My post didn't tear you down any more than yours did me me. Cat, you dish out critical, derogatory remarks all the time, usually by twisting people's words into falsehoods, but call foul when you get a taste of your own medicine. Where I come from, we call that a double standard.

If this site is about helping marriages, what help is it for you to make up sarcastic stuff, telling me I'm going to have to guard my wife "like a prize pig" and she's going to "resent you for it for the rest of your marriage"? You use inflammatory language. You make negative assumptions about my marriage which you cannot prove. And you expect me not to respond?

"Real mature", indeed.

You then imply that I am "forbidding conversations altogether", a complete fabrication and contradiction of my statements in this thread.

You make stuff up to be critical and sensational. Then you goad and put down someone whose marriage isn't recovered, telling them they have failed to fulfill their spouse, when your own marriage is a wreck.

I didn't tear you down. I called you on your hypocrisy and I defended myself against your lies.

Here is my second post on this thread:

How did it come to this?

Does anyone besides me think this thread has degenerated into something actually resembling the subject?

Fred, ottert's threads last year were an awful lot like bingo's thread. He just can't stand to not have the last word. I guess it's a matter of pride or something, but he just can't walk away.

Actually he can't stand it that people don't agree with him.

Perhaps, everyone can disagree on a thread set up for just that. I believe someone discussing a current affair, which it turns out may actually lead to the BS (husband) losing his position because of her actions.

Nice, really nice.

JL

No, JL, losing his positions because of HIS actions.

It seems that he knew about and covered up his wife's financial impropriety. He does not deserve to remain in office if this is what indeed happened.

You took the words right out of my mouth SC. I posted to Butteflyjump yesterday and said...


The evidence seemingly points to a cover up of sorts.

The question for Mr Robinson is "did he compromise himself because of the shame of his wife's A or was he already a person of little integrity"?

And I'd also like to add that just because he was her husband he should not have felt that he had to protect her from the consequences of her own poor choices.

But I do understand how difficult a decision it must have been for him, given her suicide attempt and poor mental health.

I feel for him because it was her actions that put him in such a terrible situation.

What chance of recovery for these two?

INterestingly, The article posted on Yahoo yesterday discussed his being challenged for his office because of HER actions. There was speculation of his knowledge about how she raised the money and speculations about how she raised the money for her lover's restuarant, but no evidence that she did anything illegal even there.

However, his opponents are apparently going to go after him no matter what now, and clearly speculation as to financial dealings will weaken his position even if they are proven to be only speculation.

Out her in Ca. roughly a decade or more ago. There was a close campaign in Socal. Apparently the challenger had put up a bill board that stated something like: Are you aware that Mr. **** is living with @@@@ ????. Suggesting that he was having an affair as everyone knew he was married. However, @@@@ ???? was his W's maiden name. Nice, really nice.

As you can tell my respect for politicians is not very high nor the people that run their campaigns.

But, no matter what there is a good chance Mr. Robinson will be under heavy pressure to leave office either by outright challenge or enuendo. And it all stems from her affair.

JL

Whatever the outcome for these two in the public inquiry, the resentment in their personal life will be huge.

I'm not sure I could believe that she'd spill the beans to her H about the A but keep quiet about the money.

Waynerds are crazy though so who knows?

What's interesting to me is how far a person can go from their normal character in order to engage in an A.

How on earth did she justify her behaviour to herself, given her religious convictions?