jerryskids

Oops, thanks. Yeah her.

It's not misogyny to point out the facts that she slept her way into her career, or what her husband did to women in his past, or that Biden said he would choose a woman for VP. I would explain this to Worms, but somehow he is a lawyer who doesn't understand words. I don't know how he maintains his career with this disability, but it's impressive.

Not embarrassed at all. You do love to label me though. Feel free to tell me how I'm wrong. Specifics please, not your Leftist word salad.

Sorry, I missed this earlier, HT just quoted it so I noticed it. - I know nothing in life is absolute, which is why your "you voted for all of this!" position is absurd. - Trump wasn't found liable for rape. He bragged because Trump brags, but I don't particularly think that Trump played 4D chess to put in specific justices to make it harder for women to kill unborn children. BTW, I notice that you never respond to my assertion about killing unborn children. - Regarding the assault allegations, Gaetz was obvious but I really think that was some back door way of giving Gaetz an out. We can agree to disagree. - Harris would have zero career without sleeping with Willie Brown. She married a guy who focked his nanny while married to his previous wife, and who slapped his girlfriend around. Facts. - Harris was a DEI hire whose only success was the above sluttiness and being a black female. She is devoid of any qualities necessary for POTUS.

Wait, no kid ever talked to teachers, who then didn't talk to parents? Ever? Awesome, that's better than 0.001%! There is absolutely no downside to making it illegal then. Thanks for helping! I think we're done and agreed on this topic. In the interest of discussion tho, your candidate's one and only "position" was that Trump was orange man bad nazi fascist hitler end of democracy. You seem to have guzzled that koolaid. Also, I happen to think that the culture war is a, dare I say it, potentially existential threat for our country. We've given the progressives too much power, and they need to be slapped back into their productive role, which is a (very) slow but steady move towards "progress", constantly measured against the concept of Chesterton's fence.

I'm typically more into the latina/Italian brunette with girl curves, think Salma Hayek in From Dusk Till Dawn, or Alyssa Milano from Seduction of a Vampire. But I love Gwen's smile, and maybe from watching The Voice, something about her strikes me as her being a woman who likes to please her man. Speaking of the voice, Shakira...

Don't speak, Frank.

Interesting, as I think this SCOTUS decision yesterday is relevant. Unanimous, KBJ wrote the opinion even: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/dec/10/dhs-power-revoke-visas-sham-marriages-supreme-cour/

I'll ignore the typo and say... wut? Probably. I'm describing a scenario where there are no trans women in actual women's safe spaces, no medical transing of kids, and parents are kept apprised of trans discussions in schools. I think most of us knuckle-dragging MAGA cultists are OK with that. Or are you concerned with the welfare bud light cans?

That's a pretty good app, I tried it out when it first came out. Also, she's not typically my type, but something about Gwen is a big wood for me.

Even though she is clearly CGI or AI generated, I'll give her the best 45 seconds of my life.

I don't know where you got that number, but if it is so infrequent, just don't let them go into the women's safe space, or trans the kids. Very few of them are impacted. Problem solved?

Which one? Aubrey Plaza was so annoying, I wanted to club a baby seal whenever she was on. Rashida Jones is just a horrible actress.

Good point. I bet some of the players plant their flags into some of the cheerleaders as well.

He should propose a bill that says THE Ohio State University should stop sucking against Michigan.

I understand what you are saying, and I'm telling you that it's possible to support one thing and oppose the inevitable slippery slope thing it leads to. Moving on from this somewhat, I'm sure you'll recall the hard progressive push to call gay unions "marriages," and the similarly strong objection from opponents. The reasoning from the progressive side is that if you draw any differences, in language or otherwise, then they wouldn't quite be "married" the same as hetero couples. I think we see that now in the trans progressive movement. Bathrooms, spas, prisons, sports... progressives insist that trans "women" share these spaces. Otherwise, they aren't quite women. I think it also explains the conundrum that progressive people have in defining a "woman." Because to define it, you kinda need a word that is specific to a biological woman. Let's say we use "female" as such a word. A woman would thus be "a person who identifies as a female." But nono, they can't do that, because now female is a difference. Anyway, just my thoughts.

I'm saying that I don't object to gays being married, but recognize that allowing it was a slippery slope, because all progressive movements are slippery slopes. We are literally living through it now with trans rights as I've listed (women's safe spaces, women's sports, kids, etc.). Sorry for the snark, but I've now said at least three times that I don't object to gays being married, and you are saying I said we should have given rights to gays.

I'm not saying that. I was explaining how it, like all progressive movements, was a slippery slope. In fact I specifically said up thread that I'm not saying it. But, you famously like to attribute stuff to me that I've never said because you think you know me so well, so I look forward to your response.

There is a concept of punishment and negative incentives, it's pretty well established. Theoretically, our entire criminal justice system is based on the concept of not so much punishing people per se, but in creating disincentives for such behavior in the future, for both the perpetrator and others who might commit similar crimes. Incentives drive the reason that kidnapping by itself is typically not a capital crime -- if it were, the kidnapper would have no reason NOT to kill their victims should things not go astray. It is the unfortunate that incentives work this way, but if your approach is to give illegal aliens free housing, free healthcare, free schooling, free translation, and other services totalling $20B in your state alone... you aren't incentivizing them to leave, or stop coming. Sorry about this reality drop. Also, you either won't read it or won't respond, because as usual, you have nothing substantive to add to my comments. But others might.

I just explained it, you don't see how it was a progressive movement although it clearly was, you don't see how LGBTQ+ rights lead to future movements for more rights... you just don't see it and offer nothing else. Agree to disagree.

Gay marriage expanded LGBTQ+ rights, trans is the "T", so by association it could lead to expanded trans rights, as spelled out in the slate article. Look, I don't want to be insulting, but I'm having a hard time seeing how anyone could NOT see gay marriage as a progressive movement, or how that helped pave the way to the trans right expansion (safe spaces, sports, kids). If you can't or don't want to see it, let's just agree to disagree and move on.

Well if you disagree with Slate, you must be correct. Just because you think it should always have been normal (it wasn't, ask Clinton or Obama when they opposed it), it was in fact a progressive movement, and continues to be expanding in the interest of trans rights including minors. Do you at least agree on this latter part, or do you still not see the relationship.

You should read your own links:

Yeah... I think that is unfortunate, because I think there is actually value in separating MAPs who haven't assaulted kids, from pedos who have. I would like MAPs to get therapy or whatever they need to not assault kids. IMO they are two different things, but unfortunately you are probably correct, and obfuscating the two will eventually lead to normalizing pedos.

I don't know if she is still around, but Rashida Jones is/was a turrble actress. I first saw her in The Office and thought she sucked; thankfully they got rid of her. Wait, not really, she got a bigger gig at Parks and Rec, where... she still sucked. Speaking of Parks and Rec, Aubrey Plaza also sucked.