Maybe Coleman’s Suits Were Borrowed!?


Coleman.jpgHere would be an interesting line of defense in Senator Norm Coleman’s brewing scandal.
Perhaps Coleman just BORROWED the suits — and wore temporarily — a few times — and then returned them to friend and campaign supporter Nasser Kazeminy.
Note to the press: Ask the spokesman if Coleman just took a few loaners. . .
— Steve Clemons


12 comments on “Maybe Coleman’s Suits Were Borrowed!?

  1. Kevin says:

    It looks like hyperlinks do not work on this site. Sorry about that. Here’s the link the article:


  2. Kevin says:

    This is awesome. Coleman is such a joke. It’s nice to see that Fraken has improved and is relatively even now. I actually wrote a piece on this Senate race recently at
    Senate Spotlight:


  3. Mr.Murder says:

    When will Canadian tabloid television rain down upon the MN electoral airwaves?
    “Suit l’empty!”


  4. serge says:

    For his first years in the Senate, Norm Coleman was the original “empty” suit. Then came Jim DeMint (sounds French, no?). DeMint, from my state and to my great personal shame, rewrote the book on empty, vacuous non-entities.


  5. Mr.Murder says:

    Is he a “suit is half empty” or “suit is half full” kind of guy?
    Who could have imagined?


  6. jollyroger says:

    “but I brought them back!”
    Indeed. And Mr. Coleman’s spokesman is prepared to assure you that Mr. Coleman brought back anything the bringing back of which was mandated and did all proper bringing back of any kind whatsoever.
    Next question.


  7. Bil says:

    Well,I used to borrow paper products at work plus paper clips etc…
    I guess I used to borrow suits at a clothing store I worked at, but I
    brought them back!


  8. JohnH says:

    Ah, yes, the post-modern Congress…


  9. Paul Norheim says:

    “The Senator has no clothes”….
    Or, to vary the words of JohnH on the thread below: The Emperor
    is nothing but clothes, and they aren`t even his.
    That`s precisely what the intellectuals celebrated as “post-
    modernism” 20 years ago.


  10. sam says:

    Hilarious. The best joke I’ve seen on the note in a long time.


  11. velvet says:

    Why does Norm need a sugardaddy when he’s getting filthy rich off Laurie’s fantastic entrepreneurial efforts with Blo & Go? (Erm not the usual Senate Blo & Go, teh pouty ex-model hair product kind.)
    I thought they were well on their way to being filthy rich with no need for sponsored shopping sprees from shadowy investment bankers etc. It’s just not cool to mention this- much like discussing Nadhmi Auchi’s financial connnections to Rezko. It’s poor form. That’d be like kicking Rezko when he’s down.


Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *