SA Footy

There's lots of tooing and froing re is Mike Rann innocent.
Be interested in a straight out Poll regarding this.

All debate etc is in the other thread viewtopic.php?f=20&t=25744&p=857490#p857490

But simple question - what do you believe or - what is your gut feeling from what you know thus far.
Is Mike Rann Telling the truth when he says "I did not have sexual relations with her?"

(And no, there is no 'I don't care option' you either think he is telling the truth or lying or you're not sure....lol

i voted unsure because only 2 people know the truth, i find it hard to believe the golf course story though & i have a feeling that it could be a set-up......having said that IF it did happen it would be by two consenting adults so i can't see much of a problem anyway & lets face it this type of activity happens a lot

If he did have sex with her what's the problem.He was single at the time she was the married shouldn't we be up in arms over a WOMAN being adulterous.
Hell we can't have a single politician having sex. but a married woman having an affair we can feel sorry for .Round the wrong way if its true .
And then her estranged husband wants an enquiry smells rotten to me or in other words a set up to end his political career.

Mickyj wrote:If he did have sex with her what's the problem.He was single at the time she was the married shouldn't we be up in arms over a WOMAN being adulterous.
Hell we can't have a single politician having sex. but a married woman having an affair we can feel sorry for .Round the wrong way if its true .
And then her estranged husband wants an enquiry smells rotten to me or in other words a set up to end his political career.

He was not single...he was engaged to Sasha....so that makes it ok then????

southee wrote:

Mickyj wrote:If he did have sex with her what's the problem.He was single at the time she was the married shouldn't we be up in arms over a WOMAN being adulterous.
Hell we can't have a single politician having sex. but a married woman having an affair we can feel sorry for .Round the wrong way if its true .
And then her estranged husband wants an enquiry smells rotten to me or in other words a set up to end his political career.

He was not single...he was engaged to Sasha....so that makes it ok then????

And she is married so its ok for a married american or canadian women to commit adultery and then get paid for her story from a tv station and a magazine

who'd want to root either one of 'em anyway

Mickyj wrote:

southee wrote:

Mickyj wrote:If he did have sex with her what's the problem.He was single at the time she was the married shouldn't we be up in arms over a WOMAN being adulterous.
Hell we can't have a single politician having sex. but a married woman having an affair we can feel sorry for .Round the wrong way if its true .
And then her estranged husband wants an enquiry smells rotten to me or in other words a set up to end his political career.

He was not single...he was engaged to Sasha....so that makes it ok then????

And she is married so its ok for a married american or canadian women to commit adultery and then get paid for her story from a tv station and a magazine

He was not engaged at the time. he was single!

Is Mike Rann sleeping in the spare room or on the couch at the moment? A good topic for another poll.

What really goes to the question of his ethics is not whether or not he had sex with the woman.
It is whether he conned his fiancee into making a call to her, ostensibly to invite her and her husband to a function, but in reality to help him create an alibi..
This is a much more serious allegation.

who cares

Psyber wrote:What really goes to the question of his ethics is not whether or not he had sex with the woman.
It is whether he conned his fiancee into making a call to her, ostensibly to invite her and her husband to a function, but in reality to help him create an alibi..
This is a much more serious allegation.

You're kidding, Psyber

Bum Crack wrote:who cares

you are exactly right. Who really cares and what has it got to do with anything. I guess people just love gossip especially journos.

redandblack wrote:

Psyber wrote:What really goes to the question of his ethics is not whether or not he had sex with the woman.
It is whether he conned his fiancee into making a call to her, ostensibly to invite her and her husband to a function, but in reality to help him create an alibi..
This is a much more serious allegation.

You're kidding, Psyber

No mate...
Manipulating your intended life partner is in my opinion more morally questionable than having sex [if he did] with an apparently willing partner.
I might forgive an infidelity in a partner in some circumstances, but I'd part with one who tried to con or manipulate me very fast.

I don't necessarily disagree with that, but it's a personal matter, not a 'serious allegation'.

It's between him and his wife, no-one else.

If not, do we then become morality judges for all politicians (or anyone, for that matter).

I would not be surprised if there isn't an "outside influence" in this so I'll play Devil's advocate.

Maybe someone ( bikies perhaps they hate MR) has put up a considerable amount of money for the story to be spread, she gets the coin and disappears back to the US, noone over there knows the story and I'm not sure about the woman's ex-husband either, has a shifty look about him. May have had more than a finger in the pie.

Is this 'too far fetched' to be true?

Lunchcutter wrote:who'd want to root either one of 'em anyway

Eloquently put there LC - the moment deserves the phrase...

Especially her now, if Mike's been there......

redandblack wrote:I don't necessarily disagree with that, but it's a personal matter, not a 'serious allegation'.
It's between him and his wife, no-one else.
If not, do we then become morality judges for all politicians (or anyone, for that matter).

I have no argument with that.
I've also said elsewhere that I am aware he could be telling the truth - false accusations do occur.

Of the 34 who voted either No or Unsure, how many would change their vote now given what has happened in the last week or so?

wycbloods wrote:Of the 34 who voted either No or Unsure, how many would change their vote now given what has happened in the last week or so?

Money will entice a lot of weak people to say or do a lot of things. I still say it's "bikie driven" and I wouldn't trust the ex husband with a mangy dog!

aceman wrote:

wycbloods wrote:Of the 34 who voted either No or Unsure, how many would change their vote now given what has happened in the last week or so?

Money will entice a lot of weak people to say or do a lot of things. I still say it's "bikie driven" and I wouldn't trust the ex husband with a mangy dog!

mangy dog.jpg

Love the mangy dog picture. Lol