describe the most incendiary things Wright has said. For example, the article doesn’t even bother to tell readers that Wright screamed “God damn America!” in a sermon, or that Wright suggested America deserved to get attacked on September 11. Nor does the article tell readers any details regarding the intimacy of the relationship between Wright and Obama.

A reader unfamiliar with the facts will come away with exactly the impression that Obama wants to convey: that 1) Wright is nothing more than the pastor of ObamaÂ’s church; 2) Wright has merely spoken forcefully about racism in this country; and 3) McCain has had a similar problem in being linked to a religious figure with objectionable views.

Well, gee then, whatÂ’s the big deal??

Exactly the intention, of course. The MSM long ago abandoned its putative mission of delivering the news, good or ill, without prejudice or favortism.

They view their role not merely as one of informing, but of deciding precisely what the public should think of information -- and if they judge the public can't be trusted to think "the right way" about certain information, they embargo it and refuse to report it. They just can't take the chance that the public will come to the "right judgments" if given all the facts.

The Deciders. "God Damn America" is, as a judge might call it, "unduly prejudicial," so like a judge, they strike those comments from the record and order (sub silentio) the jury to disregard them.

Newsbusters: CBS' Early Show claims that Wright is just using the words of Jesus.

In a set-up segment, CBS's Dean Reynolds rhetorically asked: "the question is whether the rhetoric is so remarkable, because in African-American churches pastors often seek to rouse their congregants to self-reliance by speaking harshly about the country's troubled racial past and the need to overcome it."

Nice try, but how does accusing the US government of introducing AIDS and giving black people drugs equate to a call for self-reliance?

Reynolds concluded by stating that the Obama campaign is concerned that its candidate has been "victimized" in the same way the Trinity church claims Rev. Wright has.

And Jesus cried "God Damn America!" and it so was damned, and by the way, FDR blew up Pearl Harbor too, chickens roosting explosively along the hull of the USS Arizona, as God decreed.

And Lo, Jesus appeared among the throng, and he spake, saying, "Is it not the CIA which created AIDS? And the American government which provides crack to blacks? And Yay and verily, is it not true that black on black crime is only wrong because it's blacks fighting 'the wrong enemy'? And shouldn't they be killing the 'right enemy' instead, if you know what I mean, and I think you do?"

And Jesus winketh, and all around kneweth who he meanteth, and all around began gathering baseball bats and breaking beer-bottles, knowing, in their hearts, that it was well and truly on.

And the crowd understood; Jesus had come with a New Covenant, but He still knew how to go Old Testament on crackers. He spoketh of Love, but of the Ike Turner kind of Love, and hos got to know that that Love is pure, but sometimes leaves visible bruising.

Jesus sat at the right hand of God, but he wieldeth the Pimp Hand of God, and He would, if needed, smack a bitch if she stepped nasty.

For that is how Jesus rolled. Amen.

Cuffy Meigs: The NYT asserts Obama was not present for the repulsive post-9/11 remembrance celebration, because Obama says he wasn't. Well, maybe he was and maybe he wasn't; I, like Cuffy Meigs, would like to have a better source than Barack "I had no idea he was saying these things" Obama.

Stop the ACLU: Trinity Church sanitizing its site of (most) of its black-nationalist/separtist rhetoric and mission statement.

But Gee, I thought Wright was only sayin' stuff Jesus said? Why the need for the scrub?

Hot Air: That Juan Williams bit from FNS some of you liked, plus MyDD delivers an obituary.

Also from Hot Air: Obama to deliver a "major speech" on race tomorrow. Perfect. We'll see if CNN runs those "fun facts" about the Trinity Church's vile hatred just like they ran cute little facts about long-abandoned Mormon racial dogma when Romney delivered his speech on his faith.

Posted by: Ace at 10:48 AM | Comments (57)
Post contains 820 words, total size 6 kb.

Obama's Friday interview by Major Garrett, in which he describes his membership at Trinity United and his connection to Rev. Wright, has been called one of his worst ever. At the time, people were wondering what he could have been thinking, especially given the Democrats on-again-off-again boycott of Fox News.

Melanie Morgan says that as soon as it aired Garrett got an earful:

As I was waiting to go on-the-air, Major Garrett of Fox News was on stand-by to do further reporting on his excellent interview with BHO in which he simply asked a number of questions like: "Did Reverand Wright marry you? Did Reverand Wright baptize your children? How often did you attend church? Did you donate money to the church?"

After that segment aired, Major Garrett's phone started buzzing. He recieved a call from Obama's campaign, and they were REAMING him over the report. From his end, I heard Garrett say "I have nothing to apologize for."

He repeated that several times, and he amplified by saying that he was merely asking questions that everyone wanted answers to.

That did NOT satisfy Obama's people, and Garrett flushed a couple of times while responding to the invective thrown his way.

Strategically, I'm not sure why Obama would choose to go only to Fox News with this story, especially because I don't think that anyone every believed this one would be confined to "conservative" media. [UPDATE: The morons inform me that Obama also made Friday appearances on CNN and MSNBC; I'm not sure why I thought he'd just gone to FOX. Loose shit.] So far it looks like every decision he's made about Wright has only made him look worse. Obama himself admits that "my judgment at the time [that he asked Wright to join his campaign] was that this was not as problematic as what I've seen over the last couple of days.

Genius.

Transcript of the interview is here. YouTube video is below the fold.

h/t Greg Pollowitz at National Review's Media Blog. more...

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:48 AM | Comments (60)
Post contains 315 words, total size 3 kb.

So cute.

Posted by: Ace at 08:17 AM | Comments (27)
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

This story is now kinda old. I held off posting it because 1, it's just a claim from a shady kind of guy (the claim itself, if true, makes him shady), and 2, if untrue, it's a nasty thing to say about a victim in all this, and 3... uccchh.

And also: Even I'm tired of kinky Democratic sex scandals at this point.

Jim McGreevey's driver says he had three-way "hot sex" with McGreevey and his wife Dina, casting doubt on Dina's claims to have been shocked by McGreevey's homosexuality. Which is sort of "Who cares?"

It's also borderline plausible anyway. I guess a gay guy could sell this to his wife as not gay. "It will really help our marriage." Who knows.

If true, though, it paints an even more corrupt picture of McGreevey.

I'm sure no one's surprised to learn the media is once again airbrushing party members who've fallen out of favor out of the picture. Yes, Guess! That! Party! once again, this time from both NewJersey.com and AP. You'd almost think they were... doing this deliberately or something.

Little Miss Attila wants to know why it's gay for two dudes to be in bed with each other if there's another woman. Well, if there is guy-to-guy stuff going on, obviously it's gay. And even if there's not... it's still pretty gay, actually.

Why? Just is. Most straight guys have a One Penis Rule when it comes to sex. That rule may be bent if a girl insists, but most straight guys aren't thinking "You know what would make this sex even hotter? Another dude's penis and hairy ass."

There's also the possibility of, um, friendly fire. 'Nuff said.

I remember when I first logged on to the Internet, way back in, what, 1996? And I was on AOL (of course). And I was cruising dirty chat rooms (of course) and especially the lesbian ones (of course).

But I remember a lot of rooms were of the "Please have sex with my wife and let me watch" sort.

Weird. I don't get it. Then again, I don't really get vagina, either. It's like some kind of warm pudendal caprese with a side of free-range taint. Every sex dream I have ends the same way: Me, in a restaurant, with a lobster bib, screaming at the waiters "This is not what I ordered!"

PS, for any new readers, I have to toss these vagina-knocking statements on occasion. It gets me hits from the left, who are all perpetually shocked at how unintentionally self-revealing about my confused sexual identity I am.

And Mom -- no, I'm not trying to tell you I'm gay. Your other sons...? Iffy at best, but me? Solid.

Bonus: Virgin Mobile enlists a new celebrity spokesman -- Elliot Spitzer.

Hidden Bonus Track: Know why "They" took out Elliot Spitzer? To cover up "The Truth" about 9/11, natch.

Thanks to Conservative Belle.

Posted by: Ace at 08:15 AM | Comments (52)
Post contains 494 words, total size 3 kb.

Well, it's not the deadliest charge to lay against him, especially with the Uncle Crazy still potent and yet not really covered very thoroughly by the MSM (how about matching his visits to known sermons?), but it's not flattering, either.

Obama may not be offensive or overbearing, but he can be a bit too cocky for his own good.

The freshman senator told reporters in July that he would overcome Hillary Rodham Clinton's lead in the polls because "to know me is to love me."

A few months later, he said, "Every place is Barack Obama country once Barack Obama's been there."

True, there's a certain amount of tongue-in-cheekiness to such remarks — almost as if Obama doesn't want to take his adoring crowds and political ascent too seriously. He was surely kidding when he told supporters in January that by the time he was done speaking "a light will shine down from somewhere."

"It will light upon you," he continued. "You will experience an epiphany. And you will say to yourself, I have to vote for Barack. I have to do it."

But both Obama and his wife, Michelle, ooze a sense of entitlement.

"Barack is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign to enter this messy thing called politics," his wife said a few weeks ago, adding that Americans will get only one chance to elect him.

Eh. Thanks to Kempermax.

Posted by: Ace at 07:34 AM | Comments (52)
Post contains 256 words, total size 2 kb.

And "erroneous" is the most charitable characterization.

Allah discusses the shrewdness of Obama.

Here's a possible bit of shrewdness: It could well be that Obama and Wright had an agreement that Wright wouldn't talk about conspiracies and Hiroshima and God damn America when Obama was present. He might have warned him in advance of... interesting sermons.

So it's possible we'll never catch him in the church when Uncle Jerry is going off. As if that matters. And yet, of course, it denies us the smoking gun evidence of a lie.

I haven't linked a NewsMax generated story in forever, and now I'm remembering why. I suppose it's possible this is a fairly innocent error -- story right, date wrong -- but I'm having trouble imagining how a reporter could get something as basic as the dateline wrong.

As Tom Maguire notes, it's still possible that NewsMax is right; but based on Obama's itinerary, it seems a stretch.

NewsMax now says it stands by the story but also allows the date may be wrong:

The church holds services three times every Sunday at 7:30 and 11 a.m. and 6 p.m. Central time (with weekly praise/prayers starting 15 minutes previous to those times). While both the early morning and evening service allowed Sen. Obama to attend the service and still give a speech in Miami, Mr. Davis stands by his story that during one of the services he attended during the month of July, Senator Obama was present and sat through the sermon given by Rev. Wright as described in the story. Mr. Davis said Secret Service were also present in the church during Senator Obama's attendance.

Um, that's not good enough. If something as simple as the date was wrong, why should anyone believe anything else in the story? Further, if the date's wrong, how do we match the content of the sermon to the "nodding"? For all we know Obama was caught nodding along to a statement like "Jesus saves."

There may be something to this, but NewsMax has to provide something more than its not-particularly-convincing institutional competency to back it up. The MSM does that all the time, and they're also usually full of shit.

PS, it's ludicrous that in this day and age, with almost everyone carrying a frickin' cellphone with a camera, that this guy can't produce a picture.

Posted by: Ace at 07:08 AM | Comments (30)
Post contains 418 words, total size 3 kb.

They're just having too much fun in China, I'll tell you what buddy.

IÂ’m visiting the Guo-li-zhuang restaurant, a specialist penis and testicle emporium that caters mainly to wealthy businessmen and Communist party officials (who, truth be told, are often one and the same).

...

I ask a chef to show us the preparation of a penis first, so that I can get a feel for the process. He enters holding aloft an eye-wateringly large yakÂ’s knob. ItÂ’s about 45cm long, but thin, so thin. ItÂ’s been boiled gently and - I canÂ’t believe IÂ’m writing this - peeled, except for a hunk of foreskin still clinging on to the end. He cuts the thing in half lengthways with a pair of scissors.

...

We try the water-buffalo penis first, in thin shavings. It started long and thin, but someone has shredded this noble old chap on a mandolin. It has the texture of squid and tastes of the mild chilli stock itÂ’s been poached in.

...

She seems pleased, and pours me some deer-penis juice, which IÂ’m delighted to say is the vilest concoction IÂ’ve ever had the privilege to imbibe. ItÂ’s as sour as a smacked lemon and as bitter as neat quinine.

...

We try goat’s penis, chicken feet, bull’s penis tip (that’ll keep you up all night too, the boss warns), terrapin leg and all manner of radishes. I’m offered dog’s penis (“The only one with a bone in it”, and served with a glacé cherry placed pointlessly on the tip), but decline. All the knobs have intriguing, delicate and bizarre textures, although the flavour is mainly of pork braised in hot stock. My favourite dish of all is undoubtedly bull’s perineum – a delicate piece of flesh, the size of a chicken oyster, which has been poached, then slow-fried.

ItÂ’s sweet and crispy, with a deep taste of soy and honey.

Yan Yan, my guide, isn’t too keen on penis, but she’s adventurous in the face of adversity, and tries most things with a curled lip. Just before we go, I ask why the girls get off lightly. The boss bursts into giggly, embarrassed laughter. “That’s a crazy idea - why would anyone want to do that?”

I hear that. Yuch.

Thanks to Jen.

Posted by: Ace at 06:53 AM | Comments (22)
Post contains 366 words, total size 2 kb.

Chauffeur claims he had regular three-way sexual encounters with the McGreeveys before and during their marriage.

A former driver and aide to former New Jersey Gov. Jim McGreevey yesterday made the bombshell claim that Dina Matos McGreevey must have always known her husband was gay - because he was the other man in bed with them.

In an explosive interview with The Post, the McGreeveys' self-professed man in the middle, Teddy Pedersen, gave explicit details of three-way sex romps that he claimed to have had with the now-divorcing duo, starting during their courtship and continuing into the marriage.

Pedersen - who said he had already spilled the beans on the ménage a trois arrangement under oath in a deposition for the couple's divorce battle - hinted that he thinks his presence was required to get Jim's motor running for Dina.

Hawt.

A former Democratic Party official who knows the couple said he "always suspected something" was going on between Jim McGreevey and Pedersen. But as for the reputed threesome with Dina?

"That's a complete shock," the source said. "To be honest, I don't believe it. She's not the smartest woman in the world, but I don't think she's that stupid.

I mean, I once saw her cut her arm trying to get the last Pringle out of the can, but I didn't think she was homo-erotic three-way stupid."

I might have toyed with that last quote just a lil' bit.

H/T Spongeworthy.

Posted by: LauraW at 06:20 AM | Comments (21)
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.