Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

Bubba Broke O’Donnell’s Heart

rosieofinger.jpg
Rosie O’Donnell really took the Monica Lewinsky scandal to heart.

Unemployed O’Donnell told her New York Comedy Festival audience that she once used her stage to rail against Bill Clinton’s philandering ways. The lesbian entertainer didn’t know, however, that Clinton had been in attendance. Upset by her rant – during which O’Donnell said she hated the then-president – Clinton sent O’Donnell a note and his phone number. Impressed by his balls, O’Donnell dialed up Billy Boy, whose apology apparently brought tears to Rosie’s eyes. Page Six relates the story she related.

“And I said, ‘You know, listen, here’s the deal, dude. I’ve been disappointed by men my whole life. I loved JFK, my mother loved JFK, and you were the JFK to me. And you let me down, man. You killed me and that hurt me a lot, and when you hurt me, I don’t know, I didn’t expect that out of you and I thought you could do better for your wife, for the country and just in general.”

Clinton then worked his charm on O’Donnell. “He goes, ‘I’m sorry for all the men who ever hurt you, I’m sorry that I hurt you. Everything you’ve said to me, I’ve said to myself, and I hope one day you can forgive me, and I hope I can forgive me.'”

It’s then that O’Donnell says she lost it and cried like a baby whose deep psychological issues cause severe, debilitating, presidential projection.

By:           Andrew Belonksy
On:           Nov 8, 2007
Tagged: , , , , ,
  • 19 Comments
    • Rt. Rev. Dr. RES
      Rt. Rev. Dr. RES

      William Jefferson Clinton is the antithesis of George Walker Bush. The former was born to ” southern white trash” and educated himself to Ivy and Rhodes scholar level. Bush was born to a socially privileged uterus, and many combinations of privileged sperm and ovary who were merged together, and who legacied himself to Ivy graduated status.

      We can continue with the absence and presence of both vices and virtues of these two men – and their wives as well.

      What is common between them…is that they belong to two wings of the same bird, and as Lou Dobbs says, ” both wings are giving you the bird.”

      Nov 8, 2007 at 10:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • daniel11211
      daniel11211

      I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again: it’s none of our fucking business what the president does in bed- we should be worrying about his performance as pres, not his sex life.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 10:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dawster
      Dawster

      why are people in the worst need of medication always given the loudest microphone?

      Nov 8, 2007 at 10:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      Right on, Daniel, Clinton’s sex life was PRIVATE, and we should respect that. Uh, well… except that it happened in his office, publicly financed as was his salary. But except for that it is PRIVATE! Oh, I forgot, Monica moved from being an intern to a paid bureaucrat, and gave him head on the clock. But otherwise, Clinton deserved PRIVACY as does anybody in his personal sex life. But… well, he did give us Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, which penalizes only a certain group for their private lives. Hey, what the hell, Clinton is a VICTIM of right-wing busybodies, trying to run everyone’s life. Ummmm, well, on the other hand, Clinton gave us the Defense of Marriage Act, saying who can marry whom.

      Wait, now I’m confused.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 12:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dawster
      Dawster

      ProfessorVP – i never thought Clinton’s blow job was “private”. he was president of the free world (although it’s less free now) and a public figure that is suppose to stand in front of every other country and represent us as a nation. yes… he gets held under a microscope, mainly because of the sheer weight of his power.

      was it impeachable? god no. definitely wasn’t worth the millions of dollars spent. it was stupid to get caught, linda tripp was a stupid woman, and the situation was handled stupidly.

      as for don’t ask don’t tell… wow. how easy we forget the absolute HORRID time when military men and women were being tossed in front of the public arena and thier sex lives revealed to the world, ending in shame, embarrassment, and being dishonorably discharged publicly. not only were gay soldiers forced to indite themselves, they were forced (with fear of perjury and treason) to out any known homosexuals they knew of AND any persons they had sex with (including any straight boys just getting a blow job). it was nothing short of a McCarthy witch-hunt and a scary-as-shit time for anyone serving – gay and straight.

      yes, DADT was a finger in the dam, not solving anything… but it saved the lives of many of our gay military brothers and sisters from public and private embarrassment, beatings, and prevented the military from using treason and perjury charges to get sexual information out of a solider, saving themselves, and more than a few straight friends.

      i can’t believe we have gone THIS LONG without changing DADT. sad really. but please don’t act like it was an incredible disservice. it solved a hemorrhaging problem AT THE TIME.

      the Defense of Marriage Act that Clinton signed did not bar states from legalizing gay marriages. the act was so states would not have to be obligated to recognize gay marriages performed in another state. it was in response to a bill which would ban gay marriage and demand that marriage be ONLY between a man and a woman.

      again, a middle ground solution to two opposing forces – which is what Clinton was really good at, finding the middle ground to solve problems at the time. it DID successfully prevent the federal ban on gay marriage from going though. again, now it’s outdated, but at least it paved the way for things like the sodomy law to be reversed federally rather than criminalize homosexuality.

      instead of preventing the christian right from gaining ground (which is what clinton did at the time with both of your examples), we should now be ready and prepared to move forward offensively… abolishing both DOMA and DADT in favor of full and equal rights.

      i think had you paid attention to politics at the time (or done some research), you would be less confused. THINGS NEED TO CHANGE… i cannot agree more… but don’t go back to a decade ago and bitch at solutions which provided the stepping stones to where we are now. they may be small, and maybe not the best for the long term… but they were something.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • leomoore
      leomoore

      Claiming that Clinton is any way as morally bankrupt as George Bush is just bullshit. Clinton did a bad thing. He did not bring evil down on our country. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was accepted by Clinton simply because he had little choice. He attempted to eliminate the gay ban completely by executive order. This was thwarted by bigots amongst the Democratic leadership in the Senate such as Sam Nunn. They did not want to completely oppose the first Democratic president since 1980 so they retained the ban by rephrasing it and essentially forcing it on him.

      Clinton’s blowjob in his office was the most ridiculous story, ever. To put it on par with George Bush’s sins of incompetence, deceit, torture, tens of thousands of deaths, massive debt, loss of stature, and just plain stupidity is beyond comprehension.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 1:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dave
      Dave

      Maybe some of you faggots can forgive Clinton but I can’t or won’t. I am not talking about the BJ-I am referring to DADT and DOMA-plus don’t forget his urging of John Kerry to support some of those state intitaives banning gay marriages back in 2004. He is a morally weak and an opportunist that will say or do anything to be popular, and I am afraid his wife is of the same ilk.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 5:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      Dawster, don’t get in a snit and reach for your smelling salts, but your use of the word “indite” shows that you need to read more. Way more. Less TV, more books.

      Stats prove conclusively that more gays and lesbians were kicked out after DADT than before. No, I’m not making that up, and most people who stay on top of the news are aware of that.

      Clinton never promised to compromise when he ran for president in 1992. He promised to end the ban with the stroke of his pen by presidential order. Again, I’m not making that up. That’s how Truman ended segregation in the military, and believe me, in the late 1940s, the public wasn’t ready for that. He didn’t get the senators and generals together to figure out what would make progress but not upset the rubes too much.

      Some folks still fuel the urban legend that Clinton was impeached for oral sex. Nope, he wasn’t. It’s a long story, too much to explain here. Some people also cling to the line that, “Well, Bush is much worse, more destructive.” Well, duh! Ever hear people say about the cretin who shot MLK, “Well, at least he wasn’t Charles Manson!” Should anyone over the age of 8 make such comparisons?

      Nov 8, 2007 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dawster
      Dawster

      a patter over linguistics is usually the last argument of those who have no actual case.

      there may be more gays and lesbians kicked out, but at least they weren’t slapped with perjury, treason, and forced to out other members of the military, and forced to list all of their sexual contacts.

      i never said DODT was right… i said it was pugging finger in a dam to stop a leak. it stopped the truly horrid events and witch hunt at the time. if you want to get pissed that Clinton didn’t change if further before leaving office, that’s fine. i’ll go with that. Ii’m sure the assumption at the time is that the next president would take the ball. as we can see with Bush, that’s not going to happen.

      so what we have is all this waisted time where an archaic idea sits and festers, with all the ultimate problems of the finger in the dam solution are now being shown in their true light. i know that.

      i very much think his wife is very similar. i don’t think Clinton was a saint by any means… but i’m not going to demonize them when his band-aid solution ultimately failed over the course of a decade plus…

      Nov 8, 2007 at 5:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • leomoore
      leomoore

      Professor, I will agree that technically Clinton was not impeached for oral sex. He was impeached for denying that he had sex with someone other than his wife while under oath. Yes, indeed. Clinton tried to hide the fact he had a sexual encounter in an adulterous relationship. Was it worth the millions spent trying to find an impeachable offense in a political fishing expedition that went on for years and only came up with his attempt to hide adultery? Not in my book. Since I’m not pure as freshly fallen snow in the category of adultery, perhaps, my view is skewed.

      What I do know is that no one was killed as a result of his adultery. No war was launched on the basis of a stain on a dress. Competence was the general sense of the Clinton presidency when we managed to get back to a reasonably balanced budget and an effort was being made to pay down the public debt. That is what brought us to the point of very low interest rates.

      I was angered about DADT, but statistics do not tell the whole story. The comparison with Truman is at best imperfect. It was not illegal for non-whites to serve in the military. The separation of races was not restricted to black and white but also extended to those of Asian descent. World War II destroyed the myth that black troops were cowardly and stupid and that those of Japanese descent would betray their country. Truman took an action that only segregationists opposed strongly, but it was clearly costly to maintain.. In addition, one could not reasonably pass for white if one’s ancestors were not European. Truman would have backed down had Congress signaled it certainly would reinstate segregation. Truman was almost as unpopular in his first term as Bush is now.

      The prejudice against us (queers) is harder to overcome. It is a visceral fear for some people based on religious myth. We look like anyone else and come in all the colours and shapes of which humans are capable Some people, particularly men, seem to think that we are hiding amongst them waiting to pounce on them. Contrary to that rather immature, ignorant notion, I for one have lived a number of years without pouncing on anyone who was not agreeable. DADT is a despicable charade, but I think it was an attempt to at least partially mitigate the complete ban, which was noticeably relaxed during the wars in Vietnam, Korea, and World War II. Clinton was a consummate politician. He saw that he would lose the fight. It is time to end DADT, but you and I both know it won’t happen so long as we have religious nuts in control of the White House.

      I continue to believe that initial hatred of the Clintons started because he had the audacity to defeat a Republican incumbent. The first articles of impeachment were filed by Bob Barr before he lied under oath. After years and years of nearly constant ranting from the Republicans and their media attack dogs, I think many came to hate them just because they were conditioned to think so. There were even nasty comments about his daughter being ugly. Bush on the other hand was just a light-weight, largely harmless fool who had accomplished little on his own until 9/11 when he became a paranoid fool. The past several years, in particular 2004, removed the last remnant of faith I had in the wisdom of the American electorate.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 6:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      Dawster, let us face facts: Anyone who writes “indite” and “waisted” gets all his information only from the spoken word, which is often folklore and urban legend. Again, I urge you to start reading. I can’t discuss anything with you further ’til you do that.

      Leo, the millions spent by Ken Starr, and I have read everything from $40 million to $60 million, is a mere bag o’ shells compared to a day in Iraq or bridges built to nowhere. Of course, it is the Clinton machine that keeps harping on the price tag, and I ain’t buyin’.

      No, Clinton was impeached on two counts out of four, and again, I’m not going to hog this board by telling the whole story. It has been very well documented.

      Segregation of blacks during WWII was not based on their supposed cowardice or stupidity. It was based on the bus/water fountain idea. You don’t want to get too close, exchange germs, possibly- the horror!- touch or get touched. Same thing with gays. (Gasp) The shower… the SHOWER…

      Nobody is saying that the Clinton years were better than the Cheney Years (I name them so for the real person running things). Well, certainly I am not saying so. I am only saying that Clinton is hornier, nastier, and more predatory than the gays and lesbians he compromised to protect the “good” soldiers from when he signed off on DADT… after getting gay and lesbian votes in 1992 after his promise to end the ban by executive order.

      He and his lesbian wife, to me, are worthless, lying scum who have a blind spot about saying anything to get elected. But compared to George W. Bush, they are Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Churchill, Albert Schweitzer and Tootie from Facts of Life all rolled into one.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 7:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      Ooops, meant “Nobody is saying that the Clinton years WEREN’T better…”

      Nov 8, 2007 at 7:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dawster
      Dawster

      uugh… you’re really going to push this?

      indict –

      Main Entry:
      in·dict Listen to the pronunciation of indict
      Pronunciation:
      \in-ˈdīt\
      Function:
      transitive verb
      Etymology:
      alteration of earlier indite, from Middle English inditen, from Anglo-French enditer to write, point out, indict — more at:

      INDITE –

      Date:
      circa 1626

      1 : to charge with a fault or offense : criticize, accuse 2 : to charge with a crime by the finding or presentment of a jury (as a grand jury) in due form of law
      — in·dict·er or in·dict·or Listen to the pronunciation of indictor \-ˈdī-tər\ noun

      Nov 8, 2007 at 7:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dawster
      Dawster

      and… just so you know… i actually lived through that time. and that was long ago… the ONLY way to re-live those events, and to get information about what was happening at the time IS TO READ.

      i would hope you follow your own advice, turn off FOX news, put away the Joe Solmonese newsletter and drink voucher… and do some research.

      if you can retain enough information, then you can compare events, understand opposite arguments, and we can discuss topics like adults.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 7:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rt. Rev. Dr. RES
      Rt. Rev. Dr. RES

      Kudos to leomoore

      Nov 8, 2007 at 8:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      Nice that you lived circa 1626. In that case, your spelling of “indite” is perfectly understandable. Now about “waisted”… This is my last appeal to you: swallow your pride and get some help reading. You cannot just rely on the spoken word, especially the tiny soundbytes of TV, if you want to really know what’s going on. Swallow your pride. Pretend it’s cum. Reading is a joy, not a task.

      Nov 8, 2007 at 8:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dawster
      Dawster

      i would like to know where you think i have NOT read. please explain. i don’t watch televised news, i get the New York Times and USA Today, Time, Newsweek, Maxim, National Geographic, and the onion, everything is archived on the internet, i have an entire library of religious history studies.

      exactly what else am i not doing with my eyes that isn’t good enough?

      my ears are for music and listening to people’s thoughts… they are never to be used to be told what to think…

      Nov 8, 2007 at 11:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      Baby, what gives you away is the spelling of somebody who doesn’t read. You cannot be a reader and write things like “indite” and “waisted.” Someone who reads on a regular basis wouldn’t do that; it’s that simple. You are unfamiliar with the written English language; you get your- and I use the term loosely- information from word-of-mouth only.

      Your lack of reading fuels your ignorance. For example, you think DADT saves lives. Barry Winchell was killed by his fellow soldiers AFTER DADT, and Winchell’s own mother blamed the policy. You also thought that the Defense of Marriage Act was a moderate response to a harsher bill against same-sex marriage. There was no such other bill. That is an urban legend.

      I am not saying you are retarded or even stupid. Just a lazy-ass. Merely because you have subscriptions to certain publications doesn’t mean you actually read them. I could buy a female blow-up doll. Doesn’t mean I’d use it.

      Nov 9, 2007 at 12:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alice
      Alice

      I always love her show. I was surprised when I saw her blog on a celebrity and millionaire dating site called SearchingMillionaire.com last week.

      Nov 9, 2007 at 4:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     


    POPULAR ON QUEERTY


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.