Coreece

He already posted an op-ed on the subject about 10 hours prior to your bet. You should lose by default and penalized the house minimum of $100 for not even bothering to look it up for yourself. I'll chose the charity if that's ok - I'll even pick a secular one if you'd like. It's a win win win all around. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/30/trumps-suggestion-delay-election-is-most-anti-democratic-thing-any-president-ever-said/ "President Trump’s tweet Thursday morning suggesting that the November election should be delayed is more than reckless and irresponsible. It is the single most anti-democratic statement any sitting president has ever made. It should be immediately, forcefully and vocally repudiated by every conservative and Republican." "Trump’s tweet jumps the shark in so many ways that it is impossible to ignore. Such a statement should be unthinkable (in fact, I assumed it was unthinkable, which is why I strongly criticized Biden in April when he claimed without evidence that Trump would try to delay the election)." "McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) should jointly introduce a nonbinding resolution in their respective chambers reiterating that it is the will of Congress that elections occur on Nov. 3 as scheduled. This resolution should be supported by every Republican member of each chamber, regardless of their beliefs on mail-in balloting. This resolution would immediately distinguish Trump from his party, to the latter’s advantage." " our greatest president never contemplated delaying that fall’s election, even though as late as Aug. 23, 1864, he felt certain that he would lose. Today’s Republicans should follow the course set by the first Republican president, embracing our democratic heritage and rejecting the fevered musings emanating from the Oval Office." And I wouldn't be surprised if you try weaseling it all back - "but, but he didn't specifically reiterate that it was "treason" in the wapo article - what a hypocrite! All bets are off. . ."

Cincinnati has some changing to do then. Well their team wasn't named after natives. And just to add, the only reason redskins doesn't sound racist to me is probably because it's such a familiar term. It's ridiculous. I even heard it said that these products invite white people to indulge in the fantasy of enslaved black people. Never once do I remember even thinking about race when using these products. I don't even remember recognizing that they were even black. Personally, I think by canceling these products, we miss an opportunity to educate people about the history, if indeed it was racist. And another thing. If these pretentious virtue signaling white liberals actually spent any decent amount of time living and working in black communities as their equals, they'd see that they're actually more offended than the blacks are. Most blacks don't even care about this crap, and I'm laughing right along with them at these woke-ass partisan hacks that won't give a shit about black people and the inner city after the election for another 50 years, or until they need to pull that race card from their sleeve again in another desperate attempt to garner votes and win an election.

There are plenty of unfavorable opinions and stigma surrounding various sexual practices, even autoeroticism - doesn't mean that you are hating or judging anyone - no need to be offended. What's interesting tho, is how you people can go on and on with your virtue signaling and politically correct bullshit, but when so some anti-religious bigot seriously starts talks about documenting Christians, locking them in a church, denying them medical treatment and leaving them for dead - not a fucking word from any of you hypocrites.

No, but bringing it up in an entirely unrelated conversation about women in general would be a strong indicator. Gowlerk was the one that brought up misogyny, so I found it fitting.

Are you going to answer my question?

I apologize in advance for the following: It's not so much being homosexual in and of itself - I know a good looking guy when I see one. And if I cloned myself I couldn't say that I wouldn't be tempted, tho I'd probably just file it under some weird type of autoeroticism. So no, it's primarily the hole anal sex thing that makes me cringe, (or laugh given certain contexts) similar to how a heterosexual woman may go ass to mouth makes me cringe, but that wouldn't make me misogynistic would it?

So is what it looks like when you trigger a troll, lol. A self-admitted troll - still having fun?

The 1990s called, it wants its outdated jokes back. Nothing wrong with being homosexual, so as such it cannot be an 'attack'. What about Gay Bowel Syndrome? Or is that also too outdated for your sensibilities - how about proctitis?

Excellent, so you don't have me blocked. What a relief. I don't do that. I thinks it displays cowardice and only exacerbates the problem given that the blocker now only sees selected quotes of the blocked out of context.

hardness and penetration resistance

Rule #1 - don't get remarried

Yes, you are confused. Does that clarify it?

Feels more like a gun to it's head. . . .and I mean that in more ways than one.

That's going overboard man - there's no reason to attack Phil like that.

Yep, always double down when dealt that hand! Only way to blame masks is if they give you a false sense of security, but that still would be categorized under ignorance.

You are here by choice. There's a difference between criticism and complaining. . . .but whatever, I suppose there's plenty of blame to go around - because humans.

Do you ever think anything shows hypocrisy or double standards coming from the left, especially in this dog shit forum? Didn't think so. . .

"The Redskins" doesn't really sound racist to me, but calling native people "reds" does sound racist to me. Like, "those reds own all the damn casinos." On the other hand, calling black people "blacks" doesn't really sound racist to me, but calling them blackskins does sound racist to me. Like, "The Detroit Blackskins."

For the most part, the country's problems of today can be traced back to decisions made throughout the 90s, from Clinton's handling of al-aeda, to the violent crime bill, to Gingrich and his goons with their wedge issues and the lobotomizing of congress by de-funding in-house research organizations and replacing congressional staff with lobbyists that have been doing the thinking for the past 25 years.

Yup. Exactly what I came here to say. There is ZERO reason for him to do anything but put a giant wall between the two of them and he has all the information at his fingertips to know exactly how guilty she is. Similar sentiments crossed my mind as well, but I'm also wondering if this is his way of telling her she's on her own.

So beautiful that some men even sleep with their eyes open.

Oh so when you and lock-step liberals do it, it's "paraphrasing." When others do it, it's "making things up." Got it.

Clearly you do. You care enough to block posters and you care enough to keep responding to them, lol.

Why, because you can't take a joke? . . .and then you have the balls to tell turtle to get a life?