The reason Republicans claim sex is bad is that for them it is!

Say what?

If you had merely added the word promiscuous before the word sex you would have it right Sparky!

So to correct your siggy, The reason Republicans claim promiscuous sex is bad is that for them it is! I cannot think of any true Republican who would disagree with that statement, as corrected. But I bet there would STILL be some Democrats who would object based mainly upon the negative connotations associated with the word "promiscuous."

Get a grip,Dude! It's my friggin signature line and I like it! Posts like yours are exactly why the right-wing is losing elections and public support.
Whatever someone chooses to do in the privacy of their own home is their business, not government's. I think the reason of many Republican legislators are involved in sex scandals is because the Puritanic BS they spout to pander to religious Right prevents them from truly enjoying sex. Face it pal, the Dems are younger,healthier and getting way more action that the bloated Limbelices. There is a reason that rock stars are so popular in society. Joe Six pack is strongly in favor of wild,promiscuous sex!

LOL-
If R's weren't enjoying and having sex so much there wouldn't be sex scandals- DUH! :headbang:

Ohhmama wrote:

LOL-
If R's weren't enjoying and having sex so much there wouldn't be sex scandals- DUH! :headbang:

The scandals have to do with the fact that bloated neo-cons have to pay for sex or are caught soliciting other men in public washrooms!

Of course- but they are still doing it, which is different from what you claim-

Your quote was- "Face it pal, the Dems are younger,healthier and getting way more action that the bloated Limbelices".

Got a link to prove that?

sparks wrote:

Get a grip,Dude! It's my friggin signature line and I like it! Posts like yours are exactly why the right-wing is losing elections and public support.
Whatever someone chooses to do in the privacy of their own home is their business, not government's. I think the reason of many Republican legislators are involved in sex scandals is because the Puritanic BS they spout to pander to religious Right prevents them from truly enjoying sex. Face it pal, the Dems are younger,healthier and getting way more action that the bloated Limbelices. There is a reason that rock stars are so popular in society. Joe Six pack is strongly in favor of wild,promiscuous sex!

There's just so very much wrong with that comment!

First, it very much is the government's business what you do in private in many instances you may not have intended. Setting the issue of minors aside of course how about levels of abuse? Say someone in authority says sleep with me and I'll give you something you want say like a judge and a defendant? What if someone is manipulative? What if someone is willingly a punching bag? It's not always so black & white.

The real issue isn't even whether you have a right to engage in consensual sex but rather aren't we really better off by choosing some restraint. How can anyone not agree that the more partners you have the more likely you are to catch & spread a SDT? And now we have a call to provide medicine to teenage girls who are sexually active so they don't get a particular type of cancer from promiscuity.

Get a grip? Please! That's the problem with liberal Dems. They apparently don't think through the consequences for actions and then expect Big Brother government to come along with a miracle, or money at least. .

------------------

I re-read your reply and it occurs to me you kinda skirted the whole issue of welfare mammas. If someone's promiscuity costs me money to raise their rug rats then why don't I rate a say so?

It amazes me that he wants the g'vt to stay out of the lives of what people do in their bedroom but wants the g'vt to govern everything else in our lives. Funny stuff!

Ohhmama wrote:

It amazes me that he wants the g'vt to stay out of the lives of what people do in their bedroom but wants the g'vt to govern everything else in our lives. Funny stuff!

You mean like regulating church organizational structures like they are trying in Connecticut?

Funny story-

One time on this forum (which really isn't around anymore) this creepy poster started attacking me "outta da blue", calling me derogatory names like skeezer, whore and other stuff like that cuz I made a remark about a singer who was hot-

Here, here's the funny thing- I'm not even a DEMOCRAT! So since I usually vote Republican those things couldn't POSSIBLY be true since I ain't doin' it- right?? LOL

I wonder what ever happened to that poster - I think I'm owed an apology.

Mirage wrote:

sparks wrote:

Get a grip,Dude! It's my friggin signature line and I like it! Posts like yours are exactly why the right-wing is losing elections and public support.
Whatever someone chooses to do in the privacy of their own home is their business, not government's. I think the reason of many Republican legislators are involved in sex scandals is because the Puritanic BS they spout to pander to religious Right prevents them from truly enjoying sex. Face it pal, the Dems are younger,healthier and getting way more action that the bloated Limbelices. There is a reason that rock stars are so popular in society. Joe Six pack is strongly in favor of wild,promiscuous sex!

------------------

I re-read your reply and it occurs to me you kinda skirted the whole issue of welfare mammas. If someone's promiscuity costs me money to raise their rug rats then why don't I rate a say so?

You have your say-so everytime there is an election. If you think the welfare system is a waste of tax dollars,you have every right to support politicians who promise to abolish it. Actually, the neocons have been courting voters like you for years, with a couple hot button issues like welfare,abortion and gun control, even though they have absolutely no intention of doing anything about any of these issues. Btw, once you write that check to the IRS, it is no longer "your money". It belongs to the federal government and they decide how to spent it. Why don't you spend your time worrying about something you can control, ie, the money you have left after taxes?

The flaw in your logic Sparky is that we have liberals and those who receive government aid voting their guys in while those who just pay the bills and get very little in return for their involuntary contributions get the privilege of paying their 60% or so of earnings to keep the entitlements coming.

It is not the neocons but in fact the socialists who have been courting voters. And of course it's not a hard sell. One side tells people they can have things their way and get things for free while the other side tries to encourage restraint and reason, and at that within the Republican party there are too many willing to accommodate the gimmie mentality.

You see we don't want the truth. We want to live in Disneyland all expenses paid. But that's not the real world and judgment day is coming!

Now in my youth I considered a theory for a more socialistic model given the rise in technology among other things. But in the end it never proved practical. One of the major flaws, property taxes aside, is a lack of free utilities and fuel. Oddly as it turns out not only does energy cost more but government taxation on utility use has gotten out of sight to the point of almost becoming a sin tax status.

-----------------------------------

Btw, once you write that check to the IRS, it is no longer "your money". It belongs to the federal government and they decide how to spent it. Why don't you spend your time worrying about something you can control, ie, the money you have left after taxes?

I'm sorry but that statement is simply ridiculous!

It's not much different than an armed robber telling you to be glad he only took your money and not your life.

Mirage wrote:

The flaw in your logic Sparky is that we have liberals and those who receive government aid voting their guys in while those who just pay the bills and get very little in return for their involuntary contributions get the privilege of paying their 60% or so of earnings to keep the entitlements coming.

Aren't all people equal under the law? I'm sure those who pay higher tax rates are perfectly able to find lesser paying jobs if they so chose. No one is putting a gun to their head to seek high paying jobs.

Artie60438 wrote:

Mirage wrote:

The flaw in your logic Sparky is that we have liberals and those who receive government aid voting their guys in while those who just pay the bills and get very little in return for their involuntary contributions get the privilege of paying their 60% or so of earnings to keep the entitlements coming.

Aren't all people equal under the law? I'm sure those who pay higher tax rates are perfectly able to find lesser paying jobs if they so chose. No one is putting a gun to their head to seek high paying jobs.

I think you may have answered your own question- no, all people aren't equal, if they were they wouldn't be paying higher tax rates. However, the almight One is trying to make sure that everyone's wealth is equal by redistribution...

I think you may have answered your own question- no, all people aren't equal...

Exactly. Regardless of what should be in theory it is clearly not the case in practice. America was supposed to be the land of equal opportunity, not the land of free socialism parasites sponging off of those who earn their living. And when you also consider the Congress and corporate greed and their too often incestuous relationship both above and below the table it becomes harder to maintain that we are equal at all.

So just how much a percentage of someone's earnings being stolen away by taxation is actually fair and equal? And how much of that percentage going overseas or for corporate welfare is is fair and equal?

And that's not even considering the government preying on consumers with sin taxes and with utility taxes and with energy taxes in order to promote a political agenda.

Republicans don't have sex....do they?
From what I hear the "Anti-Christ" is in the White House having sex.
:rolfcry: You guys are a riot!

Well it certainly seems that it's not permitted for Republicans to procreate in Whiting. Is it a city ordinance?

As for the sex life of the President I'm not sure anybody really wants to go there, do we?

This is the most boring sex thread I've ever read. :tumble:

Start a better one.....

Mirage wrote:

So just how much a percentage of someone's earnings being stolen away by taxation is actually fair and equal? And how much of that percentage going overseas or for corporate welfare is is fair and equal?

About 90%

WhitingLib wrote:

Republicans don't have sex....do they?
From what I hear the "Anti-Christ" is in the White House having sex.
:rolfcry: You guys are a riot!

Yes and multiplying as we speak.... bring in your pets and lock your doors! OH MY!

Ohhmama wrote:

Mirage wrote:

So just how much a percentage of someone's earnings being stolen away by taxation is actually fair and equal? And how much of that percentage going overseas or for corporate welfare is is fair and equal?

About 90%

Well I think we all knew they wanted a 90% or more tax on the better income earners to pay for more foreign aid and more free lunches. And now we have the undisputed proof in hand!

Kinda ironic that the President claimed taxes wouldn't go up "much," huh? LMAO

Mirage wrote:

Well I think we all knew they wanted a 90% or more tax on the better income earners to pay for more foreign aid and more free lunches. And now we have the undisputed proof in hand!

Kinda ironic that the President claimed taxes wouldn't go up "much," huh? LMAO

Even more ironic is that half of the House R's voted for the increase.

So it's okay for one party and not the other? YES OR NO response only.

Ohhmama wrote:

So it's okay for one party and not the other? YES OR NO response only.

Every one of these representatives signed a pledge never to raise taxes....

Quote :

Taxpayer Protection Pledge, candidates and incumbents solemnly bind themselves to oppose any and all tax increases. While ATR has the role of promoting and monitoring the Pledge, the Taxpayer Protection Pledge is actually made to a candidate's constituents, who are entitled to know where candidates stand before sending them to the capitol. Since the Pledge is a prerequisite for many voters, it is considered binding as long as an individual holds the office for which he or she signed the Pledge.

Since its rollout with the endorsement of President Reagan in 1986, the pledge has become de rigeur for Republicans seeking office, and is a necessity for Democrats running in Republican districts.

House Members
Al-01 Jo Bonner
Al-03 Mike Rogers
Al-04 Robert Aderholt
Al-06 Spencer Bachus
Ak-AL Don Young
Ar-03 John Boozman
Az-02 Trent Franks
Az-03 John Shadegg
Az-06 Jeff Flake
Ca-02 Wally Herger
Ca-03 Dan Lungren
Ca-04 Tom McClintock
Ca-19 George Radanovich
Ca-21 Devin Nunes
Ca-22 Kevin McCarthy
Ca-24 Elton Gallegly
Ca-25 Buck McKeon
Ca-26 David Dreier
Ca-40 Ed Royce
Ca-41 Jerry Lewis
Ca-42 Gary Miller
Ca-44 Ken Calvert
Ca-45 Mary Bono
Ca-46 Dana Rohrabacher
Ca-48 John Campbell
Ca-49 Darrell Issa
Ca-50 Brian Bilbray
Ca-52 Duncan Hunter, Jr.
Co-05 Doug Lamborn
Co-06 Mike Coffman
Fl-01 Jeff Miller
Fl-04 Ander Crenshaw
Fl-05 Ginny Brown-Waite
Fl-06 Cliff Stearns
Fl-07 John Mica
Fl-09 Gus Bilirakis
Fl-10 Bill Young
Fl-12 Adam Putnam
Fl-13 Vern Buchanan
Fl-14 Connie Mack
Fl-15 Bill Posey
Fl-16 Tom Rooney
Fl-18 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Fl-21 Lincoln Diaz-Balart
Fl-25 Mario Diaz-Balart
Ga-01 Jack Kingston
Ga-03 Lynn Westmoreland
Ga-06 Tom Price
Ga-07 John Linder
Ga-09 Nathan Deal
Ga-10 Paul Broun
Ga-11 Phil Gingrey
Ia-04 Tom Latham
Ia-05 Steve King
Id-02 Michael Simpson
Il-06 Peter Roskam
Il-10 Mark Kirk
Il-13 Judy Biggert
Il-15 Tim Johnson
Il-16 Don Manzullo
Il-18 Aaron Schock
Il-19 John Shimkus
In-03 Mark Souder
In-05 Dan Burton
In-06 Mike Pence
In-08 Brad Ellsworth
Ks-01 Jerry Moran
Ks-02 Lynn Jenkins
Ks-04 Todd Tiahrt
Ky-01 Ed Whitfield
Ky-02 Brett Guthrie
Ky-04 Geoff Davis

Ky-06 Ben Chandler
La-01 Steve Scalise
La-04 John Fleming
La-05 Rodney Alexander
La-06 Bill Cassidy
La-07 Charles Boustany
Md-06 Roscoe Bartlett
Mi-02 Pete Hoekstra
Mi-04 Dave Camp
MI-06 Fred Upton
Mi-08 Mike Rogers
Mi-10 Candice Miller
Mi-11 Thad McCotter
Mn-02 John Kline
Mn-03 Erik Paulsen
Mn-06 Michele Bachmann
Mo-02 Todd Akin
Mo-06 Sam Graves
Mo-07 Roy Blunt
Mo-08 Jo Ann Emerson
Mo-09 Blaine Luetkemeyer
Ms-03 Gregg Harper
Ms-04 Gene Taylor
Mt -AL Dennis Rehberg
Nc-03 Walter B. Jones, Jr.
Nc-05 Virginia Foxx
Nc-06 Howard Coble
Nc-09 Sue Myrick
Nc-10 Patrick McHenry
Ne-01 Jeff Fortenberry
Ne-02 Lee Terry
Ne-03 Adrian Smith
Nj-01 Robert Andrews
Nj-02 Frank LoBiondo
Nj-04 Chris Smith
Nj-05 Scott Garrett
Nj-07 Leonard Lance
Nj-11 Rodney Frelinghuysen
Nv-02 Dean Heller
Ny-03 Peter King
Ny-26 Chris Lee
Oh-02 Jean Schmidt
Oh-03 Mike Turner
Oh-04 Jim Jordan
Oh-05 Bob Latta
Oh-07 Steve Austria
Oh-08 John Boehner
Oh-12 Pat Tiberi
Oh-14 Steve LaTourette
Ok-01 John Sullivan
Ok-03 Frank Lucas
Ok-04 Tom Cole
Ok-05 Mary Fallin
Or-02 Greg Walden
Pa-05 John Peterson
Pa-06 Jim Gerlach
Pa-09 Bill Shuster
Pa-15 Charlie Dent
Pa-16 Joseph Pitts
Pa-18 Tim Murphy
Sc-01 Henry Brown
Sc-02 Joe Wilson
Sc-03 J. Gresham Barrett
Tn-01 Phil Roe
Tn-02 John Duncan
Tn-03 Zach Wamp
Tn-07 Marsha Blackburn
Tx-01 Louie Gohmert
Tx-02 Ted Poe
Tx-03 Sam Johnson
Tx-04 Ralph Hall
Tx-05 Jeb Hensarling

Tx-06 Joe Barton
Tx-07 John Culberson
Tx-08 Kevin Brady
Tx-10 Michael McCaul
Tx-11 Mike Conaway
Tx-12 Kay Granger
Tx-13 Mac Thornberry
Tx-14 Ron Paul
Tx-19 Randy Neugebauer
Tx-21 Lamar Smith
Tx-22 Pete Olson
Tx-24 Kenny Marchant
Tx-26 Michael Burgess
Tx-31 John Carter
Tx-32 Pete Sessions
Ut-01 Rob Bishop
Ut-03 Jason Chaffetz
Va-04 Randy Forbes
Va-06 Bob Goodlatte
Va-07 Eric Cantor
Wa-04 Doc Hastings
Wa-05 Cathy McMorris
Wa-08 Dave Reichert
Wi-01 Paul Ryan
Wi-05 Jim Sensenbrenner
Wi-06 Tom Petri
Wv-02 Shelley Moore Capito
Wy-AL Cynthia Lummis
http://www.atr.org/current-taxpayer-protection-pledge-signers-th-a2851

So is that a yes?