discussion comment
8 years ago
I lived near (I was 60 miles away from downtown) Chicago for about 10 years and drove into town often. Midway Airport is on the fringes of gang territory on the Southside, as well as several businesses I visited. While I do not claim to "know" Chicago, I was in town often enough to hear the gunshots. At the time, civilian weapons carry of any kind was prohibited (except for special "permits" which they simply never issued). Gun ownership, even gun sales in the city were also highly restricted. I don't remember the word "banned" being used often, but guns were banned. (or in proper TUSCL usage, "band.") I simply neglected to approach any Chicago police officers and inform them I was armed.
I went about my business, or pleasure. Interestingly, very few places made any attempt to frisk people entering. I went all over Chicago with a 9mm holstered inside my belt and never encountered any problems. Whether in Maggiano's at Clark and Grand, Wriggly Field, the Admiral Theater (way north), Arnie's (Harvey is not way north), or around Midway, no one ever asked or attempted to check whether I was carrying, and I never needed to use my weapon. But like jackslash, " I would rather have my gun and not need it than need it and not have it." (Note, this was before 9/11 and all the crazy "can't profile so search grandma" rules)
As for all the Second Amendment hype, any form of restriction on a citizen's ability to own and carry firearms (without prior - specific and individual - adjudication of just cause) is a violation of the Second. The "militia argument is bullshit. The very first elected Congress passed a law REQUIRING every adult male citizen to own and maintain a military grade firearm (the "Militia Act of 1792"} which also specified that pretty much everyone WAS in the militia. The current version of that law divides the militia into "organized" (the Guard and Reserves) and "unorganized" (just about everyone else who is not on active duty, in jail, over age, or disabled - 10 US Code section 311 and others). In fact, over 100 years of court decisions on the current "militia law" establish that anyone excluded (like women who are not in the Guard, or the disabled, or men over 45) can "volunteer" for the unorganized militia, but do not have to assert they are volunteering unless and until the militia is "called."
Since the "militia" referenced in the Second Amendment really IS everybody, any argument that the Second Amendment applies only to militia members is pretty stupid.
discussion comment
8 years ago
That was a terrible thing to do to a driver! Couldn't she at least have picked out a 7 iron?
discussion comment
8 years ago
It doesn't matter whether it is fake or not. I'm printing it out for trips to the SCs. Let them read it.
I'm thinking some strippers will believe it - at least for the fifteen minutes I need in VIP.
discussion comment
8 years ago
What in the hell is "safe" about pictures of Gigi Hadid? It is blatantly obvious from the outfits that Hadid wears, she is an unrepentant Trump supporter. Sheis clearly channeling the incoming first lady. Not one picture of her in a pants suit, no sign of liberal flab, or even baggy T-shirts proclaiming, "I'm with her." Plus not one outfit was funeral black - and we know that all liberals are in deep mourning!
Just messin' wit' you! ;<) !
discussion comment
8 years ago
Vince, the important questions are : : :
Do you feel refreshed?
Did you get an attitude adjustment?
discussion comment
8 years ago
Nice catch 25. My Bad.
Boy the way Glenn Miller Played
Songs that made the Hit Parade
Guys like us we had it made
Those were the days.
Didn't need no Welfare states
Everybody pulled his weight
gee our old LaSalle ran great
Those were the days
And you knew who you were then
Girls were girls and men were men
Mister, we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again
People seemd to be content
$50 payed the rent
Freaks were in a circus tent
Those were the days
Take a little sunday spin
Tonight I'll watch the dogers win
Have yourself a dandy day that cost you under a fin
Hair was short and skirts were long
Kate Smith really sung the song
I don't know just what went wrong
THOSE WERE THE DAYS!
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
Papi_ChuloMiami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
^^^ But Shadow - they do! Just look for the sign that says "MEN" inside almost any public place and you wil find a stall with free parking for your butt. Or you could just ask our very own McDonald's shitter for directions.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Wait, wait . . . I can see it now. The new President hires cheerleaders to perform before and after all his speeches. The Trumpets! To steal a word - "brilliant."
Maybe those Trumpets are what John of Patmos was referring to?
discussion comment
8 years ago
Vince, really dude, you need to get laid and chill. Run over to Bogart's or H8 and get some special attention.
Then come back and bitch about the Bogart's VIP couches, or the stink in H8. The election is over. Some of us are ecstatic. Others, not so much. But we all have a love for fondling strippers.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Over the past 10 days I keep humming the song, "Happy days are here again" (it was the theme song for "All in the Family). I am thinking THESE are the days.
And yes, the few liberal socialist idiots I know are in mourning - and for good reason. This election may have began the end of that radical experiment in pseudo communism (not the USSR version, the Haight-Ashbury "summer of love" version. For decades liberal hippie socialists have tried to force their imaginary ideal upon the rest of us, and just like the '60s version, not only does it not work - it stinks (both figuratively and literally).
I now, maybe, I am free, free at last. No more bowing to the altar of political correctness. No more having more and more of my money stolen by the IRS to pay people who won't work. No more living in a land with a crushingly pitiful economy and millions without jobs or hope. No more listening to idiot liberal socialists like Obama and Hillary, lie and lie again.
Now if someone could just do something about the TV talking heads (those who didn't have a public nervous breakdown on election night). I am going to ENJOY Thanksgiving.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Like other attempts to "change the results" for future elections (usually enacted after voters made a selection opposed by the leaders of state governments), the supposed "popular vote compact" is an attempt to compel Electors to vote according to the dictates of state party leaders. It simply will not work. The Electors (selected by their candidate's party) make a commitment to vote according to the dictates of their own state's majority voters, subject only to their own judgment. Were (for example) an Elector from a state who voted for the Republican candidate, ordered by Democrat state leaders to vote for the Democrat candidate, the Elector is unlikely to comply.
NO state law can compel an Elector to vote as dictated by state leaders (read the constitution) and since the state election was to select Electors who committed to vote for a particular candidate, the "popular vote compact" cannot be binding, nor enforced. There have been only a few "faithless" (who did not vote for the candidate they were elected to support) Electors (179) in all of US history. Almost half of those "faithless" votes (71) happened when the candidate died before the Electoral College met (1872, 1912). Although 26 states do have laws against "faithless" Electors, it is very unlikely any of those laws will ever be enforced.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Some people think modern liberalism is a political position. It most certainly is not. As has been clearly demonstrated over the past weeks, liberalism is a mental defect/disease very similar to schizophrenia. Sufferers of this debilitating and dangerous condition, like schizophrenics, often hear or see things that are not there, hold onto false beliefs even with proof that the beliefs are not true or logical (delusions), and experience disorganized thinking. A significant difference between schizophrenia and liberalism is the "group think" or herd affect of liberalism. Recently, sufferers of liberalism collectively experienced a severe shock when a major collective, or herd, delusion was exposed. Large numbers of liberals are now wandering the streets confused and disoriented.
Unique to sufferers of liberalism, affected individuals often collect in large violent groups when their individual delusions are challenged, chanting nonsense words and destroying property. Recently, groups of liberalism sufferers have been seen wandering the downtown streets of major urban areas, chanting unintelligible words, destroying property and attacking people. These disturbed liberals can be dangerous if confronted, causing harm to themselves or others.
If you encounter an agitated liberal, please use caution. Do NOT confront or dispute their delusions. Speak softly (if you are familiar with their group think pseudo-language of "politically correct," it would help calm them to use some of the common nonsense phrases), maintain some distance for your own safety, and attempt to direct the sufferer to a mental health professional.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Thanks to each of you who answered the call and put yourself in harm's way.
Remember the sacrifices of those who served and died before us.
And thanks to you who recognize and honor the service of our veterans.
I was USN 1970 - 1975 but was never in harm's way, never on the ground in Nam, and will not claim to be a war veteran.
For those of you who have seen the elephant, God bless you and may every stripper you encounter be a ten who begs you to allow her to worship your package.
discussion comment
8 years ago
For those of you who want to leave, please, leave.
Go to Canada - but understand that they have single payer health insurance run by the government and it usually takes one to three years of waiting for approval of many medical services - and be careful, Canada DEPORTS illegal aliens.
Or you can go to Mexico - but avoid the 70% of Mexico that is controlled by violent drug gangs, and be very careful about your paperwork - Mexico puts illegal aliens in wretched prisons for months before DEPORTING them. If you choose any of the immigrant friendly nations of Europe, please avoid public places where Islamic Terrorists murder people and be prepared for tax rates over 50%.
Enjoy yourselves and write us a note occasionally.
discussion comment
8 years ago
The difference in the popular vote is less than 0.2% of all votes cast. Clinton received only 47.7% of the votes cast, to Trump's 47.5. You can rest assured that virtually none of the other 5% of people who voted for the libertarian, or any of the other candidates, would have voted for Clinton if their only choices were Clinton or Trump. Many recently elected Presidents won the Electoral College but not the popular vote, most falling far short of Trump's numbers.
And the Electoral College numbers are all that count. When the media gets over it's crying jag, figures out they really cannot decide who becomes President, and actually posts the final numbers, Trump will have won with 306 Electoral College votes to Clinton's 228. During the day Tuesday, when the Clinton team over at ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/PBS thought Clinton was going to win, they were calling an Electoral College result of over 300 votes a "modern mandate" and the real definition of a landslide.
I actually enjoyed watching the PBS coverage - where they acted like it was a wake, the NBC coverage - especially when their "Chief Foreign Correspondent" had an on-screen breakdown, the CNN coverage - ("whitelash") and MSNBC - where everyone was "off script" and in panic mode from midnight to dawn. I even enjoyed that Hillary failed to follow tradition and make a concession speech as soon as it was clear she lost - she sent Podesta over to send everyone home and didn't publicly concede until almost noon the next day. All of that shows - to me - that the "fix" was really "in," the media really was "all in" for Hillary, and again Hillary showed lack of character.
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
shailynnThey never tell you what you need to know.
The county I live in is abut 35% black (with NO public housing) and 15% Hispanic, yet the vote was over 70% FOR Trump. While not a "rich" county (and not one mansion that I know of) the US Census demographics assert over 60% "some college" or college graduate. So, in my county at least, more than dumb white rednecks voted for Trump. I do know many Blacks who openly displayed their support for Trump with hats, bumper stickers and yard signs. Anyone who claims the election of Trump was a white against black racist act is either an idiot, a liar or pushing their own agenda without facts.
What I see on the election result maps is a clear separation between rural and urban - not race - not gender - not income, not even education. What I see in the national, state and local results is most voters in large cities voted for Clinton, and most of the rest of us voted for Trump. So if this nation is divided - the divide is between people living in crowded cities and everyone else.
Honestly, I think Trump won because too many people realized Clinton was TOO dishonest, TOO unlikable, to ever serve as President.
discussion comment
8 years ago
My first "remote access" computer use included feeding punch cards into a reader (at an astounding rate of 250 cards per minute), the electro-mechanical reader connected to a distant computer thru a sound/data emulation telephone headset connection (vaguely similar to a modem, except I plugged the dial phone's headset into it). The response (if/when it came) was transmitted over the same system, but received by a separate teletype printer.
Man, that was the bee's knees the one time in twenty it actually worked! But on average, it was faster to mail stuff back and forth.
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
shailynnThey never tell you what you need to know.
I voted early for the first time - - but only because I was driving by an early voting station and it looked empty I was curious, and went in to discover it was almost identical to voting on election day, just not as busy.
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
founderslip a dollar in her g-string for me
Slick Willie the Molester and Child Rapist?
The Cigar Wuss?
If some rumors are true, he will be exiled to Chappaqua, so he will likely be the,
"Energizer Bunny's Toy."
discussion comment
8 years ago
Just a view from the Vietnam era members here.
My wife wants sex almost all the time and I work hard to meet all of her desires. She gives phenominal BJs, cums often and loudly, is often romantic and - almost as often - lustful and aggressively slutty at home. She meets almost all of JohnSmith's criteria - except - she is damn close to my age and I have known her (in a "biblical sense") for decades, many decades.
Whether my wife approved, allowed, or opposed my interest in SCs, naked strippers, VIP blowjobs, ITC extras or occassional OTC activities, I would be going to SCs. There is a life enhancing, "Fountain of Youth" quality to experiencing a tight young stripper bowing before my dick and sucking in a very different way from my usual. It is fun and entertaining to visit a SC, talk to strippers, paw and grope them, fuck them and then enjoy a beer while looking for another stripper.
NOTE: I do NOT presume to speak for any other Boomer. The above is my opinion, and may not reflect the opinion of management.
discussion comment
8 years ago
I do not drink and drive! Never before breakfast and certainly not since last night..
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
impalaThe People's Republic of Pennsylvania
I have been in a few club with working cameras that did not stop the fun. At one the bartender (a guy) told me the owner wanted the cameras, but also ordered the shift managers to erase everything unless a crime occured. The bartender also said that after a manager was caught watching extra action in the VIP, the owner unplugged the monitors, but still kept the recordes on and still ordered every shift to erase the recordings. Other than having a record of a robbery or fight, I don't really know why SCs would want cameras.
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
Papi_ChuloMiami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
@Random, honestly I do not believe that the hatred of Hillary has anything to do with her gender as a presidential candidate. I believe her record, her lies, her many changing positions, her husband, her lies, her criminal acts, her lies, her associates, her tantrums, her crude two faced manipulation of her history and (in case I didn't mention it) her lies, ARE entirely and completely the reason people are very willing to chant, "put her in jail."
discussion comment
8 years ago
The evil stares from frumpy women, the drooling men, the waiters who don't know whether to look down their nose or beg for the secret formula, all of that is part of the fun of taking your fav stripper out to dinner before fucking her brains out. Most of the dancers I have treated to dinner thought the drooling, envious crowd was foreplay.
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
Papi_ChuloMiami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
As a married, "aging boomer" I can assure you that I have great experience with women in positions of power and have no issues with that state of affairs. I do, however, have a real problem with the record, the experience, the backers, the payoffs, and the positions of one particular woman, named Hillary.