Hustler magazine is looking for some scandalous sex in Washington again — and willing to pay for it.
“Have you had a sexual encounter with a current member of the United States Congress or a high-ranking government official?” read a full-page advertisement taken out by Larry Flynt’s pornographic magazine in Sunday’s Washington Post.
It offered $1 million for documented evidence of illicit intimate relations with a congressman, senator or other prominent officeholder. A toll-free number and e-mail address were provided.
Stay tuned.
Looks like those “glazed” dresses will be in fashion again.
There aren’t too many members of Congress I would want to see in any state other than fully dressed.
Larry Flynt King or Queen maker.Even though the traditional press disparages paid for journalism it works.He saved Clintons butt now watch him save democracy.If he lives this could be the most important development of the coming election.Hey for a million dollars I’d sleep with Hillary or even Rick Santorum.
And you guys worry about Big Brother. Wait for it.
RBG
A man and a woman chat over their drinks at a bar:
Man: Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?
The woman, figuring she didn’t have anything to lose, said, “Yes!”
Man: Would you sleep with me for $5?
Woman: Never! What kind of girl do you think I am?!
Man: Well, we’ve already determined that. Now we’re just negotiating price. . .
Didn’t he do something like this before?
I suspect it’s a way to blackmail Congressmen into passing immigration amnesty. First he gathers the info, then he reveals juicy details without the names, and the Congressmen will get the message. He did this before to prevent impeaching Bill Clinton.
Holy Jebus – Are you guys saying it was Larry Flynt, not the hugely outraged reaction of most voters, that kept the Senate from going along with that harebrained, venomous House impeachment campaign?
Larry Flynt?
Unbelievable. Tell me some more, please. This is too funny.
And another myth flits through the wishlist of neocon Amerika…
#7: Doubt that it’s true but if so, it would be crude but effective.
Dollars to donuts he gets a scoop. I’ll lay odds…er…
As long as you can publish smut there’s at least some liberty. I hope he gets stories on every member.
Strangely enough he is one of the reasons this blog can publish some of the material we read here. Aint that America.
We should call it the Flynt Center for Public Accountability.
This is all quite pointless. Everyone knows that Congressmen only have sex with their own dutiful spouse, in the missionary position and behind closed doors. What could Flynt possibly hope to uncover? Sheesh!
Larry Flynt is the pimp of Democracy…I am thinking he should have the “Love American Style” music in the background.
I don’t give a shit who’s poking who, do you?
What about the whole Halliburton thing, attorney firings, etc… there are more important matters to worry about. Of course, these things won’t make million-selling headlines…
#17 I don’t give a shit who’s poking who, do you?
But it’s not you, Flint is going after (assuming you didn’t jump on the Monica entrapment operation against Clinton.)
We Democrats are still PO’D at the conservative blowhards who stepped out of their mistresses’ boudoir to sanctimoniously lecture us liberals for not having “family values.”
Bah! Last time he did this it was just to establish plausible deniability for the real source of his data – Hillary’s FBI files.
#18…GregAllen….he’s fishing for ANY bait…Democrat or Republican, unless they are on his payroll.
Where’s the real story today Uncle Dave, you know, the one where they finally indicted Congressman Jefferson- D.La.
#8…TJGeezer….I’m not sure what you consider ****HUGLY OUTRAGED****……but here is the link to the Time magazine poll done just before the House voted on if Clinton should be impeached or not.
What I find interesting about this poll (i have few personal memories, I was barely 16 and not hugly interested), is that a fairly large majority not only believed he made advances to Paula Jones, but that he was probably guilty of lying under oath and other things. But, they didn’t want him impeached, just censured.
For people like me, that were to young to really have been focused on this at the time, this poll is a good insight into the psyche of the American electorate.
http://tinyurl.com/yszsqd
Check it out.
#21, joshua,
Since you were too young to remember, I’ll fill you in on the general mood of the country.
The majority felt what happened was a private sexual encounter and should remain just that, private.
Americans were annoyed at Kenneth Starr’s constant weaseling to find dirt where there was none.
Americans were generally happy with the economy and their lives.
Americans were unhappy at the anti Clinton witch hunt by the right wing nut evangelical hypocritical Republican leadership.
Clinton was regarded as a great President.
I vote for Nancy.
Mr Fusion, you’re right on the 2-4 but not the first or last. Polls showed that the public thought Clinton deserved to be impeached but didn’t want him to be impeached for various reasons, including your points, anger at Ken Starr, not liking the Republicans(the main reason), good economy, and not wanting to see Gore become president,
#21 – Joshua – thanks for an interesting link.
Time, which seems to be disliked or distrusted by both right and left, did a fair job of report one moment in time, it seems. Just before the ill-advised party-line House impeachment proceedings, which colors the data a bit, you will probably agree. The following passage, *before the impeachment*, pretty well wraps up American feelings that only intensified as the corrupto harassment of Clinton turned into an indefensible impeachment:
How have Americans reacted to what Congress has done so far in the Lewinsky probe? In general, they do not like it. A majority disapprove of how the House Judiciary Committee has handled the investigation into Clinton. The number who approve of how Congress is handling its job has dropped nine points in a week, while Clinton’s job approval rating has remained essentially unchanged during the same period.
If you don’t like “hugely outraged,” change it to mere disapproval if you like. But what I remember is letters to the editor, editorials, and columns published by other than party-line hacks who expressed outrage. The Senate corruptos certainly back down in the face of it.
I think Americans were more grossed out that he lied about it under oath. I know I was. Lying is one of the worst human shortcomings.
#26, We’re getting off topic, but I disagree strongly.
Most people would consider a private or personal matter and especially a sexual matter sacred and subject to a permissible lie. Basically, if it ain’t none of your fucken bisiness, don’t fucken ask.
When Clinton lied, the only one I know (in my circle) who voiced any true venom was my Baptist mother-in-law. She was so horridly outraged that the President would have ORAL SEX, a definite sin. She shut up when my bro-in-law asked her if she had never given her late husband any.
While lying under oath is serious, IMHO people were more outraged that the question had been asked in the first place and deferred to Clinton’s privacy.
There used to be jokes about women’s age and how they answered, which were never truthful. Or teenage boys boasting about their sexual conquests. Or whether a woman colored her hair. It matters little to people to be lied to about these things. Being fooled for gain is a much greater shortcoming though.
#24: To put it politely, I do believe you’re blowing smoke out your ass. A large majority of Americans overwhelmingly approved of the job Clinton was doing in office (as high as ~70% if I recall correctly). It is entirely nonintuitive to make the conclusion that a majority of Americans supported Clinton’s performance while at the same time overwhelmingly supported impeachment.
I would love to see your polls backing up your point, and I would argue it’s more likely there are more people in support of impeaching Bush right now than there ever were in support of impeaching Clinton.
Clinton’s party affiliation had less to do with how people felt about then the fact most Americans don’t like anyone taking shots at a seating president unless he royally screws up, cough Bush cough, we love our incumbents.
uhm sitting president….jeesh damn keyboard.