Comments by dallas702 (page 7)

It may be that "Stripper" is one of the few "safe" outlets for women with amp'd up libidos. I remember reading a real scientific study done a decade or more ago (and NO, I am not going to spend the time to look it up and cite it) about women's sexual interests. If I remember correctly (and it was more than a decade ago - my memory is not perfect.), the results of the study showed than fewer than 15% of all women (I don't remember the exact ages, but was something around young adult thru pre - menopause) were sexually aggressive and intentional is seeking serial sexual partners. The study found a correlation between the sexually aggressive women and increased amounts of both estrogen and testosterone. It really may be true that women who want to get laid often, might gravitate to sexually charged jobs. That is likely more true with the current changes in socially acceptable behaviors. Still, I find that the dancers who seem to just want to fuck are rare, even as the number of dancers who want to fuck for money goes up.

For the first time in - - ever - - - I gotta' say I am in agreement with rockstar666. ;<)

Fumbling fingers - "than gators".

Speaking of foreign donors = = = did you guys see that Hillary's biggest backer, Soros, lost over a billion in the market betting on a Trump crash - after wasting a billion trying to get Hillary elected? He is already predicting that Trump will fail - and helping that prediction along with every dirty trick he has.

poledancer83, I disagree - it IS about validation, but tittyfag. is full of shit (as are his usual comments). Validation is NOT a bad thing, and it isn't always about insecurity. Everyone needs validation - some more than others - because we are genetically built to be social creatures and affirming - or validating - our value, in our piece of society, is part of our makeup. Like the writer of the article you posted, you have defended your actions, and part of what you (perhaps subliminally) seek when you defend yourself, is validation. So allow me to be a "validator" today. What you do is bring fantasy to life for people who need - themselves - some validation. It is a real need and your continued performance in fulfilling that need is no less important than what nurses and doctors do. Whether you are an always "clean" dancer, or become occasionally more intimate with some customers, what you do is a service that is valued by an actual majority of people. (even if many of that majority would prefer not to admit it in public) Admittedly, American society is schitzo about everything that has to do with sexual intimacy. A county commissioner may make a long speech condemning strip clubs and the "seedy sex industry" at a Lions Club meeting then drive over to your club for a few lap dances and - if not caught on camera soliciting extras - continue to get the support of the DA (who probably has seen a dancer or two in the past month as well). But their problems are usually NOT yours. Did you see Shadowcat's posting about the prostitution arrests? One ADA (prosecutor) got caught in the mess - I would argue that arrest makes my point about both schitzo America and the universal need for validation.

Dougster, though your comment is pure speculation, it does ring with a possible truth. I would be disappointed if the Clintons exited the national stage without a felony conviction, but if the exit sticks - I'll get over it!

Heartbreaking story. But not really new - One of the writers from the Republican era of Rome (pre - 56 BC) asserted that sex and politics were intimate enemies - condemning each other in the Forum and meeting at night to accomplish what they condemned. The ADA arrest is probably an accurate summary of the conflicted issue.

Dougster, you claim to be "baffled" - implying you want the answers, yet you dispute or dismiss the reasons offered. The short version is, Obama failed to fully accomplish anything he promised in either campaign, and he did do a lot of things that angered a lot of Americans. Nothing baffling about that.

Dougster, Bush asked Congress to modify the Dodd/Frank CRA three times and was ignored. The first time some Republicans joined Democrats in claiming it was not a problem, but the second two times Democrats controlled Congress and they didn't even bother to respond. By the time Bush43 took office in 2001, the subprime loans totaled more than 700 billion dollars - it is possible that even if the tap was turned off in 2001, the mortgage collapse would have happened anyway. Bush didn't simply "kill it" because, as President of the United States, he did not have the authority to ignore or override legislation. Something Obama failed to understand - another reason many people have issues with Obama.

Random - I actually did study the facts, and those facts were why I got out of the mortgage security business back in 1999 - when the consequences of the Dodd/Frank CRA were just beginning to show! I wasn't part of the Wall Street "mortgage securities" blow up, or the investment bank idiocy, but I was well informed (then and now) and your, "libertarian fantasy" is - and was - nothing more than one of many cover up stories designed to protect the people who pushed the original scheme, including the Clintons, and Democrat party leaders (like multi-millionaires Pelosi and Reed), who ran around proclaiming Dodd/Frank CRA meant the American dream was within reach for everybody. Fact is, the poor never applied for home loans, and the subprime borrowers were mostly middle income (and a surprisingly large number of "upper" middle income, people with bad credit. Builders loved the government subsidized housing boom. Loan brokers got rich off the scheme. The "poor," including anyone with an income under $33,000 per year, didn't see any benefit. The markets tanked for multiple reasons, the subprime Dodd/Frank fiasco was only the largest and principle reason. Ramdon, I do not object to people having differing opinions, I don't even object to different perspectives on the same facts. But it does bother me when people ignore facts, make up some alternative reality, and demand I agree. If you want facts LOOK at the actual LAW - look at the House and Senate committee testimony - read the actual statistical analysis of the securitized REMPs - follow the breakdown of the liquidations of the 1,000s of subprime (an alternative name for loans made under the Dodd/Frank CRA rules) loan portfolios. The creation of the subprime market is entirely on the shoulders of Dodd, Frank, Bill Clinton and the Democrats, Those same subprime loans were the real proximate cause of the mortgage loan fiasco of 2007, 2008 and 2008. Facts (actual documented facts) trump liberal opinion pieces, except in "liberal fantasy."

I am still hopeful that there will be real indictments over the Clinton Foundation, Pay for Play, Speech equal bribery, Sale of the office of Secretary of State, and failure to comply with security statutes.

RandomMember, offering an opinion piece from a liberal magazine is not "proof" that the CRA Dodd/Frank amendment was not a core and proximate cause of the mortgage collapse, and there are certainly are not "countless articles" refuting - at least credibly refuting - the CRA cause. And more to the point, neither I, nor any credible student of the recent economic situation, have said anything about "the financial crises was caused by government lending to the poor." In fact, the evidence clearly points out that a significant majority of the CRA loans were made to individuals claiming household incomes over $72,000 per year. Your claim of the "libertarian fantasy" is a part of the Obama era "blame Bush" disinformation. The Dodd/Frank CRA IS the proximate and major - but not only - cause of the 2007 - 2009 mortgage collapse. That fact is only disputed by Dodd/Frank supporters and the political disinformation machines, like Atlantic. But to focus on disputing that issue, you simply ignore the point of my response to the original post. Obama is disliked by many for very good reasons - many very good reasons. Among them, his refusal to accept responsibility for his own actions.

- Begin with, "Elections have consequences, I won." Obama remark during first meeting with Republicans at White House, he has always been arrogant and self centered. Not a likeable trait. - Add his over the top push to get the ACA passed, a bill full of little gifts for Democrats on the Hill and very light on benefits for the people. To make it worse, Obama went on campaign telling lies - They knew, Obama knew, "keep your doctor," and "lower premiums" were not going to happen - COULD NOT happen, but he kept saying it. Remember only the democrats voted for the ACA and only liberals ever believed any of the propaganda Obama vomited on his campaign stops. - The dude couldn't stop doing "fundraising" tours, hanging with Hollywood idiots and rappers. Creepy - Kept blaming Bush - - - I don't argue Bush43 didn't fuck up - a lot - but not everything was Bush's fault. In fact even the market collapse wasn't really W's doing. Dodd and Frank co-authored changes to the Credit Reporting Act in the 90's, democrats passed the bill, Slick Willie Clinton signed it - and mortgage lenders were forced, by the bill, to make loans to unqualified borrowers with little or no down payments- if those lenders wanted access to FNMA and Freddie (the only places mortgage lenders could sell their loans to get the cash they needed to stay in business). That is the real cause of the 2008-2009 collapse. - - There are more examples of, "it wasn't really Bush" when Obama blamed Bush but the idea is all the same - - Blame Bush, create a disinformation narrative, repeat the disinformation often, refer to the disinformation stories as "proof" of the veracity of the disinformation. - Foreign policy and the Apology Tour, Obama really did travel around the world and in speech after speech, apologized for the things the US has done to try to help the rest of the world. Pissed off a lot of people. - Blamed cops - often and usually before the facts were in. Then, when the facts showed the cops were right (not every time, but more than half of instances), Obama either ignored the facts or changed the narrative to describe the cops as needing training in "racial sensitivity." - Blame the white guy - often - in violent interactions involving blacks and whites, Obama too often spoke up BEFORE the facts were clear and blamed the white guy (or in Florida once), blamed the Hispanic and called him a "white Hispanic" "Travon could have been my son." Obama's constant inflamitory, racist remarks CAUSED the racial tensions we see today. - Totally ignored major issue of Black gangs and violent black on black crime. Why is a white cop shooting a black teen with a gun, worthy of days of Presidential attention and Black gangs, in Obama's hometown, shooting HUNDREDS of innocent, unarmed kids not worth mentioning? - Extreme left agenda, supporting spending TRILLIONS to "fight" climate change - yet never propose anything that specifically would or even potentially could reduce warming. Repeatedly attempting to "back door" gun control measures with ATF actions, and "Executive Decisions" like banning .223 ammo (thankfully failed), and pushing, "common sense gun control" like banning weapons that don't exist to prevent "more" mass shootings. - Extreme Globalist agenda - Obama clearly wanted to decrease the international influence of the USA in favor of a global coalition of powers, while still committing the US to provide most of the funding. - Obama hates Israel - at least that is the message most of us get from what Obama has done - and not done - over the last 8 years. The list really goes on for pages, but in essence - - No matter how well meaning, Obama did, said, and promised a lot of things that far too many of us disagree with. No matter his intentions, he has not improved the economy. Whatever he wanted to do - the world is a more dangerous place than it was 8 years ago. And worst of all, while it is clear he intended to favor Blacks in this country, the opposite has occurred - - race relations are worse because of Obama, fewer Blacks are working, more Blacks are on EDP and welfare, opportunities for Blacks in this country are fewer than they were 8 years ago.

In the middle of the 90's I enjoyed a number of conversations with an older (but still hot) stripper who worked weekend days at a Chicago area club (Chicago was a strip club wasteland back then, too). I did get a few, tame, dances from her but mostly I just bought drinks while we talked. She claimed she had another, civi, job during the week and said she "went to school" but was vague about both. While I didn't doubt her about having another job, I quietly discounted her claim about school, especially since I thought she was near 30. A few months after I last saw her at the club, I attended a suburban university graduation ceremony on the far side of Chicago many miles from the club, where I watched "my" older stripper receive her doctorate. The Dean of her college announced she also was moving from "instructor" to Assistant Professor. During the reception after the ceremony, she walked up to the group I was with and greeted a mutual friend - then turned very white as she recognized me. I "introduced" myself and asked some dumb question about her dissertation - which gave her time to calm down. Other than a quiet, "Thank you" we really didn't speak. And, unfortunately, I haven't seen her since. I learned then not dismiss completely everything a stripper says, but I also learned not to every totally believe anything a stripper claims. Just like anyone else, strippers will tell half truths and slide around questions they don't want to answer. I also learned some women will work hard to accomplish goals, whether the goal is enough lap dance cash payments for the next hit of Oxy or Meth, or enough money to pay this month's student loan installment.

As an honorable graduate of Immatellin U, I note that poledancer83 appears to have a brain that is actually plugged in and functioning. I also note that this hot young lady has probably encountered more than one twerp who is unable to refrain from expressing biased, unwelcome, an immature opinions about Poledancer83's career and life choices. I goes without saying that I would agree with her positions as long as I think I might get a chance to gropesome of her stuff. (But if it goes without saying, why did I say that?)

Best: Beer drinking, flying around (a lot) on Air Force One, golf games, blaming Bush. Worst: Just about everything else. By the way, Obama "decisions" stymied market recoveries, until Soros and friends convinced him in late 2009 to back off and let the Fed just keep printing money until Wall Street was flooded with US$, allowing the stock markets to soar without any real economic recovery. Specifically, fewer people work full time jobs today than in 2008 AND the median income is still lower than in 2008. Notably, black full time employment (as a percentage of population) is lower than at any time since BLS records started calculating that stat.

Got me! That was rude, crude and evil!

Add my "Happy Birthday" to your growing pile of accolades.

Just as an FYI, government pressure forced Backpage to shut down the "Adult" pages. Check the news feeds for the Senate Report on "trafficking." The escorts and body rub girls just moved to the backpage.com "dating" section in "women > men," and the "services" section at "massages." The same adds, same pictures, same offers. I am sure Claire McCaskill and the snowflakes in California are celebrating their "victory," but I doubt much has really changed. I saw a report on this, checked out a few stories, then went to the backpage.com site to check it (in several different cities) for my self.

While Putin's Russia is not afraid to meddle with the US, and certainly is not above blackmail, the Russians do NOT need real video evidence to have "proof" of Trump doing whatever they want to "prove" he did. Lucasfilm and Disney are amateurs at sci-fi scene making next to the Russian spy guys. If they want to "prove" that one of their own was consorting with prostitutes and selling state secrets, they can create the proof in days - and it will be convincing (they already did that - several times). So if they want to show Trump getting golden showers in Moscow - they can. The problem is that even the "never Trump" guys, like John McCain and Lindsey Graham, know the "proof" - if from Russia - will NOT be credible. The real story here is that D.C. insiders - again like McCain and Graham - are willing to destabilize the US just to score points against the incoming President.

Sorry to rain on the illegal conflicts of interest, and the other arguments for impeaching Trump, but the President of the United States is specifically (and exclusively) exempt from the conflicts of interest statute and impeachment requires BOTH Houses of Congress. He cannot be impeached for violating any law about conflicts of interest. Impeachment is only allowed for, "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." If the "never Trump gang and the socialist left (oops, I mean Democrats) can come to some kind of accommodation in the Senate, Trump will have trouble pushing his agenda. But obstruction is about as much as they can accomplish. The Constitution requires that to impeach a sitting President a Bill of Impeachment from the House of Representatives is required. That simply will not happen. I don't doubt that some "loyal left" Democrats in the House will introduce Bill(s) of Impeachment, repeatedly. But I DO doubt that any one would ever get out of committee. In the unlikely event a Bill of Impeachment reaches the floor, it will die. Even allowing for disaffected Republicans in the House, there simply are not - and will not be - enough votes in the House to attempt to topple Trump. My money is on never impeached.

I went cold turkey for about three months once but, like Shadowcat, it was surgically necessary. Unlike Shadowcat, I did NOT have any strippers visit me during my recovery!

Years ago, I had a boat I considered beautiful, but I did not want to fuck it. I have several married friends and some are very attractive women (or are married to attractive women), I even have a few friends who are very attractive single women. In Twentyfive's vocabulary, none of these pretty or beautiful women I am friends with fall into the "Hot" category. I do know a (very) few civi women who are truly HOT, HOT, HOT, but it is hard to be friends with a woman when you drool all over them (figuratively). But mostly my drooling is just wishful thinking. I guess my strip club experiences have spoiled me. In a strip club, when I see a really HOT woman I "know" that I can get her into my lap, I know she will get naked (or nearly so) and grind on men and I know I can paw and fondle her. Most of the (even the hottest) strippers I see in a club I can fuck, if I am willing to fork over the price. It may be I am jaded, even mercenary, but for years what Twentyfive defines as, "Hot" is for me mostly limited to a beautiful young woman who is coming on to me and is willing to fuck me. I guess what I am trying to express is that beautiful, and Hot, and attractive, are more expressions of our own (projected) expectations than actual, definable standards.

I am sorry to hear she has died. I met Carrie Fisher once ( over 20 years ago I had a 5 minute conversation with her near a restaurant hostess desk, while the staff moved a seated couple to make room for Carrie's small group). She was polite, conversational, and acted pleased that I didn't recognize her at first. She even stopped by my table on her way out and thanked me for a comment I made in our brief conversation. What amazed me was she remembered my name.

And rentz2, where did the annointed Hillary get her "more votes?" Actually, in only 55 counties (out of over 3,000 in the US) did Hillary get more votes than Trump. Notably, her greatest vote totals came in CA, where votes from counties with high populations of illegal aliens were higher than ever. Still, in liberal California, Trump won more counties than Crooked Hillary. In Detroit, a third of the precincts recorded more votes for Hillary than they had registered voters (yet Trump still won the state). It is entirely possible that those, "3 million more people" were mostly illegal aliens, dead Chicago voters, Detroit frauds and other attempts to skew the results. Not saying it was, but I am saying that only 1% of the counties voted for Clinton, and we all know that the one percenters should not rule over the rest of us, right?