Comments by AbbieNormal (page 7)

Shit, I've been one-upped. Swear to god, without referring to IMDB... Recruiter: Are either of you homosexual? Bill Murray: You mean like ...flaming? Recruiter: Well, (heh heh) we just have to ask... Harold Ramis: No, but we're willing to learn.

You still might have to say you're sorry, you just don't have to mean it.

Hey FONDL, I still check in every so often, but right now I don't have much interest in clubbing, or for the most part the discussions, but I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to quote lines from Stripes.

Oooohhhh, I wish I were a loofa...

Shopper, I agree that strippers are women, and will respond on some level to "game" or as we used to call it, charm. My point is that there is another way, and don't forget that she is well aware what you want and probably willing to provide it at some level for the right compensation. Being nice and polite certainly doesn't hurt, but being generous helps a lot.

Well, I've been preaching this for a few years, although I pretty much stopped when it became a flash point with one poster who shall not be named. OTC, in the sense we are talking about here, is a bad idea. It NEVER works out as anything positive (FONDL's case being the exception that proves the rule since he wasn't getting sex, or after it as far as I can tell). For years I've been saying if you want to go OTC, go to a pro, not a semi-pro stripper. OTC, in my opinion, is always a bad idea.

I gave it up mostly out of boredom. I tried hitting a few new clubs, but it still seemed like the same old shit, different zip code. I'm not saying this is permanent, I'm just not very interested right now, and I've had periods where I didn't go for several months before and then come back to enjoy it again. As for the restrictions, that's part of it. The clubs in DC, which are convenient for me, are all no contact and I just don't feel like driving to Baltimore or West Virginia just to visit a club.

Still here FONDL, just not particularly interested in any topic. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Gave up clubbing about half a year ago, although I'd been spotty for about a year prior to that. I check in about once a week, I'll post for fun if there are interesting topics.

Don't knock Ron, he gives all us fat hairy guys with 10 inch dicks hope. Actually I'm not that hairy.

"Ben Franklin clearly slept around a lot, and probably had children out of wedlock". Yep, one was the royalist governor of New Jersey. He was widely known to be Franklin's bastard son. Washington, while rumors persist and the signs are everywhere, probably never can be proven to have slept around because he was most likely sterile. Jefferson, on the other hand was single for a long time after his wife died, although I doubt the Sally Hemmings legend is true. The DNA tests expressly DIS-proved the legend that Jefferson fathered certain of Hemming's older children, but they did prove that a descendant of Jefferson's paternal grandfather did father children with her, when Jefferson was in his 70's I believe.

I think this is a case of the rooster believing he makes the sun rise. Jenna was the biggest star in porn right around the time it went mainstream and became a multi-billion dollar industry. It started with videotape, but really took off with the internet, cause there were sites where you could order porn without going into that seedy store on the wrong side of town, or even that special room in the video store. Porn consumption (much like this board and strip clubs) thrives on anonymity, and that was mostly about the internet, not Jenna. Besides she was a lot cuter and hotter before she carved herself up in the last few years.

apparently, no.

For a change this year the game was actually, you know, good (who says D is boring) and the commercials weren't the most memorable part of an otherwise mediocre snoozefest that was over by the second half.

BG, damn, you perv, I'm humbled.

Jejune fuck, lame blow job? The FK and BJ work, not sure about the rest. I suddenly want to talk about strippers and extras on a politics thread...weird.

This is why don't like discussing politics. People throw around "facts" like legalized domestic spying, or torture being official policy, facts with no basis in fact, yet you can never disprove them. I prefer political philosophy, as some of you know, but for those of you who prefer politics here are a few facts. Politically Reagan was indistinguishable from JFK. Nixon was more liberal than JFK, LBJ, and some would argue, Carter. Bush is politically, in domestic terms (not rhetorically, politically, as in policy achieved) indistinguishable from Clinton.

MG, You basically ignored every substantive point I made. I'm a Native American. The first of my ancestors arrived here in the late 1600's. How long do I have to trace my ancestors back? I have to go back three generations to find any ancestor of mine born anywhere other than America. Is Kennewick man Native American? Sure, nobody is disputing that. That he is distinctly a member of a tribe based on their belief that their people have been here "since the beginning of time", absolutely unprovable as a matter of law, yet, as a matter of law, we are supposed to defer to their legends as the basis for a legal decision. I'll re-iterate, the importance is that should a court declare that these remains are those of a specific tribe, based entirely on the fact that that tribe says so, it is nothing less than the federal government recognizing one specific religious tradition as true. If that is a precedent you are comfortable with, fine, but no complaints when abortion is outlawed, OK?

MG, a few points. 10,000 was a round figure, not a claim of fact. I knew it was in that area, and in fact after looking it up the skeleton has been radio carbon dated at 9,300 years old, so I'm slightly closer in my rounding than you. Also I certainly would not dispute the Egyptian's OWNERSHIP of antiquities found in their soverign territory, what I dispute is that there is some sort of religious or cultural connection. In this case there is no dispute over sovereignty. He was discovered on federal lands, not an indian reservation. He is the property of the Army Corps of Engineers, as he was found below the high watermark of a navigable waterway. That is the legal fact. The argument is that under the provisions of the Native Americans Graves Repatriation Act he can be established as culturally connected with a specific tribe, i.e. the tribe in question can establish that his customs, religion or ancestry are uniquely identified as the same as theirs. This is absolutely preposterous. The argument the tribe in question (the Umatilla) is making is that according to their religion (their legends and oral history) their people have lived in their lands since the dawn of time, QED he is one of them. Now when christians argue that every fertilized zygote is a unique human deserving of the full protection of the law the screams of suppression of science and separation of church and state and theocracy abound in the debate, so why then aren't people calling this attempt what it is? Religious fundamentalists demanding the government officially recognize their religion as true, and decide a legal case based on their religious beliefs. I'd also be remiss if I didn't point out that initially no less than five, yes five tribes claimed him as a member of their tribe. The importance of the "caucasian features" and all the other stuff isn't some balderdash about Europeans getting here first, or earlier than we thought, it is that at less than 10,000 years old and noticeably "caucasian" this puts at doubt the theory that all American Indians are descended from a single wave of migration some 12,000 to 15,000 years ago. That is a matter of scientific interest and legitimate scientific inquiry. Wether the Umatilla have as they claim, lived on their lands since the beginning of time is not.

The problem, to put it into anglicized terms, is that it's rather like the Norman Kings of England in 1100 AD claiming a 5,000 year old skeleton as one of their ancestors. Whoever was here 10,000 years ago we can be pretty damn certain they weren't calling themselves by the names of any of the tribes Europeans encountered, or any of the tribes recognized by the US government by treaty, and their customs and religions had about as much in common as modern day Egyptians do with ancient Egyptians. I don't doubt that there are some absolutely sincere people who believe this is their ancestor and want to believe this land is theirs from the beginning of time, but then we like to think we're above allowing religion to determine what science can be done and what science is acceptable don't we.

At the end of 2006 I switched jobs and as a result I got a big raise, about $9,000/year. I just filed my 2007 taxes, the first full year at the new salary. Out of that $9,000 increase in my income I paid an extra $3,000 in federal, state, and local income taxes, and I bought a new car, so I paid about $1,500 in fees and sales taxes. That doesn't even consider property tax increases, which while they follow the housing prices up very quickly never seem to track quite as close as prices fall, they increased in the neighborhood of $900. So, of that big $9,000 raise I probably actually took home an extra $3,600, or about $300 a month. Nothing to sneeze at, but when I only get to keep about 40% of my extra income, income I have to work much harder for, I get a bit miffed when politicians do me the huge favor of giving me some of my own money back and then want to be praised for their generosity. I'll probably spend it on a kayak. I've always wanted to take up kayaking.

I've always thought the concept of one ATF a bit limiting. I've had 5 or 6 favorites, real favorites. And in many cases they overlapped, but I never really considered narrowing it down. Now they've all been retired for at least a year, and in retrospect I can call one my ATF. If I were presented with the choice of choosing one dancer to come out of retirement and give me a LD, she'd be it. So I knew about a day or so ago and just got around to posting now.

"Yea, right...the Pilgrims were *much* more advanced than the Mayans or the Incas or the Egyptians or the civilization in India...right." Uhm, yeah, they were, and it's pretty obvious. Aside from the whole technological part (you know, iron working, firearms, etc) they sprung from a society that taught the value of the individual, and a tradition that the individual was free to live as they desired and to worship as they desired, free from the dictates of anyone other than their god or conscience. These were utterly alien concepts to Mayans, Incas, Egyptians, or Indians. If they weren't what the hell are all these white people named Smith and Jones doing over here and where are all the Incas and Mayans?

Wondergrl. if you haven't figured it out by now, he lives for it. Personally, in much the same manner I believe calling something genocidal should be confined to say, and effort to wipe a race of people off the face of the earth through a highly organized campaign of shipping them to death camps, I think slavery is one of those words that shouldn't be used lightly.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. By any reasonable standard we don't.

Sorry, I'm just bit put off by the silence. Someone brings up the topic of sex slavery, which we all seem to agree exists, our only disagreement seems to be the degree to which it exists. So I'm just posing a question. When is it acceptable to be outraged? My screed seemed to be greeted with some derision, apparently because sexual exploitation isn't widespread enough. So, OK, you may be able to go to an AMP and get FS from a willing provider. How you know that is true, that she is willing? Well I will leave that to all y'all. I just want an answer to one simple question. At what level is sexual slavery acceptable?