General Discussion

cali

(114,904 posts)

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

Reply to closeupready (Reply #20)

Thu Oct 30, 2014, 01:44 PM

Oct 2014

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

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