BarleyNY Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Wow!--what are you watching right now...."Barretta" reruns? No. I have a friend who I will not give details on. I’ll just say that she’d know.
Toesy Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 What do you guys think internet porn is? It is Prostitution plain and simple-and a huge business. So anybody that has ever viewed internet porn supports Prostitution. Period.
K-9 Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said: I can’t speak for everyone but I think it has more to do with the arrogance of Kraft. Most fans on this board are biased because of football, but if they felt that he was a decent guy I don’t think the snarkiness would be as thick. Yep. Robert Kraft is a phony son of a b**ch. Spare me the rhetoric about how his philanthropic activities prove he’s a decent guy. I don’t think there’s a decent bone in his inebriated body.
Gugny Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 11 minutes ago, Toesy said: What do you guys think internet porn is? It is Prostitution plain and simple-and a huge business. So anybody that has ever viewed internet porn supports Prostitution. Period. What the hell is internet porn???? 2
Spiderweb Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 1 hour ago, BarleyNY said: That would be a common misconception. People who support illegal prostitution absolutely are contributing to human trafficking as they create the demand for it. The vast majority of prostitutes - the ones with pimps - cannot leave their profession, except in a body bag. Be careful. You seem a bit too logical for many here. However, you are 100% correct. 1
Doc Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Gugny said: To each his own. I suppose I'm above that. Congrats. 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: No his lawyers accused, in court, the cop that did the traffic stop of fabricating the reason for the stop (which the prosecutor pretty much already conceded). The prosecutor is now, a week later (not while he was standing there, in court when the accusation was made) saying the accusation was "lying". Kraft's lawyers say they have some sort of tape where the cop says this stuff. It's amazing how readily you believe everything from Bobby's side. No, wait a minute, it's not.
Warcodered Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said: I can’t speak for everyone but I think it has more to do with the arrogance of Kraft. Most fans on this board are biased because of football, but if they felt that he was a decent guy I don’t think the snarkiness would be as thick. For me that's more the issue not that he committed some heinous crime but that he thinks he's above the law and can buy himself out of it.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 5 minutes ago, Gugny said: What the hell is internet porn???? Actors with a collective IQ of 80 and a lot of moaning
Mr. WEO Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 6 minutes ago, Doc said: Congrats. It's amazing how readily you believe everything from Bobby's side. No, wait a minute, it's not. LOL--read the article for yourself doc. Help yourself for once.
JohnC Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said: I can’t speak for everyone but I think it has more to do with the arrogance of Kraft. Most fans on this board are biased because of football, but if they felt that he was a decent guy I don’t think the snarkiness would be as thick. What difference does being arrogant or not or a jerk or not or arsehole or not when it applies to how the law is applied? It shouldn't be surprising that someone who has the resources to buy a franchise in pro sports (any pro sport) might likely be arrogant. Is there a need to go through the ranks to come up with some owners who might not be likeable. Many people in his financial strata don't have the common touch. Again, what does that have to do how the law should be applied to them?
Doc Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: LOL--read the article for yourself doc. Help yourself for once. Ah yes, more "regurgitation."
Mr. WEO Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 8 minutes ago, Doc said: Ah yes, more "regurgitation." Why do you do this to yourself? Lol
Doc Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Why do you do this to yourself? Lol Remind me again who was the one who claimed he was vomiting forth what others were feeding him? 31 minutes ago, JohnC said: What difference does being arrogant or not or a jerk or not or arsehole or not when it applies to how the law is applied? It shouldn't be surprising that someone who has the resources to buy a franchise in pro sports (any pro sport) might likely be arrogant. Is there a need to go through the ranks to come up with some owners who might not be likeable. Many people in his financial strata don't have the common touch. Again, what does that have to do how the law should be applied to them? Not exactly true, as he certainly received the "common touch." Edited May 8, 2019 by Doc
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 51 minutes ago, K-9 said: Yep. Robert Kraft is a phony son of a b**ch. Spare me the rhetoric about how his philanthropic activities prove he’s a decent guy. I don’t think there’s a decent bone in his inebriated body. He’s old and his wife died. Let him live, so says my terrible friend who likes the Pats.
Mr. WEO Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 23 minutes ago, Doc said: Remind me again who was the one who claimed he was vomiting forth what others were feeding him? No, really. Just read the article. I'm trying to help you.
YoloinOhio Posted May 8, 2019 Author Posted May 8, 2019 (edited) 47 minutes ago, JohnC said: What difference does being arrogant or not or a jerk or not or arsehole or not when it applies to how the law is applied? It shouldn't be surprising that someone who has the resources to buy a franchise in pro sports (any pro sport) might likely be arrogant. Is there a need to go through the ranks to come up with some owners who might not be likeable. Many people in his financial strata don't have the common touch. Again, what does that have to do how the law should be applied to them? It doesn’t have anything to do with how the law is applied. The post - at least i thought - was about him being humiliated and why anyone would want someone to have to deal with that. I’m not surprised at all that some think he should be faced with humiliation based on how he acts. Schefter said on the radio today that he believes he’s done nothing wrong and is above whatever they are trying to charge him with. Well if that’s the case, why you in court bro? Edited May 8, 2019 by YoloinOhio
Doc Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 13 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: It doesn’t have anything to do with how the law is applied. The post - at least i thought - was about him being humiliated and why anyone would want someone to have to deal with that. I’m not surprised at all that some think he should be faced with humiliation based on how he acts. Schefter said on the radio today that he believes he’s done nothing wrong and is above whatever they are trying to charge him with. Well if that’s the case, why you in court bro? Opinions...
YoloinOhio Posted May 8, 2019 Author Posted May 8, 2019 38 minutes ago, Doc said: Opinions... I should rephrase - Schefter said that Kraft believes that Kraft has done nothing wrong. There is a video that says otherwise. But he believes he can suppress it, so that he can remain “innocent” 1
Doc Posted May 8, 2019 Posted May 8, 2019 3 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: I should rephrase - Schefter said that Kraft believes that Kraft has done nothing wrong. There is a video that says otherwise. But he believes he can suppress it, so that he can remain “innocent” No, I know what he meant. It's stupid because he was caught breaking the law, so he has done something wrong. Just because there's a possibility he could get off on a technicality, again one that wasn't the reason why he broke the law, doesn't change the fact that he's not innocent in real life. 1
YoloinOhio Posted May 8, 2019 Author Posted May 8, 2019 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Doc said: No, I know what he meant. It's stupid because he was caught breaking the law, so he has done something wrong. Just because there's a possibility he could get off on a technicality, again one that wasn't the reason why he broke the law, doesn't change the fact that he's not innocent in real life. Right but that just shows how arrogant he is. He thinks we are all just that stupid. We should believe what his lawyers say, because of who he is. Just like we should believe that his employees with the deflator were trying to lose weight. It’s absurd how he thinks. Edited May 8, 2019 by YoloinOhio 1
Recommended Posts