quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

If it were up to this guy, BDSM would be outlawed, and there are people on this website that support this idiot.

YES! YES! This message cannot be repeated often enough.

Do the fools who defend this creep, or the 1100 odd anti-women bills the GOP is try to legislate think for a moment that BDSM people are not on the hit list of the moral police? Do they think for a minute that Frothy Mix et al aren't going to come after you because you supported him? Are they deluded enough to think that this support will make them immune from the hate?

The Religious Right will be targeting any one who falls outside their narrow medieval view of what constitutes 'proper' sexual conduct (ie unsafe Male-female intercourse - they don't like the word 'sex' - only in marriage bed) You can stake your sex life that BDSM and kink will be high on their hit list. Vote for this creep and you will be doing just that - staking your sex life on it.

That makes every single one of us their enemy, whether we like it or not. Those of us into compulsory chastity might possibly be the sole exception.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


I have often wondered how people involved in BDSM in any sort of real way could possibly be socially conservative. Again, just another example of people voting against self-interest.

Yet again, it's left to the liberals to protect the rights of everyone else, even those who don't realize they need to protect their rights. Will it ever end? [sm=ofcourse.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


I have often wondered how people involved in BDSM in any sort of real way could possibly be socially conservative. Again, just another example of people voting against self-interest.

Yet again, it's left to the liberals to protect the rights of everyone else, even those who don't realize they need to protect their rights. Will it ever end? [sm=ofcourse.gif]

Think '50's household'. there's no whips, no chains, no kinky sex, just an obedient little Stepford wife who waits on hubby hand and foot.

That aspect of WIITWD would fall right in line with the far right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

True dat mike. How, then do you explain conservative, heterosexual male subs? We have a few here. It would seem that the conservative mindset wouldn't allow for any of that female superiority silliness. (personally, I think it's bunk too[8D] ).

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967
I can explain it very easily, you guys on the left don't know shit about conservatives, or conservative values... The religious right are a small minority of the conservatives, and most of us want government out of our lives, period! As in it's nobodies business what we do in private... Thats how REAL conservatives think, which isn't voting against our best interest... That's the socialistic progressive party, voting against their own interests because they want their free shit from the gubbamint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

True dat mike. How, then do you explain conservative, heterosexual male subs? We have a few here. It would seem that the conservative mindset wouldn't allow for any of that female superiority silliness. (personally, I think it's bunk too[8D] ).

I can explain it very easily, you guys on the left don't know shit about conservatives, or conservative values... The religious right are a small minority of the conservatives, and most of us want government out of our lives, period! As in it's nobodies business what we do in private... Thats how REAL conservatives think, which isn't voting against our best interest... That's the socialistic progressive party, voting against their own interests because they want their free shit from the gubbamint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

True dat mike. How, then do you explain conservative, heterosexual male subs? We have a few here. It would seem that the conservative mindset wouldn't allow for any of that female superiority silliness. (personally, I think it's bunk too[8D] ).

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

True dat mike. How, then do you explain conservative, heterosexual male subs? We have a few here. It would seem that the conservative mindset wouldn't allow for any of that female superiority silliness. (personally, I think it's bunk too[8D] ).

I can explain it very easily, you guys on the left don't know shit about conservatives, or conservative values... The religious right are a small minority of the conservatives, and most of us want government out of our lives, period! As in it's nobodies business what we do in private... Thats how REAL conservatives think, which isn't voting against our best interest... That's the socialistic progressive party, voting against their own interests because they want their free shit from the gubbamint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967
I can explain it very easily, you guys on the left don't know shit about conservatives, or conservative values... The religious right are a small minority of the conservatives, and most of us want government out of our lives, period! As in it's nobodies business what we do in private... Thats how REAL conservatives think, which isn't voting against our best interest... That's the socialistic progressive party, voting against their own interests because they want their free shit from the gubbamint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

True dat mike. How, then do you explain conservative, heterosexual male subs? We have a few here. It would seem that the conservative mindset wouldn't allow for any of that female superiority silliness. (personally, I think it's bunk too[8D] ).

I can explain it very easily, you guys on the left don't know shit about conservatives, or conservative values... The religious right are a small minority of the conservatives, and most of us want government out of our lives, period! As in it's nobodies business what we do in private... Thats how REAL conservatives think, which isn't voting against our best interest... That's the socialistic progressive party, voting against their own interests because they want their free shit from the gubbamint.

I don't think the religious right are the only social conservatives. I know plenty of people who are social conservatives but who are not the religious right.

You can define your own brand of conservatism however you want. But you can't claim all social conservatives are the religious right. Simply not so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

True dat mike. How, then do you explain conservative, heterosexual male subs? We have a few here. It would seem that the conservative mindset wouldn't allow for any of that female superiority silliness. (personally, I think it's bunk too[8D] ).

I can explain it very easily, you guys on the left don't know shit about conservatives, or conservative values... The religious right are a small minority of the conservatives, and most of us want government out of our lives, period! As in it's nobodies business what we do in private... Thats how REAL conservatives think, which isn't voting against our best interest... That's the socialistic progressive party, voting against their own interests because they want their free shit from the gubbamint.

Believe me,we know what cons are about.It fits on a match cover......


Fighting tooth and nail to extend bush`s trillion dollar tax cuts to rich people.......while we shlubs make up the difference.....


Tell us how that`s in your`s or anybody`s interest?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Oh yes.....yes we do.....

That`s why you can`t tell us what our interest in your party`s trillion dollar givaways to rich people,is.

Then there was the looney terrorist in the DOJ whacko thing you were pushing.....[8|]

quote:


How do Bush and Obama compare on closer inspection? Just about like they do on an initial glance. According to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, during his eight fiscal years, Bush ran up a total of $3.283 trillion in deficit spending (p. 22). In his first two fiscal years, Obama will run up a total of $2.826 trillion in deficit spending ($1.294 trillion in 2010, an estimated $1.267 trillion in 2011 (p. 23), and the $265 billion in “stimulus” money that was spent in 2009). Thus, Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending per year, while Obama is running up an average of $1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year — or $1.003 trillion a year more than Bush.

Obama, of course, has said the economy made him do it. But the average inflation-adjusted deficits through Obama’s first two fiscal years will be more than ten times higher than the average inflation-adjusted deficit during the Great Depression. Even as a percentage of the gross domestic product, the average deficits in Obama’s first two fiscal years will more than three times higher the average deficit during the Great Depression. The fact that Obama’s deficits have, by any standard, more than tripled those of the Great Depression, cannot convincingly be blamed on the current recession.

And none of this even takes into account Obamacare, which the Congressional Budget Office says would increase spending by more than $2 trillion in its real first decade (2014 to 2023) — and which, even under very rosy projections, the CBO says would increase the national debt by $341 billion by the end of 2019.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

Yet again, it's left to the liberals to protect the rights of everyone else, even those who don't realize they need to protect their rights. Will it ever end?