Maybe Marylin was his one exception. Like he and Jackie had a deal where he could hook up with Marylin and she could hook up with Burt Reynods and it wouldn’t count against them. 🤷♂️
For your birthday, I give you the gift of having to explain me to Jackie.
Oh she knew. Even before they got married everyone warned her that jfk wasn’t suited to monogamy.
He was a rich playboy with decently good looks. Monogamy was never in the cards.
I never believed in conspiracy theories around deaths /murders of prominent people until I watched that video. ‘as seductively as possible’ is actually an understatement, she came short of sucking the mic. If I was JFK’s wife watching that, I would definitely have given her ‘a lesson’.
You got a link?
I watched it as part of a German (ZDF) documentary on unsolved deaths of the famous, including Van Gogh and Monroe. The one part about Monroe prominently displays that clip. If that’s good enough for you, I’ll try to find it again!
::Skyler White enters the chat::
Bubba was at the white house for krasnov’s bday?
Careful with those barbituates
Happy birthday,… Mr. President…
Wait. Did Vince Gilligan add that one awkward scene (with Skyler doing the thing from the meme) to secretly imply that Marilyn Monroe ordered the hit on JFK?
deleted by creator
Ahhhhhhh politics. Democrats not being able to keep their hands off of young women, Republicans not being able to keep their hands off of young men. Both sides trying to convince everyone they aren’t doing it.
One side trying to fuck the working poor, the other side trying to help the working poor whilst fucking themselves at the same time.
(It’s not the same, is what I’m getting at)
While it is clear which side is less worse over the other one, I’d really argue that that one side that is not trying to fuck working poor is trying to help them. At best, they do bare minimum. In case they would really try and help working class and give them security, many things in USA would differ from what they are today.
To that I’d argue, the shittier side has blocked them every step of the way that they’ve tried to do any real good. They have of course shot themselves a few times in the leg too
You don’t think touching someone who isn’t your spouse isn’t the same regardless of what political party you’re a part of? Seems odd. Call me old fashioned but infidelity is infidelity regardless.
Ive been well aware every time ive been cheated on. Its almost like if you cant trust your partner, you shouldnt date them. If thats something that bothers you then dont engage with cheaters. And if you cant tell whether theyre a cheater, then you dont know them well enough to be dating.
I mean infidelity really isn’t old fashioned. It’s a relatively new thought process. Most cultures throughout the centuries past have seen it as normality.
I just don’t care, personally. Infidelity is the kind of thing that makes me go, “that’s kinda not cool, but you do you.”
I don’t know what JFK and Jackie had going on- maybe they had screaming fights on the regular over it, or maybe they were both explicitly on board with him fooling around. Their marriage ain’t my business.
As long as everyone involved is of age and consenting, I largely don’t care who politicians are fucking past the memes being funny occasionally.
I care to the extent that they care. If a politician is making bank on being moral and upstanding and against that sort of thing, I’ll treat them as they treat others when they’re caught with a side hustle.
That’s true- hypocrisy is a bad look.
That’s not infidelity though. Infidelity is cheating. An open relationship isn’t cheating.
That’s exactly my point, though. I don’t know their marriage, I’m not their friend. What they have going on isn’t my business. I don’t know if Jackie Kennedy even wants me to be offended on her behalf, or if she’s perfectly happy being his wife while he goes full on fuckboy.
Maybe he’s cheating, maybe they have an open marriage, maybe he’s not built for monogamy and she’s fine with that because she gets to be first lady. It’s not my business.
And what do you call it when someone assumes to know the arrangements of a marriage from over 50 years ago, while attempting to inject a both sides style dilemma.
I call them tankies but I’m guessing you use comrade.
You’d be wrong on both accounts.
Claiming I’m wrong on both accounts with no further elaboration.
Nice.
I’m saying the level of shit is stacked higher in one party than it is in another.
The crime is bad. The frequency of the crime when split by party has a humongous ratio
